Labor unions representing thousands of workers in Los Angeles County are opposing plans to create an elected county chief executive position, warning that such a move would “politicize” the chief executive position.

Leaders of unions representing firefighters, paramedics, probation officers and sheriff's deputies said Tuesday that county supervisors should scrap a plan to have voters select a top official to manage the county's operations and budget.

This proposal is Bigger Charter Reform The measure, scheduled for the Nov. 5 ballot, would reorganize county government by increasing the number of supervisors from five to nine, creating a director of budget and management, creating a legislative analyst position and establishing a new ethics commission to fight corruption.

Derek Shea, executive director of the Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs Association, said the sweeping proposal, which emerged last month, is being rushed and presented to voters without understanding the potential costs and impacts to other county services.

“I think this is being rushed,” he said, “and the idea that this whole plan is going to be cost-free is just completely wrong. It may not require new taxes, but it will mean cutting other services to raise the money.”

Shea said the union has not yet taken a position on the larger ballot proposal, but noted that many of the county's other employee unions are just beginning to consider the details and decide whether to participate.

The county already has a CEO who is appointed by and can be fired by the five supervisors. Shea argues an elected CEO would establish its own political power base, leading to power struggles with the board and confusion about who is in charge.

Supervisors voted 3-2 on Tuesday to approve an ordinance that would put reforms to county government on the Nov. 5 ballot. Supervisors Katherine Barger and Holly Mitchell voted against the measure.

The proposal would require another vote by the board to place it on the ballot.

Before Tuesday's vote, Berger and Mitchell tried unsuccessfully to remove language calling for the countywide executive to be elected, with Berger saying he was concerned a countywide executive elected by a simple majority vote might not feel obligated to serve all communities in the county.

“I don't believe a politicized chief executive is a good thing for the people of this county or my district,” she said.

An elected county commissioner would be in place by 2028, with the board's expansion planned for 2032, according to the ballot proposition.

Supervisor Lindsay Holbert, who co-wrote the proposal with Supervisor Janice Hahn, said the proposal would allow the county to be more responsive to its 10 million residents. She argued that the new system would actually reduce confusion, because department heads would report to the chief executive instead of five supervisors. And she said the charter amendment “is not proposing any kind of service cuts,” denying the notion that it would have any harmful effects.

Holbert also responded to claims that the commission would “politicize” the county's top executive.

“If that's how you look at direct democracy, then I guess that's one way of looking at it,” she said. [the proposal] It’s about making sure that this position is one that is accountable to the public as well as to all of us.”

Supervisory board members have been divided in recent weeks over the Holbert-Hahn proposal, which would expand the size of the board for the first time in more than a century.

Supporters say expanding the commission would improve representation of some communities and create new opportunities for Latinos and Asian Americans to win seats — an argument made by elected officials in small San Gabriel Valley cities including Monterey Park, Alhambra and West Covina, as well as several advocacy groups.

Supervisor Hilda Solis, who voted in favor of the ballot measure, noted that she is the only Latina on the five-member board in a county that is about 50% Latino, and she was sharply critical of the proposition's critics.

“There are a lot of people who are scared because they think they're going to lose power, they're going to lose some kind of status,” she said.

Each supervisor earns about $280,000 a year, represents roughly 2 million people and oversees a range of services, including medical, mental health and social services, aimed at the county's homeless population.

Berger and Mitchell said they have long supported expanding the board, but they questioned whether nine auditors was the right number and also disputed the idea that the proposed governance changes would be cost-neutral.

The two called for requiring a fiscal analysis for all countywide ballot measures, a proposal that passed unanimously Tuesday to ensure voters receive information about the financial impacts of any county government reorganization plan.

“We have a responsibility to make sure our voters clearly understand all the costs,” Mitchell said.

Meanwhile, it's not yet clear whether criticism from the county employees union could pose a problem for the proposed ballot measure.

AFSCME Local 685, which represents 2,400 county employees, including probation officers, said it opposes an elected county manager but has not taken a position on the larger ballot measure.

“It is the role of professionals, not politicians, to manage a $43 billion budget and 116,000 employees,” the union's executive committee said in a statement. “We are strongly opposed to publicly elected countywide executive positions and therefore have not yet taken a position on this entire potential measure.”

Dave Girotto, president of the Los Angeles County Firefighters Union Local 1014, asked the commission on Tuesday to remove a plan to elect countywide officers from the larger ballot proposal. A union spokesman declined to comment on whether the union opposes other elements of the proposal.

Times reporter Rebecca Ellis contributed to this report.