council

Voters will elect two new Los Angeles City Council members on Tuesday, one representing the San Fernando Valley, the other South Los Angeles.

In the 3rd District, businessman Tim Gaspar and longtime local government employee Barri Worth Girvan are vying to replace Bob Blumenfield, who is termed out. The district includes Canoga Park, Reseda, Tarzana, Winnetka, and Woodland Hills.

In Council District 9, residents are preparing for a historic shift: No matter who wins, the district will elect a Latino council member for the first time since 1963.

The South L.A. district has long been represented by a Black council member, but over the last few decades it has undergone a demographic shift and today is about 80% Latino. Councilmember Curren Price also has termed out. Estuardo Mazariegos, co-director of the L.A. chapter of Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment, and Jose Ugarte, who previously served as a deputy chief of staff to Price, are vying for the seat.

District 3

Gaspar led the June primary with 46.1% of the vote compared to Worth Girvan, who secured 42.5%. Both candidates have spent the last few weeks of the campaign knocking on doors and making their case to voters, saying major issues like public safety and cleanliness are common concerns.

Gaspar, who founded an insurance agency in the Valley that he sold in 2021, would bring a pro-business perspective to City Hall, and among his top priorities would be eliminating “red tape” to stimulate small businesses in the region.

“We need somebody who’s going to come to the table with different ideas,” Gaspar said. “If we keep doing the same thing as before, we’re going to keep getting the same results.”

Worth Girvan, who worked as L.A. County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath’s district director for three years before running, would use her experience in the public sector to advocate for the West Valley.

“I am fortunate to have experience at every level of government,” she said. “That’s going to allow me to leverage relationships and know how to work together across jurisdictions to get things done.”

The race has been filled with accusations. Two weeks ago, Worth Girvan’s campaign published an ad featuring Christina Rackohn, a former employee whose family company merged with Gaspar’s insurance company, who alleged he created a hostile work environment.

Worth Girvan also filed an ethics complaint against Gaspar with the City Ethics Commission in October, alleging he failed to report more than $150,000 in personal and business expenditures related to his campaign and violated the city’s matching fund rules.

Gaspar called the allegations about creating a hostile working environment and violating campaign finance violations “lies.” He said he is focused on campaigning in the final week before the election.

Gaspar said Worth Girvan is a career politician who will only maintain the status quo.

“If she ends up getting elected, she’s going to have the same ideas and the same ways of addressing these issues as what got us into this mess in the first place,” he said.

On homelessness, Gaspar has criticized the city’s Inside Safe program and said a housing-first approach doesn’t work. He praised the anticamping zone law but believes the city should be tougher against encampments.

Worth Girvan supports Inside Safe but wants more permanent housing built instead of relying on interim housing. She would expand the city’s CIRCLE program, which provides 24/7 unarmed mobile response for nonviolent calls involving homeless individuals, to the West Valley.

In fundraising, Gaspar reported bringing in nearly $600,000 during the runoff campaign including matching funds, compared with about $287,000 for Worth Girvan.

District 9

Both Mazariegos and Ugarte share many similarities, including having arrived to the U.S. from Latin America as children and growing up undocumented. Both spent years working as community organizers, but now they diverge on issues such as policing and homeless policies.

Mazariegos and Ugarte were nearly evenly matched in fundraising, with both raising about $350,000 for the runoff in contributions and matching funds. Ugarte placed first in the June primary in a crowded field against five others, winning 39% of the vote. Mazariegos, who has been endorsed by the Democratic Socialists of America‘s L.A. chapter, came in second with about 26%.

Ugarte’s campaign has received more than $1 million in support from independent expenditures, committees that can receive unlimited donations but cannot coordinate with a candidate’s campaign. Airbnb, Uber and the California Apartment Assn. are among the groups supporting Ugarte.

Mazariegos has criticized the companies supporting Ugarte’s candidacy, accusing them of attempting to displace low-income residents by pouring money into the election.

“They’re trying to displace our community. That’s what this fight is all about,” Mazariegos said. “I know this is a righteous campaign and a righteous cause with the people, alongside the people. Solo el pueblo salva al pueblo.” Only the people can save the people.

Ugarte said he has never met with Airbnb officials but would take a call from any group to figure out what is going to best benefit South L.A., including prioritizing protecting renters.

“I’d open my eyes and see what’s going to benefit South L.A.,” he said. “I want to focus on making South Central clean, safe and affordable.”

While both would defend immigrants, they diverge on issues such as the police budget. Ugarte supports Mayor Karen Bass’ goal of restoring the L.A. Police Department to 9,500 officers, while Mazariegos supports increasing oversight of the department’s budget and reducing its budget to fund other departments, including Recreation and Parks and the Bureau of Street Services.

Ugarte supports enforcing Municipal Ordinance 41.18, which prohibits camps near schools, daycare centers and other “sensitive” areas as a tool to clear homeless encampments. Mazariegos has said all the ordinance does is shuffle people around, and instead the focus should be on addressing addiction and mental health issues.

Mazariegos has been endorsed by Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez, City Controller Kenneth Mejia, U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), United Teachers Los Angeles, L.A. Forward and several labor unions.

Ugarte has been endorsed by the L.A. County Democratic Party, Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights Action Fund, Rep. Sydney Kamlager Dove, the late Dolores Huerta and Councilmember Tim McOsker.

The L.A. City Council took modest steps Tuesday to help the homegrown film industry as it struggles to keep production in California.

The City Council passed two film-friendly measures, one that creates free permits for so-called micro-shoot productions and another that limits parking fees on city-owned lots, yards and civic properties and staging areas to $1 a day, regardless of the size of the project.

The city currently charges $450 a day for base camp parking at city-owned parks and $100 to $300 a day for crew parking, according to FilmLA.

“Both efforts advanced today aim to support independent shoots and attract aspiring storytellers to our city,” Councilmember Adrin Nazarian, who introduced the initiatives, said in a statement. “As we work to protect established productions, we must also uphold Los Angeles’ reputation as a hub for the next generation of filmmakers. People need to believe that this is still the town to turn their filmmaking dreams into reality.”

Micro-shoot permits refer to sets with up to 10 filmmakers on site that have a minimal community impact. Under this new ordinance, student filmmakers, documentary crews and ultra-low-budget projects will be able to obtain free permits. City departments soon will report back to the Council on how they plan to implement this.

The idea behind the $1 permits is to turn more areas of L.A. into homes for all kinds of productions.

Nazarian is chairman of the Council’s recently formed Ad Hoc Committee on Film, Entertainment and the Creative Industry, aimed at making filming in L.A. more accessible.

The steps come as film and TV production in the area continues on a downward trend. FilmLA, the nonprofit group that handles film permits for the region, recently reported that shoot days between July and September were down 4.8% from the same period last year and nearly 29% below the five-year average.

“The stark reality is that California is on the brink of losing its position as the nation’s premier destination for production spending,” Nazarian said during a City Council meeting this month. “While we retain the Hollywood name, the data makes it urgently clear, crisis-level clear, that Los Angeles is fast losing its footing as the center of film and television production.”

With just over a week to go before election day, Nithya Raman’s endorsement for mayor from the Democratic Socialists of America’s Los Angeles chapter is in jeopardy, as members of the local and national branches tussle over the city council member’s bonafides on Palestine.

The local chapter voted to endorse Raman last month, and with that comes teams of eager doorknockers canvassing for her across the city.

The endorsement wasn’t exactly full-throated — the tally was 937 in favor and 484 against — and since then factions within the DSA have argued that she isn’t in compliance with the organization’s stance on Palestine, namely, that she doesn’t support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against Israel.

The DSA’s National Political Committee, or NPC, emailed the local’s leaders saying that they were out of compliance with “R22,” a DSA resolution that requires local chapters to inquire about a politician’s positions on the BDS movement before they are endorsed, DSA-L.A.’s co-chair Leslie Chang told The Times.

Chang acknowledged that the chapter didn’t include a question about BDS on its questionnaire for Raman before it endorsed her.

“This was an oversight,” she and co-chair Sean Wakasa wrote in an email to DSA-LA members. To the group’s national political committee, leadership wrote that Raman “has always supported the right of private citizens to engage in boycotts, including BDS.”

The Raman campaign declined to comment. At a forum last month, Raman called BDS a “legitimate form of peaceful protest” without saying whether she supports the movement.

The DSA’s national political committee, which was originally set to meet on the issue last week, is now expected to meet Monday to mull either suspending the endorsement or asking Raman to clarify her position.

Chang insists the national group has no authority to rescind an endorsement made by the L.A. chapter.

“Our endorsement of Nithya was a democratic decision made by the membership, and the NPC is violating its own bylaws by considering un-endorsement and expulsion without following proper procedure,” she said in a statement to The Times. “So we’re going to continue campaigning for our entire slate and protect our chapter’s vote by all means necessary.”

A spokesperson for the DSA national organization declined to comment.

‘City of L.A. on steroids’

As voters ready to go to the polls next month, another local race is already looming large in the background: the contest for top dog in Los Angeles County government.

Measure G, approved by a slim margin of voters in November 2024, set in motion the process of creating both a new CEO position with broad executive powers and an independent ethics commission, and it expanded the Board of Supervisors from five members to nine.

But Supervisor Kathryn Barger is now asking her fellow supervisors to take a “pause,” telling the Times in an interview that “haste makes waste” and that she is concerned about that process and the speed of its implementation. She also called into question the ethics of a sitting supervisor running for an office that is expected to pay $558,000 in total compensation.

“This position is going to change the county. We’re going to become the city of L.A. on steroids,” she said Wednesday, a day after the board’s latest meeting devolved into a contentious discussion of the county executive issue and Barger’s intention to slow down the process.

“Once again,” she added, “we are rushing to put something together, I think maybe in the hopes that no one will peel back the curtain and expose what is going on.”

At Tuesday’s board meeting, Barger committed to not run for the CEO position and called on her fellow board members to do the same. Supervisors Holly Mitchell and Hilda Solis have now publicly stated that they too will follow the pledge.

But Supervisor Lindsey Horvath, widely viewed as a potential top contender for the position, has declined to pledge not to run. Instead, she criticized Barger’s approach in an emailed statement to The Times.

“Pressuring others out of an election is political interference, no matter how many times she calls it ethics,” Horvath said, adding that voters “took this power away from politicians like Supervisor Barger because they wanted to make this choice themselves. She doesn’t get to claw it back and dress up a power grab as an ethics crusade.”

Golfing for Gates

Thirty-four years after he left his post, former Police Chief Daryl F. Gates continues to be an unexpected flashpoint in this year’s mayoral contest.

Raman said during an Oct. 13 debate that the LAPD under Gates was “the gold standard” for its noncooperation with federal immigration enforcement. Bass responded by accusing her of romanticizing a chief who presided over the mistreatment of Black and Latino residents.

Raman initially accused Bass of twisting her words. But this week, the council member began issuing apologies, telling CNN she “should not have said it.”

Although Bass has repeatedly denounced Gates’ 14-year tenure on the campaign trail, one of her biggest financial supporters has been keeping his legacy alive.

The Los Angeles Police Protective League, which represents rank and file officers and is backing Bass, has been a long-standing host of a memorial golf tournament named after Gates, who died in 2010. This year’s was billed as one of the union’s “premier fundraising events.” According to the union, proceeds go to its Officer Needs Help Fund, which helps officers and their families in times of need.

Bass’ campaign, asked about the tournament, did not immediately offer a comment. Neither did Raman and the police union.

Times staff writer David Zahniser contributed.

State of play

— WILL SHE, WON’T HE: Los Angeles County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath endorsed Raman on Tuesday, giving the City Council member a powerful boost in the battle for votes on the Westside and in the San Fernando Valley.

Former Los Angeles mayoral candidate Rick Caruso, however, declined once again to endorse either Bass or Raman in the Nov. 3 runoff election, but expressed what he called “extreme concern” about Raman’s plans to remove Police Chief Jim McDonnell.

— VALLEY RAIL: Construction is set to begin this week on a 6.7-mile rail line linking Van Nuys and Pacoima. The nearly $4-billion project, which will run along Van Nuys Boulevard, will include 11 street-level stations and is projected to open in 2032, according to L.A. Metro, the Los Angeles County transit agency.

— TOP COP FLOP: Raman’s police chief woes continued this week when she was asked by CNN anchor Elex Michaelson to name a police chief she respects. “I don’t know. I don’t know,” she said, before Michaelson continued with another question.

— GHOST OF GASCÓN: In the homestretch of the mayor and city attorney contests, George Gascón has been conjured as a boogeyman by opponents of progressive candidates Marissa Roy and Raman.

— LET THE GAMES BEGIN? The next mayor of Los Angeles will be in the global spotlight in 2028, when L.A. plays host to the Summer Olympic Games. And if Raman prevails over Bass, that mayor will be someone who didn’t even want the Olympics here in the first place.

QUICK HITS

• Where is Inside Safe? The mayor’s signature program did not launch any new encampment operations this week.
• On the docket next week: The DSA National Political Committee will meet Monday to discuss DSA-LA’s endorsement of Raman.

Stay in touch

That’s it for this week! Send your questions, comments and gossip to LAontheRecord@latimes.com. Did a friend forward you this email? Sign up here to get it in your inbox every Saturday morning.

After the L.A. mayoral debate on NBC4 ended Tuesday, reporters rushed downstairs to a courtyard hoping to speak with the candidates or their surrogates.

Speaking for Mayor Karen Bass were Councilmember Monica Rodriguez and State Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur (D-Los Angeles). On the other side, speaking for Councilmember Nithya Raman, the sole spin doctor was Controller Kenneth Mejia.

“What Councilmember Nithya Raman did up there was show a better path, a better vision for what this city could be,” Mejia told reporters outside the NBC4 and Telemundo52 studios in Universal City.

Mejia isn’t just listed as Raman’s top endorser on her campaign website. He’s also her biggest cheerleader, and the only elected official at City Hall publicly supporting her mayoral bid. (Raman’s camp has contended throughout the campaign that endorsements are not necessarily a sign of how the electorate is feeling.)

Of all the elected officials out there, Mejia is an obvious ally for a politician like Raman who has been somewhat ostracized at L.A. City Hall since she announced her candidacy in February. Not a single council member — even her three fellow comrades in the Democratic Socialists of America — has endorsed Raman’s candidacy.

“When you’re in office, once you learn how status quo works and how to game it, you don’t want to change it,” Mejia told The Times, referring to the three DSA council members supporting Bass.

As for Mejia, he doesn’t mind being on the outside.

“It’s been lonely since I’ve been here [at City Hall],” he said.

“People have told me, ‘Kenneth you ruined your political career by endorsing Nithya,’” he said. “I’m honored to be the only one endorsing her … Karen Bass said the political establishment doesn’t like Nithya and I said, ‘So? I won by bucking political establishment.’”

Mejia has turned into an attack dog for Raman over the past few weeks. After endorsing her in July, he has showed up at news conferences with her and posts sometimes multiple times per day on social media supporting her or attacking the mayor.

One reason for his endorsement is that Bass declined to consent to Mejia performing an audit into her signature homelessness program Inside Safe.

Raman, meanwhile, has said she’ll open the books to Mejia.

If Raman wins, she will have a formidable City Hall ally in Mejia, who has not been shy about using social media to attack an assortment of political targets in and outside city government. On Friday, he announced that he had issued subpoenas to LA28, the private Olympic organizing committee, demanding financial records on the planning for the 2028 Games.

A vote, but no endorsement

Fourteen members of the Los Angeles City Council have endorsed Bass (yes, that includes Raman, who subsequently decided to challenge the incumbent).

The sole holdout on the council, Traci Park, made her allegiances — soft as they may be — abundantly clear Wednesday at a town hall in Pacific Palisades when she said she would be voting for Bass but not endorsing her.

“I want some change too,” Park said, addressing her constituents about the mayor’s race. “But the alternative does not actually get us where we want to be. I think it actually impedes our progress.”

“I have deep concerns about the leadership and effectiveness of both candidates. I have personally been deeply frustrated and angry with our current mayor. We have tangled on some major policy issues. But always respectfully.”

Park said that as difficult as things may be now, they could get worse if Raman were elected.

The council member, who represents a large swath of L.A.’s Westside, said she is “very, very concerned” about a Raman mayoralty.

Park represents the Palisades, where the Palisades fire burned last year, destroying thousands of homes and killing 12 people.

Park told The Times in an interview that an endorsement of Bass would have represented “an affirmative statement of support earned based on agreement with someone’s records or positions or accomplishments.”

But Bass is someone Park can work with, the council member told The Times.

“I cannot say the same thing about Nithya Raman. That’s the problem. She doesn’t work with others. I think that deep frustration with her unwillingness to collaborate with others is reflected in the fact that no other council members at all are endorsing her,” Park said.

Bass goes to Ramanland

Bass went hard after Raman at this week’s NBC4/Telemundo 52 debate, accusing her of neglecting constituents in her district, which stretches from Silver Lake to the San Fernando Valley. She pushed even harder the following morning, appearing with some of those dissatisfied residents and business owners in Sherman Oaks.

Standing outside the Valley Inn Restaurant and Martini Bar, Bass said she reached out to Raman early on as mayor to warn her that some of her Valley constituents had contacted the mayor’s office to voice unhappiness with Raman. Bass said she told Raman she was going to meet with them.

“She essentially said to me that … she knew that they didn’t like her, that it was a feeling that was mutual, and to have at it if I want,” Bass said. “To me, I thought that was a strange way to respond.”

Raman spokesperson Liz Garcia denounced Bass’ comments as “bizarre and simply not true,” saying her boss has maintained positive relationships with her constituents. In a statement, she pointed to recent polling that showed Raman with an 8-point lead in the Valley.

“Nithya’s results in her district help explain why: She has reduced encampments, tents and RVs by 70% in her district over the past three years, helped businesses succeed, protected tenants, installed traffic safety upgrades and improved quality of life for residents,” Garcia said.

Raman has been pushing back against the mayor’s claims in other ways, noting that two-thirds of voters in the June 2 primary chose someone other than the incumbent.

During this week’s debate, Raman criticized Bass for boasting that she had given Sherman Oaks residents her personal cell number, saying it showed that regular government operations are dysfunctional.

Standing outside the martini bar, Bass acknowledged that her own staffers aren’t always happy about her generosity with her cell number. But things were worse when she was a member of Congress, she said.

“My cellphone was on my business card,” Bass said.

State of play

— BLOW FOR BLOW: The gloves came off in the final debate between Bass and Raman this week, with the two candidates trading verbal jabs over public safety, the Palisades fire and the fate of Police Chief Jim McDonnell. Meanwhile, here’s who three L.A. Times columnists believe won the debate.

— A MOVING TARGET: Raman has shifted her position on police hiring, public safety spending, the so-called mansion tax and other issues, causing some to question what she stands for. Raman has defended her various policy shifts, saying she made them after receiving new information or recognizing changed circumstances.

— CHIEF AMONG THEM: Raman and Bass have diverged over whether to keep Chief McDonnell. Raman said she would replace the chief if she becomes mayor, although she offered mixed messages on the timing. Bass said that McDonnell’s replacement before the 2028 Olympics could throw the LAPD into turmoil.

— GATES-GATE: Bass denounced Raman for saying the “gold standard” for the LAPD’s noncooperation with immigration enforcement took place during the tenure of former police chief Daryl Gates. Bass suggested Raman is not in touch with the city’s Black community, while Raman said the mayor had deliberately twisted her words.

— HOPE FOR HOUSING: Both Bass and Raman have been talking up their work on housing affordability. Bass said her administration has fast-tracked tens of thousands of units of affordable housing, while Raman has boasted of her success in enacting the strongest tenant protections in L.A. in 40 years.

— FIGHTING FRAUD: Los Angeles County voters are concerned about a host of voter fraud issues that could disrupt the Nov. 3 general election, even though they have a high degree of confidence in local elections officials, according to a new poll funded by the nonprofit California Community Foundation.

QUICK HITS

• Where is Inside Safe? The mayor’s signature program did not have an operation this week.
• On the docket next week: The final, pre-election campaign finance statements are due in Los Angeles runoff contests on Thursday.

Stay in touch

That’s it for this week! Send your questions, comments and gossip to LAontheRecord@latimes.com. Did a friend forward you this email? Sign up here to get it in your inbox every Saturday morning.

In the Los Angeles mayoral debate Tuesday night, I was reminded of two things.

First, as I’ve said before, it’s no surprise that roughly one-third of likely voters remain undecided with less than three weeks to go until election day.

Second, there is one key difference between the two candidates: We know who Mayor Karen Bass is, but we don’t yet know who Councilmember Nithya Raman is, even though she’s been leading in most polls.

Those two points are connected. I think a majority of voters want a change at City Hall because of the marginal progress on homelessness, the erosion of basic services and the bad decisions before and after the Palisades disaster, among a host of other issues.

But they’re not sure what they’d be getting in Raman.

Why not?

If you haven’t already seen the story a few days ago by The Times’ longtime City Hall reporting ace, Dave Zahniser, you need to check it out right here.

The headline neatly sums it up:

“L.A. mayoral candidate Nithya Raman has strong opinions. But they often change.”

Raman has flip-flopped so many times, it’s as if she’s having a political identity crisis, which is not a great selling point for a candidate.

She endorsed Bass, an ally, for reelection and then abruptly and surprisingly announced that she was running against her.

She rose to power as a darling of the Democratic Socialists of America and vowed to defund the police, only to later support an LAPD budget increase.

She embraced the so-called mansion tax, then said it needed an overhaul.

She supported and helped fund Bass’ signature homelessness initiative, Inside Safe, and now has turned against it.

“That’s the real wild card,” said Sara Sadhwani, assistant professor of politics at Pomona College. “She has flip-flopped so extensively on policy that it’s unclear which version of her values we would get.”

Look, it’s not uncommon for a candidate of the left, or the right, to move toward the center to broaden support. And there’s nothing wrong with learning on the job and evolving. It’s all too rare, in fact.

The problem for Raman is that in somersaulting around on core issues, she’s alienating some of the people she would need as allies in order to be an effective mayor.

They might come around, because in the city’s shared system of power, there are times when the City Council and mayor need to paddle in the same direction in order to get anywhere. But among the 15 City Council members, 13 have endorsed Bass, and that support includes even the DSA wing of the council.

I like the idea of a rebel as L.A. mayor, but the job is hard enough with City Council allies. Without them, Raman could be cooked. And it’s not as if she’d have an easy time winning support for much of anything from the powerful public employee unions and traditional business interests, which are for the most part aligned with Bass, for better and for worse.

Both candidates had their moments in the debate, although I gave the edge to Bass. During The Times’ live chat, I said I think L.A. really needs a leadership change, and I think Raman did not prove that she’s the answer.

It’s probably the second-most important political job in the state, in one of the great cities of the world, and along with the ducking and punching, I wanted more love, more poetry, more unbridled passion and a contagious sense of possibility.

And please, all you Spencer Pratt toadies, don’t send me your whiny little notes about how he was the guy all along. Identifying some of the obvious problems is easy enough. (I do it all the time.) Having a plan is another matter, and that’s why I never ran for mayor, and why Pratt faded out of the picture.

So what next, as the final three weeks of the campaign play out?

If I were Raman, who is 45, I’d go heavy on touting the work she’s done on eviction protections and capping rent hikes, because nailing down younger voters could give her the keys to the throne. On homelessness, she knows the issue better than most, has detailed what’s wrong with the Bass program, has made headway in her own district, and has laid out a plan to speed up progress and efficiency citywide.

But her best argument is that City Hall and the entrenched political establishment need a major shake-up, because the machine is now a jalopy.

“We cannot afford another four years of decline, of mismanagement, of excuses,” Raman said in the debate.

As for Bass, 73, you can’t count her out just yet because she’s a fighter, and she’s better at campaigning than at being mayor. She also is likely to benefit from the fact that older voters — who are most likely to go to the polls — favor her by a huge margin.

“You are not ready for prime time,” Bass told her former ally during the debate, and Bass also hammered Raman for taking “different positions on different days of the week.”

In 2005, Mayor Jim Hahn became the first L.A. mayor to lose a reelection bid in more than three decades, falling to Antonio Villaraigosa. It was a rout, at 58% for Villaraigosa to 41% for Hahn.

I don’t see a rout this time.

The question for Los Angeles is this:

Have you had enough of the mayor you know, and are you ready to roll the dice on someone you don’t?

steve.lopez@latimes.com

Karen Bass and Nithya Raman faced off Tuesday night in a debate hosted by NBC4 and Telemundo52 in Universal City. It was the L.A. mayoral candidates’ last head-to-head before the Nov. 3 election.

Times columnists Lorraine Ali, Gustavo Arellano and Steve Lopez weigh in on the highlights and lowlights.

Arellano: Raman had the line of the night at the very beginning, channeling — of all politicians — Ronald Reagan, one of the last people you’d think of as an Angeleno, even though he absolutely was.

“Are you better off than you were four years ago?” she asked while looking directly into the camera.

For the vast majority of L.A. residents, the answer is a resounding no.

Up until tonight, Raman has done a good job of communicating a message of hope and change, while Bass, as the incumbent, has repeatedly tripped on her record over the biblically bad four years of her first term.

But I didn’t hear that Raman tonight — partly because Bass made her play defense, from her first answer to her closing statement.

The mayor won the debate, if we’re judging by forensics. She rarely looked down at her notepad, unlike Raman. It’s something I’ve never noticed about Raman before — either a new nervous tic, or an indication that the city councilmember can’t seem to speak with conviction, which has been a frequent critique against her.

Bass’ barrages got to Raman more than a few times, leading her to talk over the NBC and Telemundo moderators or even shush them. A whining Raman is not a good Raman, which her advisors need to drill into her sooner rather than later.

But Raman’s answers never meandered and weren’t too elliptical, even when she was pressed by the able moderators. Since she’s ahead in most reputable polls, Raman’s job for the night was not failing — and she cleared that low, low hurdle.

Bass, meanwhile, needed to deliver a knockout punch. Instead, as a politico friend who cares for neither candidate texted me after the debate, she won one round. There are only so many more rounds before Election Day for her to catch up — and Bass can’t rely on just winning on points anymore, especially with an opponent who’s now running like she’s ahead.

During closing remarks, Raman hearkened back to her Reagan shout-out, stating, “We cannot afford another four years of decline, of mismanagement, of excuses.” She then pivoted to her positivity message, smiling while proclaiming, “We can be joyful and ambitious again.” The more she sticks to that upbeat vibe, the better she comes off to a voter base tired of the doom and gloom that has fallen over L.A. under Bass.

Bass, meanwhile, came off as funereal, beginning with, “It has been the honor of a lifetime to serve in the city that I was born and raised.” That’s how you start a retirement announcement, not another four-year term. Let’s see what the voters say on Election Day.

Incumbent Karen Bass during a mayoral debate against City Councilmember Nithya Raman Tuesday night.

(Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times)

City Councilmember Nithya Raman during Tuesday night’s debate against Mayor Karen Bass.

(Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times)

Lopez: After watching the debate, I don’t think this thing is over.

Yes, Raman has been ahead in polling, and Bass is saddled with high negativity ratings, the baggage of the Palisades fire and the continued challenge of homelessness.

But this debate could have been a knockout punch for Raman, and instead, I think Bass won the night, not just by touting her achievements and responding sharply to criticism, but by seeming to have a better command of the moment.

My colleague Lorraine Ali made a good point — how many people were actually watching this debate? Probably not many, so it’s not like this one-hour back-and-forth tips the scale.

But as has been noted, a huge percentage of likely voters remain undecided. Maybe that’s because they’re not in love with either candidate. Or maybe they’re ready to move on from Bass but aren’t sure about who Raman really is. If they watched tonight, looking for an answer, I’m not sure they got one.

Raman came into elected office as a darling of the Democratic Socialists of America and was a high-profile member of that wing on the City Council. But even the council’s DSA members didn’t endorse her bid for mayor. In fact, Bass has gotten support from 13 of the 15 council members.

So how will Raman build a coalition in a city where mayoral power is shared with the council, and matters like homelessness are the joint responsibility of the city and the county, and any progress is stymied without strong mayoral relationships in Sacramento and D.C.?

It’s possible that the council will come around to her if she’s elected, because just as the mayor needs the council to get much done, the council needs the mayor.

But I’d like to know more about who Raman is and why she’s flip-flopped so much (on support for the LAPD, on the mansion tax, on the Inside Safe homeless initiative, etc., etc.), as my colleague David Zahniser reported just the other day.

Learning and evolving can be a good thing. But voters need to know who Raman is, what her vision is for the city and how she expects to lead.

I didn’t get that in this debate. Bass, whose first term works against her as much as for her, is still hanging on and hanging in.

It may come down to whether older voters, who are likely to favor Bass, turn out in greater numbers than younger voters, who are likely to favor Raman.

But from where I sit, it ain’t over. Except maybe for the Dodgers.

Ali: Raman was ahead in the polls headed into tonight’s mayoral debate, so her job wasn’t quite as hard as Bass’, who is fighting for her political life. Raman just needed to knock the mayor off balance — then keep her there for an hour. But that didn’t happen.

Bass came off composed, confident and in command of the conversation, while Raman appeared less sure of herself, frequently looking down to check her notes while defending her work on key concerns such as homelessness (until recently, she was chair of the city’s housing and homelessness committee) and attacking Bass for leaving the city “leaderless” during crises such as the Palisades and Lineage fires.

The overall tone of the debate was less heated than when the two candidates met in August to battle it out sans Spencer Pratt, the former reality TV personality and Republican contender who lost in the primary.

But there were moments Tuesday when the women’s history as colleagues — and onetime allies — informed their attacks on one another.

Bass said Raman was “not ready for prime time” and that she had a “contemptuous” relationship with her constituents. Raman continually pointed out that Bass had failed to remedy L.A.’s homelessness crisis, and did so from the perspective of someone who had worked closely with the mayor.

There’s still a question around how many folks actually watched the debate, and if the candidates’ points will resonate in subsequent clips or memes. Neither contender has the charm or spark of, say, New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani, and as vapid as it may sound, charisma matters.

Three weeks out from the election and there still isn’t a lot of excitement over the mayoral choices on the ballot. This debate didn’t help that cause, or juice the race.

Lucky for Bass, she has the presence of a leader, and that gave her the edge over Raman tonight. But was anyone watching beyond my fellow columnists Gustavo Arellano and Steve Lopez?

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and challenger Nithya Raman will be on the same stage Tuesday night for their final debate before the Nov. 3 election, but the two mayoral candidates are expected to come in with starkly different game plans.

With recent polls showing Raman in the lead, the councilmember will likely try to avoid making any kind of flub during the in-studio debate hosted by NBC4 and Telemundo52 in Universal City.

“A successful debate for Raman is one in which not very much happens,” said Dan Schnur, a professor of politics at USC, UC Berkeley and Pepperdine.

Raman floundered at the last NBC4/Telemundo debate during the mayoral primary, when Spencer Pratt was also on stage. She got better marks after a debate with Bass before the Sherman Oaks Homeowners Assn. in August.

Along with avoiding mistakes, Raman will need to paint a positive view of the city she hopes to lead, said Sara Sadhwani, a professor of politics at Pomona College.

“She needs to able to spell out a vision for the city of Los Angeles and inspire confidence that she would be able to deliver on such a vision,” she said.

For Bass, it’s a different task entirely. The mayor was the top vote-getter in the June 2 primary, but numerous several polls now show her trailing. The Berkeley IGS / L.A. Times poll, conducted Sept. 15-20, showed Raman with an 11-point lead over the incumbent.

To gain ground, Bass needs to go on the attack and convince voters that Raman isn’t fit to lead, Schnur said.

“Bass needs to explain to voters why voting for a relatively unproven candidate would be a dangerous risk to take,” he said. “I’m curious if it will go down the road of the nasty,” Sadhwani said.
The debate, being conducted in partnership with Loyola Marymount University, will run from 7 p.m. to 8 p.m. and will be moderated by NBC4 news anchor Colleen Williams, NBC4 chief political reporter Conan Nolan and Telemundo 52 news anchor Alejandra Ortiz.

The Times will have live coverage.

An influencer digs in on Bass

Social media creator Ed Choi made headlines this week, posting and then removing an Instagram video showing him and Raman declaring in unison: “Only you can stop fascist liars.”

The pair used that phrase as an image of Bass appeared on the video. Raman, facing criticism for her words, said she was referring to Trump and Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids, not the mayor or Los Angeles Police Chief Jim McDonnell, and had asked for the video to be taken down.

Choi defended his messaging, saying in a subsequent Instagram video that Bass is in fact a fascist, pointing to to Bass’ decision to appoint McDonnell, a former L.A. County sheriff. He also cited the Los Angeles Police Department’s treatment of anti-ICE demonstrators as evidence that the city is “descending into fascism.

Raman voted in 2024 to support Bass’ selection of McDonnell, even as her fellow Democratic Socialists of America colleagues on the council cast opposed his appointment. On the campaign trail, she has repeatedly criticized McDonnell, saying the LAPD should not have used tear gas on anti-ICE protesters exercising their First Amendment rights.

Choi also claims in his video that Raman is committed to defunding the police. But Raman no longer supports that idea, saying in February that LAPD staffing should not get any smaller.

Banned word lawsuit

When the Los Angeles City Council considered banning the use of the N-word and C-word at its meetings last year, Stacey Segarra-Bohlinger was in attendance to give the politicians a piece of her mind.

“This is going to bring lawsuits,” said Segarra-Bohlinger, who often sings parody songs at council meetings and has been a member of the Sherman Oaks Neighborhood Council.

Segarra-Bohlinger filed suit Tuesday, represented by lawyers with the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. The group contends that word bans — which can lead to people who use those words getting kicked out of meetings and potentially barred from future ones — violate First Amendment protections of free speech.

“The Council has weaponized the Word Ban and Meeting Ban to silence, remove, and prospectively exclude its critics,” asserts Segarra-Bohlinger’s lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles.

Segarra-Bohlinger filed the suit after her repeated use of the C-word at two council meetings last year, once while singing a parody song of the Ghostbusters theme song in which she repeated the line “Council is afraid of the word c—” four times.

Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson is standing by the ban.

“In a moment of very serious attacks on our basic rights in this country, it’s especially absurd that some individuals would waste the court’s time defending the right of racists and misogynists to hurl invectives at the public simply to hear their own profanity,” he said in a statement to The Times.

State of play

—MONEY, MONEY, MONEY: Hedge fund manager Aaron Sosnick dropped another $3 million into Estamos Con Nithya, the pro-Raman independent expenditure committee sponsored by Western States Regional Council of Carpenters. Sosnick, who has been pushing for an expansion of the city’s bike lane network, has now put $6 million into the committee.

— UNION KERFUFFLE: The LAPD’s officer union said Tuesday it will oppose Measure FD, the half-cent sales tax measure on the Nov. 3 ballot pushed by the city firefighters’ union — setting up a bitter and expensive clash between two of the city’s most powerful unions.

— LEFT UNREAD: Citing lingering concerns about the potential misuse of police license plate readers, the Los Angeles City Council voted Tuesday to delay an agreement that would enable the deployment of hundreds of the controversial devices until officials are satisfied that the technology will be wielded responsibly.

— LAUSD WOES: The state’s school Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team concluded that the Los Angeles Unified School District is at “high risk” of insolvency — and needs to move quickly to avoid losing control over budget decisions.

— HIT THE SKIDS: Federal authorities along with local partners like LAPD made more than a dozen arrests on Skid Row during a massive drug trafficking crackdown in the troubled Downtown neighborhood.

— LAPD’S LEGAL BILLS: The city of Los Angeles has shelled out nearly $480 million over the last five and a half years to end legal disputes involving the Police Department, including claims of excessive force, litigation over traffic accidents and cases filed by employees who allegedly faced retaliation after reporting misconduct.

— POLLING UPDATE: New polling from the pro-Nithya Raman independent expenditure group that was conducted between Oct. 2 and Oct. 7 found that Raman is leading the mayor 43% to 33% with 23% undecided. The poll’s margin of error is 3.5%.

— A separate poll sponsored by the United Firefighters of Los Angeles City, Local 112 and conducted between Sept. 25 and Oct. 5 found a tighter race, within the margin of error, with Raman leading 35% to 33% with 19% undecided. That poll’s margin of error was 4%.

— A third poll conducted for the Bass independent expenditure group Unidos con Bass of 602 likely Latino voters found the incumbent ahead by 12 points, 40% to 28% for Raman. The poll, conducted between Oct. 1 and Oct. 8, has a margin of error was 4%. That’s a 36-point swing from a UC Berkeley IGS/L.A. Times poll from September that found Raman ahead with Latinos by 24 points, 45% to 21%.

QUICK HITS

• Where is Inside Safe? The mayor’s signature program went to Councilmember Ysabel Jurado‘s district on Santa Fe Avenue and 23rd Street and moved 35 people indoors.
• On the docket next week: Bass and Raman will square off in a debate Tuesday night at 7:00 p.m. on NBC4/KNBC and Telemundo 52/KVEA.

Stay in touch

That’s it for this week! Send your questions, comments and gossip to LAontheRecord@latimes.com. Did a friend forward you this email? Sign up here to get it in your inbox every Saturday morning.

Citing lingering concerns about the potential misuse of police license plate readers, the Los Angeles City Council voted Tuesday to delay an agreement that would enable the deployment of hundreds of the controversial devices until officials are satisfied that the technology will be wielded responsibly.

By a 10-4 vote, the council opted to overrule approval of the 10-year, $235-million contract between the Los Angeles Police Department and Axon Enterprise, halting a deal that had previously been signed off on by the Board of Police Commissioners.

Axon is seeking to outfit hundreds of LAPD patrol squads with plate scanners, which track the movements of vehicles around the city. Under the agreement, the company would also replace thousands of body-worn cameras, supply new Tasers, provide cloud video storage, and roll out a program that uses artificial intelligence to assist officers in writing police reports.

In addition, Axon is seeking to launch a pilot program that would attach plate scanners to streetlights around Los Angeles, offering the LAPD a souped-up version of its current systems by using AI to identify vehicles, license plates, pedestrians and objects that appear on streets and sidewalks.

The council’s decision — which was preceded by several fiery comments from members of the public who oppose the use of license plate readers — sends the contract back to the Police Commission for reconsideration.

A commission spokesperson said that the board’s members weren’t immediately available for comment.

Several council members voiced unease about proceeding without a better sense of the LAPD’s internal policy on license plate reader use. Delaying the contract, Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez said, would give the public and city leaders more time to review the safeguards and policies written into the LAPD’s proposed memorandum of understanding with Axon.

Councilmember Traci Park, a staunch supporter of plate reader technology, said there is an urgent need to get the devices “up and running.”

Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez shot back that it would be irresponsible to deploy the technology, citing news reports about officers misusing plate readers to stalk romantic partners and track women seeking reproductive health services.

Earlier this year, the LAPD allowed its agreement with one of Axon’s chief competitors, Flock Safety, to lapse over concerns that the Trump administration is using the data it collects to locate immigrants targeted for deportation. Police officials say they no longer have access to the company’s cameras, many of which are owned by homeowners associations and other private groups.

LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell and other department leaders have pushed to expand the use of license plate readers, saying they are a valuable tool for solving crimes, enabling investigators to more easily locate stolen vehicles and fugitives.

Hernandez noted that other police technologies, such as a robot dog used in situations involving barricaded suspects, had quietly moved from a pilot to a full-fledged program without input from the council.

Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson said he still had privacy concerns about license plate readers, while noting that their deployment along the Figueroa corridor had assisted in the rescue of dozens of juvenile sex trafficking victims.

“Now having said that, if I’m honest I don’t know what else the cameras are doing,” he said.

Councilmember Monica Rodriguez said that as the license plate reader technology is adopted by other, non-police agencies such as sanitation and street services, the city needs a universal policy governing its use.

The matter will next be heard by the public safety committee — likely at its Oct. 20 meeting — before being taken up by the full council later that week.

In a presentation to the Police Commission last month, the LAPD’s technology czar, Dean Gialamas, said that the department understood the privacy and civil liberty concerns raised about companies such as Flock. This summer, the department announced it was pausing its relationship with the Atlanta-based firm, but police officials have said they are still hopeful to negotiate a new deal with the company that would include more data-sharing safeguards.

Much like the initial debate over the use of forensic DNA testing, Gialamas said, the answer wasn’t to abandon the technology but to create safeguards to “ensure responsible and trusted use.”

Gialamas told commissioners that Axon had agreed to terms that would give the LAPD complete ownership of the data captured and bar the sharing of data with federal authorities. The proposed deal, he said, would also limit the use of plate readers to criminal investigations, missing persons cases and other “serious public safety matters.” Investigators, for instance, would not be able to conduct searches based solely on protests or other 1st Amendment-protected activities, he said.

Under the proposed contract, investigators would no longer be given “unfettered access” to license plate data and the retention period would be significantly cut down, he said. The department would also be permitted to conduct regular audits to flag officers who use the system frequently or conduct unusual searches.

A report issued last month by the LAPD inspector general’s office found numerous “limitations” in the department’s existing agreements with its three plate reader vendors — Flock, Axon and Motorola — including a lack of clear language about how long data are retained and how they are shared with third parties or other law enforcement agencies.

The inspector general recommended that the department update its current license plate reader contracts to address data security and privacy concerns, conduct regular audits and develop standardized rules for traffic stops based on plate reader hits.

Hours before Nithya Raman took the stage at Jewish Federation L.A.’s mayoral forum this week, Mayor Karen Bass’ campaign blasted out a press release accusing the council member of skipping a City Council Jewish Heritage Month event to appear on Hasan Piker’s livestream.

The Raman camp’s response: “The Mayor is deliberately spreading misinformation that the public record directly contradicts,” said Liz Garcia, a campaign spokesperson.

Piker is a left-wing streamer on the platform Twitch and a fierce critic of Israel. Raman appeared on his stream on May 15, where he asked her if she thought Israel was committing genocide in Palestine. She said she did.

That same day, Raman missed a Jewish Heritage Month event at City Hall. Debbie Paperman, who is on the executive board of Democrats for Israel Los Angeles, said Raman told her that she had not been feeling well.

The Bass campaign, citing the fact that Raman appeared on Piker’s stream the same day, fired off an email to reporters claiming the councilmember had lied about her reasons for missing the Jewish heritage event.

The Raman campaign said that Raman was, in fact, ill.

Video from the May 15 council meeting shows Raman was present at the start of the meeting, but no longer at her seat during the heritage event, in which Councilmember Bob Blumenfield celebrated Jewish athletes. More than an hour later, Raman was back in council to make a speech and introduce other speakers for Hapa Day, celebrating people of mixed Asian and Pacific Island heritage, during which she said she wasn’t feeling well.

Raman’s team said she was still at City Hall during the Jewish Heritage Month event, but that she left council chambers due to her illness.

She felt better later that afternoon, the Raman camp said, allowing her to appear on Piker’s show.

Paperman said she wasn’t convinced. “It happened that you were sick for the multiple hours this was going on and you happened to get better to go on this psycho’s stream?” said Paperman. “I don’t believe that.”

Piker, meanwhile, shot back at the mayor for using his name to try to dissuade voters from supporting Raman.

“Karen Bass is deploying the same nasty tactic that Donald Trump used recently at a press conference, wondering out loud why any Jewish person would vote for Democrats, due to my presence in the big tent,” he told The Times in a text message.

Piker said he will vote for Raman, though he supported Bass against billionaire Rick Caruso in 2022.

“I was also a fan of [her] past work in Cuba,” he told The Times. “Karen Bass used to be quite the radical.”

Bass swings up in new poll

Bass will need to rely on undecided Republican and conservative voters to propel her to a mayoral victory, a new poll paid for by a group supporting her found.

The incumbent mayor is trailing Raman by 4 percentage points, 39% to 35%, with a quarter of the electorate still undecided, according to the initial results from an FM3 Research poll that was commissioned by the Central City Assn.’s PAC, an independent expenditure group supporting the mayor.

When the pollsters gave likely voters additional, critical information about both candidates, Bass shot up by 5 points and took a narrow lead over Raman, 40% to 39%, with 21% undecided, according to FM3.

“The undecided voters — including many that say they will refuse to make a choice between Bass and Raman by Election Day — are disproportionately: Republicans, conservatives, 65+, homeowners, Democratic women over the age of 50 and those who do not hold a college degree,” wrote the research company in a polling memorandum.

The poll surveyed 809 likely L.A. voters from Sept. 21-28. It has a 3.5% margin of error.

“The mayoral race remains a statistical tie,” said Nella McOsker, the president of the Central City Assn. “Our poll demonstrates that some of the most reliable voting blocs swing to Bass once they fully learn both candidates’ records.”

A poll conducted between Sept. 15 and Sept. 20 by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, co-sponsored by The Times, found Raman was ahead 39% to 28%.

Raman allies engage in trash talk

A woman walks out of her home carrying a full garbage bag, then starts venting about the high cost of trash pickup.

“Karen Bass has nearly bankrupted L.A., so the city doubled my trash fees. Isn’t L.A. expensive enough?” the woman says angrily, before slamming the lid on a black trash bin.

That message is at the heart of a campaign video created by Streets For All, a transportation advocacy group now spending about $1.2 million to promote Raman and tear down Bass.

That ad is missing a key piece of information: Raman voted to hike those trash fees several times last year, even as two of her council colleagues spoke out against them.

“I was one of two no votes,” said City Councilmember Monica Rodriguez, who is supporting Bass’ reelection, in an interview. “She never once pushed back.”

Rodriguez called the ad misleading, saying it implies that Raman was an opponent of the fee hikes.

Michael Schneider, who runs the Streets For All campaign committee, defended the 14-second spot, saying council members hiked the trash fees to make up for bad budget decisions made by the mayor — including her support for a $2.6-billion upgrade of the Convention Center.

The council boosted the trash fee to $55.95 per month last year for small apartment buildings, up from $24.33. For single-family homes, the monthly fee was also hiked to $55.95, up from $36.32.

The city’s budget advisors said the increases were needed in large part because the monthly fees had not been increased in 17 years. As a result, L.A.’s residential trash customers were not being charged the full cost of garbage pickup, leaving the city budget to cover the difference.

“Kick it in the Park” gets Olympic makeover

L.A.’s summer of 2026 will be remembered for stifling heat, innumerable Dodgers injuries and, especially, World Cup watch parties.

Teams, corporate sponsors and the city of Los Angeles welcomed in the world, producing large crowds and kumbaya moments — with fans of opposing teams partying side-by-side in (relative) peace and harmony.

Mayor Karen Bass’ “Kick it in the Park” events drew a total of 45,000 fans over the length of the quadrennial soccer tournament. A survey of about 2,000 of them registered overwhelming support for the free shindigs.

Paul Krekorian, executive director of the mayor’s Office of Major Events, declared victory in a meeting with City Council members this week. He also said that substantial planning is already underway to bring the city even more viewing parties and “activations” during the 2028 Olympics.

While the city hosted a maximum of three viewing parties a day during the World Cup, it plans to stage as many as 15 a day when the Olympics come to town. A list has been drawn up of possible locations for the festivities — spread around every corner of the city and distant from Olympic venues to avoid overcrowding.

Among the possible viewing party locations: MacArthur Park, the Greek Theatre, Pan Pacific Park, Leimert Park Plaza, Koreatown, Penmar Recreation Center, Echo Park Lake, Angels Gate Park and the Watts Towers.

Given the welter of Olympic events, it will be a challenge to schedule the parties, whose centerpieces are usually big screen projections of the live events, with food and live performances often thrown in.

State of play

— SPLIT ON GAZA: Bass and Raman split on Tuesday over whether Israel has committed genocide in Gaza during the Israel Gaza war. The two candidates gave their opinions during a forum hosted by Jewish Federation Los Angeles. Raman said she agrees with the experts who use the term, while Bass said she would not use the term genocide to describe Israel’s counteroffensive in Gaza.

— WILDFIRE FAILURES: A long-awaited independent investigation commissioned by Gov. Gavin Newsom offered the most in-depth review of the Jan. 7, 2025, Palisades and Eaton fires, describing the chaos and poor communication that made firefighting, rescues and evacuations even more difficult. The 724-page report also cited the Los Angeles Fire Department’s failure to fully extinguish the Jan. 1 Lachman fire, which reignited days later, and Los Angeles County’s failure to provide timely evacuation alerts in Altadena.

— ESTAMOS CON WHOM?: Recent polling by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, co-sponsored by The Times, found that likely Latino voters favor Councilmember Raman over incumbent Bass by a wide margin — 45% to 21%, with 34% undecided. That’s an even bigger lead than Raman had over Bass with voters overall in the most recent Berkeley IGS/L.A. Times poll.

— VOTER GUIDES: The Times released its much-anticipated voter guides for the November election this week, including a mayoral guide and a guide to the Council District 9 race, among many others.

— OLYMPIC OBSCURA: The nonprofit organizer of the 2028 Summer Olympics, LA28, has provided less information in its annual reports than it agreed to in a 2021 contract with the city. The group has stopped reporting the contracts it signs over $1 million, leaving taxpayers with less information about the work going into the Games. LA28 says it has provided all necessary info.

The city also asked LA28 to take out a $650-million insurance policy, and agree to cover any potential losses above that amount, should the Games be canceled by a calamity.

— LAPD BLUES: Secret recordings documenting LAPD officers making racist comments have renewed questions about whether the force, which is now less than 50% white, has made forward progress on stamping out prejudice in its ranks.

— STORM’S BREWING: L.A.’s sanitation agency is bracing for the coming ‘Super’ El Niño, which could wreak havoc with the city’s Hyperion sewage treatment plant.

QUICK HITS

• Where is Inside Safe? The mayor’s signature program went to East Hollywood in Hugo Soto-Martínez’s district on Tuesday, where they moved 61 people indoors near Beverly Boulevard and Madison Avenue. On Thursday, Inside Safe moved 27 people indoors near Louvre Street and Ralston Avenue in Pacoima in Rodriguez’s district.
• On the docket next week: On Wednesday, the City Council’s transportation committee will be discussing an independent evaluation of the city’s Vision Zero Program.

Stay in touch

That’s it for this week! Send your questions, comments and gossip to LAontheRecord@latimes.com. Did a friend forward you this email? Sign up here to get it in your inbox every Saturday morning.

Gaspar founded Gaspar Insurance in 2008 and sold it in 2021 after he built it into one of the largest independent insurance companies in the Valley, and worked with several nonprofit and community groups: Discovery Cube Los Angeles, YMCA of Metropolitan Los Angeles, Viewpoint School‘s board of trustees and the West Valley/Warner Center Chamber of Commerce.

He would bring a pro-business perspective to City Council and help it make decisions that support business owners and residents alike.

Gaspar came in first during the primary election with 46.1% of the vote. He is running with support from groups including the Valley Industry & Commerce Assn. and the Los Angeles Police Protective League, a union representing LAPD officers. He’s also been endorsed by Blumenfield, L.A. County Supervisor Kathryn Barger, real estate developer Rick Caruso and former Democratic state Assemblymember Bob Hertzberg, Worth Girvan’s former boss.

Worth Girvan meets voters during a neighborhood event in Canoga Park’s Lanark Park.

(Gina Ferazzi/Los Angeles Times)

Worth Girvan is a longtime city and county employee, with nearly 20 years working in public service. Prior to running, she was L.A. County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath’s district director for three years, handling constituent services on the Westside and in the Valley.

Before that, she spent eight years as an aide to Hertzberg, who failed to take Horvath’s seat in 2022.

Worth Girvan secured 42.5% of the vote in the primary, only 4% shy of her opponent.

Worth Girvan said her two decades of experience at the city and county levels have helped her build relationships and gain deep knowledge of the communities she works with.

“It allows me to be able to make a phone call and to be able to know how to bring about the change that we need,” she said.

She’s been endorsed by the L.A. County Democratic Party and labor unions including the local chapters of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and the Service Employees International Union. She’s also been endorsed by Horvath and former L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.