Council

Four countries vote to stop sanctions from being reintroduced, while nine vote against sanctions relief.

The United Nations Security Council has voted not to permanently lift economic sanctions on Iran over its nuclear programme, delivering a major economic blow that Tehran claims is “politically biased”.

A resolution on Friday to block the sanctions fell in the Security Council by a vote of four to nine, meaning European sanctions will return by September 28 if no significant deal is reached beforehand.

Russia, China, Pakistan and Algeria voted to stop the sanctions from being reintroduced, while nine UNSC members voted against sanctions relief. Two countries abstained.

The vote follows a 30-day process launched in late August by Britain, France and Germany – known as the E3 – to reinstate sanctions unless Tehran meets their demands.

Iran says Europeans ‘misusing JCPOA mechanism’

Iranian officials have accused the European trio of abusing the dispute mechanism contained in the 2015 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), which allows for the application of sanctions under a “snapback mechanism”.

“What Europeans are doing is politically biased and politically motivated … They are wrong on different levels by trying to misuse the mechanism embedded in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA),” Deputy Foreign Minister Saeed Khatibzadeh said.

The Europeans offered to delay the snapback for up to six months if Iran restored access for UN nuclear inspectors and engaged in talks with the US.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi claimed that Tehran had presented a “reasonable and actionable plan” and insisted Iran remains committed to the NPT.

But the E3 accuse Tehran of breaching their nuclear commitments, including by building up a uranium stockpile of more than 40 times the level permitted under the JCPOA. The UN’s nuclear watchdog board also ruled back in June that Iran was not respecting international nuclear safeguards.

‘Clock is ticking for high-level diplomacy’

The UNSC vote allowing sanctions to snap back is not the complete “end of negotiations,” as the parties have just over a week to come up with a last-ditch deal, said Al Jazeera’s Diplomatic Editor James Bays, reporting from the UN.

“It’s the week where world leaders are all here in New York for the high-level meeting of the UN General Assembly, so it sets the stage for high-level diplomacy between Iran and particularly the three European countries,” said Bays. But “we’re reaching the end of this high-stakes diplomacy, and the clock really is ticking.”

Under the JCPOA – signed by Iran, the United States, China, Russia and the EU – Tehran agreed to curb its nuclear programme in return for sanctions relief. But the agreement unravelled in 2018 after then-US President Donald Trump pulled out and reimposed unilateral sanctions.

Tensions escalated further earlier this summer, when Israel launched a 12-day war on Iran, with Israeli and US forces striking several nuclear facilities.

Iran has repeatedly denied pursuing nuclear weapons but affirmed its right to peacefully pursue nuclear energy.

The Los Angeles City Council on Wednesday approved a fivefold increase to its contract with a law firm that drew heated criticism for the invoices it submitted in a high-stakes homelessness case.

Three months ago, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher billed the city $1.8 million for two weeks of legal work, with 15 of its attorneys billing nearly $1,300 per hour. By Aug. 8, the cost of the firm’s work had jumped to $3.2 million.

The price tag infuriated some on the council, who pointed out that they had approved a three-year contract capped at $900,000 — and specifically had asked for regular updates on the case.

Despite those concerns, the council voted 10-3 Wednesday to increase the firm’s contract to nearly $5 million for the current fiscal year, which ends in June 2026. Councilmember Katy Yaroslavsky supported the move, saying Gibson Dunn’s work has been “essential to protecting the city’s interests.”

“At the same time, we put new oversight in place to ensure any additional funding requests come back to council before more money is allocated,” said Yaroslavsky, who heads the council’s budget committee.

Councilmembers Tim McOsker, Adrin Nazarian and Nithya Raman voted against the contract increase.

McOsker, who also sits on the budget committee, said he was not satisfied with Gibson Dunn’s effort to scale back the amount it is charging the city. After the council asked for the cost to be reduced, the firm shaved $210,000 off of the bill, he said.

“I think Gibson should have given up more, and should have been pressed to give up more,” McOsker said after the vote.

A Gibson Dunn attorney who heads up the team that represents the city did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Meanwhile, an aide to City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto welcomed the council’s vote.

“We are pleased that the City Council recognizes and appreciates the strong legal representation that Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher has provided and continues to provide to the city,” said Karen Richardson, a spokesperson for Feldstein Soto, in a statement.

Gibson Dunn was retained by the city in mid-May, one week before a major hearing in the case filed by the L.A. Alliance for Human Rights, a nonprofit group that has been at odds with the city over its handling of the homelessness crisis since 2020.

The city reached a settlement with the L.A. Alliance in 2022, agreeing to create 12,915 homeless shelter beds or other housing opportunities. Since then, the L.A. Alliance has repeatedly accused the city of failing to comply with the terms of the settlement agreement.

In May, a federal judge overseeing the settlement called a seven-day hearing to determine whether he should take authority over the city’s homelessness programs from Mayor Karen Bass and the City Council, and hand them over to a third party. Alliance lawyers said during those proceedings that they wanted to call Bass and two council members to testify.

In the run-up to that hearing, the city hired Gibson Dunn, a powerhouse law firm that secured a landmark Supreme Court ruling that upheld laws prohibiting homeless people from camping in public spaces.

Feldstein Soto has praised Gibson Dunn’s work in the L.A. Alliance case, saying the firm helped the city retain control over its homelessness programs, while also keeping Bass and the two council members off the stand. She commended the firm for getting up to speed on the settlement, mastering a complex set of policy matters within a week.

Feldstein Soto initially hoped to increase the size of the Gibson Dunn contract to nearly $6 million through 2027 — only to be rebuffed by council members unhappy with the billing situation. On Wednesday, at the recommendation of the council’s budget committee, the council signed off on nearly $5 million over one year.

A portion of that money will likely go toward the filing of an appeal of a federal judge’s order in the LA Alliance case, Feldstein Soto said in a memo.

Faced with lingering criticism from council members, Feldstein Soto agreed to help with the cost of the Gibson Dunn contract, committing $1 million from her office’s budget. The council also tapped $4 million from the city’s “unappropriated balance,” an account for funds that have not yet been allocated.

By transferring the money to the Gibson Dunn contract, the council depleted much of the funding that would have gone to outside law firms over the current budget year, said McOsker, who called the move “bad fiscal management.”

Raman, who heads the council’s homelessness committee, said her dissenting vote wasn’t about the price of the services charged by Gibson Dunn, but rather the fact that so much was spent without council approval.

“As someone who is watching that money very closely, I was frustrated,” she said. “So my ‘no’ vote was based on that frustration.”

A $2.7-billion plan to expand the Los Angeles Convention Center is in jeopardy after a narrowly divided City Council committee opted on Tuesday to recommend a much smaller package of repairs instead.

Amid mounting concerns that the expansion could siphon money away from basic city services, the Budget and Finance Committee voted 3 to 2 to begin work on a less expensive package of upgrades that would be completed in time for the 2028 Olympic Games.

Councilmember Katy Yaroslavsky said the expansion proposal — which would add an estimated 325,000 square feet to the facility, spanning both sides of Pico Boulevard — is too risky for the city, both in terms of the tight construction timeline and the overall cost.

“The risks to the city’s finances are too great — and risks us having to cut our city workforce to offset the costs of this project for years to come,” said Yaroslavsky, who heads the committee.

Yaroslavsky proposed the less expensive alternative plan, drawing “yes” votes from Councilmembers Bob Blumenfield and Eunisses Hernandez. Councilmembers Tim McOsker and Heather Hutt voted against the proposal, saying it was a sudden and huge departure from the original expansion plan.

“I’m not comfortable voting on these recommendations today,” Hutt said. “The substantive changes have not been circulated to the committee members, staff and public — and the public hasn’t been able to give public comment on these last-minute changes that are very significant.”

Both proposals — the expansion and the less expensive package of repairs and upgrades — are set to go before the full City Council on Friday.

Council members have spent the last year trying to find a way to expand the size of the Convention Center, doubling the amount of contiguous meeting space, without also creating an excessive burden on an already stretched city budget. They have received increasingly dire warnings as Friday’s deadline for making a decision approaches.

Chief Legislative Analyst Sharon Tso, who advises the council on policy matters, told the committee Wednesday that she fears the project’s first phase won’t be done in time for the 2028 Games, when the Convention Center will host several competitions, including judo, wrestling and fencing.

Tso also warned that the ongoing cost of the project would make it much more difficult for the city to hire more firefighters, recruit more police officers and pay for such basic services as street repairs. Four months ago, the council approved a budget that closed a $1-billion financial gap, requiring cuts to city personnel.

“We just completed a budget process that was very brutal,” she said. “If you’re happy with the level of service that we have today, then this is the project for you.”

At City Hall, the Convention Center is widely viewed as a facility in need of serious repair, including new elevators and escalators, up-to-date restrooms and overall cosmetic upgrades. Expanding the Convention Center would allow the city to attract much larger national conferences, exhibitions and meetings.

The project, if approved, would connect the Convention Center’s South Hall — whose curving green exterior faces the 10 and 110 freeway interchange — with the West Hall, which is a faded blue.

The council has already pushed for several cost-cutting measures, including the removal of a plaza planned on Figueroa Street. Mayor Karen Bass and the council also have hoped to generate new revenue by installing digital billboards — two of them within view of drivers on the 10 and 110 freeways.

Even with the freeway-facing digital signs, the cost of expanding and operating the Convention Center could reach $160 million in 2031, according to City Administrative Officer Matt Szabo, a high-level budget analyst.

The cost to taxpayers is expected to average about $100 million per year over three decades, according to updated figures prepared by Szabo.

The Convention Center expansion has become a top priority for business groups, labor leaders and community organizations who say that downtown L.A. desperately needs an economic catalyst — one that will creates thousands of construction jobs and spark new business activity.

After the pandemic, office workers never fully returned to downtown, and dozens of stores and restaurants shut their doors. Homelessness and drug addiction also continue to plague portions of downtown.

“We want to see downtown recover. We want it to be a place Angelenos can be proud of, and this is the solution,” Cassy Horton, co-founder of the DTLA Residents Assn., said at the committee hearing.

Labor and business leaders told the council members that the city has a long track record of developing plans for upgrading the Convention Center, only to shelve them once it’s time for a decision.

“For more than a decade, we’ve studied this project, we’ve debated it, we’ve delayed it,” said Nella McOsker, president and chief executive of the Central City Assn., a downtown-based business group. “We’ve been deciding whether or not we are a city that can maintain and invest in this essential asset, and every time we make that delay, the cost increases.”

McOsker is the daughter of Councilmember Tim McOsker, who voted “no” on the repair proposal. An outspoken supporter of the expansion, he argued that the city took on a similar financial burden 30 years ago when it financed the construction of the Convention Center’s South Hall.

Yaroslavsky, in turn, said she was concerned not just about the project’s cost but the potential for it to pull resources away from the Department of Water and Power.

Dave Hanson, senior assistant general manager for the DWP’s power system, told the committee that deploying his workers at the Convention Center could result in delays on utility work elsewhere, including a San Fernando Valley light rail project and the installation of underground power lines in the fire-devastated Pacific Palisades.

“DWP may — we don’t know for sure yet, because they don’t know for sure yet — may have to sideline other critically important projects, including reconstructing the Palisades and all these other projects,” said Yaroslavsky, who represents part of the Westside.

Yaroslavsky’s alternative proposal calls for the city to regroup in four months on strategies for requesting new proposals for expanding the Convention Center, as well as other strategies to “maximize the site’s positive economic impacts.”

Hernandez, whose district includes part of the Eastside, said council members remain open to the idea of the Convention Center expansion as the project heads to a final vote.

“So it’s not that we’ve ruled out any options,” she said. “We’ve added more options to the conversation.”

There are certain first names that are also businesses that tap into the Angeleno collective unconsciousness and bring a smile of familiarity even to those who’ve never patronized the place.

Tommy’s Burgers, especially. Frederick’s of Hollywood. Phillippe the Original. Nate’n Al’s. Lupe’s and Lucy’s.

And, of course, Leonardo’s.

The nightclub chain with five spots across Southern California has entertained patrons since 1972. Its cumbia nights, Mexican regional music performances and a general air of puro pinche parri bridged the gap in the cultural life of Latino L.A. between the days of the Million Dollar Theater and today’s corrido tumbado stars.

Its namesake, Leonardo Lopez, came to Santa Monica from Mexico in the late 1960s, at age 17, to work as a dishwasher and proceeded to create a cultural empire.

On Friday, the Los Angeles City Council honored him in a celebration that reflected the joy and diversity — but especially the resilience — of Latino LA.

His family members count at least 40 businesses among them, including restaurants, banquet halls, concert venues, equestrian sports teams, political firms that work Southern California’s corridors of power, and the Pico Rivera Sports Arena, Southern California’s cathedral of Mexican horse culture. They were one of the main forces in the 2023 fight that carved out exemptions for traditional Mexican horse competitions such as charrería and escaramuza when the L.A. City Council banned rodeos.

“Our family is like a pyramid, with every person supporting each other at every level,” said Leonardo’s son, Fernando. “And my dad is at the very top.”

A resplendent celebration

He and about 40 other relatives went to Friday’s City Council meeting to see their patriarch recognized. They strode through City Hall’s august corridors in charro outfits and Stetsons, berets and hipster glasses, leopard-print blouses and sharp ties — the diversity of the Mexican American experience in an era where too many people want to demonize them.

Leonardo was the most resplendent of them all, sporting an outfit with his initials embroidered on his sleeves and his back. A silver cross on his billowing red necktie gleamed as much as his smile.

“You work and work and work to hope you do something good, and it’s a blessing when others recognize you for it,” Lopez told me in Spanish as we waited in a packed conference room for the council meeting to start. He gestured to everyone. “But this is the true blessing in my life.”

Sitting at the head of a long table, Lopez doted on his grandson but also greeted well-wishers like Esbardo Carreño. He’s a historian who works for the government of Durango, the state where Lopez was born in 1950.

“Don Leonardo came with a bigger vision than others,” Carreño said in Spanish. “But he never left his people back home,” noting how Lopez has funded restoration projects in Durango’s eponymous capital, a welcome arch at the entrance to the entrepreneur’s hometown of La Noria and more.

“My tío and dad and my other tíos made it in L.A. because there was no Plan B,” said Lopez’s nephew, Lalo Lopez. He was shepherding guests toward his uncle while also talking up a fundraiser later that evening at the Sports Arena for L.A. County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath. “That’s a lesson all us kids learned fast.”

Spanish-language reporters pulled Don Leonardo into the City Hall press room for an impromptu conference, where he talked about his career and offered child-rearing advice.

“Get them busy early,” he joked, “so they don’t have that free time to do bad things.”

Lopez motioned to Fernando and his son Fernando Jr. — both wearing charro suits — to join him at the podium.

“I got them to follow me” to be proud of their Mexican heritage. “Today, it’s the reverse — now I follow them!”

Councilmember Monica Rodriguez then grabbed Lopez. The meeting was about to start.

Always the sharpest-dressed member of the council, Rodriguez didn’t disappoint with a taupe-toned tejana that perfectly complemented her gray-streaked hair, black-framed glasses and white outfit.

Her introduction of Lopez was even better.

“His spaces have created a place where we [Latinos] can be authentically who we are,” said Rodriguez, who represents the northeast San Fernando Valley. She praised Lopez’s life’s work as an important balm and corrective “at a time especially when our community is under attack.”

“I want to thank you, Don Leonardo, for being that example of how we can really be the force of resilience and strength in the wake of adversity,” the council member concluded. “It’s a reminder to everyone who’s feeling down that we will persevere.”

Lopez offered a few words of thanks in English, tipping his sombrero to council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson, who had previously honored him in 2017 when each council member recognized an immigrant entrepreneur in their district.

Harris-Dawson returned the respect.

“You are such angels in this city — L.A. is not L.A. without the Lopez family,” he said, noting how two Leonardo’s stood in his South L.A. district and “y’all never left” even as other live music venues did. Harris-Dawson told attendees how the Lopez family had long catered jazz festivals and youth sports leagues without ever asking for anything in return.

“The only time I’ve seen you closed was that weekend of the terrible ICE raids,” Harris-Dawson said. “And you all were back the next week ready to go and you had security out. … Thank you all for treating us like family.”

The Lopez clan gathered around their jefe at the podium for one final photo op. Doctors and contractors, retirees and high schoolers: an all-American family and as Angeleno as they come. See ustedes soon at — where else? — Leonardo’s.

Today’s top stories

Colorado River water flows in the Central Arizona Project aqueduct beside a neighborhood in Phoenix.

(Kelvin Kuo / Los Angeles Times)

The dwindling Colorado River

• A group of experts say Western states urgently need to cut water use to avert a deepening crisis on the Colorado River.
• The river’s major reservoirs are less than one-third full, and another dry winter would push reservoirs toward critically low levels.
• They say the Trump administration should act to ensure reductions in water use.

Trump’s $1.2-billion call to remake UCLA

• A Times review of the Trump administration’s settlement proposal to UCLA lays out sweeping demands on numerous aspects of campus life.
• The government has fined UCLA nearly $1.2 billion to settle allegations of civil rights violations.
• Hiring, admissions and the definitions of gender are among the areas the Department of Justice seeks to change.

A looming fight over vaccines

• After Robert F. Kennedy Jr. ousted vaccine experts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, California is now making its own vaccine guidance.
• The CDC is no longer a trusted source for vaccine guidance, some experts now say.
• California and medical groups are urging more people to get vaccinated against COVID-19 compared with the Trump administration.

Your utility bills

The Emmys were last night

What else is going on

Commentary and opinions

• There will be cooling in all L.A. rentals by 2032. Here’s how contributors Sophia M. Charan and Hye Min Park suggest you survive the heat until then.
• Wait, what happened to saving the children? California columnist Anita Chabria points out that California congressmen dodge the issue.

This morning’s must-read

Other must-reads

For your downtime

(Amir Mrzae / For The Times)

Going out

Staying in

And finally … your photo of the day

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

Today’s great photo is from Times photographer Allen J. Schaben of ctor Kathy Bates on the red carpet at the 77th Primetime Emmy Awards. See Allen’s photos from the awards show here.

Have a great day, from the Essential California team

Jim Rainey, staff writer
Diamy Wang, homepage intern
Izzy Nunes, audience intern
Kevinisha Walker, multiplatform editor
Andrew Campa, Sunday writer
Karim Doumar, head of newsletters

How can we make this newsletter more useful? Send comments to [email protected]. Check our top stories, topics and the latest articles on latimes.com.

Good morning, and welcome to L.A. on the Record — our City Hall newsletter. It’s Noah Goldberg, with an assist from David Zahniser, giving you the latest on city and county government.

Los Angeles City Councilmember Monica Rodriguez does not run. As in, she is not a runner.

So why did she post an Instagram reel on a new personal account Tuesday of herself inside a Foot Locker, asking a salesperson for recommendations for a running shoe?

“I am an avid precinct walker,” Rodriguez said in an interview with The Times on Tuesday, hours after she posted the reel. “I needed a pair of new shoes — good supportive shoes for my run, and the announcements will be imminent.”

The North Valley councilmember bought the Cloud 6 On running shoes highlighted in the video. Now, rumors are flying around City Hall about what she may be considering running for — if not a marathon.

The three options being bandied about are a run to challenge Mayor Karen Bass in the upcoming 2026 election, a possible run for controller against Kenneth Mejia, or just a cheekily mysterious announcement of her reelection bid for her own council seat.

“It’s clear she’s weighing options which may include running for mayor against Mayor Bass,” said Sam Yebri, a lawyer who is board president of Thrive LA, a moderate PAC focused on quality-of-life issues in the city. (Yebri commented with a clapping hands emoji on Rodriguez’s Instagram post, and Thrive LA responded, “We’re ready!”)

Rodriguez would not say what her plans are for 2026, though she said that more social media posts will be forthcoming and that she is definitely running for something.

The councilmember has been a sharp critic of the mayor for years now. She has lambasted the mayor’s signature Inside Safe homelessness program, arguing that it lacks transparency. She has also repeatedly called for the council to end the mayor’s state of emergency on homelessness, even though she voted for it when it was first passed.

“We were supposed to get reports on what money was spent on. It took until 2024 that we were finally told how much Inside Safe was costing per room, per night,” Rodriguez said in an interview.

Rodriguez said she and other councilmembers had to fight to even get information released on where Inside Safe was conducting cleanup operations and where homeless residents were sent after the operations.

The councilmember also opposed the mayor’s ousting of Fire Chief Kristin Crowley following the January wildfires, saying that Bass used Crowley to deflect criticism of her own absence in Ghana at the start of the conflagrations. She also called on the mayor to reinstate Crowley.

“On Jan. 7, she was praising the fire chief and her response,” Rodriguez said at the time. “And then it appears, as the heat kicked up [over] her absence, she continued to try and attribute blame to someone else.”

Rodriguez was first elected in 2017 to the seventh district and was reelected in 2022.

If she were to announce a mayoral run, she would be Bass’ first major opponent.

There has also been speculation about Rick Caruso, the billionaire owner of the Grove shopping mall, potentially running against Bass again after losing to her last time, though he is also considering a bid for governor. Both he and Rodriguez are more conservative than Bass.

Rodriguez still has not filed for a reelection campaign for her seat, even as two others have joined the field.

“I know there were rumors she was considering a run for mayor. … So more or less, I’m seeing if she is going to run [for her council seat] or if she isn’t,” said Michael Ebenkamp, a former president of the North Hills Neighborhood Council who has filed to run for the District 7 council seat.

Rick Taylor, a political consultant, said that Rodriguez is interested in running for mayor but not likely to do it.

“She’s intrigued, don’t get me wrong. I just don’t think she’s going to pull the trigger,” he said.

A serious mayoral campaign is expensive, and Taylor said he doesn’t believe that Rodriguez can easily raise the $8 million to $10 million necessary to be a viable candidate.

“Monica is not Rick Caruso. She can’t put $100 million of her own in,” Taylor said. “I think most likely she will be councilwoman of the seventh district at the end of it all, but I think she’s keeping her options open.”

State of play

— SUPREME DECISION: The Supreme Court ruled Monday that U.S. immigration agents can stop and detain anyone they believe is in the country illegally, even if that suspicion is based solely on a person’s job, the language they speak or the color of their skin. The justices voted 6-3 to lift an L.A. judge’s order that had barred “roving patrols” from grabbing people off SoCal streets.

— FLAME OUT: It was a late night surprise: L.A.’s mayor, working with former State Assembly Speaker Bob Hertzberg, persuaded several lawmakers to carry a bill rewriting Measure ULA, the so-called mansion tax. Bass and Hertzberg said the changes would boost housing production while also cutting off support for an anti-tax measure being prepared for the ballot next year. But just as suddenly, Bass pulled the plug, saying the proposal needed more work. The plan is to bring it back in January.

— TAKE A (WAGE) HIKE: The business group seeking to repeal the hotel and airport workers’ minimum wage hike via a ballot measure failed to gather enough signatures, city officials said. The L.A. Alliance for Tourism, Jobs and Progress hoped to get voters to roll back the ordinance passed by the City Council in May but fell short of getting the measure on the ballot by 9,000 signatures.

— HOUSING BILL MARCHES ON: The controversial housing bill that would override local zoning laws and allow high-density buildings near public transit continued its march toward law Thursday. The California Assembly passed SB79 in a 41-17 vote. On Friday, the Senate approved it, 21 to 8. Now, it needs only the governor’s signature to become law.

— CHIEF UPDATE: Bass has hired Mitch Kamin to be her third chief of staff in just under three years. Kamin, a lawyer who has fought the Trump administration and provided legal services for underserved communities, will replace Carolyn Webb de Macias.

— UNCONVENTIONAL PRICE: The price tag for renovating the Los Angeles Convention Center has ballooned again. The City Council was informed this week that the project will cost $2.7 billion — an increase of nearly $500 million from six months ago.

— SaMo MONEY MO’ PROBLEMS: The city of Santa Monica could soon declare a fiscal emergency due to an ongoing budget crisis, due in part to more than $200 million in legal payouts related to an alleged sexual abuser who worked for the Police Department.

— LESS ‘LESS-LETHAL’: A U.S. district judge extended restrictions Tuesday that block federal agents and LAPD officers from targeting reporters and nonviolent protesters with crowd control weapons often known as “less-lethal munitions.”

— CLERKED IN: Bass appointed Patrice Lattimore to be the new city clerk. Lattimore has been a chief management analyst for the Office of the City Clerk since 2018, overseeing administrative, budget and personnel functions.

— LEADERSHIP MERGER: Two leadership programs that have produced civic leaders across the state are merging. Coro Southern California and Coro Northern California are becoming, simply, Coro California. Alumni include former Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Sen. Alex Padilla and L.A. City Councilmember Katy Yaroslavsky.

QUICK HITS

• Where is Inside Safe? The mayor’s signature program was in Council District 9 this week, near the Brotherhood Crusade and an elementary school, clearing an encampment that was a safety concern for people in the area, the mayor’s office said.
• On the docket next week: A report from the mayor on Lattimore’s appointment as city clerk will go before the government operations committee on Tuesday.

Stay in touch

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

The United Nations Security Council has condemned the Israeli attack on the Qatari capital Doha on Tuesday and called for de-escalation in a statement agreed by all 15 members, including Israel’s chief ally, the United States.

Council members issued the statement ahead of the emergency meeting on Thursday, which was convened to discuss Israel’s attacks targeting Hamas leaders in the Qatari capital, as it ramped up its offensive in Gaza City, forcing more than 200,000 to flee.

Five Hamas members were killed, but the Palestinian group said its leadership survived the assassination bid. A Qatari security force member was also killed in the unprecedented attack, which has sent tensions in the region skyrocketing.

Hamas leaders were meeting to discuss a new deal proposed by US President Donald Trump when the attack happened.

“Council members underscored the importance of de-escalation and expressed their solidarity with Qatar,” said the statement, drafted by France and the United Kingdom, which nonetheless stopped short of explicitly mentioning Israel.

It also emphasised that “releasing the hostages, including those killed by Hamas, and ending the war and suffering in Gaza” were “top priority”. More than 40 captives are still held in Gaza, but only 20 of them are believed to be alive.

The US, which traditionally shields its ally Israel at the United Nations, appeared to deliver a strong rebuke to Israel, reflecting President Donald Trump’s purported unhappiness with the attack.

Acting US Ambassador Dorothy Shea said: “Unilateral bombing inside Qatar, a sovereign nation working very hard and bravely taking risks alongside the United States to broker peace, does not advance Israel’s or America’s goals.”

“That said, it is inappropriate for any member to use this to question Israel’s commitment to bringing their hostages home,” she continued.

Reporting from New York, Al Jazeera’s Gabriel Elizondo said that diplomatic sources had told him the US “pushed back” against stronger language against Israel in the statement, which was nonetheless “highly significant”.

However, Shea had made it clear that “the US cannot and will not defend Israel’s attack on Qatar”.

“Clearly, the US still backs Israel. Clearly, the US will still … protect Israel in the Security Council, but this was a bridge too far for the United States,” said Elizondo.

“It will be interesting to see in the coming hours and days if we even get more clarification from the White House on this,” he added.

After Tuesday’s attack, the White House had said President Trump was not notified in advance. Upon learning of the attack, the president had allegedly asked his envoy, Steve Witkoff, to warn Qatar immediately, but the attack had already started.

‘A new and perilous chapter’

The Security Council statement highlighted “support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Qatar”, underlining the country’s crucial role as “a key mediator” in peace talks between Israel and Hamas.

Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani flew in from Doha for the marathon three-hour session, telling the UNSC that Doha would continue its humanitarian and diplomatic efforts, but would not tolerate further breaches of its security and sovereignty.

Blasting Israel’s leaders as “arrogant”, he said that the timing of the attacks during mediation efforts showed that the country intended to derail them. “Israel is undermining the stability of the region impetuously,” he said.

UN Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs Rosemary DiCarlo described Qatar as a “valued partner in advancing peacemaking” and expressed concern over Israel’s recklessness, saying that the strikes represented an “alarming escalation”.

She pointed out that Israel’s war on Gaza had killed tens of thousands of people and almost completely destroyed Gaza, noting that the situation in the occupied West Bank, including occupied East Jerusalem, had “continued to spiral downward”.

She also noted Israel’s other “dangerous escalations” across the region, involving Iran, Lebanon, Syria and Yemen.

“The Israeli attack on Doha potentially opens a new and perilous chapter in this devastating conflict, seriously threatening regional peace and stability,” she said.

‘A sign of madness’

In other interventions, Algeria’s ambassador to the UN, Amar Bendjama, said: “Israel behaves as if law does not exist, as if borders are illusions, as if sovereignty itself is a dispensable motion, as if the UN charter is an ephemeral text.”

Noting Israel’s attacks on Syria, Lebanon, Yemen and “renowned peace broker” Qatar, he added: “This is not strength, it is recklessness. It is a sign of madness. It is the conduct of an extremist government, emboldened by immunity [and] impunity. A government driving the region and the whole world toward the abyss.”

Israel’s UN envoy, Danny Danon, said Israel carried out its strike on Hamas leaders, who had directed attacks planned in the “luxury confines of Doha”.

Danon said these were the “sole targets” of the attack, adding that they were “terrorists” rather than “legitimate politicians, diplomats, or representatives”.

Al Jazeera’s Elizondo said the prevailing sentiment at the session was that “the world clearly stands behind Qatar”.

“It was widespread support for Qatar and widespread condemnation of Israel,” he said. “You also saw countries wanting accountability for Israel’s continued crimes.”

Good morning, and welcome to L.A. on the Record — our City Hall newsletter. It’s Dakota Smith giving you the latest on city and county government during a short week.

When Los Angeles hosted the Olympics in 1984, the San Fernando Valley refused to take part.

Valley homeowners, fearing traffic and development, successfully blocked any Olympic competitions from taking place in the Sepulveda Basin. Environmentalists also objected to using the basin, a 2,000-acre flood plain that’s home to an array of birds.

Business owners, who had hoped for a surge from international visitors, lost out. Many tourists didn’t come across the hill, and some Valley locals stayed home to watch the Olympics on television, rather than shop, The Times reported in August 1984.

Now, the Olympics are coming to L.A. and the Valley, with BMX, skateboarding, 3×3 basketball and modern pentathlon planned for temporary venues at the Sepulveda Basin.

L.A. City Council members and business leaders are planning for a flurry of activity, including Olympics watch parties, youth sports clinics and pin-trading parties where athletes and fans swap pins and other Olympics memorabilia.

They are also hoping that stores, restaurants and other businesses in the Valley can benefit from the Games.

“During ’84, I remember being this young girl in the Northeast San Fernando Valley and feeling completely disconnected [from the Olympics],” said Councilmember Monica Rodriguez at a Greater San Fernando Valley Chamber of Commerce event Thursday.

Rodriguez and four other council members who represent San Fernando Valley neighborhoods (Bob Blumenfield, John Lee, Nithya Raman and Adrin Nazarian) weighed in on Olympics planning and other city issues during the panel, hosted by journalist Alex Cohen. (Councilmember Imelda Padilla, who represents the central and eastern Valley, was absent.)

Rodriguez said her father worked at a Los Angeles Fire Department station near USC and the Olympic Village, and would come home with stories about the festivities.

Blumenfield, whose district includes Reseda, Woodland Hills and Tarzana, recalled sneaking into a men’s gymnastics final in 1984 by walking the wrong way through an exit door. (His seats were very good: actor John Travolta was a few rows in front of him, he told The Times.)

During the 2028 Games, Blumenfield is planning watch parties in his district, with locals and visitors enjoying the Games on a big screen. He hopes visitors will take the G Line to Olympic events at the basin, and stop at stores and restaurants along the way.

“We want the Olympics to be part of the whole city, including the West Valley,” Blumenfield said in an interview.

Resistance to the ’84 Olympics wasn’t isolated to the Valley: Many Angelenos feared traffic from swarms of visitors and the threat of terrorism following the murders of 11 members of the Israeli Olympic team by a Palestinian militant group at the 1972 Munich Summer Games.

Still, the pushback by Valley residents traced to another event: Mayor Tom Bradley‘s effort in 1978 to move the Hollywood Park racetrack from Inglewood to the Sepulveda Basin. Dozens of homeowners and business groups fought the proposal, and Bradley eventually dropped it.

The same opponents coalesced again when Bradley supported swimming, archery, rowing and biking events in the basin.

Renee Weitzer was president of the Encino Homeowners Assn. during planning for the ’84 Games and helped fight the Hollywood Park project. But she later broke with those opponents and backed Olympic venues in the Valley.

Peter Ueberroth, head of the committee that brought the Games to Los Angeles in 1984, also lived in Encino at the time and told Weitzer that the committee couldn’t afford a long fight over Valley venues.

Ueberroth said, “ ‘I don’t have time for this. I am pulling out of the Valley,’ ” Weitzer said in a recent interview.

Ueberroth also claimed that anti-Olympic Valley residents threw poisoned meat to his dogs at his home.

Today, Weitzer thinks the Valley lost a big opportunity to transform the Sepulveda Basin with swimming pools and other venues that the committee would have paid for.

“It would have been fabulous, and it would have served the Valley well,” she said.

Bob Ronka, then a city council member from the northeast San Fernando Valley, led the effort to put a charter amendment on the ballot in 1978 to ensure that taxpayers didn’t foot the bill for the Olympics.

In the end, the ’84 Games generated a profit of more than $250 million dollars.

“He thought it would be a financial disaster for Los Angeles,” said Rich Perelman, former vice president of press operations for the L.A. Olympic organizing committee that Ueberroth chaired.

“So we didn’t put anything [in the Valley]. Why row the boat uphill?” said Perelman, who today runs The Sports Examiner, an online news site dedicated to Olympic sports.

Nor did Bradley want a fight with Valley council members over Olympic venues, recalled Zev Yaroslavsky, who was a council member representing the Westside and part of Sherman Oaks at the time.

“The Valley was left out of any part of the Games,” said Yaroslavsky. “Most people would probably say it was a mistake.”

While the Valley didn’t host any events, Birmingham High School in Van Nuys got a new synthetic-surface running track so Olympic athletes could train. (The school is now called Birmingham Community Charter, and the neighborhood is referred to as Lake Balboa.)

Nailing down venues in the Valley isn’t the only pressure faced by LA28, the private committee paying for and overseeing the Games.

Like other parts of L.A., the Valley today is far more ethnically, racially and culturally diverse than in 1984. Rodriguez, whose district includes Mission Hills, Sylmar and Pacoima — neighborhoods with large Latino populations — has repeatedly questioned whether Latinos will be adequately represented.

LA28’s “Los Angeles” portion of the closing ceremonies and handover event at the Paris Olympics included Billie Eilish, H.E.R., Red Hot Chili Peppers and Snoop Dogg, as well as appearances by Tom Cruise and Olympic athletes, sparking criticism on social media about the lack of Latino participants.

A coalition of Latino and Asian organizations also highlighted the dearth of diversity in a September 2024 letter to LA28 chair Casey Wasserman and Mayor Karen Bass.

At last week’s Ad Hoc Committee for the 2028 Olympics, Rodriguez asked LA28 leaders about the “glaring omission of the Latino community in the flag transfer ceremonies” during the 2024 Paris Games.

“I’ll be damned if that happens again with these Games, especially in light of what our community is going through,” Rodriguez said last week, referring to the recent federal immigration raids in L.A. that have overwhelmingly targeted Latinos.

State of play

— SETBACK FOR TRUMP: Mayor Karen Bass and other California political leaders cheered a federal judge’s decision Tuesday barring soldiers from aiding in immigration arrests and other civilian law enforcement in the state. The 9th Circuit or the Supreme Court could reverse the order.

— UP, UP, AND AWAY?: The price tag for the proposed Los Angeles Convention Center expansion keeps rising and is now an estimated $2.7 billion — an increase of $483 million from six months ago. The project would connect the two existing convention halls with a new building and add massive digital billboards, including some facing the freeways.

—BAD OWNER: City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto announced that the city is settling several lawsuits over alleged illegal short-term rentals and party houses in Hollywood. Among them is Franklin Apartments, a rent-stabilized building that turned 10 units into short-term rentals, and later, an underground hotel.

— MEET THE TRASHERS: Bass launched Shine LA to clean city streets in time for the 2028 Olympics. Meet the San Fernando Valley group whose members — mostly retirees in their 60s and 70s — are already volunteering their time.

— PADILLA TARGETED: A group of residents in City Councilmember Imelda Padilla‘s district on Tuesday filed a notice of their intention to seek her recall. The residents — some of whom have a connection to the Lake Balboa Neighborhood Council — didn’t respond to requests for comment. Padilla’s chief of staff, Ackley Padilla, told The Times that her office is “focused on the work at hand, improving the quality of life in our neighborhoods, keeping our youth, seniors and families safe.”

—GARCETTI REEMERGES: Former Mayor Eric Garcetti, in an email fundraising pitch for U.S. House of Representatives candidate Eileen Laubacher, who is trying to unseat Colorado’s Lauren Boebert, confirmed that he is now a Valley resident after returning from India, where he served as U.S. Ambassador. Garcetti, who spent some of his childhood in Encino, wrote that it’s “great to be home in our house in the San Fernando Valley (where my LA story began).”

Zine exits. Who didn’t see this coming?

Former City Councilmember Dennis Zine last week abruptly withdrew from consideration to serve on the commission tasked with changing L.A.’s charter.

Zine, a former LAPD sergeant who is now a reserve officer, served on a similar charter commission in the late 1990s. He is known as a bomb thrower who regularly skewers some city council members by referring to them as the “Crazy Train” in his CityWatch column.

Zine wrote in CityWatch that he met with two council members, including Ysabel Jurado, ahead of his nomination hearing and concluded that he could not work with a “hostile and anti-LAPD body of elected officials.”

In an interview, Zine said he has no ill will toward Jurado — who is among the council’s most progressive members — and plans to have lunch with her. Other council members relayed to him that the full council wouldn’t support his nomination, Zine said.

“I didn’t want to see a split vote on the council floor,” he said. “I didn’t want to see a dogfight.”

Zine, who represented the West Valley when he was a council member, said he is staunchly against some proposals pushed by advocates, including expanding the size of the City Council.

Blumenfield, who nominated Zine for the commission, mistakenly told him that the appointment didn’t need council approval, Zine said.

Blumenfield said he hadn’t anticipated the “difficult process” and said the former council member would have added “immense institutional memory and experience regarding how the city works.”

QUICK HITS

• Where is Inside Safe? Inside Safe, Bass’ program to shelter homeless people, visited Skid Row this week, a Bass spokesperson said.
• On the docket next week: The City Council is expected to consider a vote on the Convention Center expansion. On Sept. 10, the council’s Transportation Committee will hear an update on transit plans for the 2028 Olympics.

Stay in touch

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

For the last year, Los Angeles political leaders have searched for a way to upgrade the downtown Convention Center without also delivering cuts to core services.

The city’s budget team pushed for the facility to be emblazoned with digital billboards, which would produce tens of millions in ad revenue. A city-hired consultant came up with several cost-cutting measures, including the elimination of a public plaza originally planned as part of the expansion.

Despite those efforts, the project has only lost ground. On Tuesday, City Council members were informed the price tag has gone up yet again, reaching $2.7 billion — an increase of $483 million from six months ago.

Some at City Hall are growing nervous that the project’s first phase won’t be finished in time for the 2028 Olympic Games, jeopardizing the Convention Center’s status as one of the main venues. Beyond that, city officials have begun worrying publicly that Gov. Gavin Newsom might not support a state bill permitting the installation of two digital billboards that would face the busy 10 and 110 Freeway interchange.

Those two signs — hotly opposed by groups such as Scenic America — are expected to produce the vast majority of the project’s advertising income, according to the city’s budget team.

If state and federal support for the signs fails to materialize, the city’s general fund budget would have to provide an average of $111 million each year through 2058 to cover the cost of the Convention Center expansion, City Administrative Officer Matt Szabo said.

The earliest years would be the most expensive. In 2031, for example, an estimated $167 million in taxpayer funds would go toward the Convention Center’s debt and operations — even after the revenue from the project is factored in, Szabo told the council’s economic development committee on Tuesday.

“Since we last met in this room on this matter, the costs have increased dramatically,” Szabo said. “The serious [construction] schedule risks remain. And revenue that the project relies upon — will rely upon — is in jeopardy.”

For some on the council, the latest bad news is proving to be too much.

Councilmember Katy Yaroslavsky, who heads the council’s powerful budget committee, told The Times she believes an overhaul of the Convention Center is key to making downtown “stronger, more economically vibrant.” But with the city already struggling to pay for police officers, street repairs and other basic services, the current plan is “just too expensive,” she said.

“Without the signage revenue, the risk to the City’s budget is massive and unaffordable,” Yaroslavsky said in a statement.

Newsom spokesman Izzy Gardon declined to discuss the digital billboard bill, saying the governor’s office “does not typically comment on pending legislation.” State Assemblymember Mark González (D-Los Angeles), who represents part of downtown, said he is “engaging productively” with the Newsom administration on the bill.

“I’m confident we’ll find a path forward,” he said.

Council members must decide by Sept. 15 whether to move ahead with the project, Szabo said. Even some of the council’s downtown boosters sound nervous about their next step.

What “I hear some of my colleagues saying is, ‘Do we want a very beautiful Convention Center but a bankrupt city?’” said Councilmember Ysabel Jurado, who represents the vast majority of downtown.

Business groups have rallied around the expansion, saying it will finally allow L.A. to compete for large conventions, while also injecting new life into a downtown still reeling from the aftereffects of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The project has also amassed broad support from organized labor, especially the region’s construction trade unions, which say it would create thousands of jobs.

“With over 800 members out of work, we need a project like this,” said Zachary Solomon, business representative for the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 11. “The cost of this project will only continue to increase, so we need this project now.”

Many of the groups backing the Convention Center expansion have played a role in electing council members. Still, if the council presses ahead with the project, it will do so in the face of major warning signs.

The city’s top policy analysts have cautioned that any major construction delay could cause organizers of the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games to pull the Convention Center, which is scheduled to host judo, wrestling, fencing and other competitions, off its list of venues.

“It would be really bad to pay such a premium on such a project and [have] it not be ready in time to host the Olympics,” said Chief Legislative Analyst Sharon Tso, who advises the council.

Stuart Marks, senior vice president of Plenary Americas, the development company spearheading the Convention Center project, told council members he is “highly confident” the work will be done on time, saying there is flexibility in the schedule — and major penalties if the developer fails to perform.

Marks, whose company has partnered with Anschutz Entertainment Group on the Convention Center, said the companies tasked with construction have an established history, having worked on projects such as Staples Center — now Crypto.com Arena — and the expanded Moscone Center in San Francisco.

“Their reputations are on the line. Our reputations are on the line. Nobody’s saying there’s no risks. But there are contingencies … mitigation strategies, security packages and contractual regimes that equally meet that risk,” he said.

The proposed timeline calls for APCLA, also known as AEG Plenary Conventions Los Angeles — the joint venture that would oversee the expansion — to start construction later this year, pause that work during the Games and then finish once the event is over.

Under the proposal, a new wing would connect the Convention Center’s landmark green South Hall with the blue West Hall.

Much of the increase in the construction price has been attributed to the city’s Department of Water and Power, which recently issued higher cost estimates for the relocation of utilities under Pico Boulevard and the installation of several miles of cable and conduit.

DWP officials have already warned that they lack the staffing to carry out the project and would need to hire outside labor. They also indicated that work on the Convention Center is likely to result in delays to other projects — including construction of a new rail line in San Fernando Valley — because staff would have to be diverted, according to Szabo’s memo.

Tso has echoed many of Szabo’s concerns, saying in a separate report that the project would have an “acute negative impact” on the general fund budget, which pays for police, paramedic responses and other basic services.

Times staff writer Laura J. Nelson contributed to this report.

Good morning, and welcome to L.A. on the Record — our City Hall newsletter. It’s David Zahniser, with an assist from Dakota Smith and Julia Wick, giving you the latest on city and county government.

L.A.’s political leaders are facing a daunting and possibly insurmountable deadline. If they blow it, they could face all kinds of headaches — legal, financial and otherwise.

By June 2026, they must show a federal judge that they have removed 9,800 homeless encampments from streets, sidewalks and public rights of way. That means 9,800 tents, cars, RVs and makeshift structures — those created out of materials like cardboard or shopping carts — over a four-year period.

The city’s strategy for reaching that goal has become a huge source of friction in its long-running legal battle with the LA Alliance for Human Rights, which sued the city in 2020 over its handling of homelessness.

In recent months, the encampment removal plan has also become the subject of a second lawsuit — one alleging that the City Council approved it behind closed doors, then failed to disclose that fact, in violation of a state law requiring that government business be conducted in public view.

The encampment removal plan was “drafted and adopted without any notice to the public (which includes the owners of these tents, makeshift encampments, and RVs that the City has agreed to clear), let alone any public debate or discussion,” said the lawsuit filed by the Los Angeles Community Action Network, the homeless advocacy group also known as LA CAN, which is an intervenor in the LA Alliance case.

Lawyers for the city say they followed the Ralph M. Brown Act, which spells out disclosure requirements for decisions made behind closed doors by government bodies. In one filing, they said their actions were not only legal, but “reasonable and justified under the circumstances.”

As with everything surrounding the LA Alliance case, there is a tortured backstory.

The LA Alliance sued the city in 2020, alleging that too little was being done to address the homelessness crisis, particularly in Skid Row. The case was settled two years later, with the city agreeing to create 12,915 new shelter beds or other housing opportunities by June 2027.

After that deal was struck, the city began negotiating with the LA Alliance over an accompanying requirement to reduce the number of street encampments, with quarterly milestones in each council district.

The LA Alliance eventually ran out of patience, telling U.S. District Judge David O. Carter in February 2024 that the city was 447 days late in finalizing its plan. The group submitted to the court a copy of the encampment removal plan, saying it had been approved by the City Council on Jan. 31, 2024.

Two months later, City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto’s office also told Carter that the plan to remove 9,800 encampments, and the accompanying milestones, had gone before the council on Jan. 31.

The council “approved them without delay,” Feldstein Soto’s team said in a filing submitted jointly by the city and the LA Alliance.

Video from the Jan. 31 meeting shows that council members did in fact go behind closed doors for more than two hours to discuss the LA Alliance case. But when they returned, Deputy City Atty. Jonathan Groat said there was nothing to report from the closed session.

The encampment removal plan is a huge issue for LA CAN, which has warned that the 9,800 goal effectively creates a quota system for sanitation workers — one that could make them more likely to violate the property rights of unhoused residents.

At no point during the council’s deliberations did the public have the opportunity to weigh in on the harm that would be caused by seizing the belongings of thousands of unhoused people, said attorney Shayla Myers, who represents LA CAN. Beyond that, she said, the public was never told who supported the plan and who opposed it.

“The narrow exception in the Brown Act that allows a legislative body to confer with their attorneys in closed session was never intended to allow the City Council to shelter these kinds of controversial decisions from public view,” the lawsuit states.

LA CAN now wants a Superior Court judge to force the city to disclose any votes cast by council members on the encampment removal plan. The group also wants recordings and transcripts of those proceedings, as well as a declaration that the city violated the Brown Act in its handling of the matter.

Beyond that, the group alleges that the council violated the Brown Act a second time, in May 2024, by failing to disclose its approval of an agreement with L.A. County — again reached behind closed doors — over the delivery of services to homeless residents.

Assistant City Atty. Strefan Fauble pushed back on LA CAN’s assertions, saying “no settlement or agreement was voted on or approved” by the council on Jan. 31, 2024. In a letter to LA CAN last year, Fauble also said the agreement with the county was not disclosed at the time because it had not been finalized in federal court.

“The City has always complied with its post-closed session disclosure requirements under the Brown Act when a settlement or agreement is final,” he wrote. “It will continue to do so.”

Meanwhile, the fight over the encampment removal plan is getting messier.

Two months ago, Judge Carter spelled out restrictions on the types of tents that can be counted toward the 9,800. In a 62-page order, he said a tent discarded by sanitation workers could be counted toward the city’s goal only if its owner had been offered housing or a shelter bed beforehand.

The city is weighing an appeal of that assertion. In a memo to the council, Feldstein Soto said the judge had “reinterpreted” some of the city’s settlement obligations.

An appeal would be expensive, and Feldstein Soto is already in hot water over legal bills racked up in the LA Alliance case.

On Wednesday, the council balked at Feldstein Soto’s request for a $5-million increase to the city’s contract with the law firm Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, LLP, which would include work on an appeal and other tasks. The council sent the request to the budget committee for more review.

Some councilmembers voiced dismay that Gibson Dunn billed $3.2 million in less than three months, after the council had allocated an initial $900,000 for a two-year period.

State of play

— VA VOUCHERS: Los Angeles County housing authorities have more than enough federal rental subsidies to house all of the county’s homeless veterans. Yet chronic failures in a complicated bureaucracy of referral, leasing and support services have left those agencies treading water. About 4,000 vouchers are gathering dust while an estimated 3,400 veterans remain on the streets or inside shelters, The Times reported.

— TAKE THE STAIRS: Could new apartment buildings with only one staircase help solve L.A.’s housing crisis? Councilmember Nithya Raman favors such a change, saying it can be done without sacrificing safety.

— FILM FACTOTUM: More than two and a half years after taking office, Mayor Karen Bass fulfilled a longstanding campaign promise, announcing the selection of a new film liaison between City Hall and the entertainment industry. Steve Kang, president of the Board of Public Works, will serve as the primary point person for film and TV productions looking to shoot in L.A. He’ll be assisted by Dan Halden, who works out of the city’s Bureau of Street Services, and producer Amy Goldberg.

— VALLEY SHUFFLE? City Councilmember Bob Blumenfield, who faces term limits next year, told The Times he’s considering a run for state Senate in 2028. If he gets in the race, the former state lawmaker would compete for the North Hollywood-to-Moorpark district currently represented by state Sen. Henry Stern, who faces term limits in 2028.

— PROTESTER PAYOUT: A Los Angeles filmmaker and his daughter were awarded more than $3 million after a jury found Los Angeles County negligent for injuries the man sustained when a sheriff’s deputy shot him in the face with a projectile during a protest against police brutality in 2020.

— CRIME SPREE: Police announced the arrest this week of several alleged gang members accused of burglarizing nearly 100 homes and businesses, largely on the Westside. The suspects are believed to be part of a South L.A. group that called itself the “Rich Rollin’ Burglary Crew” and focused on the theft of high-end jewelry, purses, watches, wallets, suitcases and guns, LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell said.

— OFF THE BUS: Ridership on Metro’s network of buses continued to drop in July, weeks after federal immigration agents began a series of raids across L.A. County. Amid the decrease, Metro’s rail ridership grew by 6.5% over the same period.

— HOUSING WARS: After the L.A. City Council voted to oppose state Sen. Scott Wiener‘s new transit density bill, Councilmember Imelda Padilla joined Wiener and podcast host Jon Lovett (also a vocal supporter of the bill) to debate its merits on Pod Save America’s YouTube channel. The spirited conversation garnered more than 50,000 views, spawned numerous memes and sparked hundreds of replies on the r/losangeles subreddit.

At one point, Lovett appeared shocked when Padilla, who joined seven of her colleagues in opposing Senate Bill 79, boasted of getting a proposed six-story affordable housing project reduced to three stories. Padilla addressed her viral interview during Friday’s council meeting, saying she views the council’s role as one that seeks compromise “between the NIMBYs and the YIMBYs.”

— SHE’S (OFFICIALLY) RUNNING: L.A. County Supervisor Hilda Solis officially launched her campaign for a proposed new congressional district in southeast L.A. County, offering up a list of heavyweight backers, including Mayor Karen Bass, Sheriff Robert Luna, Supervisor Janice Hahn and civil rights icon Dolores Huerta.

QUICK HITS

• Where is Inside Safe? The mayor’s signature program to combat homelessness went to Skid Row in downtown Los Angeles, moving 10 people indoors, according to a Bass aide.
• On the docket for next week: The L.A. County Board of Supervisors will take up a proposed ordinance to streamline the process of rebuilding in Altadena in the wake of the Eaton fire.

Stay in touch

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

Frank McCourt will have to pursue his proposed Dodger Stadium gondola without legislation that would have limited potential legal challenges to the project.

After The Times reported on the legislation, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and the City Council publicly opposed it, asking a state Assembly committee to strip the language that would have benefited the gondola project or kill the bill entirely.

On Friday, the committee stripped the language and moved ahead with the remainder of the bill, which is designed to expedite transit projects in California. Under the now-removed language, future legal challenges to certain Los Angeles transit projects would have been limited to 12 months.

The language of the bill did not cite any specific project, but a staff report called the gondola proposal “one project that would benefit.”

A court fight over Metro’s approval of the environmental impact report for the project is at 17 months and counting.

In a letter to state legislators in which she shared the council resolution opposing the language in question, City Councilwoman Eunisses Hernandez said the language would amount to “carve outs” from a worthy bill in order to ease challenges to “a billionaire’s private project.”

McCourt, the former Dodgers owner, first proposed a gondola from Union Station to Dodger Stadium in 2018. The project requires approvals from four public agencies, including the City Council, which is expected to consider the gondola after the completion of a city-commissioned Dodger Stadium traffic study next year.

The Los Angeles City Council stopped short on Wednesday of giving another $5 million to a law firm hired to defend the city in a long running homelessness case, sending the question to a committee for additional vetting.

City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto had asked the council to provide a nearly sixfold increase in her office’s contract with Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP, taking the cost up to $5.9 million.

The council voted in May to provide Gibson Dunn $900,000 for up to three years of work. Over the following three months, the law firm blew way past that amount, racking up $3.2 million in bills.

“Obviously, we are not happy, and not ready to pay that bill that we didn’t bargain for,” said Councilmember Bob Blumenfield. “We were supposed to have been notified when they were exceeding that amount. It’s written in the contract that we were supposed to be notified at different levels. We were not notified.”

On Wednesday, after meeting behind closed doors for more than 90 minutes, the council sent Feldstein Soto’s request to the powerful budget committee for more review.

Blumenfield, who sits on that committee, did not offer a timeline for taking up Feldstein Soto’s request. However, he said he wants the city attorney to go back to Gibson Dunn to ensure that “taxpayers are better served.”

The L.A. Alliance sued in 2020, saying the city was doing too little to move people homeless people indoors and address the concentration of encampments in Skid Row and elsewhere. The group eventually reached a settlement with the city that required, among other things, the construction of homeless housing beds and the removal of encampments.

As part of the settlement, the city must provide 12,915 homeless beds or other housing opportunities, such as rental vouchers, by June 2027. L.A. also must remove 9,800 homeless encampments, such as tents or recreational vehicles, by June 2026.

Lawyers for the L.A. Alliance contend the city has repeatedly fallen short of the obligations spelled out in the settlement. In May, the group attempted to persuade U.S. Dist. Judge David O. Carter to seize control over the city’s homeless initiatives and turn them over to a third-party receiver.

Gibson Dunn waged an aggressive defense of the city’s actions, issuing hundreds of objections and working to undermine key witness testimony.

Carter ultimately rejected the request to appoint a receiver, but also concluded that the city had breached the settlement agreement in several ways.

Feldstein Soto did not immediately comment on the council’s action. She has previously praised the law firm, saying through a spokesperson that it “delivered exceptional results and seamless representation.”

The city is now planning to appeal portions of the judge’s order. Feldstein Soto said some of the additional $5 million would go toward work on that appeal, with Gibson Dunn representing the city through June 2027, according to a confidential memo reviewed by The Times.

In her memo, Feldstein Soto commended Gibson Dunn for preserving the city’s control over its homeless programs and preventing several elected officials from being ordered to testify.

Blumenfield also offered praise for Gibson Dunn, saying he appreciates the firm’s “good work for the city.” Nevertheless, he also wants Feldstein Soto to look for ways of cutting costs.

“Sending it to committee sends a message — which is, we don’t like what was put before us for lots of reasons,” he said.

Matthew Umhofer, an attorney representing the L.A. Alliance, said after the meeting that he was “heartened that the city didn’t give this misadventure a blank check.”

“I’m hopeful the City Council committee scrutinizes this,” he said, “and asks the important question of whether spending $6 million on an outside firm to avoid accountability is a good use of taxpayer funds.”

The AI company’s new council comes a month after the Pentagon signed a deal with several AI companies to develop tools for defence.

The artificial intelligence company Anthropic launched a National Security and Public Sector Advisory Council in efforts to deepen ties with Washington and allied governments as AI becomes increasingly central to defence.

The San Francisco-based start-up announced the new panel on Wednesday.

The council’s launch underscores AI firms’ growing efforts to shape policies and ensure their technology supports democratic interests amid global competition.

Anthropic’s new effort comes as rivals, such as OpenAI and Google DeepMind, step up engagement with governments and regulators on AI safety, though neither has announced a dedicated national security advisory council.

Anthropic’s council brings together former senators and senior officials from the US Department of Defense, intelligence agencies, as well as the Departments of Energy and Justice.

It will advise Anthropic on integrating AI into sensitive government operations while shaping standards for security, ethics and compliance.

Its members include Roy Blunt, a former senator and intelligence committee member, David S Cohen, a former deputy CIA director, and Richard Fontaine, who leads the Center for a New American Security.

Other appointees held top legal and nuclear security roles across Republican and Democratic administrations.

Anthropic said the group will advise on high-impact applications in cybersecurity, intelligence analysis and scientific research, while helping set industry standards for responsible AI use.

The company plans to expand the council as partnerships with public-sector institutions grow.

Last month, the Pentagon established a $200m programme to develop AI tools for defence, highlighting the sector’s push to balance innovation with security risks. The initiative reflects intensifying global competition over AI capabilities, with Washington seeking to maintain an edge against rivals, such as China and Russia.

The effort, which includes Anthropic, OpenAI, Alphabet – Google’s parent company, and xAI – the AI company championed by Elon Musk.

Angel Stadium turns 60 next year. By then, the city of Anaheim hopes to learn how many hundreds of millions of dollars it might take to keep the stadium viable for decades to come.

The Angels’ stadium lease extends through 2032, and the city manager said Tuesday there are no talks between the city and the team about what might happen beyond then.

“I want to be clear that there are no long-term discussions taking place, and none imminent,” Anaheim City Manager Jim Vanderpool told council members Tuesday.

In 2022, after the disclosure of a federal corruption investigation into then-mayor Harry Sidhu, the council killed a deal under which Angels owner Arte Moreno would have bought the stadium and surrounding land for $150 million, then built a neighborhood atop the parking lots and renovated or replaced the stadium.

The Angels remained a tenant in the city-owned stadium, and in 2023 the council authorized an assessment of the condition of the facility.

“We expect a finalized assessment in mid-2026,” Vanderpool said.

After an initial visual inspection, engineers are currently testing concrete and metal structures within the ballpark, Vanderpool said.

The results could inform the city and team about what needs to be done to maintain the stadium into the future as well as spark a debate over which party should be responsible for any currently needed upgrades.

Good morning, and welcome to L.A. on the Record — our City Hall newsletter. It’s Rebecca Ellis, with an assist from Julia Wick, giving you the latest on city and county government.

L.A. County officials have been given a task: make sure the embarrassing blunder that led voters to accidentally wipe out a popular ballot measure never happens again.

The board is expected to soon review a policy to ensure “county charter is promptly updated” following the accidental repeal of Measure J — a 2020 ballot measure that promised hundreds of millions of dollars for services that keep people out of jail.

The mistake is complicated, but the root cause is simple: The county never added the measure to its charter, akin to the county constitution.

The county’s top lawyer, Dawyn Harrison, blames the failure squarely on the executive office, which supports the five politicians with the administrative parts of the job — including, apparently, keeping the county code fresh.

But Robert Bonner, the recently forced-out head of the sheriff’s oversight commission, said the county’s top lawyers learned long ago that parts of the code were outdated.

“I always thought it was weird that it would take so long for the county apparatus to get something in the code that the voters said was the law,” Bonner said.

Bonner said it took the county four years to incorporate a March 2020 ballot measure, known as Measure R, which gave his commission the power to investigate misconduct with subpoenas. For years, he said, the commission resorted to citing ballotpedia, an online encyclopedia with information about local measures, in its legal filings. The Times reviewed one such filing from November 2022 as the commission tried to force former Sheriff Alex Villanueva to obey deputy gang subpoenas.

County attorneys said they first discovered the issue in October 2023 and it was fixed by August 2024. It is not clear why it took ten months.

“This underscores the need to reform the system with clear safeguards and accountability,” county counsel said in a statement. “This breakdown made clear that our office must also be systematically included in the administrative process.”

“Fortunately, in our case, it didn’t lead to disaster,” Bonner said of the outdated code.

A few months later, it would.

In summer of 2024, county counsel got its marching orders: To create a ballot measure, known as Measure G, that would overhaul the county government, expand the five-person board of elected supervisors to nine and bring on a new elected executive who would act almost as a mayor of the county.

The office came up with a ballot measure that would repeal most of a section of the charter — called Article III — in 2028. That section details the powers of the board — and, most consequentially, includes the requirement from Measure J that the board funnel hundreds of millions toward anti-incarceration services.

County lawyers rewrote that chunk of the charter with the changes the board wanted in the county’s form of government — but left out the anti-incarceration funding. So when voters approved Measure G, they unwittingly repealed Measure J.

And it turns out, it’s not easy to get back a ballot measure after voters accidentally wipe it out.

The supervisors hoped they could just get a judge to tell them that, actually, Measure J was just fine. After all, voters had no idea they were repealing it — nobody did.

But the supervisors were recently told by their lawyers that getting relief from a judge — considered the easiest, cheapest option — would be legally tricky terrain. One month after the mistake came to light, they’ve yet to go to a judge.

Maybe the state could help by passing legislation that would make a correction to the county’s charter, officials hoped. Not so, according to a memo from Harrison and Chief Executive Fesia Davenport. For the state to help, it would need to pass legislation that mimicked the budget requirements of Measure J — potentially a bigger ask than a charter tweak.

“A court would likely strike down as unconstitutional any changes to the County Charter that were not approved by voters,” read the July 25 memo.

And then there’s the option of last resort: putting Measure J back on the ballot.

It’s high-stakes. It is, after all, no longer November 2020, when Measure J passed handily, buoyed by a wave of support for racial justice and disgust over police brutality after the killing of George Floyd. Voters have leaned in recently to tough-on-crime measures such as Proposition 36, which stiffened the penalties for some nonviolent crimes.

If the county needed proof the atmosphere has changed, the sheriff deputy union, which fought hard against Measure J, has plenty.

The union paid for a poll of 1,000 voters that suggests the measure wouldn’t pass if it were put up for a vote again. Only 43% of respondents said they would vote for the measure if it went back on the ballot, while 44% said they’d vote no. The measure passed in 2020 with 57% of the vote.

Voters weren’t big fans of the politicians in charge either. Almost half viewed the board unfavorably.

The union fought hard against Measure J, spending more than $3.5 million on advertising to fight it and following up with a court battle. It’s not not hankering for another go at it.

“Residents are clearly fed up with the shenanigans around Measure G and J,” said union President Richard Pippin. “The fix is to focus on investing in safe communities instead of half-baked ideas.”

The poll was conducted by David Binder Research, a San Francisco-based pollster frequently used by Democratic candidates, from Aug. 5 to Aug. 12, with a sampling error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points. The Times was only sent a summary of the poll and did not view the original.

Some advocates argue that if anything goes on the ballot, it should be the measure that contained the poison pill.

“Why aren’t they considering [Measure] G?” asked Gabriela Vazquez, who campaigned for the anti-incarceration measure as a member of the nonprofit La Defensa. “Imagine all the fundraising folks would have to do to defend J if it was put back on the ballot.”

“The defect was in G not in J,” said former Duarte City Councilmember John Fasana, who voted against both measures and first noticed the county’s flub. “You’re overturning an election.”

But the overhaul of county government Take Two would also face an uphill battle, the poll suggests. The measure narrowly passed last November with 51% of the vote.

This time, only 45% of voters like the idea, while 40% said they’d vote no, according to the poll.

The Times asked all five supervisors what they wanted to do.

Supervisors Janice Hahn and Kathryn Barger did not respond. The other three appeared undecided.

Supervisor Holly Mitchell, a vocal supporter of Measure J and opponent of Measure G, said she wants to “explore all solutions” to keep the anti-incarceration measure in good standing. Supervisor Hilda Solis said she wanted to correct the error, but did not say how. Supervisor Lindsey Horvath, the force behind the government overhaul, said she’s not ruling out getting help from a judge and is moving forward with an ordinance that would mirror Measure J. Unlike a ballot measure, an ordinance could be undone by a future board.

She says going to the ballot is the last resort.

“My commitment to fixing this mess hasn’t changed. I’m open to every viable path, and we might need to pursue more than one,” Horvath said in a statement. “Before considering the ballot, we must exhaust every option before us.”

State of play

— A POLITICAL EARTHQUAKE: Come November, California voters will partake in a special election to potentially waive the state’s independent redistricting process and approve new partisan congressional maps that favor Democrats. Gov. Gavin Newsom’s high-stakes fight to counter President Trump’s scramble for GOP control is already sending shockwaves around the state.

—HILDA’S PLANS: The proposed maps would create a new congressional district in southeast L.A. County. Supervisor Hilda Solis has yet to publicly announce her candidacy, but she’s made her intention to run for the redrawn 38th District clear within the close-knit world of California politics.

—THE RICK OF IT ALL: Former L.A. mayoral candidate Rick Caruso was initially quiet about Newsom’s redistricting proposal. But after the Legislature sent the measure to the ballot Thursday, Caruso made his support clear, telling us that “California has to push back” against the Texas redistricting scheme. He plans to financially support the ballot measure, he said. One topic he remained vague on was whether he’ll run for mayor or governor in 2026, saying he was still seriously considering both options.

—AUTHOR, AUTHOR: Brentwood resident and former Vice President Kamala Harris announced a 15-city book tour for her upcoming election memoir “107 Days.” The lineup includes a September event at the Wiltern theater in partnership with Book Soup.

—FIRE JUSTICE: Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson was at the Stentorians office Friday morning to show his support for a package of state bills focused on incarcerated firefighters. He appeared alongside Assemblymembers Sade Elhawary, Celeste Rodriguez and Josh Lowenthal and Sen. Lola Smallwood-Cuevas.

— END IN SIGHT?: Councilmember Tim McOsker’s motion to “strategically and competently” work to wind down the mayor’s declaration of emergency on homelessness narrowly failed Wednesday. The motion called for the legislative body to come back in 60 days, with reports from city offices, to advise on an implementation plan to end the declaration of emergency. McOsker’s goal was to terminate the state of emergency, which has been in effect for more than two years, as soon as possible. His motion failed to pass in a 7-7 vote. The council instead continued to support the mayor’s declaration of emergency and will take up the issue again in 90 days.

—”SLUSH FUND” QUESTIONS: An election technology firm allegedly overbilled Los Angeles County for voting machines used during the 2020 election and funneled the extra cash into a “slush fund” for bribing government officials, federal prosecutors say in a criminal case against three company executives. Prosecutors do not indicate who benefited from the alleged pot of Los Angeles County taxpayer money.

QUICK HITS

• Where is Inside Safe? Staff from the mayor’s signature homelessness program visited the council district of Hugo Soto-Martínez, moving an estimated 23 people indoors, according to the mayor’s office. Her Shine LA initiative, which aims to clean up city streets and sidewalks, was postponed to September because of the extreme heat.
• On the docket for next week: The City Council will vote Wednesday on whether to approve the mayor’s appointment of Domenika Lynch to be the new general manager of El Pueblo de Los Angeles Historical Monument, which includes Olvera Street. She would be the first Latina head of the department.

Stay in touch

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

A WOMAN has been fined £116,000 for chopping down a tree over ten years ago.

Claire Rands, of Allt-yr-Yn, Newport in Wales, hadn’t realised she was doing anything wrong.

2

2

She had instructed a tree surgeon to chop down the tree after a number of serious grass fires behind the houses in the cul-de-sac.

It left her concerned that the tree could pose a fire hazard.

The mother-of-four took a precautionary measure and had the tree chopped down in 2012.

At the time, she hadn’t realised the 100-year-old lime tree would land her a colossal fine.

In articles in the South Wales Argus and the Telegraph the same year, the couple said that their tree had caught alight during the summer.

Claire said it was the result of alleged deliberate grass fires that had spread.

Several neighbours were also impacted by the fires.

It prompted Claire and her husband to file a planning application that would enable them to chop the tree down.

This required a legally-binding tree preservation order (TPO) to be lifted.

It prohibits the cutting down, topping, lopping, uprooting or wilful damage or destruction of trees without explicit consent of the local planning authority, even on private land.

The couple’s lime tree was protected because of its age and amenity value.

However, the couple chopped the tree down despite the planning applications not being approved.

They planted another tree in its place.

The council said that one of its ecologists was walking past the property when they noticed the tree was no longer there.

Recently, Newport City Council sent the couple a letter saying they would be prosecuted for causing or permitting the destruction of a tree protected by a TPO.

While husband Damon Rands was cleared of wrongdoing, it resulted in a trial at Newport Magistrates’ Court for Claire.

Yesterday, Claire lost her appeal and was sentenced.

It followed a long dispute over the TPO’s wording, with Claire’s lawyers arguing that the crime is written into law in England, and not Wales.

Instead, they argued she should be convicted of a lesser offence, as she didn’t personally chop down the tree.

Tim Straker, representing Newport Council alongside Elizabeth Nicholls said: “There is no dispute that Rands engaged somebody and secured the large lime tree of considerable amenity value to be removed from her garden, to use the vernacular, lock stock and barrel.

“It is said that in Wales you cannot be guilty of an offence of causing or permitting the destruction of a tree protected by a TPO. But it is unsatisfactory that someone could order a protected tree to be cut down on their land but then run free from any responsibility.”

It led Judge Celia Hughes to convict her of the more serious offence.

She said before sentencing:  “It would be contrary to common sense that a householder could be prosecuted for a more minor offence when they are the person who directed the tree to be removed in the first place.”

The council estimated their property value had increased by at least £50,000 by removing the tree.

As such, she was dealt a £16,000 fine, as well as being ordered to pay £100,000 in prosecution costs.

She has 12 months to pay the fines.

The case has helped to define how the English law applies in Wales, determining that “causing or permitting the felling of a protected tree is an offence” according to Sarah Dodds of Tree Law UK.

RESIDENTS in a historic city have been left fuming after a granite cobbled street was ripped up and repaired with a blob of tarmac.

Emergency repair work to fix a water leak in Canterbury, Kent, resulted in the ripping up of granite setts, locals say.

3

3

One section in Burgate Street has now been replaced with black asphalt – which has been described as a mess by disgruntled residents.

Clive Bowley, 73, from the Canterbury Society says he heard about the unappealing repairs last week after complaints from other locals.

The resident, who works as an architect restoring historic buildings, says it is becoming a pattern in the town with other traditional streets also seeing tarmac patches.

He said: “It was brought to our attention by people complaining. I just thought ‘oh not again.’ It was depressing.

“The problem is that service engineers have to go in to do necessary work and they don’t reinstate the ground properly afterwards.

“There is just a great big patch replaced by tarmac. It is a bit of a mess really. They have done a botched job.”

Photos show several repairs across the city centre, which has UNESCO World Heritage Site status.

Clive, who has lived in Canterbury for over 40 years, says that if these streets aren’t restored soon then the historic feel will be ruined.

Clive said: “It is all about civic pride really. If things are botched up then it looks a mess and seems like people don’t care. It gradually will look more and more scruffy as time goes on.

“Burgate is one of the streets that leads down into the heart of a historic area. So, all that end of town is a conservation area and is of special heritage interest.

“If they are not put right in due course the town will gradually become a pit of all sorts of patches.”

Clive claims that he has complained to Kent County Council about the tarmac, and that they have claimed it will be fixed soon.

However, he says that many locals believe the unique road materials are now in landfill- and they feel that repairs will be impossible.

He said: “The council said that they would press the water company to do it properly. But similar things have happened around the town that were never fixed- so we are a little skeptical.

“The other concern is that they have dug up all these specialist materials and we don’t know what has happened to them. If the granite setts are thrown away, then we won’t be able to get more because they are unique.

“Every material used is unique, so you can’t just go to the builders’ merchants and buy more. My skeptical nature suggests that they probably dumped them.”

The water mains repairs were completed by South East Water, who insist that this quick fix is only temporary, and say that they will begin restoration next week.

Nick Bell, of South East Water, said: “We’re sorry to customers in the Canterbury area who have been left upset at the current appearance of the interim surface laid following urgent repairs to the burst water main in Burgate.

“This is not the finished reinstatement, but our priority was to backfill the excavation quickly to allow the road to be reopened, rather than prolonging the road closure.

“We have ordered the necessary materials to complete the permanent reinstatement, which involves re-setting the granite cobbles to their original condition.

“We will be carrying out this work from Thursday, 28 August, and we’ll work as quickly as possible to minimise the impact locally and restore the road to its original condition.”

A spokesman for Kent County Council said that the emergency works were to fix a leak, with the need to reopen the road as quickly as possible.

But the authority says the company is obliged to reinstate the road to its original surface within six months.

3

After a tense and sharply divided debate Tuesday, the Los Angeles City Council voted to oppose a state bill that aims to vastly expand high-density housing near public transit hubs, arguing that the state should leave important planning decisions to local legislators.

The council voted 8 to 5 to oppose Senate Bill 79, which seeks to mitigate the state’s housing shortage by allowing buildings of up to nine stories near certain train stops and slightly smaller buildings near some bus stops throughout California.

“A one-size-fits-all mandate from Sacramento is not safe, and it’s not responsible,” said City Councilmember Traci Park at a news conference before the vote.

Park, who was joined at the news conference by Councilmembers Monica Rodriguez and John Lee, said the bill was an attempt by its sponsor, state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), and other state legislators to “hijack” local planning from the city.

Lee, who authored the resolution opposing the bill, called it “not planning” but “chaos.”

Wiener lamented the City Council’s vote.

“Opponents of SB 79 are offering no real solutions to address our housing shortage at the scale needed to make housing more affordable,” Wiener said in a statement. “California’s affordability crisis threatens our economy, our diversity, and our fundamental strength as a state.”

In addition to creating more affordable housing, the bill would increase public transit ridership, reduce traffic and help the state meet its climate goals, he said.

Councilmember Nithya Raman, who voted against opposing the bill, said the city’s housing crisis is so dire that the council needs to work with the drafters of the bill — even if there are elements of it they do not support.

“Overall, we talk a lot about our housing crisis on this body, but our actions have not met the moment,” she said. “If I thought that this body was acting in good faith to address our housing crisis, I would support this [resolution].”

The bill, which passed the Senate and is before the Assembly Appropriations Committee, would allow heights of nine stories near major transit hubs, such as certain Metro train stops in L.A. A quarter-mile from a stop, buildings could be seven stories tall, and a half-mile from a stop, they could be six stories. Single-family neighborhoods within a half-mile of transit stops would be included in the new zoning rules.

Near smaller transit stops, such as light rail or bus rapid transit, the allowed heights would be slightly lower.

Next week, the Appropriations Committee will determine whether the bill goes to the Assembly floor for a vote. If passed in both chambers, the bill would go to Gov. Gavin Newsom to sign by mid-October.

The City Council’s resolution opposing the bill has no binding effect on the state Legislature but gives the council a platform to potentially lobby in Sacramento against its passage. The resolution also called for the city to be exempt from the bill because it has a state-approved housing plan.

“If they hadn’t taken a position on this, the state Legislature would say, ‘Well, the city of L.A. doesn’t care,’” said Zev Yaroslavsky, a former City Council member and now the director of the Los Angeles Initiative at the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs.

Mayor Karen Bass has not yet taken a position on the bill. City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto came out against it in May, arguing that it would cost the city billions of dollars to upgrade infrastructure such as sewage and electrical systems to handle an influx of residents in previously low-density neighborhoods.

Wiener’s office said the bill allows for cities to exempt some properties near transit hubs if they meet density guidelines.

This year, the City Council passed the Citywide Housing Incentive Program, which provides incentives for developers to build market-rate and affordable units and aims to boost building along commercial corridors and in dense residential neighborhoods.

The council passed the ordinance, which left single-family zones largely untouched after pushback from homeowners groups, a week before a state deadline for the city to have a housing plan in place. As part of the plan, the city was required to find land where an additional 255,000 homes could be built.

PA Media

PA Media

‘Sidestepped scrutiny’

A WOMAN who moved from a council estate to a “posh” house has admitted she wasn’t prepared for her nightmare neighbour.

TerriAnn is famous for appearing on TV show Rich House, Poor House, and regularly shares behind the scenes tales from the show on her social media pages.

3

3

3

In a recent TikTok, she decided to post a story time of “coming from a council estate and moving to a ‘POSH’ area”, as she recalled acclimatising to the new home, and an unfortunate situation with their neighbour.

Calling it her “dream home”, which came complete with a cinema room and bar, TerriAnn said the real problems began when she spent £40,000 building a home office in her garden.

“Then I had a new neighbour and he was a doctor and he wasn’t very nice,” she said.

“I think personally he could not stand the fact like I’m just me – I’m not posh, I’m just me, I’ll never change.

“I’ll always be from a council estate, always a bit rough and ready… and he just couldn’t stand us.”

While the house had a “massive drive” for all her staff to park on, they all arrived for work at different times, meaning that they ended up blocking each other in.

So they instead decided to park on the street.

And following one of her staff having an argument with the neighbour, the man ended up phoning the council to complain.

“Then when council got involved basically the reason I had to move out of the house is because they said I couldn’t run my business from there,” she said.

“So I’d spent £40,000 on this office being built in the back garden and the council turned around and said you’re using your property as a commercial property.

“There was a massive hoo-ha over it anyway and I thought, I’m not staying here and not being able to run my business.

“It’s just not worth it what we’ve invested.”

So they decided to sell the house – making a profit in the process – and then moved to another home, which was the one that featured in Rich House, Poor House.

Concluding the video, TerriAnn said it wasn’t the first time she’d been discriminated against for coming from a council estate – and it probably won’t be the last.

“I think they look down on people who have turned their life around, who are now living that lifestyle – who are doing it by genuine means, who are earning legitimate money.”

She was quickly praised in the comments section for her refreshing attitude, with one writing: “Love to see my own kind of people getting along in life good on you.

“Sounds like the doctor was very bitter and jealous of you!”

“You hit the nail on the head,” another agreed.

“As long as you’re happy now!” a third said.

“Love your story times, you’re so real,” someone else added.

FEARS are growing that Rachel Reeves could slap a new tax on people’s homes to replace stamp duty and council tax.

The Chancellor is studying plans for a levy on houses worth over £500,000, according to The Guardian.

1

The paper said the Treasury is looking at a “proportional property tax” which would be paid when owners sell their homes.

It claimed the shake-up could also pave the way for a new local levy to replace council tax, which is still based on 1990s property values.

But Treasury officials last night insisted that while tax reform is being explored, the details – including any threshold or rate – have not been decided.

A Treasury spokesperson said: “The best way to strengthen public finances is by growing the economy – which is our focus.

“Changes to tax and spend policy are not the only ways of doing this, as seen with our planning reforms, which are expected to grow the economy by £6.8bn and cut borrowing by £3.4bn.

“We are committed to keeping taxes for working people as low as possible, which is why at last Autumn’s Budget, we protected working people’s payslips and kept our promise not to raise the basic, higher or additional rates of Income Tax, employee National Insurance, or VAT.”

The Sun reported yesterday that homeowners would be forced to hand over £82,000 to the taxman thanks to Reeves’ inheritance tax raid.

Inheritance tax is charged on all assets above the £325,000 threshold, which is called the nil-rate band.

Anything above this threshold is charged at 40%, but your tax-free allowance rises by £175,000 if you leave your home to a direct descendant, such as a son, daughter or grandchild.

Currently, pension pots are exempt from inheritance tax – but this will all change from April 2027, when they will suddenly be subject to the 40% levy, following a tax grab announced in last year’s October Budget.

The change is expected to increase the number of estates paying death duties from 4% to 9.7%, dragging thousands of people into the tax net.

New analysis by Quilter shows that grieving families could face a nasty bill sting following the changes.