The Brief

A church-going agricultural worker. An Echo Park man taking his son to school. A 16-year-old kid searching for work to support his family in Mexico.

Three weeks into President Donald Trump’s second term, a clearer picture is beginning to emerge of some of the first Californians targeted in his high-profile immigration crackdown. It’s very different from the descriptions of hardened criminals President Donald Trump has touted. People CalMatters interviewed about the raids across California suggested those swept up in them are dedicated family members and employees, their lives deeply woven into their communities. None appeared to pose the risks to national security or public safety Trump promised he’d target during his campaign.

The state has only begun to grapple with the resulting fear and need for reliable information. Last week Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law legislation allocating $25 million to provide immigrants with legal services to fight immigration proceedings against them.

A spokesman for ICE said officers do not target noncitizens indiscriminately. “ICE’s enforcement resources are based on intelligence-driven leads,” said Richard Beam, a spokesman for ICE’s Los Angeles office.

Some people detained during the statewide crackdown said that’s not what it feels like on the ground.

“It was just a regular morning,” said Loreal Duran from Echo Park in Los Angeles, describing her family’s before-school rush to get the kids out the door and loaded into the car.

But on the morning in question, Jan. 23, as her husband fastened their two young children into their seats, an immigration officer walked up, asking Loreal to show identification. “As he got closer to the car, he saw my husband, and basically, he just went around to the other side to grab my husband out of the car and take him away.”

Loreal Duran holds a photo of her with her husband Giovanni Duran at her apartment in Los Angeles on Feb. 8, 2025.

(

Joel Angel Juarez

/

CalMatters

)

The Durans’ one-year-old daughter, whose identity is being withheld for privacy concerns, eats breakfast at their apartment in Los Angeles.

(

Joel Angel Juarez

/

CalMatters

)

The Durans’ eight-year-old son, whose identity is being withheld for privacy concerns, sits on their bed at their apartment on Feb. 8, 2025.

(

Joel Angel Juarez

/

CalMatters

)

Giovanni Duran, 42, came to California from El Salvador without federal authorization when he was 2 years old, brought by his family. He worked as a busser in a sushi restaurant in Los Angeles, Loreal said. Duran is now being held in the Adelanto detention facility, run by a private company under contract to ICE, awaiting deportation to a country he doesn’t know.

“I haven’t talked to him in almost two days,” said Loreal last week. She’s had to get counseling for her 7-year-old son after he saw his dad taken away by officers.

“He was telling his classmates, ‘Oh, daddy got arrested for not wearing his seatbelt,’” Duran recounted. Later, the second grader asked his mom, “Did daddy get arrested because he’s Brown? I replied back to him, I go: ‘Yea, he kinda did.'”

Immigration and Customs Enforcement reported on social media 8,276 arrests nationwide between Jan. 22 and Jan. 31. The agency would not break out those numbers for California or different cities.

Casting a wide net

ProPublica and the Texas Tribune reported less than half of the approximately 8,200 people arrested from Jan. 20 through Feb. 2, so far have criminal convictions, according to government data they obtained.

In California, the apparently broad crackdown has immigrant advocates working around the clock. There have been several high-profile protests – one that shuttered a freeway in Los Angeles and another that prompted police to fire off tear gas at people in National City. Social media channels have been flooded by reported sightings of immigration officers and phones have been ringing nonstop.

“You can sense that kind of panic and also hunger; hunger for correct, reliable information as to what they should do in times of a raid or in times of an encounter with an immigration agent,” said Ian M. Seruelo, an immigration attorney in San Diego.

Two days after President Donald Trump visited wildfire-scarred Los Angeles, promising to work with California on needed federal assistance for recovery, his administration announced, with few details, immigration enforcement operations in the city carried out by federal agencies, such as the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Justice Department, “and other federal law enforcement partners.” Video released with the announcement showed officers in camouflaged uniforms and bullet-proof vests approaching apartment buildings and standing around armored vehicles and mobile command centers.

Trump authorized law enforcement agents from across the federal government to participate in immigration enforcement activities. He also lifted longtime guidelines restricting ICE from operating at “sensitive locations” such as schools, churches or hospitals.

ICE messaging about its enforcement actions has emphasized the apprehension of criminals. Last week, Enforcement and Removal Operations Los Angeles, a part of the agency, said officers arrested a 47-year-old non-citizen who was convicted of DUI. “This noncitizen had previously been arrested for driving without a license and evading a peace officer,” officials said on social media. They also said they arrested an “unlawfully present Venezuelan Tren de Aragua gang member. This noncitizen is currently in ICE custody pending removal proceedings.”

Law enforcement officials spread out through an apartment complex during a raid in Denver on Feb. 5, 2025. Officials have also been conducting immigration enforcement activities across California.

(

David Zalubowski

/

Reuters

)

Nayna Gupta, the policy director at the American Immigration Council, an advocacy group for immigrants, said for the Trump administration to deport millions of people as the president promised, it will have to target people who have not had contact with the criminal system.

“Based on recent data, we know that fewer than 1 in 10 undocumented immigrants has a criminal record,” said Gupta.

More than one in three people in Los Angeles County are immigrants, according to a report last year from the University of Southern California. Tens of thousands of county residents had to evacuate following a series of wildfires that began in early January.

“It is unconscionable to have or plan for immigration enforcement activities in a natural disaster,” said Angelica Salas, the executive director of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles. ICE did not respond to a request for comment on the issue.

In the name of public safety

California Republicans appear to be on board with Trump’s actions so far. They urged Newsom to veto two bills signed into law last week. One was the $25 million for immigrant legal defense and the other allocated another $25 million for Attorney General Rob Bonta to pursue litigation against the Trump administration.

“We have a public safety problem in California, and a big component of that is international gangs and cartels. Human trafficking has exploded, and it knows no bounds,” said Sen. Suzette Martinez Valladares, a Republican from Santa Clarita, during a floor debate on the legislation.

During his campaign, Trump and his advisors repeatedly invoked hardened criminals and threats to national security when promising mass detentions and deportations of undocumented immigrants.

That’s what Estefany Peña, 30, from Lincoln, California, believed when she supported Trump for reelection.

“I thought they were going to be targeting criminals. No one mentioned during the campaigning of Donald Trump that residents … legal residents … were going to have to go through this,” she said. Her husband, who came to the country legally in 1999 and has a green card, went to an immigration office in San Francisco for a check-in in late January and still hasn’t come home, she said.

“Everything just came crumbling down,” she said of when immigration officers wouldn’t let her husband leave.

The husband, Joel Jacuinde, 40, is the breadwinner for his family, working at a rice dryer company east of San Francisco. Peña said he also volunteers for his church and provides the primary source of transportation for the family, regularly taking their 11-year-old son for treatment for his asthma. Both children are covered for health care under Jacuinde’s Medi-Cal account, she said.

“My kids are very close to their dad, so it’s taken a terrible toll on them,” she said.

Jacuinde doesn’t show up in a database of people being detained by ICE. Peña said he was told he was not free to leave the immigration office and that agents were holding him to pressure him to sign a voluntary removal form. The family has contacted dozens of attorneys but hasn’t been able to secure legal representation, she said.

In Tijuana, outside a federal shelter set up to assist recently deported Mexicans, a 16-year-old told CalMatters he had been detained trying to reach Stockton to find work. “They grabbed me,” he said, and within hours, he was back in Mexico.

Leaving the same Tijuana shelter, Mario Guerra, 39, a construction worker from Bakersfield, said he ran from about seven or eight ICE agents on Jan. 31. Though he grew up in Bakersfield, he said he was in the U.S. without federal authorization. Guerra said the agents caught him, detained him, and sent him back to Mexico after two days in detention.

Protesters gather over U.S. Route 101 in Downtown Los Angeles in support of the “Day Without Immigrants” march on Feb. 3, 2025.

(

J.W. Hendricks

/

CalMatters

)

Guerra said the officers handcuffed his feet and hands and left him in a transportation van for hours from Bakersfield to San Ysidro with no restroom breaks and nothing to drink.

“We were, basically, telling them that we needed to use the restroom, but they didn’t answer at all,” he said.

“The kids are the ones who are going to suffer the most,” he added about his children who are still in Bakersfield.

Thirty-four-year-old Vilma Ordóñez said she and her husband and children went out to eat in East Los Angeles on Jan. 26. As they got out of the car in front of the restaurant, two agents wearing bulletproof vests approached “and told my husband that he looked like someone they were looking for,” Ordóñez described.

Her stomach dropped as she remembered advice she’d read online, telling her husband, who is in the U.S. without legal status, “Let’s not say anything; let’s just look for an attorney.” The agents kept insisting the couple show them their IDs, she said.

“He had to take out his ID,” she said. “He showed it to them, and they said, ‘Oh, we knew you were not the right person.’”

“They knew he was not the right person, but yet they still insisted on asking him for his ID?” she asked in Spanish.

It’s possible the agents were looking for indications on Ordóñez’s husband’s ID that he was not an authorized immigrant. In 2013, California passed the Safe and Responsible Drivers Act, granting undocumented residents the ability to obtain driver’s licenses. More than a million undocumented Californians got the special licenses, which look slightly different than regular state licenses. Some advocates worried at the time the licenses could be misused by immigration authorities to identify people who are undocumented. ICE did not respond to a request for comment about whether it is identifying immigrants without legal status by their AB60 driver’s licenses.

Ordóñez said the agents let them go, so they went into the restaurant with their children and had dinner. But when they returned to the parking lot, four agents were standing around their car.

“They told him he had signed a voluntary return in 1996 and had not left the country, and so they were going to detain him and take him,” she said, adding that he’s currently being held in a California detention facility. Ordóñez said her husband never signed the voluntary return form.

“The father has a very important role in the family, and right now, our children are traumatized. More than anything, our kids are suffering,” said Ordóñez. “My husband has always paid his taxes every single year since he entered, and he’s always worked and taken care of his family.”

Attention: If someone close to you has recently been detained by immigration agents, and you want to share your story, please reach out to us via wendy@calmatters.org.

Atención: Si tienes un ser querido que recientemente ha sido detenido por agentes de migración y quieres compartir tu historia, por favor comunícate con nosotros: wendy@calmatters.org.

When a candidate invests their personal fortune in running for public office, does it represent a rich person trying to buy a seat or does it grant them independence from powerful special interests? Voters will decide on Tuesday in an election that has seen candidates spend more of their own money than any previous election.

Liberal billionaire Tom Steyer put up $213 million to fund his campaign for governor. All together, more than 200 candidates have contributed about a quarter billion dollars of their own money this year. That’s an eight-fold increase since the last time Californians voted for governor in 2022 and the most since California started keeping digital campaign finance records in 1999.

The last time a candidate spent anything close to Steyer was in 2010 when Meg Whitman gave over $140 million to her own unsuccessful campaign for governor, setting a record at the time.

Previous statewide races also saw big spenders: Steve Poizner gave $14 million to his campaign in 2006 running for insurance commissioner; Eleni Kounalakis shelled out upwards of $8 million when she ran for lieutenant governor in 2018; Yvonne Yiu dropped nearly $6 million on her campaign for controller four years ago.

Candidates running for state Senate this cycle have given nearly $4 million to their campaigns – the highest amount recorded for the chamber and more than double the $1.7 million candidates put up 20 years ago. Likewise, current congressional candidates have contributed more than $29 million to their campaigns, the most of any cycle in the past two decades.

And this year, some congressional candidates have set records for self-funding their campaigns.

Two of the five congressional candidates who contributed the most money to their campaigns over the last 20 years are running this election. In the competitive contest to succeed Nancy Pelosi in her San Francisco-based congressional district, Democrat Saikat Chakrabati gave nearly $9 million to his campaign, the most of any congressional primary candidate in state history. Eric Jones, who wants to oust fellow Democrat Mike Thompson from his district representing the North Bay, transferred over $5 million of his personal fortune.

Chakrabarti said the money he’s putting up is to counter the millions being spent against him by opponents and that self-funding his campaign is his best choice in a bad system.

“To go up against that kind of money I have two options,” he said. “I could either spend my time calling big donors for money and then I can go to DC and owe a million people a million favors…so I chose to put in my own resources.”

The increase in self-funding may reflect the need for more money to compete after the Supreme Court in a 2010 decision known as Citizens United lifted restrictions on campaign spending by wealthy people and corporations, said Jeremy Mack, executive director of the nonprofit advocacy group The Phoenix Project.

In other words: more money in politics begets more money in politics.

“In California," he said, "it’s often been corporations, real estate and police unions that have often worked together to [fund] similar candidates.”

Maria Colon, a voter in Sacramento who attended a Steyer rally last week said she views corporate donations as implicit corruption, and while self-funding might be a reason to warrant further scrutiny of a candidate, she understands why some like Steyer are pouring money into their own campaigns.

“Frankly, I think there needs to be caps on how much money needs to be raised,” Colon said. “[Corporations] are not giving you their money for free, bro.”

Money is critical for political campaigns and so candidates who can contribute their own cash might have an advantage, said Dr. Wesley Hussey, a professor of political science at Sacramento State University. “A candidate who’s able to put in enough of their own money to start off is a great way to be a viable candidate.”

Andrew Coolidge, a Republican running for Assembly District 3 in the northern part of the state who is the biggest donor to his campaign, said voters should be skeptical of candidates who can fund their own campaign but chose not to.

“I think a candidate who doesn't have some skin in the game is a candidate you have to worry about," he said. "I can feel very comfortable making every decision based on my conscience rather than based upon the opinion of someone else.”

Chris Anderson, a candidate for Lodi City Council who has contributed to his own campaign and attended the Steyer rally, said he likes candidates who can self-fund while raising some questions at the same time.

“There is a part of me that likes the fact that a person is funding their own campaign because they’re less likely to be beholden to a special interest,” he said. “But on the other hand, what special interests got them to where they are?”

Money doesn’t buy everything. Hussey said voters will look at other factors in deciding how to view candidates who spend their own fortunes on their campaigns.

Take Steyer and Whitman. Both had different degrees of involvement in politics before they ran for office. Whitman was involved in both Mitt Romney's and John McCain's 2008 presidential runs, while Steyer has been active in environmental causes for over a decade.

Voters might get more suspicious when a rich candidate shows up without a political track record, Hussey said. “Tom Steyer gave a lot of money to politicians for a long time and tried to kind of enter the political world himself for a while.”

When asked if voters should view his hundreds of millions of dollars as a rich person trying to buy a political office, Steyer said at last week's rally that he believes voters should judge him by the amount of money being spent against him and not as much by the hundreds of millions of dollars he’s put into his campaign.

“In this race there is only one person who isn’t conflicted by taking money from corporations,” he said. “That’s me.”

At a recent public event at Stanford University, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Katie Porter said she doesn’t think being rich means you’re immune to lobbying.

“That is the same argument that Donald Trump made,” she said. “'You can trust me not to take special interest money because I'm so rich'–I find that unsettling in a democracy.”

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

Starting July 1, a new state law will push cities to increase housing development in neighborhoods located near major transit stops.

When the law was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom last year, Southern California cities began taking their best guess at where exactly those sites would be.

Now, the list is out. On Monday, the Southern California Association of Governments, known as SCAG, published its official map showing where new housing density will be allowed under Senate Bill 79.

Elizabeth Carbajal, SCAG’s deputy director of land use, said local officials sought many clarifications from state leaders in order to be sure that the map would accurately reflect the Legislature’s intent.

“There were a lot of questions after the statute was signed,” Carbajal said. “The clarifications helped further define bus service, as well as pedestrian access points.”

SB 79 has become a political lightning rod

The law’s impact on neighborhoods near transit lines — including those zoned only for single-family homes — has been heavily debated, especially in the race for Los Angeles mayor.

Mayor Karen Bass asked Newsom to veto SB 79, and she continues to oppose adding apartments within the nearly three-quarters of city land reserved for single-family homes.

City councilmember Nithya Raman, who is challenging Bass in the upcoming election, declined to oppose SB 79 and has said some single-family neighborhoods will need to accept more density.

Spencer Pratt, the former reality TV star running for mayor, made waves on social media when he falsely claimed last year that SB 79 would bring high-rises to the Pacific Palisades, where his home burned down. The official SCAG map confirms that SB 79 will have no impact on the neighborhood.

In response to SB 79, housing opponents in some areas have started focusing their efforts on killing plans for expanded public transit. Responding to public pressure, Burbank officials have stalled construction plans for local portions of a rapid bus line from North Hollywood to Pasadena. L.A. Metro is now suing Burbank over that move.

Where will new housing go? And how much will be allowed?

The rules of SB 79 are complex.

The tallest buildings allowed under SB 79 will be nine stories, as long as they are located within 200 feet of a Metro B or D-line stop. These stations qualify as “Tier 1” stops under SB 79, which puts the tallest buildings near heavy rail lines, which in L.A. only applies to the B and D-line subways.

More common will be the “Tier 2” zones around light rail and dedicated bus lane stops, which will allow buildings up to eight stories tall within 200 feet of those stops.

Height limits step down in areas further out from the station. In “Tier 2” zones, buildings up to six stories tall will be allowed within a quarter-mile of the stop, and buildings up to five stories will be allowed within a half-mile.

Neighborhoods near two Metrolink commuter rail stations, in Burbank and Glendale, will also qualify as “Tier 2” zones.

Change won’t necessarily come overnight

New housing won’t necessarily be coming to those zones immediately. Under SB 79, cities have the ability to put off full implementation until 2030 by making their own choices about where to allow more housing.

“Cities can develop alternative plans and delay implementation,” said Philip Law, a SCAG deputy planning director. “The map is not intended to reflect those situations.”

The city of L.A. has taken the delay approach, with the City Council recently voting to allow buildings up to four stories tall around 55 targeted transit stops. This would let the city put off full implementation of SB 79.

The new SCAG map shows no impact in Orange County. The region does not yet qualify as an “urban transit county” under the state law. However, the impending completion of the OC Streetcar through Santa Ana and Garden Grove, expected later this year, will make Orange County eligible for SB 79.

Once the OC Streetcar opens, SCAG plans to update their map to include Orange County, Carbajal said.

Tuesday is Election Day, so get ready to drop off your ballot or head to your polling place — but not before consulting the LAist Voter Game Plan if you still have some research to do about the most competitive races in your area, whether that’s city council, mayor or even the state-wide governor’s primary.

And happy Pride! We’ll be featuring tons of LGBTQ+ events this month, so stay tuned.

Licorice Pizza’s Lyndsey Parker has your music picks for the week, including: Monday, Las Vegas rockers the Cab will be at the Fonda Theatre, and Scottish indie-pop darlings Camera Obscura will play their first of two shows at Pacific Electric.

Tuesday, new-wave legend Joe Jackson will be looking sharp at the Orpheum Theatre, British-Sudanese R&B artist Elmiene will play the Wiltern and Australian buzz band Vacations will begin their three-night run at the Troubadour.

On Wednesday, alt-country harpist Mikaela Davis is at Sid The Cat Auditorium, and the Grammy Museum hosts a “Reelin’ in the Early Years of Steely Dan” panel featuring Licorice Pizza’s Jeff “Skunk” Baxter.

Thursday’s a big night for new-wave fans with the triple-bill of the Human League, Soft Cell and Alison Moyet at the Hollywood Bowl, while Vince Staples is at the El Rey. Plus, at 4 p.m. Licorice Pizza is hosting a Q&A with legendary rock photographer Henry Diltz at the record store.

Elsewhere on LAist, you can read up on artists working on post-fire projects in Altadena, and grab tickets to Tuesday’s The Moth at Los Globos and our annual LAist Night at Dodger Stadium on July 11.

Events

Angels Pride Night

Wednesday, June 3, 6:30 p.m. 
Angel Stadium
2000 E. Gene Autry Way, Anaheim 
COST: FROM $35; MORE INFO

Catch the Angels as they take on the Rockies for Pride Night.

(

Julio Aguilar

/

Getty Images

)

Kick off Pride Month with Pride Night at Angel Stadium, as the Angels take on the Colorado Rockies. You’ll score an Angels Pride jersey and can enjoy the pregame Pride Village.

Marilyn Monroe: Hollywood Icon

Ongoing
Academy Museum 
6067 Wilshire Blvd., Miracle Mile
COST: INCLUDED WITH GENERAL ADMISSION, $25; MORE INFO

Marilyn Monroe: Hollywood Icon is at the Academy Museum.

(

Emily Shur

/

Academy Museum Foundation

)

She may have sung happy birthday to Mr. President, but it’s Marilyn’s turn now. Celebrate the biggest Hollywood star of all time, Marilyn Monroe, on what would be her 100th birthday: June 1. The special exhibit Marilyn Monroe: Hollywood Icon just opened at the Academy Museum, and it includes memorabilia, film clips and costumes that explore Monroe’s impact on the studio system, her iconic style and much more. From her costumes in Some Like It Hot to the pink dress by William Travilla in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes to letters and personal materials, the exhibit takes a complete look at Norma Jeane’s legacy.

Stop Making Sense

Monday June 1, 7:30 p.m. 
Vidiots
4884 N. Eagle Rock Blvd., Eagle Rock 
COST: WALK-UP TICKETS AVAILABLE; MORE INFO

(

A24

/

FilmGrab

)

What, you think I’d let you miss an opportunity to see Stop Making Sense on the big screen? And lose all my indie cool cred? Never. Talking Heads’ classic 1984 music film (directed by the late, great Jonathan Demme) will be shown at Vidiots in 4K digital to celebrate 40 years of everyone’s favorite film nerd superstore.

The Drop: Dogstar

Tuesday, June 2, 7:30 p.m.
Grammy Museum
800 W Olympic Blvd., Downtown L.A.
COST: SOLD OUT BUT WAITLIST AVAILABLE; MORE INFO

Keanu Reeves will perform with his band, Dogstar, this week.

(

Francesco Prandoni

/

Getty Images

)

Keanu Reeves’s other career — as the rockstar lead singer of Dogstar — has taken shape and developed a loyal fanbase over the years. Join the band for an evening of stories, music and conversation on the Grammy Museum rooftop as they release their latest album, All in Now.

Edi Patterson: Playgirl 

Wednesday, June 3, 8 p.m.
Largo at the Coronet
366 N. La Cienega Blvd., Melrose
COST: $50; MORE INFO

Edi Patterson will be improvising an entire play.

(

Marcus Ingram

/

Getty Images

)

The Righteous Gemstones actress Edi Patterson brings her bold improv to the Largo for her new show, Playgirl. No, she’s not improvising a pinup; rather, she’s doing something so much bolder — performing a full-length play completely improvised right on the spot. Yes, she’s playing all the characters.

Wet Hot Amusical Summer

Thursday, June 4, and various dates through June, 7:30 p.m.
Three Clubs 
1123 Vine Street, Hollywood 
COST: $33; MORE INFO

(

Cherry Poppins

/

Eventbrite

)

A cult film if there ever was one, the 2001 David Wain film Wet Hot American Summer (starring Paul Rudd, Amy Poehler and many, many more) is ripe for a send-up stage treatment — and the folks at Cherry Poppins have delivered with Wet Hot Amusical Summer. The spoof of a spoof is sure to be an over-the-top send-up of what’s already a comedy legend; the show continues through the Hollywood Fringe Festival.

The Big Run 

Wednesday, June 3, 6:30 p.m. to 8 p.m. 
Johnny Carson Park 
400 S. Bob Hope Drive, Burbank
COST: $22.50; MORE INFO

(

Miguel A. Amutio

/

Unsplash

)

Celebrate Global Running Day with friends in Burbank as The Big Run takes over Johnny Carson Park. Hosted by Fleet Feet Burbank in partnership with the Burbank Parks and Recreation Department, run the .4 mile loop as many times as you can in 30 minutes to compete!

Huntington Beach will consider a citywide plan for more housing at its June 2 (Tuesday) meeting after a yearslong battle against the state that resulted in a court order.

The backstory

State law requires California cities and counties to plan for enough housing to meet the expected demand over an eight-year period, including for low-income housing. They don’t have to actually build the housing, they just have to make sure their local zoning can accommodate it.

Huntington Beach was told to make room for some 13,000 new homes. The city fought the allocation all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court, which declined to review the case last year.

Mayor Casey McKeon estimates the city would actually have to plan for close to 40,000 new units to meet the state mandate, since most new developments include only a small percentage of affordable homes.

Where things stand now

A San Diego court recently told Huntington Beach it must come into compliance, or pay $50,000 for each month it fails to do so. The city responded by posting a revised housing plan on its website and asking residents for comment.

Wider pushback

The Orange County Grand Jury dropped a new report last week that is highly critical of the state’s methods of forcing cities to plan for housing at all income levels. The report said the state’s efforts have led to “growing tension between state directives and local realities” and had “led to minimal housing being built.”

What’s next?

The City Council is scheduled to vote on the housing plan at its Tuesday meeting. The state could still order the city to make revisions to its current plan. "We await their adopted plan next week," Alicia Murillo, a spokesperson for the California Department of Housing and Community Development, said in an email to LAist.