The Brief

SAN JOSE, Calif. — One morning late last year, an RV pulled into a parking lot on the outskirts of Silicon Valley. Inside it was a blue Ikea bag with huge balloons, and metal tanks full of helium and sulfur dioxide gas.

The mission was led by Luke Iseman, a 41-year-old serial entrepreneur with a mohawk hairstyle and an orange t-shirt that read "Cool Earth." Inspired by a science fiction novel, Iseman had founded a company in 2022 called Make Sunsets. In the novel, a billionaire undertakes a type of "solar geoengineering": shooting vast amounts of reflective particles high into the atmosphere to reflect sunlight off Earth and counter global warming. Now, Iseman was trying to do it in the real world.

Iseman took a wrench and opened the tanks, releasing the sulfur dioxide first and then the helium. He siphoned the gasses into a long tube while his business partner, Andrew Song, stood just outside the RV using the tube to inflate a weather balloon. As the balloon grew to about 6 feet wide, some sulfur dioxide – which can be hazardous to human health in high concentrations – started to leak. I began to cough, and my eyes watered.

"Don't take big whiffs of air," Song said.

"Just don't breathe," Iseman said with a laugh.

Iseman and Song prepare a balloon with sulfur dioxide and helium.

(

Julia Simon

/

NPR

)

The three balloons that Make Sunsets launched that day made it to the stratosphere – a layer of the atmosphere about six to 30 miles above Earth's surface. When the balloons popped, the sulfur dioxide gas turned to particles– reflecting enough sunlight, the company says, to offset the warming of 175 gas-powered cars for a year. But Make Sunsets and its balloons signal something bigger: a growing number of startups, research projects, and billionaire-backed nonprofits hoping to ready this tech to potentially cool the earth on a wider scale.

In the past year, the conversation around solar geoengineering as a climate solution has become more serious, says David Keith, geophysics professor and head of a new University of Chicago initiative to study a broad array of climate geoengineering ideas. "Suddenly we're getting conversations with senior political leaders and senior people in the environmental world who are starting to think about this and engage with it seriously in a way that just wasn't happening five years ago," Keith says.

But as money flows in – some from investors who hope to profit from this technology – regulations around outdoor experiments and possible broader deployments aren't keeping up, experts say. Because of the way the stratosphere works, a large-scale release of particles in one part of the world could impact a large part of the planet. Questions persist about possible risks of solar geoengineering for everything from global crops to droughts. And there are risks of unintended consequences that scientists and investors haven't yet imagined – the unknown unknowns of trying to engineer a cooler Earth.

Shuchi Talati, founder and executive director of the nonprofit The Alliance for Just Deliberation on Solar Geoengineering, says Make Sunsets' actions crystallize the need for urgent regulation of this tech.

"At some point down the road, they're going to do this at a big enough scale to trigger some sort of climate impact," Talati says. "It can be done in an effective, globally governed way, or it can be done by two crazy people in California, and it can look horrible for a lot of people."

Song holds a balloon while Iseman watches from the RV. "I think regulations have to be holistic to be meaningful, or people, including me, will just game them," Iseman says.

(

Julia Simon

/

NPR

)

"The allure of the techno fix"

Iseman, a former director at a tech incubator who used to build large art projects at Burning Man festival, acknowledges there's a performative aspect to his work. For his company to have a measurable cooling impact, researchers say it would need to release significantly more material, probably require equipping special planes, and is likely years away.

But Make Sunsets is attracting significant Silicon Valley investment, and is hoping to have that bigger impact. The company has raised more than $1.2 million from venture capital firms like Boost VC, Pioneer Fund, and Draper Associates.

It's unclear how many entities are exploring solar geoengineering, because some projects keep their work under wraps. But Make Sunsets isn't alone.

A U.S.-Israeli startup called Stardust Solutions that plans to someday launch reflective particles into the stratosphere has raised $15 million, according to its chief executive officer and co-founder, Yanai Yedvab. Stardust's investors include SolarEdge, an Israeli green energy company, and Awz Ventures, an Israeli-Canadian venture capital fund that highlights on its website a partnership with Israel's Ministry of Defense.

From sucking carbon dioxide out of the sky to giant sun-reflecting space mirrors, geoengineering the planet to avoid the worst impacts of global warming is capturing the imagination of greater numbers of people. Coming out of the hottest year on record, with governments and industries failing to adequately transition away from fossil fuels, some people are looking for silver bullets. This attraction is especially felt in Silicon Valley, says Gernot Wagner, a climate economist at Columbia Business School.

"Climate tech is sexy," Wagner says, "because it's the allure of the techno fix. Look to D.C., and things are messy. Politics is messy. Wouldn't it be nice if we could cut through all of this with the ultimate techno fix that will solve this thing once and for all?"

Iseman says he's motivated by an urgency to act on climate change. World governments agreed to keep global temperatures from rising more than 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels by 2100. But temperatures have already risen about 1.2 degrees Celsius, and many scientists think the world will blow past 1.5 Celsius. Passing it would mean more catastrophic impacts like lethal heat waves and flooding, coral die-offs and melting ice.

"What we have done has not worked," Iseman says about current efforts to address global warming. "And we need to try many more broad approaches."

Iseman and other solar geoengineering advocates reject the idea of a so-called "moral hazard" with this technology. That's the idea that solar geoengineering will distract from the difficult - and scientifically necessary - work of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and will give fossil fuel polluters continued license to pollute.

"I think we need to do solar geoengineering – hard stop – because the world is too hot. We need to cool it off," Iseman says. "I wouldn't say we should only do that after we start dropping global greenhouse [gas] emissions. 'Cause, frankly, I don't know when we're gonna do that."

Make Sunsets does not employ any scientists. The employees are just Iseman and Song, who met while Iseman worked at a tech incubator and Song worked as an outreach manager at a crowdfunding website. Iseman says if they scale up the company, they'll hire scientists.

Stardust's team includes 20 scientists and engineers, including chemists, aviation experts, and physicists, like the company's CEO, Yedvab. Yedvab wrote in an email that he started looking into the tech two and a half years ago and found that it "is the sole viable option humanity has to stop global warming in the coming decades."

Stardust notes their focus is research in anticipation of future government contracts for deployment.

But there is still a lot of uncertainty surrounding the science, and experts worry it's too dangerous for companies to have a financial motive to develop and deploy this tech on a larger scale, when there still isn't clear regulation.

"We do know it will reduce global temperatures. That is the one thing we know," Talati says. "We don't know almost everything else."

Make Sunsets puts trackers on the balloons. Iseman tracks a balloon on a computer.

(

Julia Simon

/

NPR

)

From droughts to "termination shock," the technology poses risks

The type of solar geoengineering Make Sunsets works on is often called "stratospheric aerosol injection," and much of what's known about how it could work comes from volcanoes. When Mount Pinatubo erupted in the Philippines in 1991, sulfur dioxide from the eruption spread across the global stratosphere. The particles ended up cooling the world about half a degree Celsius the following year.

Scientists predict the world would, on average, get cooler with this type of solar geoengineering. Compared to other climate tech, it's also very cheap, and – once operational – could have a rapid cooling impact.

But there are lots of unpredictable risks. Computer modeling has limits, says Jonas Jägermeyr, who models impacts of solar geoengineering on global crops at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies. "It is difficult to know what we are getting ourselves into unless we actually did the experiment on the whole planet," he wrote in an email.

If the world engages in stratospheric aerosol injection, it wouldn't go back to some pre-global warming climate, says Alan Robock, climate scientist at Rutgers University. This type of solar geoengineering could weaken the summer monsoon, meaning some regions – where billions of people live – would see less rain. And it could end up changing the ozone layer and ultraviolet radiation, which could affect crop growth and global food supplies, Jägermeyr says.

Changing temperatures and rainfall patterns could mean new risks for infectious diseases, says Christopher Trisos, chief research officer in the Climate Risk Lab at the University of Cape Town. ​​"Solar geoengineering could shift the population at risk by nearly a billion people for malaria across developing countries," Trisos says.

Then there's "termination shock," which is what it sounds like: the shock of suddenly halting a huge experiment. After injecting particles into the stratosphere, the particles only stay there for a year or two and then fall back to earth. Depending on the material, those falling particles can sometimes create their own environmental and health risks.

Because the particles don't stay up forever, if the world doesn't simultaneously reduce the amount of planet-heating gasses in the atmosphere while doing large-scale solar geoengineering, suddenly stopping the experiment poses a big risk.

"You get a whole rush of global warming and climate change in a very short period of time," Trisos says. "That would be very dangerous for ecosystems, for biodiversity, in many cases, very dangerous for crops and food supplies as well."

Shuchi Talati, founder and executive director of the nonprofit The Alliance for Just Deliberation on Solar Geoengineering, worries about the lack of regulations for solar geoengineering, also called solar radiation management.

(

Ryan Kellman

/

NPR

)

New companies raise fears of regulatory gaps

A growing number of legal scholars say national and international regulations are inadequate to cover potential large-scale deployments of solar geoengineering. As global warming gets worse, "there's going to be a strong desire by someone somewhere to do something," says Tracy Hester, a law professor at University of Houston who studies climate geoengineering. "There will be a temptation to grab the throttle and push ahead."

Hester worries that right now there's no regulatory strategy if that happens: "We need to know what we're doing. The consequences here are pretty massive."

In the U.S., the interactions Make Sunsets has with U.S. government agencies are minimal. Before each balloon launch, Iseman calls up the Federal Aviation Administration and alerts them that he'll be launching weather balloons. Iseman also files a yearly report with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) listing all of the company's "weather modification activities". In one NOAA report in the box marked "project or activity designation," Iseman wrote: "Cooling Earth."

While Make Sunsets was launching balloons in the parking lot, on the edge of a county park, a park ranger drove up to us, got out of the car, asked Iseman and Song a few questions about the balloons, and drove away after less than three minutes.

Iseman spends much of his time in Baja California, and the company has done a number of experiments in Mexico. Last year the Mexican government released a statement saying that they would ban solar geoengineering in their national territory, referencing the activities of Make Sunsets.

But outside of Mexico, things are unclear. There are no international conventions that specifically deal with this type of technology, Hester says. The United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity – a treaty that protects wildlife – has a moratorium on geoengineering that affects living species. But the moratorium is guidance, and non-binding. And "the U.S. is actually not a party" to the treaty, says Daniel Bodansky, a climate legal expert and law professor at Arizona State University.

The Montreal Protocol, a treaty to address ozone depletion, could potentially cover the ways that stratospheric aerosol injection affects ozone. But that treaty does not currently address all the impacts of the tech, nor does it cover all types of solar geoengineering, Bodansky says.

One of the Make Sunsets balloons.

(

Julia Simon

/

NPR

)

Last month Hester, Talati and others filed a petition to NOAA. They asked the federal agency to consider making a rule requiring solar geoengineering companies like Make Sunsets to file more information about what they're doing, and consider regulating American citizens when they do solar geoengineering internationally.

A NOAA spokesperson wrote in an email, "We are currently reviewing the request for rulemaking and will provide a response to the petitioners."

Stardust is doing outdoor small-scale testing "only to the extent required ... and in full compliance with all relevant regulations," Yedvab wrote.

Yedvab, who used to work for Israel's atomic energy commission, adds: "Decision making regarding whether to deploy [stratospheric aerosol injection], when and to what extent should only be taken by governments."

A White House official wrote in an email that solar geoengineering activities in the U.S. must comply with applicable local, state, and federal laws. The email notes that new tech "may present unforeseen circumstances that require new guidance and/or governance mechanisms."

The official did not clarify what that new guidance or governance might look like.

Iseman of Make Sunsets says, "I think regulations have to be holistic to be meaningful, or people, including me, will just game them."

Aboard a decommissioned World War II aircraft carrier in Alameda on San Francisco Bay, a very different type of solar geoengineering study took place in April 2024.

(

Julia Simon

/

NPR

)

A test on San Francisco Bay

As the private sector grows, not-for-profit entities are speeding up their research.

Earlier this month, a handful of scientists and engineers gathered on deck of a decommissioned aircraft carrier on the San Francisco Bay to test a large machine. After about a decade of work, the researchers were readying the machine for one of its first tests outdoors, creating tiny salt water particles that could – someday – reflect sunlight and cool earth.

An engineer scooped salt into a large plastic container, mixing it with water. Then he turned the machine on, letting forth a giant hissing spray of salt water particles down the aircraft runway.

The test represents a different type of solar geoengineering than Make Sunsets' balloons. "Marine cloud brightening" involves brightening ocean clouds to reflect more planet-heating sunlight.

This technology could someday significantly reduce many of the impacts of global warming, says Sarah Doherty, a University of Washington professor who manages this program. But it also has risks. If the particles are too big, they can make the clouds less reflective, and actually warm the planet. An imbalance of cloud brightening off West Africa could cause a drought in the Amazon. For Doherty, these unknowns are a big reason for this research.

"You could see in 20 years from now, people saying, 'Oh my God, we're really in trouble. We've got major climate disruption. Let's do this thing that we know exists.' Well, if we haven't done the research to look at the ways to not do it properly, to not do it in a way that's going to cause more damage, then we're really in trouble," she says.

Jessica Medrado, a research scientist for SRI International, on a walkie-talkie, coordinates the test for solar geoengineering research. Behind her are (center) Kelly Wanser of SilverLining, the nonprofit that led fundraising for the program, and (right) Sarah Doherty, scientist at University of Washington and the program's director.

(

Julia Simon

/

NPR

)

The risks are why university researchers, not for-profit companies, should guide studies of this tech, argues Kelly Wanser, executive director of SilverLining, the nonprofit that led fundraising for Doherty's program. The University of Washington program – which also aims to improve current climate modeling – has raised $16 million, mostly from philanthropic climate funds and Silicon Valley scientists. Doherty says there's no strings attached. "They're not gonna ever get anything back out of it other than more science," she says.

Wanser contrasts this with what she calls the "misaligned incentives" of private companies entering the space. In addition to its venture capital fundraising, Make Sunsets sells "cooling credits" – a single $10 credit offsets the warming of 1 metric ton of carbon dioxide, the company says. For Wanser, for-profit companies like Make Sunsets have a monetary incentive to keep releasing balloons, even if the effects could be harmful.

Iseman responds in an email that, "All change is scary, and we can't use 'someday maybe' as an excuse to avoid the bold actions that the climate crisis demands."

But even with university-based solar geoengineering research, there's a need for regulation, says Imran Khalid, a climate policy researcher based in Islamabad. While the aircraft carrier is a museum open to the public – a group of elementary school children came aboard a little while after the test – there are no rules requiring future research projects to be so transparent. And while this study released a small amount of particles, there are no specific regulations to limit a future study from making a larger release.

Given the stakes, Khalid says there should be global input into research frameworks. "Research leads to deployment at some time," he says. "There needs to be a global discussion around this issue."

The machine sprays tiny salt water particles. It's a test for "marine cloud brightening" research, a type of solar geoengineering that involves brightening ocean clouds to reflect more planet-heating sunlight.

(

Julia Simon

/

NPR

)

"I have an obligation to do what I can"

Right now, most solar geoengineering research is funded and carried out by people in the Global North, in places like Silicon Valley. That worries Khalid.

"When we're talking about solar geoengineering, it's important to contextualize it from this perspective," he says, "of somebody who's sitting here in Pakistan, who's recently seen the 2022 floods."

Those floods, which scientists found were made worse because of global warming, left almost a third of the country underwater at their peak, and left hundreds of thousands of displaced people in camps. Just as global warming's impacts are often felt more in developing countries, some scientists fear developing countries could also be particularly vulnerable to solar geoengineering's risks.

"You can get some strong kinds of winners and losers," Trisos says. "And that's especially concerning because a lot of these developing countries in the tropics, such as in Africa, Asia, and parts of Latin America, right now don't have a strong voice in the solar geoengineering conversation."

Some nonprofits are trying to change that. In the past year The Alliance for Just Deliberation on Solar Geoengineering has started consultations and workshops in South Africa, India and Pakistan to educate local scientists and civil society groups about solar geoengineering. The U.K.-based Degrees Initiative has awarded $900,000 to scientists from Brazil, Indonesia, Nigeria and other countries to study solar geoengineering.

During the United Nations Environment Assembly in Nairobi this past February, Switzerland put forth a proposal for more global research on solar geoengineering. While it didn't pass, Talati, who was at the talks, says they left her encouraged. "That was a glimmer of hope for me," she says. "To see so many new countries offering their comments and wanting to engage in this conversation."

From his vantage point on a Zoom call in Silicon Valley, Iseman says it's unfair that he has privileges to act on solar geoengineering while others don't. "I think that it is unfair that I was born as a lower middle class, white-ish American male," he says.

But he says that isn't stopping him from scaling his company: "I have an obligation to do what I can to cool the planet, as does anyone else who actually reads the science."

"We're two guys playing with balloons," Iseman says. "In an ideal world, this shouldn't be something left to dudes with a startup to be doing. But that's the world we're in, for now."

"We're two guys playing with balloons," Luke Iseman says. "In an ideal world, this shouldn't be something left to dudes with a startup to be doing. But that's the world we're in, for now."

(

Julia Simon

/

NPR

)

Incumbent L.A. Mayor Karen Bass and challenger City Councilmember Nithya Raman went head-to-head in a tense, live televised debate Tuesday night.

With Election Day only three weeks away, the candidates are racing to make their case to voters on major mayoral priorities like homelessness, public safety and the 2028 Olympics.

Here are three takeaways from the hour-long NBC4 and Telemundo 52 debate in Universal City. Each candidate was given about a minute to answer a question, with another 30 seconds each for rebuttals and follow-ups.

What did the candidates say about homelessness?

Bass has repeatedly pointed to a drop in homelessness under her tenure — a trend that faltered this past year, according to the results of the annual homeless count. After two years of declines, homelessness jumped 3.4% in the city of Los Angeles.

During the debate, she acknowledged the recent increase, but pointed to several council districts where homelessness dropped, including Raman’s.

“ The main reason homelessness went down is because our efforts with Inside Safe,” Bass said, crediting the program for removing three large encampments from Raman’s district. Raman represents Council District 4, which stretches from parts of Silver Lake to the Hollywood Hills and Reseda.

L.A. Mayor Karen Bass took shots at her challenger, at one point describing City Councilmember Nithya Raman as " contemptuous of her constituents."

(

Courtesy NBC4 and Telemundo 52

)

Inside Safe is Bass’ signature homelessness program that moves people from encampments into motels and interim housing. Raman has criticized the program, arguing it has wasted money and its approach had not changed since it launched nearly four years ago.

“ Under this mayor's leadership, we have poured hundreds of millions of dollars into an incredibly expensive program, Inside Safe, which has been unaccountable to the public, for which she has refused audits," she said. " And it looks exactly the same as it did on day one.”

Both candidates seemed to agree that there needs to be more transparency in the city’s homelessness system.

Bass said the city needs to be in complete control: “ No more joint working with the county.”

Raman said every homelessness dollar needs to be monitored and every service performance tracked to actually respond to Angelenos’ needs.

What did the candidates say about policing?

Raman confirmed during the debate that she wants to replace Jim McDonnell as chief of the Los Angeles Police Department, saying he had lost the trust of Angelenos, especially in response to federal immigration raids.

Asked whether she would replace McDonnell before the 2028 Olympics, Raman didn’t give a timeline. She said it would depend on other factors and decision makers, such as the Police Commission and L.A. City Council.

“ I promise you, Angelenos, I promise you, there is no decision that I will take as your mayor that will put you in danger,” Raman said. “Everything will be done with care, and with the advice of all of the people that are involved in making sure that you are safe as these Olympics approach.”

L.A. City Councilmember Nithya Raman criticized L.A. Mayor Karen Bass' signature homelessness program, Inside Safe, and her administration's response to major fires.

(

Courtesy NBC4 and Telemundo 52

)

Bass pressed Raman on the issue, saying the council member doesn’t have “any idea” what it takes to pick a police chief.

“ We are 640 days away from the largest sporting event to ever take place — a major national security event — and if you think that you're gonna find a police chief, you would send the department in disarray by doing that,” Bass said.

Both candidates weighed in on the LAPD’s use of Automated License Plate Readers, otherwise known as ALPRs.

Raman said she’s been “very skeptical” of these kinds of mass surveillance technologies and would want to see hard proof that the data would not be shared with ICE.

Bass said she thinks ALPR’s have a place in crime prevention, but she does not support a renewed contract with Flock, describing the company as “completely uncooperative.”

What did the candidates say about emergency response?

Bass has been heavily criticized for her administration’s response to last year’s Palisades Fire, and she apologized during the debate for not being in L.A. “when my city needed me.” Bass was in Ghana when the fires ignited as part of a Biden administration delegation for the inauguration of the country’s new president.

Bass said the city would be ready to respond to the next catastrophic wildfire, in part under new leadership from Fire Chief Jaime Moore.

“ As a matter of fact, we're preparing for what is a potential Red Flag day this Thursday,” Bass said. “He has already reached out to the state for additional resources. He is planning to pre-deploy in the Palisades and other high-risk fire areas.”

Raman honed in the Palisades Fire, as well as this summer’s Lineage warehouse fire in Boyle Heights, describing both as a “failure” of leadership from the mayor. Raman said she would have handled the Lineage fire differently.

“ I will make sure that our community is met with resources, evacuation support and the information they need in the languages that they need, which this community did not get during these fires,” she said.

Go deeper

LAist Voter Game Plan guide - Los Angeles mayor

A Los Angeles homelessness planning body voted Tuesday to have L.A. County officials take over the region’s yearly homeless count and handle applying for federal homelessness funds on behalf of the region — two jobs currently held by the embattled L.A. Homeless Services Authority.

The decision by the L.A. Continuum of Care — in a 310-9 vote — comes after the Trump administration sidelined the agency, known as LAHSA, from the federal-facing roles it’s held for decades. It signals a loss of power for LAHSA and a major shift in homelessness oversight for the L.A. area, passing significant control of the region’s homelessness response to L.A. County officials.

The details

If Tuesday’s selections are approved by a federal judge, L.A. County’s Department of Homeless Services and Housing will soon be in charge of conducting the region’s annual point-in-time homelessness tally, instead of LAHSA.

The county would also take over the responsibility for submitting annual homelessness funding applications for hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funds to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, or HUD, on behalf of the whole region.

Volunteers at the 2023 L.A. homeless count review the map of Westwood prior to heading out.

(

Samanta Helou Hernandez

/

LAist

)

The timeline for these responsibilities being fully transferred away from LAHSA is expected to be determined by a federal judge in the coming weeks.

How we got here

LAHSA is the city and county’s joint-powers homelessness authority. In June, HUD suspended the agency from performing its federal-facing responsibilities, citing financial mismanagement. LAHSA sued. In August, U.S. District Judge David O. Carter paused LAHSA’s suspension. He also ordered the L.A. Continuum of Care to run an evaluation process to replace LAHSA in federal roles within 60 days.

The L.A. Continuum of Care is a HUD-recognized group representing homeless services providers, government agencies and community advocates across L.A. County. It’s responsible for choosing the entity that fills these federal roles. The Trump administration’s suspension of LAHSA forced the group to consider alternatives.

L.A. County’s Department of Homeless Services and Housing was the only agency or organization that applied to manage both the homeless count and the region’s yearly application for federal homelessness dollars.

What’s next?

While a report is due to Carter on Tuesday, Oct. 13, the full selection process he ordered is not yet complete. The L.A. Continuum of Care still needs to vote on its final designations for who should succeed LAHSA in two other federal roles: managing a database that tracks unhoused Angelenos and running the system used to match people with shelter and housing. The city of Los Angeles and L.A. County are competing for those roles.

A vote scheduled Oct. 9 was delayed when over 1,000 people overwhelmed the Zoom capacity. It will be rescheduled — no date has been set yet.

The court’s preliminary injunction pausing LAHSA’s suspension is set to expire on Oct. 27.

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

Hollywood Park, the home of SoFi Stadium, is throwing its financial weight into a campaign to block Inglewood Mayor James Butts’ bid for reelection on Nov. 3, according to campaign finance records.

The Take Back Inglewood campaign is the latest signal that Butts’ ties to SoFi Stadium owner Stan Kroenke are unraveling as the city battles its stadiums over billboard deals and $400 million in infrastructure payments.

Inglewood’s stadium interests have supported Butts politically and financially in past elections, according to reporting from the LA Times, but a spokesperson for the Hollywood Park-funded campaign said stadium officials lost confidence in Butts. 

“The relationship changed because, in their experience, they could no longer trust him to deal with them honestly and fairly,” Shallman said. “Political support isn’t a lifetime contract.” 

Butts fired back in an interview with The LA Local that the campaign is about trying to protect Hollywood Park’s business interests. 

“They believe because they have millions to spend on advertising, they can manipulate the electorate into voting against someone that has changed the entire trajectory and value of our city” the four-term mayor said, adding in a later written statement that his record speaks for itself. 

Since last summer, Inglewood officials and the stadiums have been duking it out in court over the terms of their relationship and the city’s financial deals with billboard operator WOW Media. Judges have ruled in favor of the WOW arrangement, but last month voided the city’s contract with Hollywood Park.

Now, both sides are pouring millions into Inglewood’s election, looking to sway voters. 

A new batch of election finance filings released Monday in response to a public records request from The LA Local show Take Back Inglewood is entirely funded by $750,000 from Hollywood Park. Butts’ own campaign, by comparison, has spent $264,085 this year out of just over $610,000 in total funds.

Elsewhere, the stadium-backed Neighbors for Beautiful Inglewood has spent $3.1 million campaigning for the anti-billboard Measure BB. Inglewood Residents for Stadium Accountability, funded by WOW, has put $2.5 million of its own into trying to block BB and pushing for the ticket tax increase Measure AT.

Fernando Guerra, a Loyola Marymount University political scientist, said the campaign dollars are unsurprising. Inglewood’s place as an international sports and entertainment hub has turned it into a prime place for a contentious, expensive election, Guerra said.

“It’s par for the course when you combine contracts and politics and cities needing to raise revenue,” Guerra said. “The higher the stakes, the more the money that’s going to be spent.”

Butts told The LA Local he sees the stadium campaigns as paternalistic, and that they treat voters as pawns in Hollywood Park’s economic interests.

Shallman countered that the campaign is not tied to the stadium development’s disputes with the city and said Butts has in the past defended the support he received from Inglewood venues. The stadium development, he said, has a natural stake in the race through its employees.

“These aren’t outsiders who parachuted into Inglewood. The venues have invested billions of dollars in the city, created thousands of jobs,” he said. Shallman added that locals have aired their own criticisms of Butts’ leadership.

Butts isn’t without his own allies. Billboard interests have put $80,000 into the mayor’s reelection campaign since January alone, with more coming from real estate firms. Butts said campaign donations don’t influence his decisions as mayor. 

“My decisions are driven by the needs of our community,” Butts said.

Take Back Inglewood isn’t backing any of the five candidates running against Butts, Shallman said, at least for now. 

“They reserve the right to weigh in if they feel the need,” Shallman said. “The key at this stage is to make sure voters are aware of his record.”

Los Angeles resident Noemi Tagorda’s mother and grandmother used to go to Langer’s Delicatessen, buy chicken and enjoy their meal with a relaxing picnic in MacArthur Park. Tagorda shared her story during her address to Mayor Karen Bass regarding public safety at a candidate forum on Sunday in a Westlake church.

“That’s virtually impossible for anyone to experience now,” Tagorda said. “Now when you say MacArthur Park, you think of a place that is destitute, [where] there’s just a lot of human suffering, and it’s not a place where you think you can go and relax.”

Hundreds of people from different faith backgrounds attended the public accountability assembly at Precious Blood Church hosted by One LA-IAF, a network of diverse religious and non-profit institutions across Los Angeles County.

Mayor Karen Bass says farewell during a public accountability assembly hosted by One LA-IAF at Precious Blood Church in Westlake in Los Angeles, Calif. on Oct. 11, 2026.

(

Isaac Ceja

/

The LA Local

)

The forum included Bass and Councilmember Nithya Raman, along with candidates for L.A. County sheriff. 

Parishioners like Tagorda walked up to the stage to share their stories and faith leaders then asked each candidate if they were willing to work with One LA-IAF to address the issues while giving each candidate a minute to respond. 

The key issues discussed during the event included: immigration, public safety, sidewalk repair and sex trafficking. 

Manuel Olvera, a member of St. Anthony Catholic Church in San Gabriel, shared the story of a friend and immigrant churchgoer who asked Olvera to share his story on his behalf due to fear.

In the story, Olvera shared that the man and his son had recently lost their jobs due to the current situation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and have been living off of their savings for months.

“It’s not just difficult trying to survive financially,” said Olvera in Spanish on the immigrant’s behalf. “It’s also having your home be a prison.”

Nithya Raman stands at the podium during a public accountability assembly hosted by One LA-IAF at Precious Blood Church in Westlake in Los Angeles, Calif. on Oct. 11, 2026.

(

Isaac Ceja

/

The LA Local

)

On immigration 

Councilmember Raman committed to hosting an immigration retreat and meeting with One LA-IAF. She shared that she is also an immigrant from India, who arrived in the US when she was 6. 

She added that Bass proposed to cut legal defense funds in the last budget. The city council eventually approved $1.5 million in funds for the immigrant legal defense program in the final budget earlier this year.

“If I am elected mayor, I will make it higher and ensure that immigrants who are facing deportation have the resources they need to be able to respond.”

Mayor Bass made the same commitment as Raman with One LA-IAF but when it came to the topic of immigration, she chose to focus on her past work of being part of a congressional hearing alongside Congressman Robert Garcia. 

“It was several months ago, but you came to me and you proposed the idea of doing a city hearing on immigration, we established a great partnership then,” said Bass to One LA-IAF. “And what we did was we actually turned it into an official congressional hearing and what I am hopeful is that in the next 25 days or so, I try not to count, we will have a change in the House of Representatives.”

Manuel Olvera shared the story of a fellow parishioner who was afraid to speak due to his immigration status during a public accountability assembly hosted by One LA-IAF at Precious Blood Church in Westlake in Los Angeles, Calif. on Oct. 11, 2026.

(

(Isaac Ceja

/

The LA Local

)

On public safety 

Bass wants to focus on differentiating between drug dealers and drug users and fighting for residential drug treatment if elected to a second term in office.

“We need to separate those people who prey on our people, who are the drug dealers and the criminal element, from the people who are addicted to the drugs, and we need to get treatment for those people,”  Bass said. 

Raman shared the successes on reducing homelessness in her district and wants to center a compassionate response to the ongoing crisis.

“We have had incredible results on addressing homelessness, a 50% reduction in the number of people living on the street just last year, even as homelessness went up citywide,”  Raman said. “I do not believe that a compassionate response to the crisis on our streets and the safety of our residents have to be in conflict.”

Closing statements

For the final question, organizers asked each candidate if they were willing to meet regularly to address the topics discussed, collaborate on other issues if needed and if the candidate was willing to host a retreat.

Bass said that she believes the group meets regularly with her office and agreed to not only host the retreat, but also being there in person.

“I believe the way you bring about change is from the inside and outside strategy,” said Bass. “That’s a must-do, and I also think it’s important that if you really believe in change and if you really believe in all the issues we talk about, then you’ve got to show up. You’ve got to be there. It’s not just about your idea or all of that, but you have to be there.”

Raman said that the needs in the city are so great and city resources are not enough to address them, so she is happy to commit to partnering with One LA-IAF.

“I know from my work on the council that nothing succeeds without partnership with the people, and so I’m deeply committed to coming to you and partnering with you before we put any of this forward, so that we face the highest likelihood of success, and so that we can lift up our city and its needs together,” Raman said. 

Tagorda, who is also a parent of a student at Precious Blood school, told the LA Local that she was happy seeing people from different faiths and parts of the city participating in the event.

“It’s really great to have that cross-religious platform of all the different religious organizations coming together and sharing the same stories and working together to get the government’s attention on issues that are important to us as a community,” said Tagorda.

Looking for the facts about what’s on the ballot and how it will affect your neighborhood? Visit thelalocal.org/elections for voter guides, news and more.

The post Voters take LA mayoral candidates to church in Westlake election forum appeared first on LA Local.