The Brief

Hours after the Trump administration sued California last week, threatening to end key benefits for students without legal status, Michelle was scrolling social media when she saw a video that made her panic.

The Trump administration is challenging California’s policy of providing in-state tuition, scholarships and subsidized loans to immigrants without legal status — including Michelle, an immigrant who is a community college student in San Mateo County. CalMatters has agreed to withhold her full name because she fears drawing attention to her legal status.

On TikTok, rumors swirled. Michelle saw a video of a young man, around her age, asking if the Free Application for Federal Student Aid, or FAFSA, is gone. In reality, FAFSA is still around, and while the new lawsuit could affect some students' financial aid, some top legal experts say the Trump administration is unlikely to win. Regardless, the court process may take weeks or much longer to resolve the government’s claims against California.

In the lawsuit, the U.S. Department of Justice alleges that California’s policy of granting in-state tuition and financial aid for some students without legal status is unconstitutional. Federal lawyers also argue that California’s policies violate a 1996 federal law, which bars states from providing benefits to residents without legal status that aren’t also available to U.S. citizens who live anywhere in the U.S. The Justice Department is arguing that California either needs to drop the policy or let all U.S. citizens, including those who are out-of-state, pay the same rate.

In California, over 100,000 college students lack legal status, according to one estimate by an alliance of university leaders who advocate for immigrants. Federal assistance, such as Pell grants and federal student loans, are off-limits to anyone who isn’t a U.S. citizen or does not have permanent legal status. California has its own money for college financial aid, which it distributes according to state law.

As long as individuals meet certain requirements, such as attending three years of high school in California, they’re eligible for in-state tuition, saving as much as $39,000 of dollars each year compared to their out-of-state peers. Once they meet those requirements, students without legal status can also qualify for the state’s cornerstone financial aid program, known as Cal Grant, though only a small fraction of these students actually apply for and receive it.

To Kevin Johnson, a law professor at UC Davis, Trump’s actions may be more about political wins than legal ones. “The Trump administration is engaged in a full-court press on undocumented immigrants and so-called sanctuary jurisdictions, and California and Governor Newsom in particular,” Johnson said. That the U.S. Department of Justice named the suit “United States of America v. Newsom” is another indication that this is political, he added.

Others noted that states have already invested in students without legal status and denying them an affordable path toward a college education is a waste of resources. Economists have pointed out that immigrants without status also are integral to the U.S. workforce and aren’t easily replaceable.

‘We didn’t expect them to go this low’

Even weak lawsuits or outright misinformation can make students nervous during November, when college and financial aid application season is in full swing.

On TikTok, videos of students panicking about the financial aid system surfaced last winter, after the Biden administration delayed and botched the rollout of the new FAFSA. Among its many glitches, the new form prevented students whose parents lacked a Social Security number from submitting their information.

After Trump was elected last November, fears about the total demise of federal financial aid swirled again on TikTok. Over the course of this year, as his administration targets universities and continues to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education, those fears have persisted.

In California, Trump seeks to impose a $1 billion penalty on UCLA for alleged civil rights abuses, though a federal judge recently handed the White House a temporary loss on that front. His administration is also suing California colleges and universities for alleged antisemitism violations and has sought to freeze or curtail billions of dollars in federal research funding.

Much of those freezes have been blocked or reversed by federal judges, but hundreds of millions of dollars still remain cut off to campuses. Much, if not all, of those friction points between California and Trump could be resolved through settlements and negotiations, which are political in nature, said UCLA law professor Hiroshi Motomura in an interview.

Before Trump was elected, state leaders, including Assemblymember David Alvarez, a Chula Vista Democrat, pushed for California to offer additional benefits to students without legal status, such as the opportunity to work campus jobs.

Now, with access to financial aid programs at risk for these students, Alvarez said the focus is shifting. “We didn’t expect it would go this low as to go after students that the president had previously said should be welcomed here.” In 2024, Trump told a podcast host that students should “automatically” receive “a Green Card,” otherwise known as permanent residency, when they get their college diploma.

Legal scholars doubt Trump’s lawsuit will win

The lawsuit against California is the Trump administration’s sixth against states with policies allowing in-state tuition for students without legal status. The White House went after Texas first, in June. Underscoring how much of a bipartisan issue in-state tuition is, Texan lawmakers were the first in the U.S. to enshrine the policy in 2001. In all, more than 20 states passed some in-state tuition policy benefiting some residents without legal status.

Trump’s legal attacks on the policy this year prompted leaders in Kentucky, Oklahoma and Texas to side with the White House to terminate the benefit in those respective states. Some legal groups that want to continue in-state tuition for students lacking legal status are challenging those states’ moves.

Trump has also sued Minnesota and Illinois, states with Democrats as governors and attorneys general who are challenging Trump’s lawsuits.

The U.S. Department of Justice says that the federal law in question bars students without legal status from receiving in-state tuition and financial aid benefits based on their living in the state. This, the federal lawyers argue, violates federal law since public campuses in California require U.S. citizens from other states to pay higher tuition rates.

However, California’s law, Assembly Bill 540, doesn’t extend in-state tuition based on where students live, scholars and a previous court ruling say. Instead, students generally need to prove that they attended three years of high school or community college in California; they also need to earn in California a high school diploma or obtain enough community college credits to be eligible for transfer into a public university.

The Department of Justice says those three-year high school or community college requirements are tantamount to an in-state residency criteria and therefore violate the 1996 federal law.

But the California Supreme Court in 2010 already struck down that interpretation. The high court observed that some students living in areas bordering California are permitted to study at California high schools. High school students from out of state enrolled in private boarding schools also satisfy the requirement; they don’t count as residents of California either. And students who were residents of California during high school but moved to a different state could still enroll in California colleges or universities paying in-state tuition.

All of these scenarios require a student to complete the same AB 540 application as students who lack legal status. The only difference is that students without status must also complete an affidavit that they’ll pursue legal residency as soon as they can.

In fact, the University of California enrolled more students under AB 540 who were legal U.S. residents than those who weren’t, the state high court said then.

“If Congress had intended to prohibit states entirely from making unlawful aliens eligible for in-state tuition, it could easily have done so,” the state Supreme Court wrote in 2010. But Congress didn’t do that, the court noted.

Lawmakers in California who passed AB 540 in 2001 knew what the federal law restricted, said Motomura, and they crafted a state law that wouldn’t contravene what Congress intended. “It was drafted to avoid the residency test, and it was drafted to avoid the exclusion of U.S. citizens,” he said.

What’s likely next

California has already signaled that it will fight the lawsuit. “The Trump Administration has once again missed the mark with its latest attack on California, and we look forward to proving it in court,” wrote Nina Sheridan, a spokesperson for the California Department of Justice.

Both the UC and the community college system said their tuition and financial aid policies have always been legally compliant. The Cal State University system did not respond to a request for comment.

The Trump administration may also seek a preliminary injunction to halt California’s in-state tuition law for nonresidents, which would again expose Californians to a seesaw of temporary court orders, sometimes contradictory in nature, while the full legal merits of the case play out slowly in court.

Thomas A. Saenz, president and general counsel for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, or MALDEF, thinks the U.S. Supreme Court will likely side with California despite its conservative orientation if the case goes that far.

A major legal question underscoring the case against California is when and how federal rules preempt or supersede state laws. The Trump White House is arguing California’s in-state policies are preempted by federal law. But the legal concept of preemption is a pillar in jurisprudence. Liberal and conservative interests benefit similarly from a consistent application of preemption as a legal concept, Saenz said. For example, businesses rely on preemption rules in situations where a state law is more progressive or consumer-friendly than a federal rule and want courts to defend them from following the more demanding state rules.

The U.S. Supreme Court is “going to be very wary of making bad law in the realm of preemption, because it could then come back to bite the right wing in protecting businesses,” Saenz said.

For Michelle and other students without legal status navigating their own financial aid applications — and the misinformation online — a series of temporary court orders could create more panic. Financial aid is top of mind, said Michelle, but she doesn’t have time to track the legal back-and-forth of her eligibility.

In addition to being a full-time student, Michelle works four days a week at a restaurant, saving up money not only to support herself but also her family. She’s the oldest of four kids and said she sends $500 to her parents each month.

College is “an opportunity for me to be someone in life, to make my parents proud,” she said. Asked about the lawsuit at the cafeteria of her college, Michelle made a choking gesture with her hand, as though the threat of losing financial aid next year could kill her. “Trump is taking that opportunity away because he doesn’t like immigrants.”

The deadline to submit financial aid applications for community college is Sept. 2, but Michelle is already working on her application, just in case.

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

The National Park Service said Tuesday it is going to start charging the millions of international tourists who visit U.S. parks each year an extra $100 to enter some of the most popular sites, while leaving them out of fee-free days that will be reserved for American residents.

The announcement declaring "America-first entry fee policies" comes as national parks deal with the strain of a major staff reduction and severe budget cuts, along with recovering from damage during the recent government shutdown and significant lost revenue due to fees not being collected during that time.

The fee change will impact 11 national parks, including the Grand Canyon, Yellowstone and Yosemite, according to the U.S. Department of the Interior.

As part of the changes, which are set to take effect Jan. 1, foreign tourists will also see their annual parks pass price jump to $250, while U.S. residents will continue to be charged $80, according to the department's statement.

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said in a post on the social platform X that the changes make sure U.S. taxpayers who support the park service "continue to enjoy affordable access, while international visitors contribute their fair share to maintaining and improving our parks for future generations!"

A White House post on X laying out the increased fees ended with the phrase, "AMERICANS FIRST."

The announcement follows a July executive order in which President Donald Trump directed the parks to increase entry fees for foreign tourists.

"There's a lot to unpack in this announcement, including many questions on its implementation – all which NPCA will raise with the Department of Interior," Kati Schmidt, a spokesperson for National Parks Conservation Association, said in an email.

The U.S. Travel Association estimated that in 2018, national parks and monuments saw more than 14 million international visitors. Yellowstone reported that in 2024, nearly 15% of its visitors were from outside the country, which was down from 30% in 2018.

The money made off the new fees will help support the national parks, including with upgrading facilities for visitors and maintenance, according to the statement.

The "resident-only patriotic fee-free days" next year include Veterans Day, which was one of the parks' eight free days open to everyone in 2025. The Department of the Interior had announced those days by saying they wanted to ensure that "everyone, no matter their zip code, can access and enjoy the benefits of green spaces and our public lands."
Copyright 2025 NPR

Wednesday is gearing up to be the warmest and windiest day of the week just before Thanksgiving.

In L.A. County, temperatures along the coast will range from 70 to 78 degrees and up to 82 degrees in the valleys.

The Orange County coast will see partly cloudy skies with highs of up to 78 degrees. Inland will be slightly warmer, with highs up to 81 degrees.

For the Inland Empire, temperatures will range from 76 to 82 degrees — same for Coachella Valley.

Santa Ana wind forecast

It's going to be another breezy day, but let's take a look at some of the blusterier areas today.

We're looking at gusts up to 45 mph for the 5 Freeway corridor, and up to 40 mph for parts of the western San Gabriel Mountains.

In the Santa Clarita Valley, Agoura Hills, Calabasas and surrounding areas, wind gusts should range from 30 to 35 mph. Isolated gusts could reach up to 40 mph.

In the Inland Empire, gusts could also reach up to 30 mph.

One of L.A.’s biggest homeless service providers has been awarded over $100 million in taxpayer funds while failing to comply with federal audit mandates, according to an LAist review of federal government records.

The downtown L.A.-based nonprofit Weingart Center is at the heart of a controversial property purchase under federal investigation and discussed in a recent criminal indictment of the developer who sold the property.

LAist found Weingart Center also has been continuously out of compliance with federal deadlines to turn in audits — known as “single audits” — since early 2022, based on a review of records in the federal database where they have to be uploaded.

The audits for fiscal years 2022 and 2023 were each finished a year and a half after the federal deadlines, according to the dates on those reviews. The audits show multiple failures by Weingart Center to properly account for taxpayer money that were not remedied from one year to the next.

The group still has not filed an audit that was due nine months ago for its fiscal year ending in April 2024, according to the federal database and L.A.’s regional homeless services agency.

Consequences for failing to turn in a single audit by the deadline can be significant. Federal agencies can cut off any further funds to groups that are overdue, and L.A.’s homeless services agency can do the same, according to a contract with Weingart Center.

Weingart Center has received over $100 million in taxpayer funds while it’s been out of compliance with turning in the audits, according to its latest public tax filing and an LAist review of the audits.

Among the funds the group received while out of compliance is a $9 million no-bid contract L.A. Mayor Karen Bass’ office directed officials to award Weingart Center in 2023 to run the largest shelter site in her signature homelessness program.

A Weingart Center audit also was overdue when the mayor and state officials greenlit the group’s taxpayer-funded purchase of a senior living facility in Cheviot Hills. Federal prosecutors earlier this month announced charges against the man who sold the property to Weingart Center.

Former state Sen. Kevin Murray, who has been Weingart Center’s president and CEO since 2011, has not returned LAist’s messages seeking comment.

Murray and Weingart Center’s chief of real estate development, Ben Rosen, have been placed on leave, according to the L.A. Times. Rosen also has not responded to LAist’s request for comment.

The nonprofit’s board has commissioned an outside investigation into the valuation of housing projects, Weingart Center spokesperson Stefan Friedman told LAist. He did not respond to questions about the audit failures.

Murray previously served in the state Legislature with Bass, who has not responded to a request for comment for this story.

Murray is an attorney and a licensed real estate broker. In addition to leading Weingart Center, he also has a local government role overseeing homelessness spending in the region.

Bass appointed him to the board that oversees hundreds of millions a year in government spending on housing and other programs from the Measure A tax approved by L.A. County voters last year.

The spending panel — known as LACAHSA — oversees just over a third of the roughly $1 billion expected to be generated each year from Measure A. Its job is to create new affordable homes, preserve existing lower-rent housing and prevent people from losing the housing they already have.

This September, Bass also nominated Rosen — the Weignart Center real estate chief — to the spending board as an alternative city appointee to step in when Murray can’t attend. She withdrew that nomination a few days after federal authorities announced their investigation into the property flip.

‘Disappointed’ it wasn’t caught sooner

A large share of the federal money Weingart Center received was distributed by the L.A. Homeless Services Authority, a joint city-county agency known as LAHSA.

LAHSA’s contract requirements say its vendors, like Weingart Center, have to comply with the single audit requirements in federal law. Those requirements say organizations that receive a certain amount of federal money — such as Weingart Center — have to submit the audits within nine months after their fiscal year ends.

Single audits are “the single most important way” to assess an organization’s ability to manage federal dollars, federal officials say.

Among other things, they check whether a group has an accounting system to accurately document the spending.

Weingart Center was long overdue turning in two annual audits for 2023 and 2024 to LAHSA when LAist contacted LAHSA on Oct. 23.

Weingart Center has since submitted its 2023 audit to LAHSA, but the 2024 audit remains overdue.

“We are currently evaluating options regarding next steps,” LAHSA spokesperson Ahmad Chapman told LAist on Nov. 20.

LAHSA’s new interim CEO, Gita O’Neill, told LAist she’s “disappointed” the homeless services authority didn’t catch Weingart Center’s late audits earlier and that she’s been working to beef up oversight of contractors.

O’Neill said LAHSA sent a notice of non-compliance to Weingart Center about the overdue audit and is reviewing the late-submitted audits to see “if additional action is needed.”

At the October meeting of LAHSA’s governing commission, O’Neill shared a plan to improve the agency’s oversight of contracts, which she told LAist will strengthen oversight over issues like single audits. O’Neill, who started at LAHSA in late August, said the reorganization plan would roll out publicly in a few weeks later.

“Every member of this reorganized team will receive training for their new role so we can more effectively hold our [service] providers to the standards we set for them,” O’Neill said. “This is an important step toward holding ourselves and our providers more accountable.”

What state officials say

Aside from LAHSA, the other major agency awarding federal dollars to Weingart Center is the state’s Department of Housing & Community Development, or HCD.

Records show HCD awarded tens of millions of dollars in federally funded grants to Weingart Center under the state’s Homekey program while the group has been out of compliance with turning in the audits.

In an emailed statement, a spokesperson for HCD said Weingart Center was not out of compliance with its award-granting process, which the agency called “very thorough.”

HCD’s agreement with Weingart Center for a 2024 grant says the nonprofit is responsible for complying with the single audit requirements.

The HCD spokesperson said the state housing agency is not responsible for reviewing the federal audits. Instead, the spokesperson said the audits are received and reviewed by the state controller’s office, which then identifies issues and discusses them with HCD.

The controller’s office told LAist it did not receive single audits from Weingart Center or any other nonprofit.

Problems found in latest available audit

The most recent available single audit of Weingart Center, covering fiscal year 2023, was not completed until July 2025, a year and a half after it was due.

That audit report, which LAist obtained from LAHSA, said Weingart Center followed the most important requirements for nonprofits receiving federal funds but also found a range of accounting failures.

The problems identified by auditors included:

• Weingart Center did not include over $50 million in federally funded grants, via HCD’s Homekey program, on the list of federal dollars it handled. The review also found Weingart Center failed to have its financial records checked for accuracy by someone who didn’t prepare them, auditors wrote. 
• Weingart Center did not have an accounting team with enough experience or size to handle housing developments, the review found — despite the problem being flagged in the prior year’s audit. This was one of six problems identified in the previous year's audit that the 2023 audit showed as ongoing.
• Other repeat issues flagged by the audit include Weingart Center failing to properly document money coming into the organization, management failing to catch errors in how it was accounting for money and failing to document how it picked vendors — including the general contractor for a Homekey housing project.

The Weingart Shelby purchase

Weingart Center has been the focus of recent controversy over its use of $27 million in taxpayer funds to buy a senior housing complex from an investor who had just purchased it for less than half that price.

As Weingart Center’s leader, Murray signed key documents in the purchase of the property on Shelby Drive in Cheviot Hills, according to contract records produced by the city in response to LAist public records requests. The documents he signed include a purchase agreement in which he agreed to have Weingart Center keep the seller’s name confidential forever from the news media and general public, with narrow exceptions.

That purchase now is the focus of a federal investigation and was referenced in an October indictment of the man who sold the property to Weingart Center. It was funded by the state’s Homekey program and the city of L.A.

Murray previously told the L.A. Times he had “no prior relationship with the seller and no continuing relationship” and that taxpayers paid fair market price. He has not returned LAist’s messages seeking comment on the property deal.

LAist also has been investigating the sale of the Shelby property and found numerous discrepancies. They include an appraisal report Murray commissioned and submitted for taxpayer funding that showed false information about the purchase deal and the property’s ownership.

[Click here to read LAist’s article exploring the property flip, published today.]

Price concerns about another Murray-led project under same state grant program

The Shelby purchase is not the only Weingart Center property deal that has faced scrutiny.

This summer, city leaders in Torrance publicly alleged the group may have been massively overpaying for a hotel property under a new round of taxpayer-funded Homekey grants. For that site, Weingart Center had teamed up with L.A. County to apply for the grant.

It was one of several criticisms Torrance officials cited in urging the county not to proceed. Ultimately, the project was canceled.

Records show Murray had signed a purchase agreement for Weingart Center to buy the Torrance hotel for $30 million in taxpayer funds. An appraisal he later commissioned found its fair market value was close to the amount he agreed to.

But an appraisal commissioned by Torrance estimated it was worth just $10 million — a third of what Weingart had agreed to pay with taxpayer dollars.

Property valuations are being reviewed by the outside law firm hired by Weingart Center’s board, according to the nonprofit’s spokesperson.

Officials at the county government’s housing agency, known as LACDA, say the appraisal Weingart Center submitted for the Torrance purchase “was conducted by a reputable appraisal company and did not raise concerns.”

Torrance officials, meanwhile, said they had “serious concerns” about how much taxpayers would be paying.

City leaders sent a letter urging the state to reject the grant application.

“This purchase price appears significantly inflated and represents a potential misuse of taxpayer dollars,” they wrote.

Even in L.A.’s famously overheated real estate market, the profit — and quick turnaround — on a senior housing complex in the Cheviot Hills neighborhood seemed extraordinary.

The man at the center of the deal, since identified by federal prosecutors as Brentwood landlord and developer Steven Taylor, bought the property on Shelby Drive in 2023 for $11.2 million, purchase records show.

He wasn’t planning to hold on to the complex for long. At the time of his purchase, a company owned by Taylor already was in escrow to sell the complex to Weingart Center, a major homeless housing provider, for more than double what he paid, according to a purchase agreement obtained through a public records request.

The $27.3 million to pay for that acquisition came from taxpayer grant funds authorized by city and state officials, according to grant documentation. L.A. Mayor Karen Bass and Gov. Gavin Newsom touted the purchase as a key tool in the fight against homelessness.

The deal called for Taylor’s involvement to be kept secret, according to a confidentiality clause included in the purchase contract obtained through a public records request.

That changed last month, when federal authorities announced criminal charges against Taylor. He’s accused of submitting fraudulent documents to borrow money from private lenders when he bought this and other properties.

At a news conference, the region’s top federal prosecutor, Bill Essayli, said the investigation is ongoing.

Taylor was arrested in August, when the case was under seal, and pleaded not guilty, court records show. It’s the first of the two known criminal cases brought so far by the federal task force Essayli assembled in April to investigate fraud and corruption around the use of billions of dollars earmarked to combat homelessness in Southern California.

Essayli announced the task force after a court-ordered review and a federal audit found city and state officials have failed to properly track homeless funds and protect against fraud.

Taylor and his attorney, Michael Freedman, have not responded to LAist’s phone messages for comment.

LAist’s review of the Cheviot Hills property deal found the purchase stands out not just for its high price tag but for the complexity and secrecy surrounding it.

The records reviewed by LAist show:

• A purchase agreement shows Taylor was in escrow to buy the property when city and state officials agreed to use taxpayer funds to buy it from him for $27 million.
• Weingart Center’s application for state funding included an appraisal report containing inaccurate information about who owned the property and did not mention the pending sale.
• L.A. Mayor Karen Bass’ office had a “big role” in the city’s process that recommended this property and two others for the government grants, according to an email from a top executive at the city housing department. 
• A Weingart Center leader said the property, now known as Weingart Shelby, isn’t expected to open until next year, despite the grant originally requiring it to be fully occupied by February 2025.

Bass’ office did not answer questions regarding the purchase. In a statement to LAist, the mayor’s office said the Shelby site “remains an important property providing interim housing in an area of the city that has extremely limited interim housing supply” and that the city is cooperating with the ongoing federal investigation.

Weingart Center’s longtime president and CEO, Kevin Murray, whose signature is on the purchase deal, has not responded to LAist’s requests for comment. He previously told the L.A. Times he had “no prior relationship with the seller and no continuing relationship” and that taxpayers paid fair market price.

Murray and Weingart Center’s chief of real estate development, Ben Rosen, have been placed on leave, according to news reports last month. Rosen also has not responded to LAist’s requests for comment.

The nonprofit’s board has elevated Chief Operating Officer Tonja Boykin to lead Weingart Center and has commissioned an outside investigation, a spokesperson for the nonprofit told LAist.

“In light of recent reporting raising questions concerning the valuation of certain homeless housing projects, we have retained an outside law firm to conduct an internal review of related subjects,” said the statement from spokesperson Stefan Friedman.

This summer, city leaders in Torrance publicly raised concerns that the group was massively overpaying for a hotel property under another round of state homelessness grants.

An LAist review also found Weingart Center has received more than $100 million from taxpayers despite failing to comply with audit requirements since 2022. The latest available audit, of the fiscal year ending April 2023, concluded the organization had multiple failures in tracking taxpayer money it was handling.

(Click here to read another LAist article, also published today, about financial concerns around other Weingart Center activities.)

Weingart Center’s spokesperson said the group remains committed to addressing homelessness, including serving almost 2,000 people daily through interim and permanent supportive housing sites across L.A.

Bass’ office had a ‘big role’ in selection process, per city email

In spring 2023, the city of L.A. was on a third round of state Homekey grants — a program launched by California in 2020 as a way to quickly expand the homeless housing supply, initially by buying motels and hotels and renovating them.

Weingart Center was one of about two dozen groups that submitted 31 proposals to the city in March 2023, according to city records.

Under Homekey, cities and counties can partner with nonprofit or for-profit developers to apply for the grants. If chosen, the non-government partner buys the property with the grant money, and the partnering city or county chips in a sizable amount of money too.

Weingart Center initially proposed an existing hotel property in Harbor Gateway, along the 110 Freeway, in their grant application.

Then, in a March email to city officials, Bass' director of affordable housing production said they’d “identified a new potential site for Weingart,” listing the Shelby Drive address. Weingart changed the proposal to the Shelby site in West L.A. in May 2023, records show.

“The mayor's office did play a big role in the selection process,” states an email from Eric Claros, director of housing at the city’s housing department, which LAist obtained as part of an open records request.

Claros and a spokesperson for the housing department declined to speak to LAist about the selection process.

In late May 2023, Bass’ office informed the office of Katy Yaroslavsky — the city councilmember who represents Cheviot Hills — “that they planned to include the Shelby property in the city's application for Project Homekey 3.0 funding,” according to Yaroslavsky’s office.

A few days later, on June 9, 2023, the city’s housing department officially recommended that the City Council approve the Shelby property as one of three projects to receive city funding and to jointly apply for Homekey grants.

Taylor signs deal to buy the property

On June 16, 2023, less than a week after city staff publicly recommended the Shelby project for state funding, Taylor went into escrow to buy the property from Bridge, according to a copy of that purchase agreement the city disclosed to LAist. The price negotiated at that point is redacted in the copy the city disclosed.

Taylor signed the deal to buy the property on behalf of an LLC he later said he was the sole owner of, according to an email disclosed by the city.

Twelve days later, the City Council took the housing department’s recommendation and officially approved the Shelby property as one of three sites the city would partner on to unlock state grant funds. In doing so, the city agreed to pay $20 million toward the purchase and to unlock the other $7 million from the state to purchase the property.

The project called for another $15 million in state funds to be set aside for renovating and preparing the property after the acquisition, plus another $15 million in city and state funds to cover at least four years of operations.

The state says the money it gave for the purchase and renovation came from federal dollars given to states during the COVID-19 pandemic.

(Click here to see a breakdown of taxpayer funds the city and state committed to the project.)

The taxpayer-funded deal to buy from Taylor

Murray signed the agreement for the Weingart Center to buy the property from Taylor for $27.3 million in taxpayer funds July 26, 2023, according to a copy of the purchase agreement the city released in response to a public records request. At that time, neither Taylor nor his affiliated companies owned the Shelby site.

The agreement states Murray, on behalf of Weingart Center, acknowledged the seller — Taylor — didn’t own the property but was in escrow to buy it.

As part of the purchase agreement, Murray — one of the two Weingart Center executives now on leave — agreed that Weingart Center — the taxpayer-funded buyer — never would identify Taylor to the public or news media as the seller, nor would it reveal the deal’s terms, outside of narrow exceptions.

The deal also said it was expected that an “affiliate” of Taylor would buy the property from its owner and complete the sale.

Appraisal problems

Ahead of the sale, the Homekey grant application required a property appraisal, which Murray commissioned and received in July 2023. LAist obtained a copy of the appraisal from the city through a public records request.

The Shelby appraisal report doesn’t mention that the property was under contract at the time to be sold. The state’s requirements for Homekey appraisals say the reports should include information about any pending sales of the property being appraised.

Instead, the appraisal states Weingart Center was buying the property directly from its then-owner for $27.3 million. The report incorrectly identifies the owner as an LLC owned by Taylor. As a title report attached to the appraisal shows, the property still was owned at the time by the subsidiary of Bridge.

The appraisal report gave several estimates for the property’s value, depending on the method.

When looking at nearby sales of apartment complexes and adjusting for differences, the appraisal estimated the Shelby property’s value would be $19.4 million — about $8 million less than what taxpayers were paying and $7 million more than Taylor was paying.

Other methods in the appraisal generated higher value estimates, including two estimates right around $27.3 million — the amount the report says Weingart Center already had agreed to pay for the property. Those methods looked at similar sales of assisted living facilities and the estimated income the property would garner as an assisted living facility.

The company that conducted the appraisal, BBG, defended its process to LAist.

“The appraiser handled the appraisal assignment correctly with the information they were given,” said Peter Christensen, BBG’s general counsel and chief compliance officer.

Weingart Center sent a copy of the appraisal to the state housing department July 27, 2023, as part of its application with the city for Homekey funds.

State approves grant

With the appraisal and other application materials in hand, state officials awarded over $22 million in Homekey money toward the purchase and renovation of the Shelby property in November 2023.

Records show a business that had Taylor as its point of contact completed the purchase of the Shelby property for $11.2 million Dec. 26, 2023. It was six months after Taylor entered escrow to buy it and about a month after state officials committed to fund Weingart Center’s purchase for double that amount.

The taxpayer money changed hands in April 2024, when Weingart closed on buying it from the company linked to Taylor. No improvements to the property were documented in city permit records during that time.

The Homekey grants are overseen by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), led since 2020 by Gov. Gavin Newsom appointee Gustavo Velasquez.

The department declined to answer questions about their approval of the Shelby grant, following the federal announcement. A spokesperson cited the ongoing investigation, saying the department is cooperating with the U.S. Attorney’s office, which “has made it clear the department is a mere witness in this matter.”

Delays in opening

In addition to the $27 million in public funds to buy the property, Weingart Center was approved to spend another $15 million in state funds for renovations and other costs to prepare it to become housing for people in need of shelter.

The state grant originally required Weingart Center to finish all construction and rehabilitation work by Nov. 21, 2024, and have the housing units fully occupied by Feb. 21.

Those deadlines have moved significantly, as work on the facility continues and runs into problems like asbestos and mold, according to city permit records and state records.

What’s next

Weingart Center says upgrades aren’t expected to be completed until late February 2026, more than a year later than the original schedule. The state has granted multiple extensions, with the deadline for full occupancy now set at April 21, 2026.

LAist reporters Ted Rohrlich, Jordan Rynning and Elly Yu contributed to this story.