Sponsored message
Logged in as
Audience-funded nonprofit news
radio tower icon laist logo
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
Subscribe
  • Listen Now Playing Listen
  • Listen Now Playing Listen

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • Widespread rejection by big LA landlord
    An illustration of an orange apartment building with a chain wrapped around it and a padlock. An orange, winding walkway is depicted beneath the building. A blue characterization of a person, round head and a stubby column as the body, appears to be walking on the sidewalk

    Topline:

    One of the biggest landlords in Los Angeles has been turning away people seeking apartments under the Section 8 housing assistance program in many of its buildings, in apparent violation of state law, a Capital & Main investigation found.

    Why it matters: Section 8 is a powerful tool for fighting homelessness and the housing crisis across the nation. But it is especially needed in L.A. County, where wages haven’t kept pace with rising rents. Housing Choice Vouchers, as they’re officially known, subsidize rent for about 85,000 households in L.A. County that don’t earn enough to afford a market-rate rental. The reluctance of landlords to participate is one of the Section 8 program’s biggest problems, even though a state law bars them from rejecting tenants because they use vouchers.

    About the investigation: Capital & Main’s findings are based on data collected by testers hired by the news organization to pose as Section 8 voucher holders. From late 2024 to early 2025 the testers contacted leasing agents to ask about available apartments in 65 buildings owned or operated by Jamison, Equity Residential, Essex Property Trust, AvalonBay Communities, G.H. Palmer Associates, Prime Residential and Greystar. The tests were limited to buildings where advertised rents were low enough for Section 8 recipients to be able to move in. Testers asked leasing staff at each building if they accepted Section 8 vouchers, and if so, what income and creditworthiness criteria each used to qualify applicants.

    The standout: Jamison, a group of family-run real estate companies, has been lauded for its civically active CEO and its efforts to turn underused office space into housing. But Jamison stands out among other large L.A.-area landlords Capital & Main investigated for its near nonparticipation in the Section 8 program, the largest housing assistance program in the country. The investigation found that Section 8 applicants were repeatedly turned down or discouraged to apply, often being asked to provide minimum income and credit scores. Between 2021 and 2024, only one Section 8 tenant moved into a Jamison property.

    One of the biggest landlords in Los Angeles has been turning away people seeking apartments under the Section 8 housing assistance program in many of its buildings, in apparent violation of state law, a Capital & Main investigation found.

    Jamison, a group of family-run real estate companies, has been lauded for its civically active CEO and its efforts to turn underused office space into housing. But Jamison stands out among other large L.A.-area landlords Capital & Main investigated for its near nonparticipation in the Section 8 program, the largest housing assistance program in the country, the investigation found.

    In a statement, a Jamison company spokesperson said “the management companies overseeing Jamison’s portfolio accept and welcome tenants utilizing Section 8 vouchers.”

    Section 8 is a powerful tool for fighting homelessness and the housing crisis across the nation. But it is especially needed in L.A. County, where wages haven’t kept pace with rising rents. Housing Choice Vouchers, as they’re officially known, subsidize rent for about 85,000 households in L.A. County that don’t earn enough to afford a market-rate rental.

    At its best, Section 8 and its federally funded assistance vouchers offer a way out of poverty for low-income residents — affordable rent in a community of their choice.

    But too often the program fails to deliver on its promises. Four in 10 voucher holders in the U.S. never find housing at all, even after years on Section 8 waiting lists, according to a 2021 study by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

    *   *   *

    Terri Reynolds, who oversees programs at the nonprofit Asian American Drug Abuse Program to help clients in the L.A. area find housing, said they’re “so happy” to obtain rental assistance. But they are often disappointed, she said, “because landlords don’t want to mess with Section 8.”

    The reluctance of landlords to participate is one of the Section 8 program’s biggest problems, even though a state law bars them from rejecting tenants because they use vouchers.

    Dan Yukelson, executive director of the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles, said red tape and hard-to-understand rules make Section 8 “an administrative nightmare” for some of his members, who are mostly mom-and-pop landlords.

    Capital & Main investigated seven of L.A. County’s largest landlords to determine whether they open their doors to Section 8 tenants. Unlike smaller landlords who might be unfamiliar with the rules, these multifamily real estate giants have abundant administrative resources to interpret and comply with state law.

    Capital & Main’s findings are based on data collected by testers hired by the news organization to pose as Section 8 voucher holders. From late 2024 to early 2025 the testers contacted leasing agents to ask about available apartments in 65 buildings owned or operated by Jamison, Equity Residential, Essex Property Trust, AvalonBay Communities, G.H. Palmer Associates, Prime Residential and Greystar. The tests were limited to buildings where advertised rents were low enough for Section 8 recipients to be able to move in. Testers asked leasing staff at each building if they accepted Section 8 vouchers, and if so, what income and creditworthiness criteria each used to qualify applicants.

    Jamison buildings were the only ones where leasing agents said they could not rent to Section 8 tenants. Of 21 properties that testers contacted, agents at 15 said they could not accept vouchers. At one property, an agent described income requirements that would automatically exclude voucher holders. Agents initially said they would accept Section 8 at five of the properties, but either described minimum credit scores that would exclude many voucher holders, or did not respond to follow-up inquiries.

    Capital & Main contacted Jamison with its key findings and a list of questions. In its statement earlier this month, the company spokesperson said many of the issues raised were “completely wrong and/or misleading” but did not comment on many of the specific problems the reporting found.

    Last fall, a tester called to inquire about an apartment at Jamison’s Atlas House in L.A.’s Koreatown with some attractive amenities, including state-of-the-art appliances, a swimming pool and hot tub. But they were told the building was not accepting Section 8 vouchers. “We are actively seeking approval to begin accepting Section 8 vouchers, and when that approval goes through, we will publicly make an announcement,” the representative said.

    But the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles has no such approval or inspection process, said its Section 8 director, Carlos Van Natter. “We would not inspect the whole building,” Van Natter said, adding that the agency only inspects individual apartments to ensure habitability after a landlord has accepted a tenant’s rental application.

    At the Sienna on Serrano and the Roya, both relatively new Koreatown buildings that offer features like modern kitchens, gyms, pool decks and even a karaoke room, leasing agents also said they were awaiting city approvals for their Section 8 participation, which they said they expected within a few months.

    *   *   *

    The cold shoulder for Section 8 voucher holders clashes with company CEO Jaime Lee’s community-spirited reputation. Last year the Los Angeles Times featured Lee on its L.A. Influential list and named her one of the “bosses, elected officials and A-list names calling the shots from the seats of power” alongside Gov. Gavin Newsom and Archbishop José Gomez.

    And in public comments, Lee has bemoaned the city’s housing shortage and positioned her family’s company as part of the solution. Lee, who is a member of the LA28 Olympic organizing committee and was appointed to the powerful California Coastal Commission by Gov. Newsom in September, has said the company offers apartments for people at a wide range of income levels.

    What Jamison appears to lack is Section 8 tenants, who are among the lowest earners and the hardest to house; in Los Angeles, for example, most make less than $53,000 per year for a single person. Section 8 tenants pay about 30% of their incomes in rent and the government covers the rest.

    Between 2021 and 2024, only one Section 8 tenant moved into a Jamison property, according to records Capital & Main obtained from the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles under the California Public Records Act.

    The Jamison spokesperson’s statement did not address the lack of Section 8 tenants in its properties, but said that the management companies overseeing its portfolio “take proactive steps, including engaging a broker and non-profits, to help identify individuals and families who hold vouchers or qualify for income-restricted Affordable Housing units.”.

    But the findings raised concerns for L.A. County Supervisor Holly Mitchell, who, as a state senator, authored the 2020 state law that makes it illegal to reject tenants because they pay rent with government assistance.

    “It’s disappointing because the law is the law,” Mitchell said.

    Jamison’s three dozen or so residential buildings in the L.A. area were built since 2013, and thus too new to be covered by local rent control laws or the state’s maximum 10% per year limit on rent increases. Under the Section 8 program, however, the company would be required to get housing authority approval for annual rent hikes.

    Jay Lybik, a real estate expert who until recently was the CoStar Group’s National Director of Multifamily Analytics, said that given state and local rent caps, Jamison may exclude voucher holders so that it can freely raise rents on its units.

    Lybik, who now directs market research for Continental Properties, said Jamison “most likely needs to hit certain return hurdles for their investors and will need to be squeezing every percentage of rent growth. Thus, they don’t want to be hampered by the lower yearly increases allowed.”

    *   *   *

    Jamison is one of the fastest-growing multifamily developers in Los Angeles. In just 12 years, the company has accumulated a residential portfolio that includes more than 6,000 units — including both ground-up construction and office-to-residential conversions. At least 2,500 additional units are either planned or under construction.

    The company has benefited from L.A.’s lucrative apartment market with its low vacancy rate and through-the-roof home purchase prices that send highly paid workers into the rental market. Jamison has also been able to maximize profits by participating in the city of L.A.’s builder incentives. Under these programs, developers can include more apartments in a building than the zoning code allows or get waivers from parking or open space requirements. In exchange, developers set aside a small percentage of apartments for lower-income renters. The company has built some 250 affordable units.

    Another reason for the company’s rapid-fire growth in residential real estate: a stockpile of aging Koreatown office buildings Lee’s father, David Lee, amassed beginning in the 1990s — before the area became a destination for nightlife, dining and traditional Korean spas.

    “They were lucky,” said Johnny Choi, a first vice president at commercial real estate firm CBRE and an expert in the Koreatown market. “They were able to purchase property at a time when prices were a lot lower.”

    Among David Lee’s acquisitions were the former headquarters of iconic U.S. corporations that pulled up stakes after once-prestigious Wilshire Boulevard lost its luster in the 1990s. The former Texaco Oil and U.S. Borax buildings are now the Crosby Apartments and the Westmore, respectively. Jaime Lee has said these conversions and the company’s other residential developments help address L.A.’s housing shortage.

    But the city’s largest unmet need — according to records from California’s state housing agency — is for housing that L.A.’s poorest people can afford. Section 8 is the only program that meets those needs on a large scale.

    *   *   *

    Capital & Main conducted additional tests a few months later to see if the Roya, Sienna, Atlas House and other Jamison buildings had begun accepting vouchers as some leasing agents had previously said.

    In a March 2025 call, a representative initially told a tester that the Jamison buildings she inquired about would accept Section 8, but only if tenants earned at least two-and-a-half times the monthly rent. When the tester said those income requirements would disqualify her as a Section 8 participant, the representative promised to double check on the company’s rental criteria and call her back, but she didn’t. Capital & Main’s tester continued trying to get an answer. When she finally reached another agent, she said that none of the 15 Jamison buildings the tester inquired about were accepting Section 8 vouchers, offering the same reason as before: They were awaiting “inspections” and “city approvals.”

    Leasing representatives for five other Jamison buildings said they accepted Section 8 vouchers. But three insisted all applicants, including voucher holders, meet specific credit scores. Two didn’t respond to follow-up calls. That requirement appeared to run afoul of another state housing law. Since January 2024, it has been illegal for landlords to reject Section 8 applicants solely based on their credit history. Landlords must also consider pay stubs or other verifiable evidence of their ability to pay their share of rent.

    If a large landlord turns Section 8 tenants away, “it would be a major resource that our folks can’t access,” said Section 8 director Van Natter.

    Jamison proved to be an outlier among the seven companies Capital & Main tested. It was the only big landlord that categorically rejected voucher holders in many of its buildings.

    At the six other companies, agents at all 44 properties said they accepted Section 8, but 22 said they would reject voucher holders for poor credit. Four would not say whether poor credit history would exclude Section 8 applicants and two others didn’t respond to follow-up calls about income and credit criteria.

    *   *   *

    On the other end of the spectrum was G.H. Palmer Associates, which appeared to roll out the welcome mat for Section 8 tenants, despite owner Geoffrey Palmer’s Scrooge-like reputation and long-documented resistance to government mandates. A 2022 Forbes magazine profile called Palmer “the real estate billionaire who hates affordable housing.” But in Capital & Main’s tests, only one Palmer leasing agent out of seven properties contacted would not accept alternative evidence of ability to pay rent in lieu of credit history, the highest rate of compliance among the seven companies investigated.

    Palmer owns thousands of apartments in the Santa Clarita Valley and the Inland Empire, and is perhaps best known for a collection of hulking faux Italianate apartment buildings in downtown L.A., some of them hugging busy freeways. In contrast to other companies whose leasing agents couldn’t immediately respond to testers’ questions about Section 8, G.H. Palmer’s were knowledgeable and responsive.

    Palmer, a prolific donor to Republican Party candidates, earned his anti-affordable housing bona fides by winning a court battle against the city of L.A. over a requirement that developers in downtown L.A.’s Central City West area include affordable apartments in their market-rate buildings. The California Court of Appeal ruled in Palmer’s favor in 2009.

    But more Section 8 tenants moved into Palmer buildings in Los Angeles between 2021 and 2024 than any of the six other companies Capital & Main investigated, even those with far more units, city housing authority records show. And in other areas of L.A. County, G.H. Palmer had more Section 8 renters in its buildings than the other six companies, according to county housing authority records covering the same years.

    Palmer did not respond to Capital & Main’s questions about the company’s participation in the Section 8 program. “He’s not going to talk to you,” said a staffer at Palmer’s Beverly Hills office.

    Palmer’s Section 8 stance may be a straightforward case of scrupulous adherence to the law. But it could also be a matter of economics. Unlike Jamison with its portfolio of newer buildings, many of Palmer’s buildings are older and covered by state rent caps. So the need to obtain housing authority approval for annual rent hikes might not threaten the company’s bottom line. It could be that tenant stability and on-time rent payments are a greater priority for Palmer’s business model. Lybik, the real estate expert, noted that Section 8 tenants tend to stay in their apartments longer than unsubsidized renters. And the lion’s share of their rent is reliably paid by the federal government.

    Whatever the reason, Palmer’s welcoming response to Section 8 applicants was unusual among the large property owners Capital & Main investigated.

    *   *   *

    The typical experience for tenants is far more frustrating and obstacle-ridden, according to housing authority data that shows it is difficult for Section 8 voucher holders to find landlords who will accept their vouchers.

    “I had so much discrimination,” said Jennifer St. Jude, a Section 8 voucher holder and social work student at the University of Southern California, who finally landed a four-bedroom house in the Santa Clarita Valley with her two adult daughters. “It took me a year and a half, and I not only got lucky, I killed myself to get this house,” St. Jude said.

    In 2024, the latest year for which data is available, Van Natter of the L.A. city housing authority reported that about 40% of Section 8 voucher holders failed to find housing before their subsidies expired — even after languishing for years on waiting lists. The program gives participants 180 days to find a landlord who will accept their vouchers before they must return them to the housing authority.

    Yukelson with the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles argued that part of the problem is landlords have a hard time getting rent increases approved and with customer service at some local housing authorities.

    “You need to be like a dog with a bone. You need to be aggressive,” he said.

    *   *   *

    City and housing authority officials have tried to increase Section 8 usage with financial incentives for landlord participation and regular informational seminars.

    Last year, L.A. Mayor Karen Bass met with property owners to urge them to give the program a try. “We have so many people on our streets with vouchers in their hands,” she said at the public event. “They just need somebody willing to give them a chance.”

    A spokesperson for Mayor Bass had no comment on Capital & Main’s findings and did not respond to an interview request.

    But Kevin Kish, who heads the California Civil Rights Department, the state’s fair housing enforcement agency, said Capital & Main’s findings “highlight a need for more education, more outreach and more enforcement”. Statewide, a single attorney and three investigators enforce anti-discrimination laws that protect people who use rental assistance, Kish noted.

    “I think that we’re using all of the tools available to us,” Kish said. He added: “That’s the hard limit on what we can do. Those are the resources we have to conduct enforcement.”

    But as Capital & Main’s testers learned through dozens of calls, emails and texts, housing laws on paper don’t necessarily make it easier for Section 8 tenants to get to yes, especially when it’s in big landlords’ financial interest to say no.

    This reporting was supported by a grant from the Fund for Investigative Journalism.

    Annakai Hayakawa Geshlider, Arlen Levy, Jeremy Lindenfeld, Maison Tran, Emily Elena Dugdale and Lita Martinez contributed to this story. 
    Copyright 2025 Capital & Main.

  • LA council votes to pursue Nov. ballot measure
    A man with dark skin tone and bald head wearing a dark blue suit with a light blue button up underneath sits behind a wooden dais with a wooden name sign that reads "Harris-Dawson" there's a tiled wall behind him and a part of an American flag. He speaks into a mic.
    President of the Los Angeles City Council, Marqueese Harris-Dawson, at a city council meeting in April, 2025.

    Topline:

    After months of debate and false starts, the Los Angeles City Council voted Wednesday in favor of developing a potential November ballot measure that would ask voters to rein in the city’s controversial “mansion tax.”

    The proposed exemption: During the meeting, Councilmembers Tim McOsker and Katy Yaroslavsky put forward a motion asking the City Attorney to draft a ballot measure that would ask voters to cancel the tax on sales of multifamily and residential mixed-use buildings within the first 10 years of their construction.

    What city leaders are saying: Ahead of the 9-5 vote to proceed with proposed tax breaks for new apartment buildings, Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson said he has seen affordable housing construction decline in his district after the policy — called Measure ULA — took effect in 2023. “I can tell you with certainty ULA has not helped,” he said. “Housing starts are as low in my district as they’ve been the entire time I’ve been in office.”

    What happens next? The council’s proposed measure is still far from officially qualifying for the November ballot. Sending final language to the ballot will require another council vote, and the council could potentially decide later this summer to pull the measure.

    Read on… to learn how we got here, and why L.A. voters may end up seeing multiple “mansion tax” measures on their November ballot.

    After months of debate and false starts, the Los Angeles City Council voted Wednesday in favor of developing a potential November ballot measure that would ask voters to rein in the city’s controversial “mansion tax.”

    Ahead of the 9-5 vote to proceed with proposed tax breaks for new apartment buildings, Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson said he has seen affordable housing construction decline in his district after the policy — called Measure ULA — took effect in 2023.

    “I can tell you with certainty ULA has not helped,” Harris-Dawson said. “Housing starts are as low in my district as they’ve been the entire time I’ve been in office.”

    Harris-Dawson said neighboring cities, such as Inglewood and Gardena, where new apartment buildings are not subject to L.A.’s tax, have not seen similar declines.

    While a majority of the council voted to proceed with a possible ballot measure, Councilmembers Ysabel Jurado, Imelda Padilla, Monica Rodriguez, Eunisses Hernandez and Hugo Soto-Martinez voted against the proposal.

    Reform advocates cheered the vote, but said more work is needed. Miguel Santana, president of the California Community Foundation, has pushed for changes with the “Mend It, Don’t End It” coalition, a group of affordable housing developers, labor organizations and business leaders.

    “Today the City Council took another important step towards reforming Measure ULA in a way that will allow us to start building housing again while saving a critical funding source that we desperately need," Santana said in a written statement.

    ‘Mansion tax’ nuts and bolts

    Measure ULA taxes the sale of real estate worth $5.3 million or more. That includes large, luxury single-family homes, which is why the measure is often called the city’s “mansion tax.”

    However, the tax also applies to apartment buildings and other commercial real estate. Economists have said that’s causing a slow-down in new multi-family construction at a time when L.A. needs more housing supply to keep up with demand and prevent rents from spiking.

    During Wednesday’s meeting, Councilmembers Tim McOsker and Katy Yaroslavsky put forward a motion asking the City Attorney to draft a ballot measure that would ask voters to cancel the tax on sales of multifamily and residential mixed-use buildings within the first 10 years of their construction.

    That reform proposal is somewhat similar to earlier failed attempts at changing the tax, including from Councilmember (and now mayoral candidate) Nithya Raman and a separate effort from state legislators.

    What happens next? 

    The council’s proposed measure is still far from officially qualifying for the November ballot. Sending final language to the ballot will require another council vote, and the council could potentially decide later this summer to pull the measure.

    If it does appear on the ballot, a majority of L.A. voters would need to approve the changes before new apartment buildings would be exempt. Close to 58% of the city’s voters supported Measure ULA when it first came up for a vote in November 2022.

    In a separate vote Wednesday, the council moved forward with another potential ballot measure that would ask voters to exempt Pacific Palisades homeowners from the tax if they sell their properties after the January 2025 Palisades Fire.

    To complicate matters further, voters are likely to encounter yet another measure on the November ballot related to the city’s “mansion tax.”

    The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association has qualified a measure that would repeal L.A.’s tax, and similar taxes across the state, while simultaneously raising the voter-approval threshold for new taxes.

    How we got here

    Though reforms are tentative at this point, the council’s decision to pursue a ballot measure is an about-face from a committee’s earlier decision to keep changes off the November ballot.

    Jurado, the chair of that committee, repeated her argument that it’s too soon to conclude the tax has caused apartment developers to retreat from L.A.

    “When we focus just on housing production alone, we’re missing the mark about what this measure was actually intended to do, which is to keep Angelenos housed,” Jurado said during Wednesday’s meeting.

    What has tax revenue funded so far? 

    Measure ULA has raised $1.2 billion over the last three years, far less than the $1.1 billion in annual funding supporters said the tax could raise. That funding has gone toward affordable housing construction and tenant aid programs, such as rent relief and eviction defense.

    However, the city has encountered trouble spending the money on its intended purposes.

    City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto has refused to sign contracts approved by the city council and the mayor in April for $177 million in tenant aid. And the measure’s strict rules on how tax revenue can be spent to support affordable housing projects have required city leaders to pursue changes to funding restrictions.

    We asked the United to House L.A. coalition, supporters of the tax, for reaction to the city council vote, but did not receive an immediate response.

  • Sponsored message
  • Shelter-in-place order in Boyle Heights
    A residential street with rows of palm trees and cars parked along the sidewalks. The sky is filled with black smoke.
    A fire at a Boyle Heights commercial building sent massive plumes of black smoke up Wednesday and prompted a shelter-in-place order.

    Topline:

    Fire broke out around 2:35 p.m. at 1400 S. Los Palos St., according to the Los Angeles Fire Department

    What we know: A shelter in place order has been issued for the area south of Interstate 5, east of Soto Street, north of Washington Boulevard and west of Indiana Street. According to East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice, the structure is an industrial freezer facility.

    A fire at a Boyle Heights commercial building sent massive plumes of black smoke up Wednesday and prompted a shelter-in-place order.

    The fire broke out around 2:35 p.m. at 1400 S. Los Palos St., according to the Los Angeles Fire Department. Aerial footage from KTLA showed the fire involving solar panels on the roof of the storage facility.

    Heavy smoke was visible around Boyle Heights and into other parts of LA, and the LAFD said people near the fire should immediately shelter in place.

    “Get inside IMMEDIATELY and close all windows and doors. Turn off air conditioning/heating. Bring all people and pets to an inside room until you receive more instructions,” an LAFD alert said.

    A street map with a large section highlighter in purple

    The shelter-in-place order was in effect for the area south of Interstate 5, east of Soto Street, north of Washington Boulevard and west of Indiana Street.

    According to East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice, the structure is an industrial freezer facility. In a series of Instagram stories, the organization urged residents to close their windows and stay inside.

    This is a breaking story. Check back for updates, or follow us on Instagram.

    The post Massive fire breaks out at Boyle Heights commercial building, LAFD orders shelter in place appeared first on LA Local.

  • Air regulators cited an oil recycling facility
    A close-up of a green street sign hanging from a lamp post with a blue sky in the background. The sign reads "Compton Blvd 100 W City of Compton"
    A street sign in the City of Compton.

    Topline:

    Air quality regulators say an oil recycling facility in Compton violated pollution rules and improperly maintained some of its equipment.

    The details: The South Coast Air Quality Management District issued four notices of violation to World Oil Recycling in Compton, and one notice of violation to a contractor operating leaky equipment on its property.

    Keep reading ... for more on the violations and what's next.

    Air quality regulators say an oil recycling facility in Compton violated pollution rules and improperly maintained some of its equipment.

    The South Coast Air Quality Management District issued four notices of violation to World Oil Recycling in Compton, and one notice of violation to a contractor operating leaky equipment on its property.

    The Compton facility “receives used oils, glycol and wastewater and re-refines these materials into engine oil and glycol products for reuse,” according to the air district. The largest oil recycler in the state, it’s located in some of the most pollution-burdened and low-income neighborhoods in California, as well, where asthma rates are higher than 95% of census tracts, according to state data.

    The violations came after the air district started receiving odor complaints from residents at the start of this year. The agency received more than 70 complaints of strong odors of gas, including from the nearby Jefferson Elementary School, the agency said in a news release.

    Officials then carried out more than a dozen on-site inspections, including using an infrared camera to identify gas leaks. They found hydrocarbons leaking from a wastewater storage tank, as well as a centrifuge pump. A small fire at the facility in late May also led to nuisance notices from the agency.

    The company told LAist it is working to remove the leaky storage tank that may have caused the odors.

    “World Oil Recycling provides an essential environmental service by recycling used oil and other materials, helping to keep them out of landfills and waterways,” a spokesperson for the company said in a statement. “We are committed to meeting or exceeding the highest standards at our facility in Compton, where we have operated safely for more than 40 years and serve as a major local employer.”

    If World Oil Recycling doesn’t comply, it could face fines or litigation.

    The company has faced such issues in the past. In 2019, the Environmental Protection Agency reached a settlement with World Oil’s Compton and Vernon facilities for violating hazardous waste regulations. The agreement required the companies to pay a $39,092 penalty and spend $167,967 on air filtration systems in nearby schools to reduce indoor air pollution.

    The facility has received dozens of violation notices from the air district over the years, as well, mostly for minor maintenance issues.

    In a statement to LAist, Compton Mayor Emma Sharif said the city “is working with the appropriate regulatory agencies as they continue their investigation.”

    How to report smoke, dust, smells or other air pollution near you

    The South Coast Air Quality Management District is tasked with regulating air pollution in the region. The public can report odors, dust, smoke or other air quality concerns by:

    Is there a potentially hazardous facility near you? How to find out

    • At a local level, the South Coast Air Quality Management District regulates air pollution across the region, but it has just one inspector for every 200 industrial sites, according to the Voice of O.C. You can search for violations by facility through the agency’s public search tool here. You can report any concerns about strong odors, excessive dust, smoke or other air pollutants here. Find LAist’s in-depth guide on reporting air pollution concerns here
    • You can search for violations by various types of regulated facilities across the state using this map from the California Environmental Protection Agency, or CalEPA. GKN Aerospace, for example, has dozens of violations logged there. You can also file a complaint with CalEPA here or to the federal EPA directly here
    • The California Department of Toxic Substances Control regulates hazardous waste sites. You can use their tool, EnviroStor, to search for public information about hazardous sites near you. 
    • The California Geologic Energy Management Division oversees oil and gas facilities across the state. You can search for wells near you via their searchable map here. L.A. County also has its own searchable map for oil and gas wells here.

  • CA won't consider LA's extension request
    The intersection of San Pedro and Second streets is included in the scope of the Skid Row Connectivity and Safety Project, one of the projects L.A. city officials had won state grants for.

    Topline:

    California will not consider the city of Los Angeles’ request for a time extension on three mobility projects in underinvested communities that are largely funded by more than $100 million from the state.

    The city’s request: In April, the city formally requested a six-year time extension on state-mandated deadlines to complete pre-construction work on the projects in Boyle Heights, Skid Row and Wilmington. The projects won grant funding in 2022 and 2023. Staffing constraints have prevented progress, city officials have said.

    State’s response: The California Transportation Commission is the state body that administers the grant program. Justin Behrens, the spokesperson for the commission, said that while the state grant program offers time extensions in certain cases, “The requested time exceeded what is allowable under the guidelines” and the extensions were ultimately not recommended to be considered by the commission.

    Read on … for reactions from local leaders.

    California will not consider the city of Los Angeles’ request for a time extension on three mobility projects in underinvested communities that are largely funded by more than $100 million from the state.

    The exclusion of the request from the California Transportation Commission's June agenda spells an uncertain fate for the projects in Boyle Heights, Skid Row and Wilmington, which involve repairing sidewalks, adding bike lanes and installing traffic-calming measures to make streets friendlier to non-vehicular modes of transportation.

    In April, the city formally requested a six-year extension on state-mandated deadlines to complete pre-construction work on the projects, saying recent staffing and funding constraints in the public works and transportation departments have hampered progress.

    Justin Behrens, the spokesperson for the commission, said that while the state grant program offers time extensions in certain cases, “The requested time exceeded what is allowable under the guidelines,” and extensions were ultimately not recommended to be considered by the commission.

    The state funds for pre-construction work, including environmental review and design, are set to lapse at the end of June.

    L.A. officials said in a March report that without the time extension, “The city will be unable to meet these deadlines and lose the opportunity to provide these critical improvements for the city.”

    The Bureau of Street Services, which is the lead agency on the three projects, did not respond to requests for comment.

    'A deeply disappointing moment'

    A statement from the office of L.A. City Councilmember Ysabel Jurado said the situation is “disappointing” and that the councilmember is taking time to “fully understand” what the California Transportation Commission’s decision means for the projects in her district.

    “What we can say clearly is this: We are not giving up,” the statement read. “Boyle Heights and Skid Row have waited far too long for safer, more accessible streets, and the residents who organized for these improvements deserve more than a setback and a closed door.”

    Jurado advocated for additional staffing resources across the bureaus of Street Services, Street Lighting and Engineering, as well as the Department of Transportation, to deliver the projects.

    For Jens Midthun, the president of the DTLA Neighborhood Council, any investment in improving the walkability of downtown L.A. is a worthy one.

    “People in downtown L.A. are here because they want to be,” Midthun said about the neighborhood’s transition from a business hub to a residential destination. “People want to be part of a vibrant city center.”

    L.A. City Councilmember Tim McOsker's office said in a statement that infrastructure improvements in Wilmington “remain a priority.”

    “We will continue exploring funding opportunities and other available options to advance as much of the project as possible,” McOsker's office said.

    The grant program

    Since its launch in 2013, the state’s Active Transportation Program has funded capital projects that promote walking, cycling or other non-motorized ways to get around. Behrens said the program is competitive and over-subscribed, meaning the applications for funds “far exceeds the available resources.”

    Over the course of the grant program, L.A. has secured $500 million to fund 46 transportation projects across the city, according to a June report from Laura Rubio-Cornejo, the general manager of the city’s Department of Transportation.

    Twenty of those projects have been constructed and staff is actively working on designing, implementing or closing out another 22.

    Jurisdictions that win the funds have to adhere to strict timelines to retain the money, which is allocated based on different phases of a capital project. Failing to meet the program’s deadlines can jeopardize a city or county’s likelihood of clinching future grants.

    The program’s deadlines require the city to allocate funds for construction for the three projects in question by the end of June 2027. In its request for a time extension, the city said it would need an additional six years to get to that point.

    Absent a time extension, it’s unclear what the path forward is for the three projects.

    The city in June submitted its application for the next round of Active Transportation Program grants, though its ambitions were tempered by “staff resource limitations and the city’s existing grant commitments.”

    The projects it submitted for consideration to the state include extending the LARiverWay bike path and enhancing mobility along Huntington Drive.

    How to reach me

    If you have a tip, you can reach me on Signal. My username is kharjai.61.