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
  • New law affects short term rentals and hotels
    A woman browses the site of US home sharing giant Airbnb on a tablet. The Los Angeles City Council approved an ordinance on Friday requiring hotels and short term rentals like those offered through AirBnb to obtain a police permit in order to operate.

    Topline:

    The Los Angeles City Council approved an ordinance on Friday requiring hotels and short term rentals like those offered through AirBnb to obtain a police permit in order to operate.

    Under the new ordinance, short term rental owners will have to submit information such as business and tax details and building and safety information to Los Angeles police to obtain a permit. Owners will also have to divulge any previous criminal history if any.

    Why it matters: Proponents say the requirement will help the city better manage short term rentals and address public safety concerns over rental party houses, human trafficking, drug sales and prostitution. But opponents, including the Los Angeles Police Commission, small businesses and some hotel owners, say the permits will be too onerous.

    The backstory: The new ordinance was part of a deal that the city council struck with the local union, Unite Here Local 11, earlier this month. Under the proposal, new hotel developers would be required to replace any housing that is demolished during construction, either by buying new housing or constructing new projects. Also included in the deal were provisions “to address nuisance hotels and prevent the use of short-term rentals as ‘party houses.’”

    The Los Angeles City Council on Friday approved an ordinance requiring hotels and short term rentals like those offered through AirBnb to obtain a police permit in order to operate.

    Under the new ordinance, short term rental owners will have to submit information such as business and tax details and building and safety information to Los Angeles police to obtain a permit. Owners will also have to divulge any previous criminal history.

    Proponents say the requirement will help the city better manage short term rentals and address public safety concerns over rental party houses, human trafficking, drug sales and prostitution. But opponents, including the Los Angeles Police Commission, small businesses and some hotel owners, say the permits will be too onerous.

    To that end, Councilmember Marqueece Harris-Dawson requested a report within 45 days from the city attorney, housing and planning departments on an alternative to the police permit.

    Issues with the police permit process

    According to a report by the police commission, the new law is expected to push the current annual batch of about 5,000 permits to 14,000.

    “Current staffing is insufficient to handle this additional burden,” the report states.

    Ray Patel of the Northeast Los Angeles Hotel Owners also called the language regarding the requirements “vague.”

    “The police department or the police commission can make those requirements up as time goes along,” he said. The ordinance, he added, puts the onus on the hotel owner for violations by a guest.

    “What does the city do with a big building or even a limited service small building sitting in the middle of the town that is empty that can no longer operate as a hotel?” Patel said. “And from the owner's perspective, you know, if they had a loan on their mortgage, well, how are they going to pay that loan down now?”

    Ed Colman, a 71-year-old who’s been an Airbnb short term rental host for nine years, said the police permitting process is unfair and would add “a whole other layer of bureaucracy.”

    “I'm not open to the public. I'm not a hotel. I'm not like a hotel,” Colman said. “No one can walk off the street and rent the room in my home. It's by invitation only. These are our private residences by law. That's what the Home Sharing Ordinance states.”

    Under the city’s Home-Sharing Ordinance, hosts have to submit a federal or state issued ID plus two forms of documentation showing that the home they want to rent out is their primary residence. Some of the criteria to get a permit also include no pending citations from law enforcement or city agencies. The permitting process also states that “hosts must not engage in any commercial uses for purposes of a party or an event.”

    Colman said adding a police permit requirement to the list will just squeeze him even more.

    “I've been living in this home for 40 years and I depend on the income from my guest room to allow me to remain in my home,” he said.

    Heather Carson, co-founder of the Homeshare Alliance Los Angeles, said the city is already behind in issuing permits under Home Sharing Ordinance.

    “The idea of adding an additional permit makes absolutely no sense when they can't even process the current permits properly,” she added.

    The city council voted unanimously earlier in the week to move the proposal forward with the addendum, even though some members expressed concerns.

    Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez said during a hearing on Tuesday that police permits work for some businesses that serve hundreds of people on a daily basis, but those aren’t the same as something like an Airbnb, “where someone would sleep for a couple of nights.”

    And Councilmember John Lee, who echoed the concerns of the Asian American Hotel Association, said he thought the process of developing the ordinance had moved too quickly.

    “Stakeholders have not been aware of this proposed expansion of the police permitting process until a few weeks ago,” he said.

    How the police permit came about

    The new ordinance was part of a deal that the city council struck with the local union, Unite Here Local 11, last month. Under the proposal, new hotel developers would be required to replace any housing that is demolished during construction, either by buying new housing or constructing new projects. Also included in the deal were provisions “to address nuisance hotels and prevent the use of short-term rentals as ‘party houses,’” according to council president Paul Krekorian’s office.

    “We need hotels to welcome the thousands of visitors we receive, but new hotel construction cannot come at the cost of our current housing stock,” Krekorian said. “Irresponsible hotel and short-term rental operators cannot be allowed to endanger the public safety or impair the quality of life in our neighborhoods.”

    The new deal between the council and the union is meant to replace a March 2024 ballot measure that would have required hotels to have vacant rooms made available for unhoused people.

    Kurt Petersen, co-president of Unite Here Local 11, said the ballot measure was born out of members’ “inability to pay rent.”

    “This replacement ordinance will replace that housing one for one at the same affordability levels, which means that no more housing will be displaced by luxury hotel developments,” he said. “And that's a major gain, not just for our members, obviously, but for all Angelenos.”

    The police permit requirement for short term rentals and hotel owners, Petersen said, was included “to curb the abuse of Airbnb and others in taking housing that's meant to be for residents and illegally converting it into hotels.”

    Airbnb did not immediately comment on the ordinance.

  • You asked us: Why are they there?
    A return envelope has a visible hole at top left. Envelope is addressed to the Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk
    An official ballot envelope for the 2026 primary election in Los Angeles.

    Topline:

    Have you noticed that the envelope for your mail-in ballot has holes in it? It turns out they have two functions (neither of which includes being able to see your votes inside).

    Accessibility: The two holes beside the signature line are there to help visually impaired people so they can sign their envelopes in private before submitting their ballot.

    Counting confirmation: They also help election officials confirm that the envelopes are empty when they’re processing the ballots to be counted.\

    When you sit down to fill out your mail-in ballot for the June 2 primary election (we have a guide for that, have you heard?), you may notice something curious on your ballot envelope.

    There are holes in it. Two small holes next to the signature line, and one on the other side.

    What’s the deal?

    This is a question an LAist reader asked our Voter Game Plan team:

    “Does the hole in the mail-in ballot have a specific see-through function?”

    It turns out the envelope holes have two functions. For one, the holes next to the signature line are supposed to help visually impaired people find the signature line so that they can sign their ballot in private before submitting it.

    And two: When election workers start processing the ballots to be counted, the holes help them confirm that the envelopes don’t still have ballots left inside.

    These holes have been part of the envelope design for many election cycles now — according to the L.A. County registrar’s office, they were included based on a recommendation from the nonprofit Center for Civic Design.

    Rest assured, they are not meant for anybody to be able to see your votes inside. Even if you try to make your vote visible, the holes just don’t line up.

    Don’t forget to check out our Voter Game Plan guides while you’re filling out your ballot.

    What questions do you have about this election?
    You ask, and we'll answer: Whether it's about how to interpret the results or track your ballot, we're here to help you understand the 2024 general election on Nov. 5.

  • Sponsored message
  • Katy Perry, Lisa will headline SoFi bash
    A large stadium is seen from across Lake Park in Inglewood, a sign that says "SoFi Stadium" can be seen in front of the stadium.
    SoFi Stadium will be home to FIFA World Cup 2026 games this summer.

    Topline:

    Katy Perry, Future, Blackpink's Lisa and other artists will headline the FIFA World Cup opening ceremony at SoFi Stadium on June 12 — one of three happening across North America.

    The selection: The lineup just announced "reflects the cultural diversity of the United States and the vibrancy of its many diasporas," FIFA President Gianni Infantino said in a statement.

    Why it matters: It's the first time the global competition will hold three opening ceremonies across multiple countries. Mexico City hosts one on June 11 and Toronto hosts another on June 12.

    What's next: Los Angeles will host eight games. The first match will take place on June 12 between the U.S. men’s national team and Paraguay. The opening ceremony will begin at 4:30 p.m., 90 minutes before kickoff.

    Tickets are available now through FIFA and will continue to be released throughout the tournament.

    Go deeper: Watch FIFA’s World Cup games with your fellow Angelenos across LA County

  • Record amount for breaking privacy law
    a parking lot full of chevrolet cars
    A Chevrolet Bolt EV sits parked in the sales lot at Stewart Chevrolet in Colma on April 25, 2023.

    Topline:

    General Motors agreed to pay $12.75 million in civil penalties for selling driving data of hundreds of thousands of California motorists to data brokers, allegedly without their consent.

    Background: It stemmed from an investigation by California Attorney General Rob Bonta, several county district attorneys, and the California Privacy Protection Agency, which enforces the privacy act. They said General Motors misled drivers who paid for the emergency roadside and navigation service OnStar and made approximately $20 million from the unlawful sale of their data between 2020 and 2024. The information included names, location information, driving behavior, and contact information, Bonta said, which went to the data brokers LexisNexis Risk Solutions and Verisk Analytics.

    Read on ... for more on GM's actions and the penalty.

    General Motors agreed to pay $12.75 million in civil penalties for selling driving data of hundreds of thousands of California motorists to data brokers, allegedly without their consent.

    The settlement, announced Friday, is the largest ever for violations of the California Consumer Privacy Act, a 2018 law that requires companies to tell consumers about how their data is shared and to respect requests to stop the sharing.

    It stemmed from an investigation by California Attorney General Rob Bonta, several county district attorneys, and the California Privacy Protection Agency, which enforces the privacy act. They said General Motors misled drivers who paid for the emergency roadside and navigation service OnStar and made approximately $20 million from the unlawful sale of their data between 2020 and 2024. The information included names, location information, driving behavior, and contact information, Bonta said, which went to the data brokers LexisNexis Risk Solutions and Verisk Analytics.

    “This trove of information included precise and personal location data that could identify the everyday habits and movements of Californians,” Bonta said in a press release.

    The settlement also requires GM to stop selling data to any consumer reporting agencies for five years and submit privacy assessments to the state, among other provisions. It followed a similar agreement between the Federal Trade Commission and GM earlier this year and California settlements with Honda and Ford over the past 14 months for their own violations of the privacy act.

    California’s investigation of GM began after a 2024 New York Times investigation found GM collected data about millions of drivers nationwide and sold it to insurance companies in order to charge the drivers higher premiums. Californians were not impacted by those premium hikes because a state law prohibits insurers from using driving data to set insurance rates, Bonta said.

    Bonta told CalMatters at a press conference Friday that it’s unclear if location data collected by General Motors was used by other companies to make predictions about the prices people are willing to pay for goods. That practice is better known as surveillance pricing and can leverage location data. Target paid $5 million to settle a suit from San Diego County’s district attorney over its alleged use of location for the technique. Bonta’s office began an investigation into the surveillance pricing practices of businesses in January.

    “I understand that there could be some overlap and maybe we'll discover something in our investigation in surveillance pricing, but that wasn't the focus of this case,” he said.

    Los Angeles District Attorney Nathan Hochman said the case started with one person finding location data in a report they requested about the data collected on them. That discovery, he added, led to investigations by journalists, prosecutors, and regulators.

    “This case shows more than anything that one consumer can make a huge difference,” he said.

    Though the settlement isn’t much compared to the $2.7 billion in net income that General Motors made last year, Hochman called it an indication that companies should expect higher penalties in the future. California reached a privacy law violation settlement with Disney in February for $2.75 million, previously the largest of its kind.

    In a statement shared with CalMatters, General Motors spokesperson Charlotte McCoy said, “This agreement addresses Smart Driver, a product we discontinued in 2024, and reinforces steps we’ve taken to strengthen our privacy practices. Vehicle connectivity is central to a modern and safe driving experience, which is why we’re committed to being clear and transparent with our customers about our practices and the choices and control they have over their information.”

    Californians will soon have a new protection against companies that use their data without their consent. Starting August 1, the more than 500 data brokers registered with the state must comply with requests California residents can make using an online tool known as the Delete Request and Opt-out Platform, or DROP. The privacy protection agency introduced the tool earlier this year.

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

  • No plans to reopen to the public
    two people pulling suitcases walk on the sidewalk by a chain-link fence with a lot of green trees around
    Pedestrians walk along Wilshire Boulevard adjacent to RFK Community Park in Koreatown that is currently fenced in April 22 in Los Angeles

    Topline:

    The Los Angeles Unified School District fenced off RFK Inspiration Park, located on Wilshire Boulevard. Nearly a year later, the district is considering reopening the space, but only to students at the adjacent RFK Community Schools.

    Why now? Enrique Legaspi, assistant principal at RFK Community Schools, said the school and the district are discussing using the park again, including for classes and student activities. LAUSD confirmed that school leaders have expressed strong interest in using the space for outdoor learning, art programs and student wellness activities.

    Background: For years, the city’s Department of Recreation and Parks operated and maintained the park under an agreement with the school district dating back to 2010. At the time, the public was allowed to use the space. Last March, the department stepped away. By then, it had already been taking on costs outside what the 2010 agreement required.

    Read on ... for more on the battle over the park.

    For nearly a year, people walking down Wilshire Boulevard in Koreatown have passed a small patch of what used to be one of the few public park spaces in the neighborhood. It’s now locked behind a tall chain link fence.

    Inside, the grass is overgrown and trash is piled up along the edges. The memorial to Sen. Robert F. Kennedy — built at the site where he was assassinated in 1968 at the Ambassador Hotel — has fallen into disrepair.

    The Los Angeles Unified School District fenced off RFK Inspiration Park, located on Wilshire Boulevard. Nearly a year later, the district is considering reopening the space, but only to students at the adjacent RFK Community Schools.

    That’s frustrating for some neighbors, who say the park used to belong to everyone.

    “I remember the park being open and suddenly a few months after, it was gated,” said Vanessa Aikens, who lives a few blocks away. “I was just wondering why they gated the area because there seemed to be a lot of people interacting with it.”

    There has been little information relayed to the community about why.

    “We have a number of our members who live right around there and so there’s an angle of access to green space, the access to a safe space for our homeless neighbors,” said Yuval Yossefy, treasurer of Ktown for All, an all-volunteer grassroots organization serving Koreatown’s unhoused community. “This went basically unnoticed.”

    Enrique Legaspi, assistant principal at RFK Community Schools, said the school and the district are discussing using the park again, including for classes and student activities. LAUSD confirmed that school leaders have expressed strong interest in using the space for outdoor learning, art programs and student wellness activities.

    Officials plan to involve the school community and nearby residents as plans take shape, but they have not given a timeline or said whether the park will reopen to the public.

    Koreatown lacks parks

    For years, the city’s Department of Recreation and Parks operated and maintained the park under an agreement with the school district dating back to 2010. At the time, the public was allowed to use the space.

    Last March, the department stepped away. By then, it had already been taking on costs outside what the 2010 agreement required.

    “RAP communicated uncertainty about its ability to sustain long-term maintenance due to staffing and funding constraints,” said Deirdra Boykin, a department spokesperson.

    For people who live nearby, the loss of the park has been simple and immediate: there’s nowhere else like it.

    “There are no parks around where I live,” Aikens said. “Now I just walk straight down the street.”

    In a neighborhood with such limited park space, the memorial park went relatively unnoticed.

    “There definitely isn’t enough green space here,” said Emere Alademir, 23, who lives nearby. “I’m originally from Toronto and everywhere they have green space.”

    People who never used the park say they would visit if it reopened.

    “I’ve never actually gone in but I would be open to coming here if it reopens,” said Wendy Kim, 70, who has lived in the neighborhood for 40 years. “Why not? It’s good for everyone.”

    Kim, who splits her time between LA and Seoul, said the parks in Seoul are much better maintained than the ones in LA, and that when she craves nature, she travels out of the city for a hike.

    “But every place is different and here, the homeless issue is out of hand. That’s just the reality,” she said.

    The fence goes up

    Public records obtained by Yossefy and reviewed by The LA Local show that city and LAUSD officials coordinated the park’s handoff around a May 22 encampment removal and cleanup, after which LAUSD took control of the site and moved forward with fencing it off. The emails do not explicitly state that the park was fenced because unhoused people were there, but they show encampment removal was a central part of the transition plan.

    Volunteers with Ktown For All, who do weekly outreach to the unhoused community in the area, said they were used to seeing people at the park every Saturday.

    “It’s just like all of a sudden the fence was there,” said Nicolas Emmons, who has been doing outreach near RFK since around 2021.

    Emmons and others said that while some unhoused residents stayed in the park, the majority of the park was open and available.

    “At its peak, it was only a small percentage of the park that was being used by people to live in,” he said. “Some of the people that lived there even took it upon themselves to clean the area around their setup.”

    Eunice Jeon, another volunteer with the organization, said they had built relationships with people there over several years.

    “We regularly saw people there and had built relationships with people there,” she said. “They respected and treated the park well.”

    Jeon added that despite restricting access, the closure has not visibly improved the space.

    “If anything I would say the park is in worse state ever since the fence has gone up despite nobody being in there,” she said.

    Jeon said many individuals she encountered were navigating complex barriers to housing and services, often caught in bureaucratic loops that made it difficult to access help.

    “A lot of the time they’re limited by transportation. Some services don’t allow certain things. They need an address, but in order to get something mailed, they need their driver’s license, which they don’t have because they don’t have an address,” she said.

    In email chains included in the public records, officials also discussed installing permanent wrought iron fencing at the site. When asked if that remains the plan, LAUSD said the project is still in the “planning phase” and that details, including potential site features, have not been finalized.

    “If the park is fenced off, nobody can access it. It doesn’t provide you any use,” Yoseffy said. “There are a number of people that can’t access this park, whether they were sleeping in this park, or they used the park to exercise, if they liked to sit and read — none of those things can happen there anymore because it’s completely closed off.”

    Public records show little evidence of public notice. One email mentions posting notices at the park ahead of the cleanup, but there was no formal announcement made to residents that the park — which had been open to the public for years — would be closed and no longer accessible.

    “I think that a public space is meant to be used by the public, including the unhoused,” Jeon said. “That’s something they need to address instead of locking up the parks. That’s a failure of the city. Kicking them out won’t keep anyone safer if they have fewer and fewer places to go.”

    LA Local reporter Marina Peña contributed to this report.