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

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • Lawsuit targets California programs
    A big crane is next to the skeleton of a large building next to what appear to be residential units or hotels.
    Construction in Hollywood in 2019.

    Topline:

    Many California cities require homebuilders to create affordable housing or pay fees to support construction of those units. A new lawsuit contends those fees are unconstitutional.

    What is it: New residential projects need to set aside a share of the units they plan to build for lower-income renters and homeowners under the terms of the city’s “inclusionary zoning” ordinance. Builders who refuse have to instead pay a fee, ranging from the tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars.

    Why now: An East Palo Alto homeowner filed a lawsuit in federal court on Thursday challenging the constitutionality of that law. The implications of the lawsuit range far beyond the Bay Area.

    East Palo Alto, like cities across California, has a law on the books that forces developers of new housing projects to foot the bill for the state’s shortage of affordable homes.

    New residential projects need to set aside a share of the units they plan to build for lower-income renters and homeowners under the terms of the city’s “inclusionary zoning” ordinance. Builders who refuse have to instead pay a fee, ranging from the tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars.

    An East Palo Alto homeowner filed a lawsuit in federal court on Thursday challenging the constitutionality of that law, likening it to “extortion” — and he had a little help from the U.S. Supreme Court.

    The implications of the lawsuit range far beyond the Bay Area. A 2017 report estimated that 149 cities and counties across California have some form of inclusionary zoning rule, though the specific terms vary. That makes it one of the most commonly used affordable housing programs both in California and in the country.

    Now all that may be on the constitutional chopping block.

    The case was filed in federal court in San Francisco by Wesley Yu, a husband and father between jobs, who was planning to build a home and backyard guest cottage for himself and his extended family on a neighboring parcel.

    Because Yu was planning to construct two new structures, the city’s inclusionary zoning rules kicked in, requiring him to either sell or rent out one of the units at “affordable” rates or to pay a one-time fee of $54,891 to be deposited in the city’s affordable housing subsidy fund.

    The core of Yu’s lawsuit, which was filed by the libertarian-oriented Pacific Legal Foundation, draws on a U.S. Supreme Court ruling from last year that also emerged from a heated California housing dispute.

    That case was brought by Placerville septuagenarian, George Sheetz, who contested that the government of El Dorado County had not done enough to justify the $23,420 traffic fee it placed on his home construction project.

    Sheetz’s case drew on the U.S. Constitution’s Fifth Amendment, which puts limits on when the government can take private property. Decades of court rulings have said that if a local government wants to base approval of a construction permit on certain conditions, those conditions have to directly relate to the costs associated with the development. A city, for example, might be able to hold off on approving a new dump until a developer pays an environmental clean up fee, but not a fee to fund local arts and recreation.

    Courts have also ruled that such “exactions” on private development should be “roughly proportionate” to their cost. That is, the $23,420 that El Dorado County wanted to impose on Sheetz should match the cost of fixing the wear and tear his new home would leave on local roads.

    The Supreme Court agreed that these standards ought to apply to the impact fee.

    Now Yu and his legal team are asking a federal judge to apply that same rule to inclusionary zoning. For East Palo Alto’s program to pass constitutional muster, the city would have to show that the $54,891 fee or the requirement to set aside new units at a discount relates to and matches the cost that Yu’s development would impose upon the city.

    The city won’t be able to show that, said David Deerson, the lead lawyer representing Yu.

    “New residential development doesn’t have a negative impact on housing affordability. If anything, it has a positive impact,” he said.

    A growing body of economic research has indeed found that local market-rate development puts downward pressure on neighborhood and city-wide rents.

    Affordable housing in California zoning

    In the past, California courts have ruled that the high constitutional bar set by the Fifth Amendment doesn’t apply to inclusionary zoning programs like the one in East Palo Alto. Requiring private developers to toss in some added affordable housing isn’t an “exaction,” the courts have found, but a standard land-use restriction akin to any other zoning rule.

    Whether a city decides it needs more schools, apartment buildings, businesses or, in the case of inclusionary zoning, affordable housing, it has broad power under the constitution to “decide, for the good of the general welfare, that we’re going to require this,” said Mike Rawson, director of litigation at the Public Interest Law Project.

    The state Supreme Court ruled as such most recently in 2015. The U.S. Supreme Court declined to weigh in, a tacit approval.

    “They can always change their mind,” said Rawson. “I don’t see a basis for it, though obviously that doesn’t necessarily stop them.”

    The composition of the court has changed since 2015, veering sharply to the right. The Sheetz decision from last year has offered new fodder for legal challenges to inclusionary zoning.

    “Sheetz really helps out here a lot” in that campaign, said Deerson. He pointed to other challenges in Denver and Teton County, Wyoming. “I would expect them to keep coming.”

    Tradeoffs in housing policy

    If and when the nation’s highest court takes up the issue of inclusionary zoning, it will be wading into one of the more politically charged debates in housing policy.

    Evidence on the impact of these laws is mixed. Requiring private developers to build affordable units can and regularly does result in more local housing options for lower income tenants at no additional cost to taxpayers. By putting affordable and market-rate units side-by-side, they also promote economic and racial integration, supporters argue.

    But inclusionary requirements can also make any given housing project less profitable, meaning that fewer units get built, leading to higher prices and rents overall. In housing markets, like California’s, that see relatively little new development, the rate at which these programs add designated affordable units to the housing stock is also quite slow.

    That policy debate isn’t relevant to the legal case, which will be fought and won over abstract constitutional principles. But for libertarian-leaning groups like the Pacific Legal Foundation, building industry groups and many “Yes In My Backyard” housing development advocates, an end to inclusionary zoning would be a win on both fronts.

    “In addition to being illegal, I think that these inclusionary zoning policies are also frankly stupid,” said Deerson.

  • CalFire sues Orange County over fire costs
    Orange and yellow flames are seen alongside a silhouette of a dark tree on the roadside. Red and blue vehicle lights are visible on the right side of the frame.
    CalFire is suing Orange County for nearly $32 million over the September 2024 Airport Fire.

    Topline:

    The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, or CalFire, is suing Orange County for nearly $32 million over the Airport Fire, according to recently uncovered documents.

    Background: The Airport Fire burned for 26 days, burning more than 23,000 acres across Orange and Riverside counties in 2024. As a result, 22 people were injured, and 160 structures were damaged.

    What do we know? CalFire filed the suit in September, according to court documents. The department is looking to recover fire suppression, investigation and administrative costs related to the fire, as well as legal fees.

    How much has the fire cost the county so far? The fire has resulted in hundreds of millions of dollars in damage claims filed against the county — $60 million of which already has been paid out. The county’s insurance covers up to $30 million, meaning remaining claim damages will be paid out from the county’s budget.

    The suit names county workers: The lawsuit also named two O.C. Public Works employees, who CalFire claims started the fire while moving rocks in Trabuco Canyon. The county “failed to take reasonable precautions necessary to prevent the starting and spreading of fire,” the lawsuit says. The County of Orange and CalFire declined to comment.

    What else have we learned? Messages between public officials obtained by LAist show that all three work crew supervisors and a manager at O.C. Public Works were alerted to high fire danger Sept. 9, 2024, hours before their crew accidentally started the Airport Fire. The full LAist investigation is here.

  • Sponsored message
  • How old is your music taste?
    There's how old you are, and there's how old Spotify thinks you are. That divide became clear this week with the release of Spotify Wrapped, the streaming platform's personalized year-end recap.

    What is it? Spotify wrapped walks listeners through their top artists, albums, genres and more in a self-reflective (and occasionally mortifying) interactive slideshow, based on data and delivered with sass. The decade-old tradition varies slightly in its aesthetics and substance every year, and this edition seems to have caught a lot of users off guard by bluntly informing them of their "listening age."
    How one's listening age is calculated: Spotify did not respond to NPR's request for comment at the time of publication. But on a webpage explaining its process, the company says listening age is based on the idea of a "reminiscence bump," which it describes as the tendency for people to feel most connected to music from their youth.

    There's how old you are, and there's how old Spotify thinks you are.

    That divide became clear this week with the release of Spotify Wrapped, the streaming platform's personalized year-end recap.

    It walks listeners through their top artists, albums, genres and more in a self-reflective (and occasionally mortifying) interactive slideshow, based on data and delivered with sass. The decade-old tradition varies slightly in its aesthetics and substance every year, and this edition seems to have caught a lot of users off guard by bluntly informing them of their "listening age."

    "Age is just a number, so don't take this personally," reads one of the slides, before proceeding to alternately humble, amuse and confuse.

    Charli XCX, the 30-something electro-pop artist who invented "Brat," is spiritually 75, Spotify declared, because she listens to music from the late 1960s. The genre-defying, synth-savvy Grimes has a listening age of 92, while introspective singer-songwriter Gracie Abrams clocks in at 14, nearly half her real age. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, when asked by a reporter, revealed his comparatively youthful 44.

    It's not just celebrities. Within hours of Wrapped dropping, social media was ablaze with screenshots and memes from listeners mostly either bragging or baffled about their listening age — particularly those many decades younger or older than their actual age. Jokes about "listening age gap relationship[s]," dinosaurs and psychiatric evaluations ensued.

    It has become the norm for people to repost their top-five lists and listening-time tallies on social media — both giving Spotify free publicity and presenting a piece of themselves to their network. That was especially true in 2023, when Spotify assigned listeners to "Sound Towns," relegating them to places like Burlington, Vt., and Jakarta, Indonesia.

    "[Spotify Wrapped] is a way by which we're able to project our identity based upon our cultural consumption," says Marcus Collins, a professor at the University of Michigan's Ross School of Business (and an R&B fan with a listening age of 40, a few years younger than his real age).

    Listening age, for better or worse, is another way to do that.

    "It creates another identity project force, another … shock to the system for us to talk about," says Collins, who previously worked on iTunes initiatives at Apple and ran digital strategy for Beyoncé. "If you're 20 and your listening age is 70, what does that say about you?"

    OK, so how did Spotify calculate this? 

    Spotify did not respond to NPR's request for comment at the time of publication. But on a webpage explaining its process, the company says listening age is based on the idea of a "reminiscence bump," which it describes as the tendency for people to feel most connected to music from their youth.

    Research shows that adults' brains especially hold onto memories from their teenage years, both generally and when it comes to music. One 2013 study, for example, found that young adults had strong positive memories of the music that their parents — and even grandparents — loved when they were that age.

    "There's this idea that there are life stages … where we are receptive and open to new music, where music sort of shapes the experiences that we have, and as we get past those years, we kind of stay … in that moment in time," Collins says.

    Spotify says it combs through a listener's songs to identify the "five-year span of music that you engaged with more than other listeners your age." It hypothesizes that this five-year window matches a listener's "reminiscence bump," assuming they were between 16 and 21 when those songs came out.

    "For example, if you listen to way more music from the late 1970s than others your age, we playfully hypothesize that your 'listening' age is 63 today, the age of someone who would have been in their formative years in the late 1970s," it explains.

    Collins says this approach not only plays into our sense of nostalgia but also helps "carve out where we sit in the timeline of our … social world." Our listening age tells us more about ourselves and gives us something new to talk about with our friends, especially if it's extreme or unexpected.

    "We don't talk about things that are just boring — we talk about the things that are unbelievable," Collins says. "It gets our attention but also sparks this part of us that makes us want to engage."

    What's the catch? 

    Isn't this just a ploy by Spotify to get people listening and reposting? Is it turning our shock into free publicity? Are we being — the 2025 Oxford Word of the Year — rage baited?

    Those are fair questions to ask, Collins says.

    "What one may see as a productive way by which people can engage with people, one may also see it as a manipulative way of getting people to engage in consumption," he says. "The truth of the matter is, it's both of them at the same time."

    Collins says it's a win-win situation because "the best marketing on the planet is us." Spotify is trying to get business for its platform, he says, but also helping people connect — which in turn helps it even more.

    Collins says that he, like most people, learns that Spotify Wrapped is live from friends posting theirs on social media, rather than TV or online advertisements. That in turn makes him want to see and share his stats, "not because I love Spotify so much but because I want to participate in the social practices of my people."

    "The best advertising isn't advertising — it's cultural production," he adds.

    For its part, Spotify says that each of its slides is "made to be accurate, fair and reflective, while still keeping a sense of mystery and magic."

    It's that mystery that some of us may find slightly maddening. Personally? As a fan of '70s music, I was pretty content with my listening age of 70 — until my much younger, cooler sister told me hers: 73.

    Copyright 2025 NPR

  • Resurrected L.A. institution shuts down again
    helms_bakery.jpg
    The Helms Bakery sign in the Helms Bakery District in Culver City. The revived bakery will close Dec. 14 after just over a year in business.

    Topline:

    The beloved Helms Bakery — an L.A. institution resurrected in November 2024 after more than a half-century — is closing again after just over a year in business, reflecting broader challenges facing independent restaurants across Los Angeles.

    Why now: In an Instagram post, owner Sang Yoon cites the increasingly difficult operating environment for independent restaurants in Los Angeles, pointing to changed dining habits and economic pressures that have made it difficult to sustain the bakery in its current form. Yoon also owns Father's Office, the popular gastropub with locations in the Helms Bakery District on the Westside and Santa Monica. He closed Father's Office's Arts District location in September.

    The backstory: The original Helms Bakery opened in Culver City in 1931 and became an L.A. icon, known for its fleet of yellow delivery trucks that brought fresh bread directly to Angelenos' doorsteps daily. The trucks became a fixture of the Southern California landscape before the bakery closed in 1969, unable to compete with rising costs and mass-produced supermarket bread.

    What's next: Helms Bakery will serve its last customers Dec. 14. Yoon noted in the closure announcement that the team is "looking forward to what the future holds," though no specific plans for a reopening or new location have been announced.

    Topline:

    The beloved Helms Bakery — an L.A. institution resurrected in November 2024 after more than a half-century — is closing again after just over a year in business, reflecting broader challenges facing independent restaurants across Los Angeles.

    Why now: In an Instagram post, owner Sang Yoon cites the increasingly difficult operating environment for independent restaurants in Los Angeles, pointing to changed dining habits and economic pressures that have made it difficult to sustain the bakery in its current form. Yoon also owns Father's Office, the popular gastropub with locations in the Helms Bakery District on the Westside and Santa Monica. He closed Father's Office's Arts District location in September.

    The backstory: The original Helms Bakery opened in Culver City in 1931 and became an L.A. icon, known for its fleet of yellow delivery trucks that brought fresh bread directly to Angelenos' doorsteps daily. The trucks became a fixture of the Southern California landscape before the bakery closed in 1969, unable to compete with rising costs and mass-produced supermarket bread.

    What's next: Helms Bakery will serve its last customers Dec. 14. Yoon noted in the closure announcement that the team is "looking forward to what the future holds," though no specific plans for a reopening or new location have been announced.

  • Metro advances plan for Long Beach-San Pedro ferry
    Sunset at a marina with water in the foreground and small personal boats in the background.
    Metro is considering a water taxi project for the 2028 Olympic Games.

    Topline:

    The L.A. Metro Board has advanced a plan for a water-taxi service between Long Beach and San Pedro during the 2028 Olympic Games.

    Why a water taxi? Long Beach will host more than a dozen Olympic and Paralympic competitions. Metro's board has for months been considering investing in a service to ferry spectators along the harbor for the Olympics, positioning it as a way to reduce traffic and increase access to the Games in the South Bay.

    What did Metro do today? The motion, introduced by L.A. County Supervisor Janice Hahn, asks the Metro CEO to start identifying private and public operators that could deliver the water taxi program. It also directs the county executive to assess funding options, including sponsorship models and public-private partnerships.

    How new is this idea? A model for this type of passenger ferry already exists. Long Beach Transit operates water taxis each summer. A 40-minute trip between Downtown Long Beach and Alamitos Bay costs $5. Supervisor Hahn also noted Thursday that other cities have water taxis.

    Read on ... for estimates on how much this project could cost.

    The L.A. Metro Board has advanced a plan for a water taxi service between Long Beach and San Pedro during the 2028 Olympic Games.

    Metro's board has for months been considering investing in a service to ferry spectators along the harbor for the Olympics, positioning it as a way to reduce traffic and increase access to the Games in the South Bay. Long Beach will host more than a dozen Olympic and Paralympic competitions.

    The motion, introduced by L.A. County Supervisor Janice Hahn, asks the Metro CEO to start identifying private and public operators that could deliver the water taxi program. It also directs the county executive to assess funding options, including sponsorship models and public-private partnerships.

    At Metro's meeting Thursday, Hahn said passengers would be able to use their TAP cards on the water taxis.

    " Other cities already run successful water transit systems," she told the board, naming San Francisco, Seattle and New York City. "There's no reason why we can't do the same here, especially with weather as good as ours."

    A model for this type of passenger ferry already exists. Long Beach Transit operates water taxis each summer. A 40-minute trip between Downtown Long Beach and Alamitos Bay costs $5.

    A feasibility study submitted to Metro this fall found that Metro launching and operating its own service on the water by 2028 wasn't feasible, instead recommending it pursue private operators or public-private partnerships to pull off the plan.

    The report, put together by the Metro CEO's office, outlined four possible budgets and plans for a ferry program, including one using hybrid-electric vessels and three others using diesel ships.

    The expected cost of operating the boats during the Olympic and Paralympic Games ranged from $750,000 for two 75-passenger diesel vessels and $1.34 million for two 350-passenger hybrid-electric ships.

    The report also found that local funds likely would be needed to cover the bulk of the costs of a short-term water taxi service but suggested grant funding might be available for a service that would extend beyond the Olympic Games.

    The water taxi is just one of many transit plans Metro is working on to deliver a "transit-first" Olympic Games. It requested more than $2 billion in federal funding for a fleet of thousands of buses to help get spectators around Southern California during the Games. Whether the federal government will deliver on that ask isn't clear.