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
  • City council votes to cap rent hikes at 6%
    Cavernous council chambers are full of a diverse crowd sitting on wooden benches, they're facing the council dais, they're backs to the camera. Two police officers stand next to the short wooden entrance that leads to the dais.
    Los Angeles City Council meeting on Dec. 13, 2022.

    Topline:

    The Los Angeles city council voted Tuesday to let landlords increase rents in the city’s rent-controlled apartments up to 6% for the first time since March 2020.

    The details: The proposal will allow rent hikes of 4% beginning on Feb. 1, with an additional 2% increase permissible for landlords who cover their tenants’ gas and electricity costs. The city’s ongoing rent freeze applies to apartments covered by the city’s rent control law, which generally includes apartment buildings built before October 1978.

    The background: By the time rent increases resume in February, L.A. will have banned rent hikes in most of the city’s apartments for just shy of four years, far longer than other parts of the country. If the council hadn’t taken action, tenants could have received rent increases of 7% to 9%.

    The lead-up to the vote: During Tuesday’s meeting, councilmembers proposed dueling amendments to alter the rules on rent hikes moving forward. Some wanted to allow small landlords to charge more, while others wanted to keep the 4% limit in place for all landlords regardless of who covers utilities. Neither amendment received enough votes to pass.

    The Los Angeles city council voted Tuesday to let landlords increase rents in the city’s rent-controlled apartments up to 6% for the first time since March 2020.

    The proposal will allow rent hikes of 4% beginning on Feb. 1 with additional 2% increases permitted for landlords who cover their tenants’ gas and electricity costs.

    The 10-2 decision came after fierce debate among council members, caught between pleas from tenants to keep low-income residents housed by continuing the pandemic-era ban on rent hikes and demands from landlords to end a nearly four-year rent freeze that blocked increased maintenance costs from being passed on to renters.

    If the council hadn’t taken action, the city’s existing rules would have allowed landlords with rent-controlled properties to increase rents by 7% to 9% starting on Feb. 1.

    Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez, who voted in support of the lower limits, said, “If we increase rent, people are going to get evicted, and we’re not going to stop this eviction-to-homelessness pipeline.”

    Traci Park, one of the council members who voted against lowering the rent increases allowed on Feb. 1, said, “We’ve already asked an awful lot of our mom-and-pop landlords, and I just can’t imagine how much more we’re going to continue to expect them to give.”

    Councilmember John Lee joined Park in voting no. Councilmembers Paul Krekorian and Curren Price recused themselves from the vote because they are landlords. Councilmember Katy Yaroslavksy was absent from the vote.

    The proposal will now move to the city attorney’s office for drafting and return to the council for another vote before it is finalized.

    The backstory to L.A.’s rent freeze

    By the time increases resume in February, L.A. will have banned rent hikes in most of the city’s apartments for just shy of four years, far longer than other parts of the country.

    The ongoing rent freeze started when COVID-19 public health restrictions first began. City lawmakers saw the ban as a way to protect renters facing financial and personal hardships caused by the pandemic.

    How do the city of L.A.’s new rent control rules compare to other cities?

    With allowable increases of up to 6%, the city of L.A. will have some of the highest permissible rent hikes among all of the cities in Southern California that have local rent control.

    • Read our guide to rent hikes across Southern California for more details.

    The policy applies to nearly 600,000 apartments covered by the city’s rent control law, which generally includes apartment buildings built before October 1978. These older buildings make up nearly three-quarters of the city’s apartment stock. Newer buildings are subject to state law, which currently allows rent increases in L.A. and Orange counties of up to 8.8% annually.

    The city’s rent freeze has helped many L.A. tenants — who tend to pay rents that exceed 30% of their income — balance their household budgets during a period when inflation surged. Housing researchers say even small rent increases have been shown to increase homelessness among the lowest-income renters.

    The ongoing ban on rent hikes has enraged many of the city’s landlords, who think it should have ended years ago. They’ve long said that rising utility and maintenance costs, coupled with the inability to raise rents, have created financial hardships.

    How the council came to this decision 

    Last month, councilmembers Hugo Soto-Martinez and Eunisses Hernandez moved to extend the rent freeze until August 2024. Landlords quickly mobilized to strike down that proposal.

    Councilmember Bob Blumenfield instead suggested allowing rent hikes to return on Feb. 1 as planned, but at increases of 4% to 6%. His proposal cleared the council’s housing committee, but a vote scheduled last week in the full city council was delayed in his absence.

    During Tuesday’s meeting, council members proposed dueling amendments to alter the rules on rent hikes moving forward.

    • Councilmember Tim McOsker moved to allow small landlords with 12 units or fewer to raise rents 7% to 9%, while preserving the lower 4% to 6% limit for larger landlords. 
    • Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez moved to keep the 4% limit in place for all landlords, with no additional 2% for landlords who cover utilities. 

    Neither amendment received enough votes to pass.

    Landlords say repairs will have to wait

    Landlords were happy to see the six-month rent freeze extension rejected, but many had hoped for higher allowable increases.

    Daniel Bleiberg with L.A. property management company G-B Investment Services said that by not allowing landlords to keep up with rising costs for years through modest rent increases, city leaders have worked against their own affordable housing goals.

    Rental property needs to be a viable business or it’s only going to get worse.
    — Daniel Bleiberg, G-B Investment Services

    “Rental property needs to be a viable business or it’s only going to get worse,” Bleiberg said, adding that some owners have already asked him if they’d be better off selling their property to a developer. “The more [city council members] don't make it a viable business, they're just going to lose more and more of this housing.”

    Geza Tokes owns and manages 18 rent-controlled apartments in the city of L.A.

    “When the rent freeze started, we had no problem with that,” Tokes said. “It was shaky times and it made sense.”

    But Tokes questioned the city’s decision to keep the ban on rent hikes in place for years. He said stagnant rents make it difficult to keep up with rising maintenance costs for gardening, pest control and plumbing. Until the rent freeze lifts in February, he said larger repairs are on hold.

    “I’ve got to put a roof on a property in Echo Park — it's $14,000,” Tokes said. “Last winter's rains got us. It's leaking, and we put a Band-Aid on that … I want to take the roof off and get permits and do it legit. But I can't throw $14,000 down right now.”

    Tenants say they’re already living on the edge

    Many tenants say they can’t afford to see L.A.’s already high rents climb even higher.

    Studio City renter Cindy Sanders said, as a retiree, Social Security is her main source of income, and there isn’t much left after she pays rent. She said an increase of up to 6% could spell the difference between staying in her apartment of nearly 30 years, or having to move out.

    “With Social Security raises not being high … it's going to really have an effect,” Sanders said. She said she could not afford a similarly sized apartment in L.A. if she’s forced to move.

    With Social Security raises not being high … it's going to really have an effect.
    — Cindy Sanders, Studio City renter

    Delia Cardona said most of her income from cleaning homes and offices goes straight to rent for the Koreatown studio apartment she shares with her two sons. With her budget already strained, she said any increase will force her to cut back on basic necessities.

    “Obviously it would affect me and make it harder to buy food and pay my bills,” Cardona said through a Spanish interpreter. She has organized with the Los Angeles Tenants Union to advocate for continuing the city’s rent freeze.

    What comes next 

    Now, city officials will have to spread the word about the new rent increase rules. The L.A. Housing Department has already told landlords that rent increases of 7% to 9% will be allowed on Feb. 1. Officials will now have to contact them again to note the change to lower limits.

    During the pandemic, tenants experienced confusion over the rent freeze, as well as a lack of compliance from some landlords. By early 2023, illegal rent increase complaints had eclipsed pre-pandemic levels. Some tenants also reported that “discount” rent clauses buried in their leases allowed landlords to pass on large rent increases.

    With allowable increases of up to 6%, the city of L.A. will have some of the highest permissible rent hikes among all of the cities in Southern California that have local rent control. Santa Monica, West Hollywood and Santa Ana have all set allowable increases below 3%. The L.A. County Board of Supervisors voted last week to approve allowable rent increases of up to 4% in rent-controlled housing starting next year in unincorporated areas.

  • Trump admin loses initial court ruling in case
    President Donald Trump listens to a reporter's question in the Oval Office of the White House on Friday.

    Topline:

    A federal judge has temporarily blocked the Trump administration from following through on plans to freeze billions of dollars in childcare and welfare funding to California and four other Democrat-led states. Friday’s ruling came less than a day after the states filed suit.

    What’s next: The temporary order expires in 14 days. The court battle will continue to play out, with further decisions by the judge expected in the coming weeks, after more arguments from both sides.

    The context: In halting childcare and welfare benefits to hundreds of thousands of low-income Californians, the Trump administration wrote that “recent federal prosecutions” are driving concerns about “systemic fraud.” But an LAist review found fraud in the targeted programs appears to be a tiny fraction of the total spending. Prosecutions that have been brought around child care benefits amount to a small fraction of 1% of the federal childcare funding California has received, according to a search of all case announcements in the state. When pressed for details about what specific prosecutions justify the freeze in California, administration officials have offered few specifics.

  • Sponsored message
  • Federal judge orders LA to pay $1.8M in settlement
    A tall, white building is surrounded by shorter buildings and trees during the day.
    A view of L.A. City Hall in downtown.

    Topline:

    A federal judge has ordered Los Angeles to pay more than $1.8 million in attorneys’ fees and costs to the L.A. Alliance for Human Rights and other organizations that sued the city over what it deemed an inadequate response to the homelessness crisis.

    The details: In addition to $1.6 million in attorneys’ fees and $5,000 in costs to L.A. Alliance, the judge awarded about $200,000 in fees and $160 in costs to the Los Angeles Catholic Worker and Los Angeles Community Action Network.

    Why now: The city is appealing the decision.

    Why it matters: In his order, released Tuesday, the judge compared the recent award to the millions of taxpayer dollars city officials agreed to pay an outside law firm representing L.A.in the settlement.

    Read on ... for more about this week's order.

    A federal judge has ordered Los Angeles to pay more than $1.8 million in attorneys’ fees and costs to the L.A. Alliance for Human Rights and other organizations that sued the city over what it deemed an inadequate response to the homelessness crisis.

    The city is appealing the decision.

    The details

    L.A. Alliance is a group of business owners and residents who sued the city and county of Los Angeles in 2020 in an effort to push both governments to provide more shelter to unhoused people in the region.

    The city of L.A. settled with the plaintiffs in 2022, and U.S. District Judge David O. Carter is overseeing the city’s progress in keeping up with the terms of that agreement. The judge found the city breached its agreement in multiple ways in a ruling last summer.

    Specifically, the judge found that the city did not provide a plan for how it intends to create 12,915 shelter beds, as promised, by 2027. The court also found the city “flouted” its responsibilities by failing to provide accurate, comprehensive data when requested and did not provide evidence to support the numbers it was reporting, according to court documents.

    In addition to $1.6 million in attorneys’ fees and $5,000 in costs to L.A. Alliance, Carter awarded about $200,000 in fees and $160 in costs to the Los Angeles Catholic Worker and Los Angeles Community Action Network.

    The organizations are considered “intervenors” in the suit, representing people experiencing homelessness on Skid Row. Their attorneys include those from the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles.

    Why it matters

    In his order, released Tuesday, Carter compared the recent award to the millions of taxpayer dollars city officials agreed to pay an outside law firm representing L.A. in the settlement.

    Carter wrote in the order that the attorneys' fees and costs to L.A. Alliance and others “is reasonable, especially in light of the approximately $5.9 million that the City’s outside counsel is charging.”

    LAist’s housing and homelessness coverage was cited several times in the order.

    “It has fallen to plaintiff, intervenors, and journalists to point out the deficiencies in the city’s reporting,” Carter wrote, referring to data the city is required to report to the court as part of the settlement.

    “Plaintiff and intervenors must be compensated for this,” he said.

    The city’s response 

    Attorneys representing the city filed a notice of appeal with the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles on Thursday.

    L.A. City Attorney Hydee Feldstein-Soto’s office did not respond to LAist’s requests for comment by phone or email.

    Shayla Myers, senior attorney with the Unhoused People's Justice Project at the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, told LAist the intervenors participated in the case without compensation “because it's incredibly important given what is at stake in these proceedings that unhoused folks have a voice.”

    Matthew Umhofer, an attorney for L.A. Alliance, told LAist he’s thrilled the court is imposing accountability on the city, including sanctions for violating the settlement agreement. But Umhofer said he’s saddened that L.A. Alliance is going to have to keep fighting to hold the city to its promises.

    “The obvious city strategy here is hire a big, good law firm to fight on absolutely every front in hopes that the plaintiffs, the intervenors or the court will ultimately give up trying to hold the city accountable,” he said.

    What's next

    The parties are scheduled to appear in federal court in downtown L.A. on Monday, when a hearing will resume to determine whether the judge will hold the city of Los Angeles in contempt of court.

    Carter has said in documents that he’s concerned “the city has demonstrated a continuous pattern of delay” in meeting its obligations with court orders under the settlement and that the “delay continues to this day.”

  • DTLA food fair has 13 new vendors this weekend
    A woman with dark skin smiling in a bold red chef’s jacket and patterned headscarf stands proudly in front of her “Hot Grease” stall,  with her arms outstretched, framed by sizzling menu boards and the hum of the street market behind her.
    Asha Stark's Hot Grease specializes in Black fish fry with a side of social justice.

    Topline:

     Smorgasburg L.A. reopens this Sunday with 13 new food vendors joining the downtown market's annual grand reopening at the Row.

    Why now: The January grand reopening with new vendors is a longstanding tradition that kicks off the year ahead. Vendors apply through Smorgasburg's website, and the team meets with every applicant to taste their food before acceptance. Competition remains fierce, with many more applicants than available spots. This year marks the market's 10th anniversary celebration in June.

    Why it matters: The new vendor class demonstrates the resilience of L.A.'s independent food scene, following a challenging year for the restaurant industry, with concepts ranging from a Grammy-nominated producer's Persian-influenced pizza to Southern fried fish honoring Black migration history.

    Every January, the open-air downtown food fair reopens after its winter break and announces new additions to its carefully selected group of regular vendors.

    This year’s new vendor class demonstrates the resilience of L.A.'s independent food scene, ranging from a Grammy-nominated producer's Persian-influenced pizza to Southern fried fish celebrating Black American culinary traditions, to an LAist 2025 Tournament of Cheeseburger heavyweight contender.

    The reopening also marks the start of Smorgasburg LA's 10th anniversary year, and will feature 41 returning vendors, who've helped build the regular event into a fun, family-friendly opportunity to try new, often cutting-edge food you may not be familiar with.

    Doors open from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. at DTLA’s The Row, with free entry and free parking for the first two hours.

    A new year

    General manager Zach Brooks said this is his favorite time of year. "We add the new vendors at the beginning of the new year, everyone's excited."

    Vendors apply through Smorgasburg's website, and the team meets with every applicant to taste their food before acceptance. Brooks said it's not a vetting process like "Shark Tank" but rather a matter of seeing if it's a good fit. Competition remains fierce, with many more applicants than available spots.

    "I think it's just a testament to L.A. and the resilience of people who love this business and have a passion for it, and are going to continue to persevere and start their businesses and want to be out there selling food," Brooks said.

    Here are a few highlights:

    Viral orange chicken sandwich 

    Long Beach-based Terrible Burger becomes Smorgasburg's new permanent burger vendor after standout appearances at LAist's Tournament of Cheeseburgers and the market's rotating Smorgasburger Stand. The smashburger pop-up, run by husband-and-wife team Nicole and Ryan Ramirez, specializes in burgers that draw from pop culture and global influences. They've made waves with a Korean barbecue burger topped with bulgogi barbecue sauce and a viral orange chicken sandwich, previously available only at their Tuesday night residency at Long Beach's Midnight Oil, making its L.A. debut Sunday.

    A fried chicken sandwich on a toasted brioche bun features a large crispy chicken cutlet coated in orange glaze and sesame seeds, topped with shredded cabbage, scallions, and sauce, served on black and white checkered paper with the Terrible Burger logo in the background.
    Terrible Burger's viral orange chicken sandwich makes its LA debut at Smorgasburg after being available only in Long Beach.
    (
    Courtesy Terrible Burger
    )

    "We have been big Smorgasburg fans for a really long time before we even started Terrible Burger. We would go to Smorgasburg on dates, just eat and hang out. And it was just always a little dream of, "oh, what if we ever sold food here?" Nicole Ramirez said.

    Crispy fried snapper and thick-cut fries 

    Orange County-based Hot Grease, run by Asha Starks, is among four vendors graduating from residencies to permanent status. The Southern fried fish pop-up celebrates Black American history through food that honors Starks' family heritage.

    "Folks often forget that there are Black folks in Orange County. My family came to Orange County during the second wave of the Great Migration, and they settled in Santa Ana... my food is very cultural. And the story, I feel like, is just as important to highlight," Starks said.

    A basket lined with black and white checkered paper holds golden-brown fried fish filets, thick-cut French fries, a slice of white bread, a lemon wedge, fresh dill garnish, and two small containers of sauce
    Hot Grease's crispy buttermilk fried snapper with thick-cut fries and "Ill Dill" tartar sauce.
    (
    Courtesy Hot Grease
    )

    Hot Grease serves crispy buttermilk fried snapper with thick-cut fries and small-batch sauces like "Ill Dill" tartar. Honoring the fish fry's history as a site of mutual aid, Starks directs 3% of sales to the Potlikker Line, Hot Grease's reproductive justice mutual aid fund. For January, she's added fish and grits, black-eyed peas and collard greens.

    Pizza with a Persian twist

    A charred Neapolitan-style pizza on a wooden cutting board topped with melted mozzarella, green pesto or herb sauce drizzled in a pattern, and fresh basil leaves in the center
    Mamani Pizza brings studio-born energy to Smorgasburg LA with pies featuring Persian-inspired creativity.
    (
    Courtesy Mamani Pizza
    )

    Mamani Pizza, from the Grammy-nominated producer Farsi, part of the music production team Wallis Lane, started making Neapolitan-style pizzas at his West L.A. recording studio a year ago. What began as late-night pies for friends and artists became an underground hit. Most pizzas are traditional, but Farsi adds Persian touches like The Mamani, topped with ground wagyu koobideh, roasted Anaheim chilis, Persian herbs and pomegranate molasses.

    Other new vendors

    Banana Mama - Asian-inspired pudding
    Barranco's Yogurt - Oaxacan fruit yogurt
    Franzl's Franks - Austrian sausages
    Melnificent Wingz - Gourmet chicken wings
    Piruchi - Peruvian street food
    RuRu's Golden Tea - Karak chai
    Stick Talk - vegan corn dogs
    SouuLA - Taiwanese breakfast concept
    Unreal Poke - Hawaiian poke
    Zindrew Dumpling Shop - Spicy wontons

  • How to file a claim if your car gets damaged
    A close up of a street with a cracked pothole in the middle, which is full of rain water.
    Potholes pop up after rain because water seeps into the road's crevices and weakens the foundation. Cars driving over it exacerbates the damage, leading to more cracks.

    Topline:

    All that rain didn’t just flood L.A. County streets, it chewed up our roads. You’re likely driving over more potholes than usual, so what do you do if your car gets damaged from one? You could get the government to pay for it.

    How it works: You’ll want to take pictures of the pothole and your car. Then, submit a claim form. Personal property damage claims have a six-month filing period, and you’ll have to pay out-of-pocket first.

    Manage your expectations: Keep in mind, this isn’t a quick way to cash. Claims can take months. You’ll also have to prove the agency was aware of the problem before your incident, such as by looking at street maintenance records for your area. Here are tips from the now-defunct site LAPotholes.com.

    What’s next: Potholes continue to plague the city of L.A., and that’s probably not ending soon. In the next budget, StreetsLA (aka Bureau of Street Services) is proposing to prioritize funding for “large asphalt repair,” which means patching over sections rather than fully repaving streets, which some argue will lead to worse roads.