The Brief

It’s been one year since the city of Los Angeles began collecting money from a voter-approved tax on high-priced property sales. The measure’s goal was to raise up to $1 billion annually for new affordable housing and tenant protections. So far, results have been mixed.

Measure ULA levies a 4% tax on L.A. properties selling for $5 million or more, and a 5.5% tax on properties selling for $10 million or more. So far, revenue generated has come in far below initial projections, raising just $215 million since taking effect in April 2023. That’s a fraction of the $600 million to $1.1 billion voters were originally told the tax could yield.

Some housing policy experts also see signs that the tax could be deterring new development in a city that, under state law, needs to plan for nearly half a million new homes by 2029.

On the positive side, proponents say ULA funding has so far supported hundreds of proposed affordable housing units and staved off thousands of evictions by providing rent relief to tenants.

“Measure ULA has already proven to be one of the greatest revenue sources L.A. has ever seen for affordable housing,” said Joe Donlin, director of the United to House L.A. coalition, which backed the measure.

ULA has raised more in its first year than other initiatives, such as the city’s Measure HHH, which collected about $120 million per year for the development of permanent supportive apartments for the unhoused, Donlin said. A rush to sell off top-dollar homes before the tax took effect last year dampened revenues, he said, but ULA collections are on an upward trend.

“We think that trend is going to continue and it's just going to increase as people factor in the tax as a regular part of doing business,” Donlin said.

New revenue brings wave of relief to some tenants

Researchers from Occidental College, UCLA and USC published a new report on Thursday analyzing the impact of Measure ULA so far. In it, they cite a number of outcomes from the tax:

• $54.7 million proposed to support the development of 795 affordable housing units
• $24 million in rent relief paid out to 4,652 tenant households
• An expansion of StayHousedLA, a program that provided full legal representation to 1,262 L.A. tenants facing eviction and limited legal advice to 3,387 tenants in 2023

Some tenants who have benefited from Measure ULA say it kept disastrous evictions at bay.

Maria Gonzalez — a renter living with her husband, two kids and one grandchild in South L.A. — received about $9,300 in emergency rental assistance. After her husband lost work as a gardener and handyman during the pandemic, they fell far behind on rent.

When she got word that her rent relief application had been approved, Gonzalez said she felt her anxiety slip away.

“I felt like a weight was lifted off my shoulders,” she said in Spanish. “I felt like I was floating.”

Without that help, Gonzalez said, her family likely would’ve been forced out of their home. She doesn’t know what they would have done.

Is the “mansion tax” hurting apartment construction?

While ULA is helping to keep many tenants housed, some housing policy researchers say the measure could also be leading to fewer new homes overall. It’s been dubbed the “mansion tax,” but it also applies to sales of apartment buildings worth more than $5 million.

Shane Phillips with the UCLA Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies says even when completed projects are not sold right away, the possibility of getting hit with a hefty tax deters lenders from working with developers who already struggle to acquire expensive L.A. land, cover rising construction costs and successfully navigate the city’s byzantine approval process.

“Future developers might look at [Measure ULA] and say, well, if they did this, what's next?” said Phillips, who supported the initiative when it was put up for a vote in Nov. 2022.

Phillips is now working on an analysis of Measure ULA’s impact by comparing sales of land ripe for development between the city of L.A. and other parts of the county that don't levy the tax. The results are preliminary and not yet published, but, Phillips said, “we are seeing a pretty significant reduction in Los Angeles compared to those other cities.”

Phillips now believes the city would be wise to exempt new apartment buildings from ULA the first time they are sold, only applying the tax to subsequent transactions.

“To the extent that we are seeing fewer land sales and potentially less housing production because of measure ULA, I think a first sale exemption would probably entirely solve that problem,” Phillips said.

Building permits for new dwelling units in the city of L.A. fell by about 25% in 2023 compared with the previous year. ULA proponents say this decline can be seen across the state, and is primarily driven by high interest rates and inflation pushing up the cost of building.

But critics of the tax, like UCLA Anderson School of Management adjunct professor of accounting and real estate Eric Sussman, say ULA shares some of the blame.

“It’s just another impediment to get projects built in an incredibly housing constrained market,” Sussman said. “[The city] should be making it easier — reducing taxes and fees for developers who want to add to our housing stock. And instead, they're doing the exact opposite.”

What lies ahead for ULA 

Supporters say the tax will do more to keep Angelenos housed in years to come by supporting renters facing landlord harassment and through a right to a free attorney in eviction court.

There is a possibility that voters could choose to overturn the tax, though. An initiative supported by the California Business Roundtable has qualified for the Nov. 2024 ballot, seeking to require two-thirds voter support for new local taxes. ULA passed with 58% support.

However, it remains to be seen whether the initiative to overturn measures such as ULA will appear on the November 2024 ballot. State legislators and Gov. Gavin Newsom have asked the California Supreme Court to prohibit it from going to voters, arguing it proposes to unlawfully revise the state’s constitution.

For renters who need assistance

How to have a voice on housing affordability

Lawmakers and the governor on Monday failed to extend a state grant program that helped schools upgrade their air conditioner systems, a decision that will allow utilities that funded the program to claw back funds for their ratepayers.

The California Schools Healthy Air, Plumbing and Efficiency program — CalSHAPE for short — set aside nearly $1 billion in utility funds to help schools assess and upgrade aging HVAC and plumbing systems. But the California Energy Commission abruptly closed applications in 2024, leaving $191 million unused — money that must now be returned to utilities by law.

After last-minute negotiations, lawmakers passed a budget trailer bill giving schools that had already received funding an additional three years to finish projects before the state claws back the money. But they dropped a separate measure that would have reopened applications for schools to make upgrades because it did not have support from Gov. Gavin Newsom, according to sources familiar with the negotiations.

“I don't understand why [Newsom] doesn't have the backs of everyday people in California, and why he doesn't think that children deserve a safe place to learn with air conditioning,” said Leah Stokes, a political science associate professor at UC Santa Barbara who has advocated for the program. “This is all on him.”

Diana Crofts-Pelayo, a spokesperson for the governor, declined to comment on the matter.

‘A disillusioning conclusion’ 

School administrators have praised CalSHAPE, saying the program offered schools the chance to improve class environments for students.

The program helped more than 4,500 schools assess the status of their HVAC systems. Of those, 172 schools made significant upgrades with program funds.

But the program’s future has been in question since 2024, when the California Energy Commission abruptly stopped accepting applications. Much of the controversy centered on whether ratepayers should be responsible for funding a school grant program.

Consumer advocates said the program doesn’t directly benefit ratepayers, while school advocates questioned why the state would pull back money already designated for schools.

In its June 2024 notice pausing the program, the commission cited budget constraints. Later that year, the governor signed an executive order directing the commission to examine ratepayer-supported programs “whose funding might more appropriately come from a source other than ratepayers.”

In a letter opposing the budget measure to extend CalSHAPE, San Diego Gas & Electric Senior Vice President Mitch Mitchell said its customers contributed about $189.6 million to the program.

The company stands to get back $100 million — the most of any participating utility — which would amount to about $24 per customer, divided into $2 monthly payments over a year, according to a legislative analysis. Utility officials said they are committed to returning all unspent funds to customers through bill relief.

“Policymakers cannot credibly elevate affordability while simultaneously redirecting unused customer dollars away from bill relief,” Mitchell said in the letter. “If affordability is truly a legislative priority, then these funds should be returned to customers as intended under existing law.”

School advocates questioned whether returning the money would make any meaningful impact for ratepayers. SoCal Edison ratepayers would receive $1.25 per month for a year and Pacific Gas & Electric customers would receive 20 cents per month for a year, according to the legislative analysis.

Meanwhile, the CalSHAPE-funded assessments revealed HVAC systems in California schools are aging and in disrepair.

“Extending CalSHAPE deadlines so existing funds could go to repair or replace broken school HVAC systems should have been an easy win,” said JuNelle Harris, founder of Clean Air Allies, a nonprofit that advocates for healthy air in schools. “Instead, this campaign has been a multiyear saga that’s come to a disillusioning conclusion.”

Schools cope with heat 

The most recent heat wave left classrooms sweltering as many students returned for their first weeks back to school. School districts throughout the state reported having to adjust school times or cancel classes altogether.

In Los Angeles, where students endured temperatures above 90 degrees for 12 consecutive days, the Los Angeles Unified School District limited outdoor time for some students. The district received $27 million to assess their air conditioning systems from CalSHAPE but no funds for upgrades.

In San Diego, average temperatures stayed in the mid to high 80s, far above the average for the coastal city. The Coronado Unified School District shut down classes for all students.

Cody Petterson, a trustee on the board of the San Diego Unified School District, said he’s disappointed the governor would rather see CalSHAPE funds returned to ratepayers, when there is so much need for air conditioning in schools. He also criticized the CalSHAPE process, saying it limited schools from completing projects on time and disincentivized applications.

“No child should be in a classroom that is overheating because they cannot learn, they cannot achieve, they cannot grow,” he said. Petterson added that he’d prefer the state fund HVAC upgrades as categorical investments, rather than through a grant program.

San Diego Unified received $12 million to assess school air conditioning systems, but no funds to upgrade them.

Advocates said they were confused about the governor’s lack of support, but will continue to advocate for school HVAC investments from the state.

“It’s deeply disappointing that lawmakers, starting and ending with the Governor, have chosen to treat our children’s and teachers’ interests as secondary to those of big utility companies,” Harris said. “As our outdoor environment is transformed by more extreme weather events and wildfires, safe classrooms where children can learn and grow have never been more important.”

Stokes said Newsom “sat on it as an executive for years,” while disadvantaged communities went without air conditioning. “Why would he do that? Seems very Trumpian to me.”

California schools won’t be able to access more funds for upgrades, but hundreds of schools could have more time to complete projects in the works. According to the energy commission, 216 out of 719 school districts that were awarded a grant have pending projects.

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

The largest cyclospora food poisoning outbreak in U.S. history is over, U.S. health officials said Friday.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration officials said they are confident that all recalled iceberg lettuce related to this specific outbreak is off the market.

Nearly 13,000 reported cyclospora cases were tied to the multistate outbreak, federal officials say. They represent the bulk of an unprecedented surge in the parasitic diarrheal illness this year.

Even with the outbreak deemed over, several questions remain, including about its origin. The parasite is spread through human feces, and it still isn’t clear how sewage could have contaminated enough food to sicken so many people.

“This contamination can happen if produce is grown in soil or comes into contact with water that has been contaminated,” said Ellen Shumaker, director of outreach for a North Carolina State University food safety program, Safe Plates.

Since May 1, the government has received reports of nearly 20,000 lab-confirmed cases, or more than 16 times the number reported during the same period last year. More than 6,100 suspected cases also have been reported.

The worst previous year in the U.S. for infections was 2019, when about 4,700 illnesses were reported nationally.

This year’s surge in cases was dominated by an outbreak in 21 states linked to iceberg lettuce. But there are thousands of other cases that have not been linked to that outbreak.

Michigan was the hardest hit state, with the most reported cases and the two U.S. deaths tied to the outbreak.

Cyclospora is a microscopic, spherical parasite that commonly causes watery diarrhea “with frequent and sometimes explosive bowel movements,” according to the CDC. Outbreaks tend to occur most often in the late spring and summer.

The illness, called cyclosporiasis, is less common than foodborne illnesses caused by other germs, including salmonella and E. coli. Many cases are never linked to a specific food or other source.

In this outbreak, investigators initially zeroed in on lettuce served at Taco Bell. Federal officials subsequently focused on Taylor Farms as the source of the lettuce, and the company recalled iceberg lettuce grown in central Mexico.

The Taylor Farms recall involved thousands of packaged salad products combining iceberg lettuce with other vegetables. The products were shipped to major U.S. restaurant chains, including Yum Brands, which owns Taco Bell, Pizza Hut and KFC.

The FDA has ended its on-site inspections and sample collection at iceberg lettuce growers and the processing facility in Mexico, the agency said Friday. Samples from the on-site inspections are pending analysis, the FDA said.

The outbreak cast a spotlight on a worsening problem: U.S. regulators are conducting fewer international inspections to catch contaminated produce before it lands on American plates.

The Associated Press’ health and science coverage receives financial support from the AP Fund for Journalism and private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

For 16 years, Carlos Ortez, 64, has opened the doors of his restaurant, Un Solo Sol, near Mariachi Plaza, eager to share the philosophy behind his plant-based dishes and the importance of nourishing the body through holistic food. 

It’s what he’ll miss the most when the restaurant closes on Sept. 28, Ortez said. 

“This decision was not made lightly,” Ortez wrote in an Instagram post announcing the restaurant’s closure. “Rising operational costs, inflation, and the broader challenges facing the restaurant industry have made sustaining a small footprint increasingly difficult.”

The announcement comes after years of declining sales and mounting economic crises that have driven customers away, including the COVID-19 pandemic, immigration raids, and recently, the Lineage warehouse fire. 

The restaurant stopped making a profit in 2022, and ever since, Ortez has been using personal funds to sustain it, he said. 

“We’re closing the front door right now so that I can think,” Ortez said. “How am I going to fit a small restaurant with these ideals … in Los Angeles, in Boyle Heights, in the world?”  

Carlos Ortez, 64, owner of Un Solo Sol, stands in front of the restaurant on Sept. 10 in Boyle Heights.

(

Laura Anaya-Morga

/

Boyle Heights Beat

)

Un Solo Sol’s origin 

Ortez, a career engineer-turned-business owner, launched Un Solo Sol in 2005 with his ex-wife as a food-service provider for charter schools. In 2010, Ortez opened the brick-and-mortar across the street from Mariachi Plaza, serving primarily vegan and vegetarian dishes before becoming fully vegan in 2022. 

The menu features Latin-American staples like pupusas from Ortez’s native El Salvador, pozole and enchiladas, as well as cuisine from cultures around the world.  

The yellow and green storefront near the corner of Boyle Avenue and 1st Street has become part of the fabric of the 1st Street business corridor. In neighborhoods like Boyle Heights, losing a small business disrupts “the cohesiveness of the community,” Ortez said. 

On social media, customers grieved the loss of one of the only vegan restaurants on the Eastside.  

“Thank you for the many years of delicious meals made with love,” one user commented. 

“Carlos you poured your heart out for the Vegan community and Boyle Heights,” another wrote. 

What’s next

While the restaurant will close its doors, Ortez said his work isn’t over. He plans to stay in the community and take time to consider how his naturopathic, whole-foods-oriented restaurant concept can continue in a different form.

“The plan is to reemerge,” Ortez said. “It’s not that I don’t have the capacity to let go, it’s that I’m still alive.” 

Want to visit?

The restaurant will close on Sept. 28. Until then, hours are Monday, Thursday, Friday and Saturday from 12 to 3 p.m. and 5 to 9 p.m. and Sunday from 12 to 3 p.m. and 5 to 8 p.m The restaurant closes Tuesdays and Wednesdays. 

Un Solo Sol is located at 1818 E. 1st St.