The Brief

Everywhere you look, there are signs of the housing crisis gripping Los Angeles. Young families are fleeing the city. Eviction filings are way up. Hardly anyone can afford to buy a home.

But when you take a closer look at most L.A. neighborhoods, housing advocates say you’ll find little in the way of change to address this crisis. Palm tree-lined streets with rows of detached houses appear pretty similar to how they looked decades ago.

That’s because almost three-quarters of the city’s residential land is zoned for single-family homes. And L.A. leaders have chosen to leave those neighborhoods largely untouched in their efforts to create more housing.

“It really does limit where we can build,” said Tara Barauskas, executive director at Community Corporation of Santa Monica, a nonprofit that focuses on developing affordable housing in higher-income neighborhoods on L.A.’s Westside.

“If there's this policy emphasis on really trying to make serious change for building more affordable housing, but these big blanket exclusions are still in place, it's a contradiction,” Barauskas said. “We're not going to be able to make the big shift we need.”

What’s happening now

On Thursday, L.A.’s Planning Department will hold a meeting to gather public feedback on a slate of proposals to significantly boost housing production in order to meet a state-mandated goal of planning for nearly 457,000 new homes by 2029.

The city’s current zoning can’t accommodate that much growth. So officials have outlined plans to increase capacity by more than 250,000 homes. Those plans exclude single-family zones. Instead, new housing is being channeled into already dense, renter-heavy districts.

A now-leasing sign hangs outside an apartment complex in L.A.’s Palms neighborhood.

(

David Wagner

/

LAist

)

Those in favor of preserving L.A.’s single-family neighborhoods say they support that strategy.

“I do think the city has taken a really good approach,” said Cindy Chvatal-Keane, co-founder of the neighborhood preservation advocacy group United Neighbors. “There are plenty of places to put affordable housing without disrupting single-family.”

Affordable housing developers, homeless service providers and tenant organizers see it differently. They argue that the city is continuing to let wealthy neighborhoods off the hook when it comes to doing their share in accepting new housing.

How we got here 

It has become a familiar debate in Los Angeles. Last year, Mayor Karen Bass decided to carve out single-family neighborhoods from her signature program to streamline affordable housing approvals. Before that, city council members voted to oppose state legislation allowing additional units on single-family lots.

Renter households outnumber homeowner households in the city of L.A. nearly two-to-one. But housing policy analysts say homeowners tend to have more political capital, vote more consistently and put up more organized opposition to change.

“The city does have a lot of very wealthy people — people who are almost exclusively single-family homeowners,” said Shane Philips with the UCLA Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies. “Those people have disproportionate influence on policy making, and I think that especially applies to land use.”

An American flag waves in the wind outside a single-family home on L.A.’s Westside.

(

David Wagner

/

LAist

)

Proponents for more housing say zoning patterns help explain why so many L.A. apartments are overcrowded, why more than half of local tenants are paying rents considered unaffordable by federal standards, and why renters looking for a new place to live are finding so few options.

“We're all aware that there is a need for housing, because every time we step out we see a homeless person on the sidewalk,” said Diana Corrales, who was born and raised in L.A. and recently moved back in with her mother.

Corrales said she lost income during the COVID-19 pandemic and could no longer afford the one-bedroom Ladera Heights apartment where she was living with her son. When she started hunting for another place to rent, she realized the options were beyond her budget.

“Everyone's scared of change, but we understand that there's a need for housing,” Corrales said. “Not just for us, but for everyone of all income levels, all walks of life.”

What’s in the plan 

According to officials with the L.A. Planning Department, the city will be able to meet its ambitious state goals by focusing on areas already zoned for dense housing. They say L.A. can get there by incentivizing development in those neighborhoods. The proposed incentives would let developers increase the density of their projects and remove certain parking requirements, as long as they reserve some apartments for low-income renters.

The department did not make an official available for an interview, but told LAist in an emailed statement that their approach “promotes housing near jobs and transit, along major corridors, and away from environmentally hazardous and sensitive areas such as fire zones and sea level rise areas.”

This strategy aligns with ongoing efforts to update community plans across the city, which have so far sought to locate lots of new housing in dense neighborhoods like Hollywood and downtown L.A.

Officials say their plans also include new tenant protections. Renters currently living in rent-controlled apartments would have the right to move into new developments if their housing is demolished to make way for a larger building, officials say. But tenant advocates worry low-income renters could still struggle to make the transition and continue living in L.A.

City planners also intend to make it easier for developers to convert old commercial buildings — like deserted malls and empty offices — into housing through adaptive reuse.

None of these plans include allowing new apartment buildings on the 72% of residential land in the city reserved for single-family homes, according to the planning department. A UC Berkeley study estimated these zones make up a slightly higher percentage of the city’s residential land, 74% to be precise.

A map created by UC Berkeley researchers shows the L.A. neighborhoods zoned for single-family homes, highlighted in pink.

(

Courtesy UC Berkeley Othering and Belonging Institute

)

Many of these protected neighborhoods are in wealthy areas that remain largely segregated due to historic policies such as redlining, racial covenants and exclusionary zoning, a fact that the planning department has acknowledged.

Planning officials had originally considered adding new density to these areas. Then last October, the department said they would exclude single-family zones following public feedback.

Why you should care 

For anyone not already steeped in local land use debates, topics like zoning, state housing goals and developer incentives may lead to snooze-inducing boredom.

But these policies profoundly shape L.A. neighborhoods. They help explain why Koreatown is bustling with younger, lower-income renters from many ethnic backgrounds while nearby Hancock Park is occupied by older, wealthier and whiter homeowners.

Similar dynamics are at play in Palms, a Westside neighborhood full of multifamily apartment buildings, and adjacent Rancho Park, a single-family area with a quiet, suburban feel. While walking through these neighborhoods, Mahdi Manji with the Inner City Law Center told LAist it makes sense to build more housing in both.

“The Westside is an area of massive growth,” Manji said, pointing to the UCLA campus a few miles north and the nearby tech employment hub of Silicon Beach. “At the same time, we are only seeing development in those very small areas that are already doing multifamily.”

Mahdi Manji, director of public policy for the Inner City Law Center, stands at an intersection in L.A.’s Palms neighborhood.

(

David Wagner

/

LAist

)

A tale of two neighborhoods 

Under the city’s current plans, Manji said, long-term tenants in Palms could see their rent-controlled dingbat apartments torn down to make way for larger, modern complexes. But developers couldn’t buy a Rancho Park homeowner’s property to create a three-story apartment building within walking distance of the Metro E Line.

Standing near a modest Rancho Park house currently on the market for $1.6 million, Manji said, “We're not saying we should be building a skyscraper here. But it might make sense to have a 10-unit building… It's about who gets to live in a neighborhood, who has the opportunity, who has a choice to live where.”

Many existing residents strongly oppose such ideas. Barbara Broide — planning and land use chair of the Westside Neighborhood Council, which represents an area that encompasses Rancho Park — said apartment buildings don’t belong near single-family homes.

“I don’t think blanket up-zoning helps Los Angeles,” Broide said. “The opportunity to have a home and a yard and have a neighborhood where you know your neighbors — which is something we work very hard for in neighborhood councils and homeowner groups — is important.”

Many homeowners argue they’ve already accepted a lot of change. Under Senate Bill 9, which took effect in 2022, single-family homeowners can split their lots and create duplexes. Last year, the state legislature passed Senate Bill 4, a law allowing churches to build affordable housing on their own land — even in single-family zones.

Next to a new apartment complex, “Palms” is written on a utility box in the Westside neighborhood bearing that name.

(

David Wagner

/

LAist

)

What happens next

No decisions will be made during Thursday’s feedback session. Planning department officials say they’ll listen to public input, incorporate the feedback and then send refined proposals to the Planning Commission in late September.

Finally, the plans will need to go before the city council for a vote. In order to comply with state law, the city must finalize its rezoning plans by February 2025.

Homeless service providers are among those eager to speak during Thursday’s meeting. Many hope the planning department will reverse course on excluding single-family zones.

“We can get people off the streets,” said Katie Hill, deputy director of South L.A.-based service provider HOPICS. “What we have not addressed is what happens to them after that. And that really just comes down to: do we have housing that people can afford? And the answer is no — nowhere near enough.”

How to attend the virtual hearing

• When: Thursday, July 25
  
  • Presentation and Q&A at 5-6:30 p.m.
  • Virtual hearing 6:30-8 p.m.
• View online: https://planning-lacity-org.zoom.us/j/81102298373
  
  • Meeting ID: 811-0229-8373
  • Phone: (669) 900-9128 or (213) 338-8477

In lieu of attending the Public Hearing, comments may be submitted by email to housingelement@lacity.org

Learn more about how to make public comments ▶

The Trump administration on Thursday proposed significant changes to Head Start, the nation's early education program for children from low-income families. The move would diminish the program's federal standards and give states and parents more control.

"We have 1,600 Head Start providers across the country," Alex Adams, the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services' assistant secretary for family support, said in a call with reporters. "And one-size-fits-all mandates from Washington cannot fully account for the realities facing these 1,600 grantees."

Head Start not only provides preschool and childcare, but also meals and support services for qualifying families. It now serves more than 700,000 kids each year from birth to age 5.

Since its launch in 1965, the $12 billion HHS program has, for the most part, enjoyed bipartisan support. Lawmakers often cite it as a success — including Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. during the call with reporters announcing these changes. But in recent years, some conservatives have criticized Head Start, saying it wastes money and fails to have a lasting impact on students.

Aiming to cut costs

The new proposal would limit the amount of money Head Start centers can spend on administrative overhead, from a 15% cap to 5%. This change should save the government $2.2 billion, Adams said, which it plans to reinvest in the program. The goal is to create 200,000 more spots for children, he said.

To get those costs down, the administration said it proposes cutting regulations and "compliance-driven activities," according to a press release. Similarly, they are shifting decisions about several standards — such as student-teacher ratios, education requirements, background checks and transportation practices — back to states.

Childcare providers are not sold on the proposal.

"If we look at the previous actions of the administration, what they have done is not in favor of expanding the program," said Yvette Sanchez Fuentes, senior vice president with Start Early, an Illinois-based Head Start partner.

"Is it enough to just bring kids in the door if we're not actually giving kids and families what they need?"

Sanchez Fuentes said administrative costs are not only things like payroll and day-to-day operations, but also help fill gaps in care. "If you, for example, have children with disabilities you [can use] some of those funds to pay for additional special services or staff with specialties who could come in and support kids."

The administration's proposal also says parents are children's primary teachers and seeks to bring in more parent opinions on "structure and curriculum" into the classrooms and emphasizes nutrition and exercise.

Loosening the standards

Head Start's current standards are laid out in a detailed 133-page guide. The manual is used not only by the program's centers, but also by many unaffiliated private childcare centers across the country.

These standards include safety guidelines, spell out who is eligible for Head Start and provide detailed rules — such as the requirement that kids in the program brush their teeth once daily with fluoride toothpaste.

Erica Phillips, the executive director for the National Association for Family Child Care, said about 10% of her members are Early Head Start childcare partners, while the rest are home-based providers around the country.

"The Head Start performance standards were a consistent … evidence-based set of standards," she said. "It can be helpful to have a nationally recognized benchmark."

Phillips said her organization will be on the lookout for variations across states. She said she worries "quality is now dependent on your ZIP code or on your geography."

The Trump administration sees it differently.

"Flexibility is permission. It's not a mandate," Adams said. "The opportunity for these programs to make a different decision does not necessarily mean they must make a different decision."

The changes did not come as a complete surprise: The conservative Heritage Foundation has long criticized the program, saying it "doesn't work." In Project 2025, the foundation's policy blueprint that the Trump administration has taken many cues from, the message is clear — eliminate Head Start.

Advocates see what they characterize as the erosion of quality and decrease in standards as the first step in dismantling the program.

A long runway

Thursday's announcement came in the form of a notice of proposed rulemaking, or NPRM. It kicks off a lengthy, formalized process of public comment and talks with stakeholders. It could be six months to a year before any new standards take effect.

"I just really want folks to know Head Start is open," said Tommy Sheridan, deputy director at the National Head Start Association (NHSA), a nonprofit that advocates for the program. "The quality of Head Start children and families truly comes from the people that are running Head Start programs. Those folks are going to be the same. They're going to be able to do that."

The administration says the NPRM will be published in the Federal Register on Friday and be open to public comment for 60 days.

Edited by: Natalie Escobar
Copyright 2026 NPR

A recent report from Feeding America shows food insecurity increased year over year between 2022 and 2024. Advocates say today’s reality could be much worse.

The report published last week showed that about 1 in 6 kids in Orange County experienced food insecurity in 2024 — that’s up 27% from the year before.

For some advocates, the report published last week was not surprising.

“With the SNAP benefits being reduced and the persistent inflation, particularly food inflation and energy inflation, and the lack of wages keeping up, something's got to give,” LaVal Brewer, president and CEO at South County Outreach, said.

Experts say the snapshot of food insecurity in Orange County could tell us more about today’s needs.

Who else did the report capture? 

Overall, 1 in 8 O.C. residents were food insecure in 2024 — up 6% from the year before.

The problem also disproportionately affected communities of color. According to the report, 29% of Black residents and 18% of Latinos in Orange County experienced food insecurity.

Nearly half of people experiencing food insecurity have incomes too high to qualify for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

What does it mean to be food insecure? 

Food insecurity is not knowing where your next meal will come from. A lot of factors can lead to this, like low or inconsistent income, access to nutritious foods and the cost of living.

Claudia Bonilla Keller, CEO of Second Harvest Food Bank, told LAist some people might not doubt that they’ll have access to food, but they might not know what they’re having for breakfast, lunch or dinner.

What does this report tell us about today? 

The findings from this report were recorded in 2024, before the federal government made changes to food programs, like SNAP. Experts say food insecurity today is likely much worse and worsening.

“Since the sunsetting of the COVID-era benefits, the onset of inflation and the high price of fuel, and now changes to the safety net, what we've seen is a constant downward,” Keller said.

The report is compiled annually using data from national survey responses, local unemployment rates, and median incomes across all U.S. counties.

What to know about hunger 

Keller said food insecurity ebbs and flows throughout the year, but spikes in the summer.

“But for families with children, we know that it spikes in the summer, also at the end of the year, for the long holiday breaks when students lose access to federally reimbursed meals,” Keller said. “Those meals can be two, even three, that families depend on to feed their kids.”

Bill Bracken is the founder and executive director of Bracken’s Kitchen — a nonprofit that specializes in food rescue, culinary training and feeding the community.

In the summer, he said, children suffer the most, and the same can be said for some college students.

“We just happened to walk past a student who saw our logo on our uniforms and stopped and thanked us so much because he recognized the logo from the meals he gets from the (UCI) Food Hub,” Bracken said. “He's so grateful and just happy that we're able to provide something that he can pop in the microwave and eat right away.”

Nevertheless, like hunger, food waste is also at an all-time high.

“That's the sad part,” Bracken told LAist. “With all the need, we're still wasting more food than ever before. We're going to rescue more food this year than we ever have, and we'll produce more meals than we ever have.”

When information is collected again, Brewer said, the numbers will be significantly worse, especially for those who no longer qualify for food benefits.

“Those people who were not spending money on food because they were receiving a benefit from the federal government, from our tax dollars, no longer have that support,” Brewer said. “It's not like those people just suddenly earned more money to be able to cover their food costs.”

Rent, mortgage, car notes, and child care are non-negotiables, Brewer added, “so you're going to be food insecure because that's something you can actually manage and control.”