The Brief

The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously Tuesday to approve an $843 million homelessness spending plan that includes nearly $200 million in reductions to programs and services in the next budget year.

Among those programs is Pathway Home, which helps move people from encampments into temporary housing. The county reduced funding for that program by $92 million, which will shrink it from 20 project sites to seven, officials said.

Supervisors also approved $105 million in reductions to other programs, including large cuts to street outreach teams, homelessness prevention programs and other supportive services.

County officials said they had to reduce spending in order to cover the rising costs of operating shelter beds and the loss of tens of millions in temporary state and federal funding, including some COVID-19 relief dollars.

“With federal neglect and state cuts, we have to do more with less,” Supervisor Lindsey Horvath told LAist. “And we will.”

The county’s new Department of Homeless Services and Housing has been warning about the looming shortfall since July. County officials solicited input on how to fill an initial $303 million gap.

Since then, the department adjusted the county’s homelessness spending plan, after finding some one-time state grants and cost-saving measures.

The budget year starts July 1.

Some funding restored

Last month, local homeless service providers urged county officials to restore all of the more than $200 million in proposed reductions to programs and services. Some supervisors raised concerns about specific cuts.

Since then, new revenue projections show the county stands to bring in $21 million more through Measure A than originally anticipated.

Measure A is a sales tax ordinance, approved by L.A. County voters in 2024, that funds homeless services and affordable housing initiatives. It is expected to generate about $1 billion annually, but exact revenues fluctuate with consumer spending.

The county’s slightly rosier revenue projections allowed the homeless department to roll back a fraction of the proposed reductions.

“It’s not a windfall and it doesn’t solve every challenge, but it does give us the ability to restore important programs that were on the chopping block,” Supervisor Janice Hahn said.

The board voted to use much of that $21 million to restore funding for two dozen full-time outreach workers and about 100 shelter beds that were previously on the chopping block.

The plan approved Tuesday also calls for $5 million in Measure A revenue to partially restore funding for interim housing in Long Beach, Pasadena and Glendale. It restored more than $1 million to operate family solution centers — hubs to connect unhoused families with services — and about $500,000 for a program that helps military veterans access government benefits.

Supervisor Holly Mitchell said she wishes Pathway Home funding could be maintained. She said it’s been crucial for helping people living in RV encampments in her district, which spans from Koreatown to much of the South Bay.

"These restorations don't expand encampment resolution operations,” Mitchell said Tuesday. “The services with the greatest impact in the Second District remain reduced, and the current plan does not replace what was cut."

County homelessness officials told supervisors the 100 shelter beds they saved will be prioritized for people living in encampments and will help make up for cuts to Pathway Home.

"The reduction to Pathway Home is not a reduced commitment to encampment resolution,” L.A. County Department of Homeless Services and Housing director Sarah Mahin said Tuesday. “It’s a recognition that it was built on one-time funding and we need to expand strategies to include more cost-effective resolution solutions."

New oversight push

The supervisors also voted 5-0 Tuesday to approve a new motion focused on accountability in homeless service contracting. The motion by Horvath and Kathryn Barger directs the homelessness department to work with the county auditor-controller to create strict oversight procedures for contracts, including random site visits, performance monitoring and provisions for termination.

They said the goal is to prevent the mismanagement that has plagued the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, and the fraud that has resulted in recent arrests. Last month, federal authorities arrested Alex Soofer, director of a nonprofit called Abundant Blessings, on suspicion of embezzling tens of millions in dollars meant to serve unhoused Angelenos. Soofer pleaded not guilty to the charges this week.

"Public dollars intended to address homelessness have gone unaccounted for under LAHSA," Horvath said. “That is unacceptable and it ends now with the county.”

Last year, the board voted to divert more than $300 million in county homelessness dollars away from LAHSA and administer the funds itself with a new homelessness department.

“As the department launches, every contract, every dollar, and every outcome must withstand scrutiny,” Horvath told LAist in a statement. “We don’t have resources to waste or time to lose in addressing the homelessness crisis.”

Barger described instances of fraud within the homeless services sector as “moral failures” that cannot be tolerated.

“They represent theft from the most vulnerable people in our community,” she said.

She also argued that ethical service providers “should not have their reputations destroyed by the criminal actions of a few bad actors.”

Barger told fellow supervisors at Tuesday’s meeting it’s their responsibility to monitor how county homelessness dollars are being spent — and to defund programs that aren’t generating results.

“Setting the budget is the easy part,” Barger said. “We have to see results. And if we don’t, we have to have a debate at this board: is that the best use of these resources?”

The department must report back to the board in 60 days with their full plan for monitoring contractors and preventing fraud and misuse of public funds.

Auditor-Controller Oscar Valdez told supervisors his office would submit a plan to county homelessness officials Tuesday.

The sounds of Los Angeles are bringing together people from all walks of life to record and archive them, from the buzzing of a bees’ nest in Griffith Park to church bells echoing over goose honks in Echo Park.

And you can listen to these recordings tomorrow in Highland Park.

George Jensen founded the Los Angeles Field Recording Club a little over a year ago. He said it has attracted sound lovers with all levels of recording sophistication, from people using their phones to folks with professional recorders worth thousands of dollars.

A longtime radio guy with shows on dublab and KCHUNG radio, Jensen fell in love with preserving audio moments in the city and beyond after capturing the serene sounds of a cove in Big Sur.

“There’s a certain fluctuation of sound happening — a pulse you might say — in this city," Jensen told LAist. "Once people sit and be still for a moment, they hear it.”

About 20 club members meet up once a month at places like the purportedly haunted Greystone Mansion in Beverly Hills, a scrap yard in Sun Valley and a section of Griffith Park, where someone recorded a cacophony of bees buzzing around their nest.

Jensen, who works as a prop fabricator in the TV and film industry, said people are drawn to field recording for many reasons: Some love nerding out over the gear; others need the sound to embellish an art or music project.

The club's next endeavor, he said, is an interactive sound map where field recordists can archive their audio online for all to enjoy.

The club’s outings end up being a bit of an antisocial social club, Jensen joked.

“At the beginning, everybody meets each other... and then you go be by yourself and be quiet,” he said.

He added there's a meditative quality to field recording that hooks people.

“I think once people do it, they realize that you kind of stop and listen," Jensen said. "You become in the present. You’re forced to.

"I think there’s, like, a certain therapeutic thing that comes with it,” he said.

Over the Linda Lindas’ career, talk about the band has often centered around how young they are.

They broke through as tweens and teens when a 2021 performance at the library in Cypress Park went viral after it was posted online, in part because they sounded so commanding for their age. The drummer, Mila de la Garza, was 10 at the time.

Five years and several albums later — Gotta Get Out, their third album and major label debut, just dropped yesterday — the Linda Lindas are outgrowing their old image.

“I do think people still hear 'kid band' when they think of the Linda Lindas,” said Lucia de la Garza, Mila’s older sister and one of the guitarists. “It's like we're not actually really that young anymore.”

It’s been eight years since the sisters joined cousin Eloise Wong and family friend Bela Salazar to play a local music fest. What was a one-off gig turned into a real band that always seemed to have homework to do.

“We'll play a show and then go backstage and finish an essay,” Lucia said.

“Almost like we're Hannah Montana,” Mila said.

“Without the secret identity,” laughed Lucia.

Then came the library video, a record deal with punk label Epitaph and their 2022 debut album Growing Up. 

They started touring the world opening for their heroes like Green Day and Paramore. (Paramore frontwoman Hayley Williams is featured on the single “Closer.”)

And as of this summer, more big leaps: They signed with Warner’s Reprise imprint, and all but Mila have graduated high school.

As they’ve grown, so has their songwriting.

Where they used to write individually, for their new album, they holed up in L.A., Long Beach and Palm Springs to write in the same room from the beginning. No phones allowed. Just riffing.

“We believe in each other and each other's ideas so much that we were kind of just pushing each other to go for it,” Lucia said. “What if we added synth here? What if the drums dropped out?”

By the end of the sessions, they had amassed about 30 songs and the 12 tracks on the album were split evenly between the three writing locations, produced by the sisters’ dad, Carlos de la Garza, who’s worked with Paramore, Bad Religion and Best Coast. (He actually started working with Best Coast after meeting them when the duo came to a Linda Lindas rehearsal in the family's backyard, according to Lucia.)

The album moves beyond straight-ahead punk, dipping into new wave, power pop and hardcore.

That range tracks with the members’ own eclectic listening habits. Lucia has been listening to indie artists Blondshell, Francis of Delirium and Indigo De Souza. Mila cited Julien Baker’s Little Oblivions, while Eloise, who plays bass, has been digging into local hardcore punk like Special Forces from San Luis Obispo, not to mention the Heated Rivalry soundtrack. Guitarist Bela has been listening to pop from Hollis and Mexico's Belanova.

Meanwhile, their lyrics tackle the issues staring down their generation, from climate change to fascism and economic injustice.

On “Blood on Our Hands," Eloise belts out an indictment of not just the government but the complicity of bystanders.

Eloise said the song isn’t just about calling people out about the state of the world, but “making everyone think about all of the little things that we can do to try and make it better, you know, and make it more sustainable, and make sure that people can live.”

Elsewhere on the album, like on the single “Burning Out,” the band reflects on that strange space between youth and adulthood and seeing friends move into new stages of life while wondering if they’re being left behind.

Whatever uncertainty they may be feeling, the Linda Lindas say one thing is for sure: It’s all about their music now.

Next month, they head out on their biggest tour yet as headliners with dates across the U.S. and Canada.

For a band whose early years involved squeezing in homework between soundchecks, life has simplified in at least one respect.

“It's pretty much all about the band,” Eloise said.

Michael Hyatt was photographing the new L.A. punk scene tearing up Hollywood when he got an offer few would refuse.

It came shortly after the band X released their seminal 1980 debut, Los Angeles. Singer Exene Cervenka and bassist John Doe had liked a photo Hyatt had taken of the Plugz.

“They asked me if I would photograph X,” Hyatt said.

X at the backstage area of Whisky a Go Go in July 1980, three months after the sudden death of Exene's sister.

(

Michael Hyatt

/

Michael Hyatt

)

For the first half of the ‘80s, Hyatt photographed X wherever he could. On their first national tour where he also drove the jury-rigged tour van. At the Whisky just months after the unexpected death of Exene’s sister. On a downtown L.A. rooftop, days before the band’s big Greek Theatre show.

“I never pose people. I find a location, a backdrop and just let them be human beings,” Hyatt said. “People reach a point where they forget the camera —  that's when the good photographs happen.”

Hyatt’s works are compiled in a new book, X: On the Road & At the Crossroads, 1980-2024, with an accompanying exhibition opening at Beyond Baroque on Sept. 5 — where Cervenka will join Hyatt for a reading.

Exene Cervenka and John Doe in the Louisiana countryside in 1980.

(

Michael Hyatt

/

Michael Hyatt

)

A band built on chance encounters 

X’s story reads like a constellation of happenstances hurtling toward inevitability. In 1976, Doe and guitarist Billy Zoom answered each other’s ads in the Recycler. That same year at a Beyond Baroque poetry night, Doe met Cervenka and saw punk lyrics in her writing. Ray Manzarek of the Doors, after seeing X live, offered that very night to produce their debut album in 1979.

A year later, Los Angeles helped cement L.A. punk, with a sound and sensibility markedly different from contemporaries the Germs and Black Flag.

A release party marked by tragedy

For the album’s release party, Hyatt said, X played two back-to-back shows in April at the Whisky a Go Go. Before they went on stage, Cervenka was told that her sister had been en route to the show when she was hit and killed by a drunk driver.

Three months later, Hyatt took this portrait of the band after another show at the Whisky.

“I placed Exene against that plywood panel,” Hyatt remembered. “My goal, maybe on an unconscious level, was to capture the emotion related to the tragedy that happened three months prior.”

The iconic rooftop shot

A photo of X taken two days after their 1981 Greek Theatre show.

(

Michael Hyatt

/

Michael Hyatt

)

In August 1981, X played in front of a crowd of 5,000 at the Greek Theatre.

“ They had reached the height of their powers,” Hyatt said.

He wanted to capture that zeitgeist. So two days later, he met the group at the rooftop of their rehearsal studio, which Hyatt scoped out at a practice session prior to the big Greek show.

“I went up and I thought, ‘Wow, this is a fantastic spot,’” he said. “Got a little bit of the skyline off in the distance of downtown L.A., but you've got the Roosevelt Hotel right there too.”

After three rolls of film, Hyatt said one shot clearly stood out.

Four decades later, still at the front row

At X's Houston show in 2024, Hyatt photographed a married couple that went on a first date to see the band in 1980.

(

Michael Hyatt

/

Michael Hyatt

)

In 2024, X went on tour for their final album, Smoke & Fiction. One stop was Houston, Texas.

They’d played in Houston on their national tour in 1980, at a long-defunct punk venue called the Island.

In the crowd at the Island in 1980 was a young couple on their first date. A couple years later, Hyatt said, they got married.

“And there they were, 44 years later, right up front cheering on X — who they saw on their very first date,” Hyatt said.

Still together, wearing matching X shirts.

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

Companies backing data center construction are flooding Sacramento with cash, hoping to stop or defang seven bills that would regulate the facilities as they head toward approval in the California Legislature this week.

The pro-data-center spenders include Big Tech companies like Amazon and AI titan Anthropic. But they are led, dollar-wise, by old school utility giant Pacific Gas & Electric, which earlier this year clocked its second biggest lobbying quarter since 1999.

The financial push comes a year after four bills that attempted to regulate data centers died or were diluted after lobbying from the industry. But as artificial intelligence fuels an unprecedented facility buildout, public backlash is transforming data center construction into a major issue for candidates in upcoming elections.

A May Gallup poll found seven in 10 Americans oppose data center construction in their communities, while a Public Policy Institute of California poll in July found similar opposition statewide. Rising public anxiety over utility costs, water use, and grid strain has driven California lawmakers to propose strict new data center rules — igniting a high-stakes lobbying push by the industry.

Hundreds of cities have considered or passed project bans this year, including in Monterey Park, where voters passed a ballot measure to permanently ban data centers, and Bay Area cities like Pittsburg, which backtracked on approvals following public outcry.

State law requires businesses and groups that engage in lobbying to report their overall quarterly spending, but does not require a breakdown of exactly how much is being spent on each bill. An analysis by CalMatters of lobbying activity for the first six months of 2026 found that utilities, tech companies and their proxies have spent millions of dollars lobbying state lawmakers, with data center bills emerging as a primary focus.

By Monday, it will be clear which bills made it out of the Legislature and onto Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk for signature or veto by the end of September.

The fate of the measures could have far-reaching consequences, affecting not only data center development but environmental regulation, utility rates, and how freely California’s tech giants can operate in the state. Nationally, advocates and lawmakers agree that California’s regulation around data centers could be an important bellwether for how similar fights will play out elsewhere.

“The level of awareness is through the roof, and the level of concern and sensitivity is through the roof — it's bipartisan, it's national, and it's across the board,” California Sen. Steve Padilla, a Democrat from Chula Vista who is author of two pending data center bills, told CalMatters.

Who is lobbying on data centers?

During the first half of 2026, Amazon paid more than $500,000 to lobby lawmakers on 33 pieces of legislation, including several data center bills and matters related to antitrust and artificial intelligence. Amazon spent more than $1.7 million lobbying in California last year.

Meanwhile, AI company Anthropic, which sent its first lobbyists to Sacramento last year, has spent nearly $90,000 to influence decisions made by the California Legislature so far this year and, according to the Financial Times, nearly tripled its federal lobbying spend in the same time period. Last year, Anthropic spent over $200,000 lobbying in the state.

Although Anthropic paid a lobbyist to influence lawmakers decisionmaking on data centers, a spokesperson said the company does not support or oppose any specific bills in California. The company, the spokesperson said, is also interested in working with lawmakers “on AI safety and other relevant issues." Representatives for Amazon did not respond to a request for comment from CalMatters.

Utility giant PG&E’s latest filing shows that it spent $2.86 million lobbying in California between April and June — its second highest quarter since 1999 (only surpassed since then by 2018, the year of the deadliest wildfire in state history, later linked to its equipment). A spokesperson for PG&E said the company has engaged on a “broad scope” of issues facing the industry during this legislative session, adding that “less than 5% of our spending was on data-center related issues,” amounting to approximately $143,000.

Groups acting as proxies for data center operators and tech companies have been especially active this year in California’s capitol, critics say. Business interests say they are trying to ground policy conversations in reality.

(

Fred Greaves

/

CalMatters

)

Other utilities, like Southern California Edison, and unions representing utility workers, like the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, have also invested in lobbying efforts on the bills.

Utilities providers are particularly motivated to influence bills because the development of new data centers represents a historic opportunity for expansion and grid upgrades, according to Matthew Freedman, senior staff attorney for The Utility Reform Network. Under the current regulatory framework, he said, the cost of expanding transmission lines is spread across all grid users, which means everyday consumers foot the bill.

But several of this year’s data center bills would change that, shifting costs back toward data center operators. “The groups that have been the strongest opponents of the bills this year include the proxies for the data centers and the tech companies,” Freedman said, referring to industry groups such as the Data Center Coalition, Silicon Valley Leadership Group and the California Chamber of Commerce. “They serve as a mouthpiece for the tech industry.”

Filings do not show that tech giants like Google, OpenAI, Meta, and Microsoft are lobbying lawmakers directly on data centers this session. Instead, the business groups Freedman referenced, which represent the Big Tech firms, carry the weight.

Silicon Valley Leadership Group, which represents companies including Apple and Amazon, has so far spent over $100,000 lobbying on bills including the various data center measures this year and is on track for its highest annual lobbying spend since tracking began in 2005.

The Data Center Coalition, which counts companies like Google, Microsoft, and OpenAI among its members, has logged its second and third highest-ever spending quarters so far this year. It has spent roughly $60,000 lobbying state lawmakers and the governor’s office to voice opposition to nearly every bill that would regulate data centers.

The bills and the backlash 

The measures before the Legislature this session include:

• Bills to shift electric infrastructure costs toward data center operators and away from residential customers: SB 1168, SB 886 and AB 2383.
• Bills mandating disclosures or estimates of water usage (and sometimes usage of other resources): AB 2619 and two bills that cleared the Legislature Thursday, AB 1577 and AB 2469.
• SB 887, which would require all data center projects to undergo environmental reviews and offer fast-tracked approval for facilities that meet standards for water and energy conservation.

Business interests opposed to the bills argue they would stifle tech companies’ ability to innovate and compete, tie up critical infrastructure in red tape and unfairly burden the construction of data centers versus the construction of other types of projects.

Silicon Valley Leadership Group CEO Ahmad Thomas told CalMatters that he sees public debate over data centers as fueled by “strong anti-AI sentiment,” and that industry groups like his aim to “ground the conversation in reality” about the ways consumers rely on data center infrastructure for everyday services.

Advocacy groups counter that transparency is vital to protect the environment and public resources, and that everyday consumers should not be affected by increased infrastructure and utilities costs.

Britt Smith, who is part of a community group organizing against a controversial $2 billion Amazon data center project in Gilroy south of San Jose, said corporate opponents of the bills are “spending so much because there’s so much at stake,” adding, “Our future, our safety, is not for sale.”

This robust fight stands in stark contrast to last year, when the only bill signed into law was stripped down to just a requirement for state energy regulators to publish an environmental impact study on data centers’ electricity demand. Newsom also vetoed a water usage disclosure bill, citing concerns that regulation could stifle AI growth.

Whether this year's intensified lobbying will yield similar results remains uncertain, but lawmakers say shifting voter sentiment heading into the midterms has altered the political landscape.

“When you're looking down the barrel of public outcry that says we don't want [data centers] at all, and you've got localities that are saying they’re going to ban them, then you know the atmosphere has changed,” Assemblymember Diane Papan, a San Mateo Democrat who authored two of the bills, told CalMatters. “We are in a totally different environment this year.”

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