The Brief

L.A. Mayor Karen Bass has made speeding up the development of new affordable housing a centerpiece of both her successful campaign and her time in office.

During her first week on the job, Bass signed an executive order streamlining the approval of new affordable housing. Executive Directive One, or ED1, represents her biggest step toward making good on those promises. And exempting new affordable housing from lengthy environmental reviews has been a key pillar of ED1.

Now, about a year after her swearing in, LAist has found that city officials have quietly started accepting environmental challenges from groups opposed to new apartments.

One developer aiming to construct a four-story apartment building for low and moderate-income renters in the Westside neighborhood of Sawtelle was assured in writing by the L.A. Planning Department in mid-December that their project was exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Two weeks later, the same department accepted a CEQA appeal from opponents of the development.

Steven Scheibe — co-founder of Generation Real Estate Partners, the company behind the development — said the city signing off on a CEQA challenge was “highly unexpected.”

“It's pretty frustrating,” he said. “It has obviously delayed the start of construction, which we were expecting to do in the middle of February. We're unlikely to be able to start at that time period.”

Scheibe and his partners submitted the project through ED1, which promises to speed up the construction of 100% affordable housing projects by approving applications within 60 days, and issuing building permits within five days.

Exempting projects from CEQA allows developers to avoid lengthy environmental impact studies that can delay new housing construction, often for a year or more. So far, the city has fast-tracked dozens of projects under ED1 that bypass CEQA.

The Planning Department’s guidelines continue to say that ED1 projects are “exempt” from environmental review. A letter of compliance Scheibe received on Dec. 12 explicitly says his project “is statutorily exempt” from CEQA. Scheibe was surprised to see the city sign off on a CEQA appeal on Dec. 27, because he was counting on ED1’s guarantees.

Standing in a dirt parcel where two single-family homes were recently torn down to make way for the 44-unit project, Scheibe said, “We would not have acquired this lot if it wasn't for ED1.”

So far, affordable housing plans have nearly doubled

L.A. housing advocates have generally cheered ED1, saying it has convinced many private developers to build affordable housing without taxpayer funding.

The planning department reported in late November that in ED1’s first year, the program had received proposals for more than 9,000 units of new affordable housing, almost double the amount proposed the previous year.

But some housing advocates now worry that the Sawtelle project’s appeal could open the floodgates for all ED1 projects to be delayed.

“I think it was a bad decision. I think the city should have not accepted the appeal,” said Scott Epstein, the policy director for the pro-housing group Abundant Housing L.A. “This appeal directly attacks ED1 and its legitimacy.”

A street sign designating this neighborhood as “Sawtelle Japantown” hangs above a busy intersection on L.A.’s Westside.

(

David Wagner/LAist

)

In response to questions from LAist, the mayor’s office said they’re currently working with the city attorney on how to handle the appeal moving forward.

“CEQA should not be used as a strategy to block affordable housing projects from moving forward,” said Clara Karger, a spokesperson for the mayor’s office, via email. She said ED1 “cuts through red tape and breaks down bureaucratic barriers.”

Could environmental appeals derail new low-income housing?

If time-consuming CEQA appeals are allowed to move forward, L.A. could struggle to meet obligations under state law to plan for nearly 185,000 new low-income homes by 2029.

City planning officials also recently accepted a CEQA appeal for an ED1 project in the San Fernando Valley’s Sherman Oaks neighborhood. Land use attorney Dave Rand, who represents the developers behind the project, described the appeal as a “Hail Mary” attempt by opponents.

Rand believes city officials’ hands were tied by opponents’ interpretation of state law, essentially forcing them to accept the CEQA appeals. But he expects the city to bat down the challenges.

“Even though this is an annoyance and a slight hiccup in the process, this by no means undercut the substantial benefit of ED1,” Rand said.

It’s unclear what happens next for the projects facing CEQA challenges. Typically, these appeals go to the city council, where public commenters will have a chance to express opposition or support for new housing projects. Affordable housing developers expected their ED1 projects to proceed without contentious public hearings and council votes.

“All of this is very new for both us and for the city,” said Scheibe. “We're unsure as to what it means. But we do know that we're going to be delayed.”

Why opponents are fighting new housing on L.A.’s Westside

State lawmakers passed the California Environmental Quality Act in 1970, and it was signed into law by Gov. Ronald Reagan. The law requires studies and disclosures of possible environmental harms from various development projects.

A fierce debate has raged over the years about CEQA’s role in slow-rolling, and even killing, new housing. Local governments exempt many projects from CEQA. The California Legislative Analyst’s Office has concluded that CEQA is often used to delay or scale down housing projects, and can result in years of review for projects in the state’s largest cities.

A “now leasing” sign advertises apartments for rent in L.A.’s Sawtelle neighborhood.

(

David Wagner/LAist

)

Opponents of the Sawtelle project have raised some familiar objections to new housing, including concerns about street parking. Located about a mile from two Metro stops on the Gold Line, the project includes no on-site parking.

Other complaints have centered on perceived impacts to nearby property values and neighborhood crime levels. Manhattan Beach resident Allen Pachtman owns an apartment building next to the proposed 44-unit building. He helped organize the CEQA appeal filed by a group calling itself Missouri Avenue Neighbors.

“I can just picture somewhere down the line that it's going to end up being a high-crime neighborhood,” Pachtman said. “People will be leaving, and it'll just ratchet downwards.”

Pachtman, a doctor, said he’s relying on the apartment building on Missouri Avenue to help fund his retirement. But he worries new low-income apartments next door will harm that investment.

“It’s going to degrade the value of my building,” Pachtman said. “I don't know if that's environmental enough. I don’t know that you're going to be able to measure, like, air pollution is any worse. But the quality of life is certainly going to decline.”

Such concerns about the impact of low-income housing on neighborhoods have been studied, with academic researchers finding that these projects do not hurt nearby property values and do not increase crime. When LAist asked Pachtman by phone to elaborate on his concerns about increased crime, he hung up and ended the interview.

One-bedroom apartments near UCLA for under $1,900

The proposed Sawtelle project consists mainly of one-bedroom apartments. Most of the units will be restricted to tenants in the city who qualify as low-income (the cut-off is currently $70,640 for a one-person household).

The project also includes a few studios and two-bedroom apartments. Some units will be reserved for moderate-income tenants (those earning up to $82,500 for a one-person household).

If the apartments were being rented today, most one-bedroom units in the building would rent for no more than $1,892 per month.

“If you go two blocks over, you're looking at $3,000 rents for a one-bedroom,” said Scheibe. “We saw this as a really good opportunity to provide affordable housing that is at a major discount.”

Unlike other ED1 projects in areas such as South L.A., where existing renters are now facing relocation, no tenants were displaced for this project. Scheibe said many of the prospective tenants will likely be students and staff commuting to the nearby UCLA campus without a car.

Should ED1 projects be stopped in cultural districts?

Some opponents of the Sawtelle project have argued the entire neighborhood should be off-limits to ED1 projects. They’ve said it’s unfair that Bass banned ED1 projects in single-family neighborhoods, while allowing developments in designated ethnic enclaves such as Sawtelle’s Japantown.

“What we foresee is that this will be of catastrophic effect to us,” said Cesar Aranguri during a recent planning and land use committee meeting of the West Los Angeles Sawtelle Neighborhood Council. “It’s striking right at our core in terms of our culture and our history.”

A hand-written sign calls on residents to help “save Sawtelle” by weighing in on plans for a new affordable housing project in the neighborhood.

(

David Wagner/LAist

)

Aranguri presented a plan calling on Bass to exclude all named cultural districts from ED1, just as she did back in June for single-family neighborhoods. California housing advocates have already sued over the city’s decision to halt projects in single-family zones, which make up 74% of the city’s residential land.

Scheibe says affordable housing benefits communities. In Sawtelle, he says new low-income housing could provide a place for aging Japanese American residents to live.

“A lot of seniors who want to stay in their neighborhood feel like they're being priced out,” he said. “This would provide an opportunity for them.”

Where lawmakers stand on the appeals

The district’s council member, Traci Park, said she has not yet taken a position on whether the CEQA appeal should move forward.

“I was surprised that it had been accepted,” Park told LAist. “Now that it’s there, and the question exists, it's going to have to be answered. I don't know that there is any kind of process to roll back the appeal.”

Kristina Kropp, the attorney helping opponents of the Sawtelle and Sherman Oaks projects pursue the CEQA appeals, declined to comment for this story.

Councilmember Nithya Raman, who represents Sherman Oaks, has supported the ED1 project in that neighborhood. The full council is currently considering a plan to transform ED1 from a mayoral directive into a permanent ordinance.

What happens next?

Meanwhile, L.A. faces a lawsuit aiming to overturn ED1 in its entirety. The Westside nonprofit Fix The City, which frequently sues the city over land use issues, filed the complaint in December, claiming ED1 “eliminates public hearings, due process and the right of appeal.”

The developers behind the Sawtelle project have sent the city a letter demanding a dismissal of the CEQA appeal. They said if the city fails to overturn the challenge within 90 days, it will be in violation of the state’s Housing Accountability Act.

The legal sparring is playing out against the backdrop of a worsening housing crisis. Most L.A. County tenants pay more than 30% of their income on rent according to the U.S. Census Bureau, a level deemed unaffordable by federal government standards. The number of people experiencing homelessness in the city of L.A. increased 10% last year to 46,260.

Scott Epstein with Abundant Housing L.A. said environmental challenges, which he sees as often abuses of CEQA’s original intent, are slowing down much-needed new housing.

“We need to shift our attitude away from the notion that housing is an impact, and toward the notion that housing is a benefit,” Epstein said.

The U.S. government on Thursday released a new crash test dummy design that advocates believe will help make cars safer for women.

The Department of Transportation will consider using the dummy in the government's vehicle crash test five star-ratings once a final rule is adopted, the agency said in a news release.

Women are 73% more likely to be injured in a head-on crash, and they are 17% more likely to be killed in a car crash, than men.

The standard crash test dummy used in the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration five-star vehicle testing was developed in 1978 and was modeled after a 5-foot-9 (175-centimeter), 171-pound (78-kilogram) man. The female dummy is smaller and has a rubber jacket to represent breasts. It's routinely tested in the passenger or back seat but seldom in the driver's seat, even though the majority of licensed drivers are women.

The new female dummy endorsed by the department more accurately reflects differences between men and women, including the shape of the neck, collarbone, pelvis, and legs. It's outfitted with more than 150 sensors, the department said.

Some American automakers have been skeptical, arguing the new model may exaggerate injury risks and undercut the value of some safety features such as seat belts and airbags.

Lawmakers and transportation secretaries from the past two presidential administrations have expressed support for new crash test rules and safety requirements but developments have been slow.

U.S. Sens. Deb Fischer, a Republican from Nebraska, and Tammy Duckworth, a Democrat from Illinois, both released statements welcoming the female crash test dummy announcement.

"Any progress here is good because there's simply no good reason why women are more likely to be injured or die in car crashes," Duckworth said.

Fischer introduced legislation, the She Drives Act, that would require the most advanced testing devices available, including a female crash test dummy. Duckworth is a co-sponsor.

"It's far past time to make these testing standards permanent, which will help save thousands of lives and make America's roads safer for all drivers," Fischer said.

The department said the new specifications will be available for manufacturers to build models and for the automotive industry to begin testing them in vehicles.

Copyright 2025 NPR

Less than a year from the midterm elections, state and local voting officials from both major political parties are actively preparing for the possibility of interference by a federal government helmed by President Donald Trump.

The problem is, no one knows what might be coming.

Steve Simon, the Democratic secretary of state of Minnesota, likened it to planning for natural disasters.

"You have to use your imagination to consider and plan for the most extreme scenario," Simon said.

Carly Koppes, the Republican clerk of Weld County in Colorado, said officials in her state are shoring up their relationships with local law enforcement and county and state attorney's offices, to make sure any effort to interfere with voting is "met with a pretty good force of resistance."

"We have to plan for the worst and hope we get the best," Koppes said. "I think we're all kind of conditioned at this point to expect anything and everything, and our bingo cards keep getting bigger and bigger with things that we would have never have had on them."

Trump, who continues to spread false claims about voting in America, issued an executive order in the spring that sought to mandate major changes to the elections system. That order has so far mostly been blocked by the courts, but he's teased other executive action as well. And his administration is still investigating his loss five years ago, while pardoning people associated with his efforts to try to overturn that defeat.

All of that has made it clear to those in the elections community that Trump plans to have a heavy hand in their processes next year. Here are a few things voting officials are watching for.

More executive action to take control of voting

The Constitution is clear: States control their own election processes, with Congress able to set guidelines for federal races. The president has virtually no authority when it comes to voting.

But Trump is testing that, and those in his circle have pushed fringe theories for how he can change how ballots are cast and counted.

Earlier this month, press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the White House is working on a new executive order that will seemingly target mail voting. Trump also said earlier this year that he wanted to ban some voting machines, though it's unclear exactly what he was referring to.

Election officials agree he does not have the legal authority to do either of those things. But recently, Trump ally and attorney Cleta Mitchell, who advised Trump in 2020, broached a bolder strategy to enact election changes: declaring a national emergency.

"The president's authority is limited in his role with regard to elections except where there is a threat to the national sovereignty of the United States — as I think that we can establish with the porous system that we have," Mitchell said on a podcast appearance in September.

It would be keeping with one of Trump's broader policy strategies: This year he's invoked presidential emergency powers more frequently than any other modern president.

Election experts say there's no legal basis for Mitchell's theory, but numerous voting officials told NPR it's something that's come up in conversations about next year.

U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., who previously oversaw voting in California as secretary of state, also brought up the scenario recently on the Senate floor.

"If the Trump White House tried to declare some fake national emergency to create a pretense for federal intervention, I will force a vote here in the Senate to stop it," Padilla said.

U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi listens as President Trump speaks in the Oval Office of the White House on Oct. 15.

(

Andrew Caballero-Reynolds

/

AFP via Getty Images

)

Troops on the ground

Washington Secretary of State Steve Hobbs, a Democrat, says six months ago he wouldn't have taken the premise of federal troops at polling places seriously.

But seeing how the National Guard was deployed — and justified — this summer changed his thinking.

"You have National Guard deploying to cities to supposedly quell these 'demonstrations' — basically people in frog suits and riding their bikes naked is the biggest threat," Hobbs said. "And yeah, I start thinking that maybe it could be possible."

Ahead of the 2020 election, Trump spoke of a desire to have federal law enforcement patrol voting locations, and this year, his former adviser Steve Bannon said on his War Room podcast that he hopes Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents are patrolling polling places in the midterms.

Legal experts say such intervention is clearly illegal, but until the federal government disavows such actions clearly, Simon said voting officials have to game out how to respond.

"One thing that would help is if someone at the federal government would come out and categorically say, 'No, no, no, stop the presses, stop everything. You'll never have to worry about that. That's not something we would ever consider doing,'" Simon said. "That would go a long way."

In response to questions about forces outside polling places, and other scenarios mentioned in this story, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson characterized them as "baseless conspiracy theories and Democrat talking points" but did not directly answer whether the White House would commit not to send agents to voting locations. She reiterated that the president is permitted to send federal personnel to localities to help quell violent crime.

Who is a trusted source?

For the last decade, as voting officials have fought to dam up a tsunami of false information about their work, they've begged people in their communities to go to "trusted sources" for election information.

In 2026, figuring out who is a trusted source may be more difficult than ever.

Along with Trump himself, his administration has elevated to prominent government roles numerous people who have a history of spreading false information about elections, and local officials worry their message may be drowned out by those with much bigger megaphones.

One of the hires alarming voting officials interviewed by NPR works at the Department of Homeland Security. Heather Honey, who's now deputy assistant secretary for elections integrity, worked alongside Mitchell for the past few years to help spread election conspiracy theories, including one about votes in Pennsylvania that Trump mentioned in his speech on Jan. 6, 2021, shortly before a mob stormed the Capitol.

"I equate this to having a moon landing conspiracy theorist and flat earther being offered a job at NASA," Hobbs said.

DHS did not respond to NPR's request for comment.

Numerous officials at the Department of Justice also have a history of election denial.

A poll worker holds "I Voted" stickers as people cast ballots on Nov. 4 in the Brooklyn borough of New York City.

(

Michael M. Santiago

/

Getty Images

)

Unprecedented demands

The insistence to relitigate 2020 also has voting officials worried about what sort of actions administration officials plan to take. Already this year, DOJ has made unprecedented requests to investigate voting machines, access old ballots, and accumulate mass amounts of voter data.

This summer, a consultant in Colorado contacted Koppes and other clerks in that state, in some cases saying he was associated with the White House and asking about accessing their voting machines.

The White House denied to CNN and other outlets authorizing the requests, but separately, in Missouri, a Department of Justice official reached out to clerks there asking basically the same thing.

In each instance, they were told no.

"Since 2020, people in the elections world have become even more knowledgeable of the responsibilities of the different levels of government [when it comes to voting equipment]," Koppes said.

A similar push and pull is playing out with elections data. The Trump administration has quickly built what is essentially a searchable national citizenship database, and is trying to entice states to run their voting records through it to root out noncitizens on voter rolls. While many Republican election officials have eagerly embraced the system, other GOP officials and their Democratic counterparts have been hesitant to engage with the tool, as there are questions about how well it works, what happens to the voting data once it's been run through the system and, in many states, whether even using the tool is legal under state law.

Still, the administration is intent to investigate voter rolls as it continues to push false narratives about widespread noncitizen voting. The DOJ recently sued eight states (all states Trump lost in 2020) in an effort to compel them to turn over their rolls.

"It's really not a red state or blue state thing," said Al Schmidt, the Republican secretary of state of Pennsylvania, in an interview with PBS News Hour about the data demands. "It is a — in my view, a concerning attempt, a concerning effort to consolidate and overreach at the federal level. In the United States of America, it's the states who run elections, not the federal government."

Vulnerable targets

Since Trump took office, the federal government has pulled back on virtually all of its work related to cybersecurity and elections. The Department of Homeland Security laid off employees focused on election security, and stopped funding a partnership that helped local elections offices share threat information.

Wesley Wilcox, a Republican election supervisor in Marion County, Fla., said smaller counties especially will be more vulnerable to cyberattacks due to the cuts, and Russia, China or any other U.S. adversary may see an opportunity.

"That's what I would do," Wilcox said. "I mean, if I were on that side of the fence, I'm like, 'OK, they're cutting this stuff out. Let's go get them.' You know, 'cause the defenses are down."

Secretary Hobbs, of Washington, told NPR that two years ago he was notified by DHS about a hack in one of his counties. The state responded immediately to make sure the breach wouldn't impact the voter registration database.

Now, Hobbs said, "I don't even know if I would have gotten that phone call, to tell you the truth."

In Arizona, Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, a Democrat, said he didn't even contact DHS' cyber agency after an online candidate portal was hacked this summer because he didn't have confidence in the agency's "capacity to collaborate in good faith or to prioritize national security over political theater."
Copyright 2025 NPR

L.A. County Supervisor Janice Hahn said she plans to unveil a new ordinance Friday that would ban all law enforcement from concealing their identities with masks.

The move, which was initiated in June, comes after government leaders and community activists reported a rise in federal immigration enforcement activity Thursday in Long Beach and San Pedro.

In a statement, Hahn said, "ICE is continuing to terrorize our communities," adding the actions "hit Long Beach hard."

"They are not communicating with local law enforcement, and we know they are not targeting violent criminals," Hahn said. "They are targeting people based on the color of their skin, or their accent, or the place that they work. They are violating our residents’ rights every day they remain on our streets. They are creating chaos and spreading fear in our immigrant community, and they need to leave."

Hahn said the ordinance will:

1. Prohibit all law enforcement, including local, state and federal officials, from wearing masks or personal disguises while interacting with the public in the course of their duties in unincorporated L.A. County; and
2. Require all law enforcement wear visible identification and agency affiliation while interacting with the public in the course of their duties in unincorporated L.A. County

There are some exceptions, like breathing apparatuses or motorcycle helmets.

Hahn said at least nine people were detained by masked agents on Thursday. According to Long Beach Mayor Rex Richardson, one of those detained was a gardener for Polly's Pies restaurant on Atlantic Avenue. He said federal agents chased down and attacked the man as diners watched.

The Trump administration increased immigration enforcement in Los Angeles County in early June. President Donald Trump has repeatedly said the crackdown is necessary to keep the nation safe from dangerous criminals. However, many activists and leaders have denounced the arrests, saying federal agents are detaining hard-working members of the community and picking up people with no criminal record.

California has already passed state laws that restrict the use of facial coverings by law enforcement. But the Trump administration filed a lawsuit this week to stop them.

The L.A. County Board of Supervisors is scheduled to vote on Hahn's ordinance at its Dec. 2 meeting, when members of the public can share their comments. A required second vote on adopting the ordinance could be held one week later on Dec. 9. If adopted, it would go into effect 30 days later.

How to attend the board meetings:

• Dates: Tuesday, Dec. 2 and Dec. 9
• Location: 500 West Temple St., Los Angeles, in Room 381B, at the Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration
• Time: 9:30 a.m.
• How to watch remotely

Federal immigration agents chased a gardener into a Long Beach restaurant Thursday and took him into custody in front of two police officers who were briefly startled by the chaotic scene, witnesses told the Long Beach Post.

The agents suddenly pulled up to Polly’s Pies restaurant on Atlantic Avenue in Bixby Knolls in the morning and started running after a group of gardeners, according to Jacklyn Mitosinka, director of brand for the chain of restaurants, which her grandfather founded.

Agents chased one of the men inside and tackled him in the waiting area in front of the hostess stand, Mitosinka said.

LBPD officers were eating inside at the time, she said, and one “popped up quickly” and drew his gun in surprise, but he put it away once he saw the agents’ badges.

In a statement, police said the officers “quickly realized it was an immigration enforcement activity and did not intervene or engage in the activity.”

The agents took the gardener, and Polly’s Pies employees who know the man contacted his family and told them of the arrest, Mitosinka said.

The situation was “sickening and disheartening,” said Blair Cohn, executive director of the local business improvement district. He said a board member of the organization, who happened to be driving by, was able to get the keys to the gardener’s work truck and pass them along to his family.

The arrest appeared to be part of a string of immigration operations in Long Beach on Thursday.

Around 10:30 a.m., federal agents arrested three people outside Cherry Donuts on Cherry Avenue near 15th Street, said Franklin Kong, who was working at the front of the shop, which his parents own. The entire encounter lasted roughly 10 minutes, Kong said.

Several people were said to be picked up by immigration agents at Cherry Donuts in Long Beach on Thursday, Nov. 20, 2025.

(

Thomas R. Cordova

/

Long Beach Post

)

Federal immigration agents were also spotted at four other locations this morning, according to local immigrant rights group Órale.

The organization confirmed sightings at:

• The Light of the World Church, 785 Junipero Ave. at 10:12 a.m.
• Pacific Coast Highway and Walnut Avenue, 11 a.m.
• Pacific Coast Highway and Gaviota Avenue, 11 a.m.
• Outside Farmers & Merchants Bank at 2302 North Bellflower Boulevard, 11:30 a.m.

State and local laws prevent Long Beach police from assisting in civil immigration enforcement. City officials have also said they will not obstruct federal law enforcement “in any way,” something that would also be illegal.

In a video posted to social media, Mayor Rex Richardson called the arrests “dehumanizing” and “absolutely unacceptable.” He said the gardener at Polly’s Pies was “chased down and brutalized.”

In a statement, District 5 Councilmember Megan Kerr called it a “chaotic and cruel attack against a hardworking member of our community.”

In a statement, Los Angeles County Supervisor Janice Hahn called for ICE agents to leave the region.

Federal immigration agents are “targeting people based on the color of their skin, or their accent, or the place they work,” Hahn said. “They are violating our residents’ rights every day they remain on our streets.”

Long Beach is part of a lawsuit seeking to block immigration agents from carrying out roving patrols targeting people based solely on factors such as their race, language or location they’re working, but in September, the Supreme Court lifted a temporary block on the tactic.

In its statement, the LBPD reiterated it “does not enforce civil immigration laws, participate in civil immigration enforcement, or obstruct lawful federal enforcement activities.”

Editor’s note: This story has been updated with information from the Long Beach Police Department