The Brief

State conflict of interest laws ban public officials from any involvement in contracts in which they have a financial interest, including agreements that financially benefit their spouse or groups that pay their spouse.

Los Angeles’ top homeless services executive told LAist in December that she stuck to those rules, saying she had been walled off and “completely recused” from business relating to her husband’s employer.

Through a public records request, LAist later discovered records that contradict her assertion.

The documents show that Va Lecia Adams Kellum, chief executive of the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA), signed a $2.1 million contract and two other contract amendments with Upward Bound House, the Santa Monica-based nonprofit where her husband Edward Kellum works in senior leadership. The contract names Adams Kellum as the LAHSA official authorized to administer it.

A LAHSA spokesperson told LAist the contracts had inadvertently ended up in front of Adams Kellum to sign.

LAist’s findings come amid mounting questions about oversight at LAHSA, the public agency tasked by the city and county with administering more than $700 million in annual contracts with nonprofits to provide homeless services. It is a creation of the city and county and jointly funded and overseen by both.

Upward Bound House is a longtime vendor of LAHSA that focuses on housing and services for unhoused families, as well as young adults. It began receiving public money from LAHSA years prior to Adams Kellum joining the agency in March 2023.

When employees sign LAHSA’s code of ethics they agree to avoid any activities that could be, or appear to be, conflicts of interest, according to a copy posted on LAHSA’s website. One of the examples given is immediate family relationships with the agency’s vendors.

The $2.1 million contract signed by Adams Kellum authorized federal taxpayer funds for Upward Bound House to pay rent for unhoused people in the region and help them find homes. The money also covered case management and administration costs at the nonprofit.

The records show Adams Kellum signed the three documents directly above the names of her husband’s employer and his boss.

The signature sections of two contract amendments (dated the same day) and a $2.1 million contract Va Lecia Adams Kellum signed between the government agency she leads and her husband’s employer. LAist obtained the documents through a public records request.

(

LAist

)

LAist found that Adams Kellum’s interactions with Upward Bound House extended beyond signing contracts.

She also spoke with her husband's employer last year regarding complaints made during public comments alleging failures in Upward Bound House’s performance, according to the nonprofit’s chief executive.

Government ethics experts say conflict of interest laws forbid a wide range of involvement, including signing contracts.

“The laws are pretty specific that you can't have any participation whatsoever,” said Sean McMorris, who manages the ethics program for California Common Cause. “You should not be putting your signature on any such contract. You have to completely recuse yourself from the matter.”

McMorris said in the eyes of the law, a conflict of interest violation can take place even if the breach was unintentional. He told LAist that Adams Kellum’s signatures appear to violate California’s Political Reform Act and the state’s Government Code Section 1090.

Following ethics expectations, he added, is "extremely important because it speaks to the integrity and character of our representatives."

Adams Kellum said her conflict was disclosed

Adams Kellum previously told LAist she had steered clear of anything to do with her husband’s employer.

“This issue was disclosed when I was hired,” Adams Kellum wrote in a Dec. 9 email, prior to LAist requesting public records that showed she had signed LAHSA contracts with her husband’s employer.

“LAHSA's [legal] counsel has put procedures in place that have been followed and these procedures ‘walled me off’ from any involvement in matters concerning Upward Bound House,” she added. “I am completely recused from matters that involve or impact Upward Bound House.”

Adams Kellum has not responded to follow-up questions and interview requests from LAist about the contracts she signed, including questions about whether conflict of interest laws may have been violated.

Edward Kellum, her husband, did not respond to LAist’s requests for comment. He is featured as one of six people on the “senior staff” section of Upward Bound House’s website, where his title is director of operations and compliance.

Also listed is the organization’s president and CEO, Christine Mirasy-Glasco. She acknowledged to LAist that Adams Kellum, in her role as LAHSA’s top executive, spoke with her once regarding complaints from public commenters alleging Upward Bound House failed to provide required services and falsified documents.

In an email, Mirasy-Glasco wrote that Adams Kellum “shared that LAHSA would follow up with UBH,” and said a subordinate of Adams Kellum was assigned to work with the vendor to get the complainants into permanent housing. Mirasy-Glasco provided LAist with written responses to several of the complaints.

Paul Rubenstein, a spokesperson for LAHSA, also said follow-up on the complaints was handled by a subordinate of Adams Kellum.

Spokesperson says signatures were an ‘oversight’

As for the three agreements with her husband’s employer, Rubenstein said Adams Kellum “mistakenly signed” them after staffers inadvertently sent them to her. When the CEO has a conflict of interest, LAHSA’s standard practice is for contracts to instead be signed by the agency’s top programs officer, Rubenstein wrote.

“Dr. Adams Kellum has not been involved in any discussions regarding Upward Bound House contracts,” Rubenstein wrote in an email to LAist. He added that Adams Kellum “has never been involved in overseeing any programs or agreements with UBH."

“LAHSA is taking steps to further ensure this does not happen again, including requiring additional staff training,” he added, noting that all contracts go through multiple reviews and require “three staff signatures before being sent to the CEO or her designee.”

Rubenstein did not respond to an email asking how Adams Kellum’s signatures could be a mistake, given their close proximity to Upward Bound House’s name.

He also did not answer why, if Adams Kellum was completely recused, she was named in the $2.1 million contract with Upward Bound House as LAHSA's representative "authorized to administer" the agreements.

What the oversight commission knew

The 10-member LAHSA Commission is responsible for overseeing the agency and its CEO. Half of the commission is appointed by county supervisors, and half are appointed by L.A.’s mayor with confirmation by the City Council.

“The LAHSA Commission was fully informed and consulted with legal counsel about potential conflicts prior to Dr. Adams Kellum being offered the position,” Rubenstein said.

But LAist found that members of the LAHSA Commission had varying degrees of awareness of Adams Kellum’s conflict — and gave different instructions over time at the recommendation of staff.

In August 2023, LAHSA’s governing commission specifically excluded Adams Kellum from signing the $2.1 million contract when it came up for a vote, according to the meeting’s minutes. Instead, the commission authorized its chair to enter into the agreement. The meeting record shows Adams Kellum recused herself and stepped out of the room during the vote.

Despite the prohibition, she signed that contract months later.

In other instances later on, the LAHSA Commission apparently changed course. Despite Adams Kellum’s conflict of interest disclosure forms, commissioners voted to follow staff’s recommendation to authorize her to enter into contracts with Upward Bound House.

L.A. Mayor Karen Bass was among the commissioners who voted unanimously last year to allow Adams Kellum to sign other contracts with the service provider, according to meeting minutes and agendas. (Bass was not yet on the commission for the August 2023 vote.)

Asked for comment about the conflict of interest, Zach Seidl, a spokesperson for Bass, said work is underway to “make LAHSA more transparent and accountable,” including “initiating additional protocols to prevent future issues.”

Va Lecia Adams Kellum, CEO of the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA), with current chair of the agency’s governing commission Wendy Greuel (left) and L.A. Mayor Karen Bass (right).

(

Office of L.A. Mayor Karen Bass

)

Two other commission members who joined the LAHSA Commission after Adams Kellum was hired — L.A. County Supervisors Kathryn Barger and Lindsey Horvath — were not formally notified of the conflict prior to voting to allow her to enter agreements with Upward Bound House, according to their spokespeople.

Barger didn’t find out about the family tie until after she left the LAHSA Commission in October 2024, according to her spokesperson. Horvath was not officially notified about the conflict, though it was known among many who work in homeless services, according to Horvath’s spokesperson.

LAist reviewed those later contracts, and found Adams Kellum did not ultimately sign them. Instead, subordinates signed with Adams Kellum’s name printed below most of the signature lines.

What’s next

Questions about transparency and how LAHSA is handling hundreds of millions in public dollars have been a growing concern for local lawmakers.

Adams Kellum faced controversy recently over her hiring of Lilly Simmering for a top-level LAHSA leadership position that oversees all homelessness programs. Simmering oversaw an Orange County government department that paid out millions of dollars to an out-of-compliance nonprofit now embroiled in a fraud scandal involving former Orange County Supervisor Andrew Do. Simmering left after less than two weeks on the job, following questions about her history in Orange County.

LAHSA officials have removed the agency’s list of leaders and organization chart from its website. For at least two weeks, those pages have been replaced with a graphic labeled “under construction.”

The webpage that once showed the LAHSA organization chart has been replaced with a graphic labeled "Under Construction." The graphic remained on the page at the time of publication.

(

LAHSA website

)

In response to a request from LAist, Rubenstein provided a copy of the organization’s organization chart, dated Feb. 1. He said the website will be updated soon with the new info. The site was not updated as of Tuesday.

In November, Horvath called for the county to pull its funding from LAHSA after an audit found failures in the agency’s oversight of service providers. The county provides about half of LAHSA’s $875 million annual budget. The Board of Supervisors approved Horvath’s call for county staff to create a plan to have the county manage the spending directly.

Before she left the LAHSA Commission at the end of last month, Horvath planned to schedule a discussion on conflict of interest procedures at an upcoming commission meeting, her spokesperson told LAist.

L.A. City Councilmember Nithya Raman, who chairs the council’s housing and homelessness committee, said in an email to LAist: “At a time when there is a great deal of distrust in government and in the homeless services system, I think it is particularly important to ensure that we avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest.”

In response to LAist’s reporting, Raman said she contacted Wendy Greuel — L.A.’s former controller and current chair of the LAHSA Commission — who assured Raman that conflict of interest policies would be rigorously enforced to prevent future lapses.

Greuel did not address concerns about the conflict when asked for comment by LAist.

L.A. City Councilmember Monica Rodriguez, a frequent critic of LAHSA’s oversight practices, called Adams Kellum’s signing of contracts with Upward Bound House “really problematic” and “absolutely unacceptable.”

Adams Kellum was hired at a base salary of $430,000 a year — nearly double the pay of elected City Council members and about 42% more than the mayor of L.A.

With such a high salary and responsibility over taxpayer dollars, Rodriguez said, LAHSA’s CEO should be adhering to high ethical standards.

“There need to be greater guardrails,” Rodriguez said.

How to watchdog local government

One of the best things you can do to hold officials accountable is pay attention.

Your city council, board of supervisors, school board and more all hold public meetings that anybody can attend. These are times you can talk to your elected officials directly and hear about the policies they’re voting on that affect your community.

• Read tips on how to get involved.
• The next scheduled LAHSA Commission meeting is Friday, Feb. 28, at 9 a.m. You can check out the commission’s full calendar here. 
• You can find the address to attend in person or attend the meeting virtually here. 
• You can speak to the LAHSA Commission during any agenda item, or at the end of the meeting during general public comments, by submitting a “Request to Speak Form” to the commission’s secretary before the agenda item starts. 
• You can see the list of all  LAHSA commissioners here (note one of the seats is currently vacant). LAHSA’s website for the commission does not include a way to contact the commissioners.

LAist reporter Aaron Schrank contributed to this story.

The average 30-year fixed-rate mortgage leaped to 7.03% on Thursday, according to the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp., which also goes by Freddie Mac.
This is the first time the rate has passed the 7% mark in 20 months, or since January 2025. While the 7% mortgage rate milestone holds no literal significance beyond the psychological effect of the round number, the sharp rise in rates since March risks further squeezing the budgets of homebuyers. And it's bound to deepen the freeze on a housing market held stagnant for years by the high cost of homeownership.

Mortgage rates tend to follow the 10-year Treasury note, which has risen sharply over the summer amid concerns about high inflation as well as the size of the federal debt.

The Federal Reserve last week raised its benchmark interest rate by a quarter percentage point — its first move this year — and many policymakers projected it may raise it one more time before year's end. Investors are bracing for potentially even more rate hikes to help fight inflation.

The housing market is hurting

High mortgage rates contributed to a 2% decline in existing home sales in August from the previous month, according to the National Association of Realtors.

The median sale for an existing home was about $429,000. At that price, a single percentage point increase in the mortgage rate can cost buyers hundreds of additional dollars a month and tens of thousands over the life of the loan.

Housing researchers had hoped 2026 would provide a break for buyers and sellers waiting for cheaper rates and those savings. For a brief moment, that seemed to happen as mortgage rates fell below 6% by the end of February.

But they quickly shot back up with the war with Iran, which has led to volatility in the bond markets. Continued fighting has also prolonged worries about inflation, further helping push up mortgage rates.
Copyright 2026 NPR

A new report from the ACLU and Amnesty International USA says universities like the University of California, Los Angeles violated free speech laws and imposed severe punishments on students, faculty and staff who expressed support for Palestinian rights. The universities’ responses “made it easier for the Trump administration to crack down on student activism, causing long-term damage to higher education.”

In 2024, a wave of activism overtook college campuses — including the USC and UCLA — as students erected tents and set up encampments to protest Israel’s war in Gaza and calling to cut ties with Israel.

The universities’ response and the Trump administration’s subsequent actions, according to the report, have “profoundly chilled student speech and advocacy, resulting in a steep decline in protests and a less visible protest movement on campuses across the country.”

What happened at UCLA?

Students set up an encampment in Dickson Court in spring 2024 to protest UCLA’s financial connections to arms manufacturers, as well as Israel’s military actions in Gaza. Five days later, around 100 masked counter-protesters attacked the encampment overnight. At the time, LAist reported how students were attacked with sticks, mace spray and fireworks.

The lack of police response to the attacks was heavily criticized; UCLA promised an independent investigation.

But soon after the attack, university officials called the encampment unlawful; law enforcement personnel from several departments tore it down overnight.

That police response drew widespread criticism and lawsuits. A UCLA Task Force reported, “We have documented multiple injuries from rubber bullets and police batons … We have seen the injuries to the face, head, legs, and chest. Some students were shot at close range. The police shot regular volleys of stun grenades, beat protesters with batons.”

A push against student activism

Soon after UCLA’s encampment was disbanded, the University of California enacted a new policy mandating disciplinary proceedings for anyone arrested. UCLA said this new policy would be implemented — retroactively — for those arrested in the encampment breakup. UCLA also banned encampments for four months.

The increased police presence on the Westwood campus following the disbanding of the encampment was “akin to a police state,” with students and faculty saying they were on high alert.

According to the report, UCLA’s response to the encampment was “particularly problematic” and “exemplified the heavy-handed and excessive responses by universities and colleges to campus protests, as well as the ongoing suppression and retaliation against pro-Palestine speech and expression on campus.” Other schools singled out for their responses include Columbia University, Tulane University, the University of Michigan and the University of Texas at Austin.

The report says UCLA's response also made it easier for the Trump administration to take further action as well, such as by:

• Withholding federal research grants from universities
• Coercing universities into "accepting broad-ranging agreements to restore federal funding in exchange for making institutional changes in programs, curricula, admissions, and hiring, curtailing the free speech rights of students and faculty."
• Targeting noncitizen students for arrest and deportation "in direct retaliation for their advocacy for Palestinian rights."

UCLA did not respond to LAist's request for comment.

How student activism changed

According to the report, the number of protests fell by 64% in the fall 2024 semester compared to the previous year, with protests declining through to the current academic year.

That was despite sympathy growing for Palestinians and support for Israel declining.

“The decline in protests was the direct result of crackdowns on protesters, university policies restricting protests, and the Trump administration’s attacks on universities,” according to the report.

You can read the full report here.

Riverside Sheriff Chad Bianco lost in California’s Supreme Court on Thursday morning. Then he lost again.

In back-to-back rulings, the justices ruled unanimously that Bianco broke the law when he seized more than 650,000 ballots from that county’s top election administrator earlier this year and that he broke it again when he ignored directives from the state’s attorney general to reverse course shortly after.

The court ruled that Bianco must end the investigation, pending a review by Attorney General Rob Bonta.

Bianco’s argument "overlooks that allowing law enforcement unfettered access to ballots, or the ability to handle and count them in secret based on unregulated protocols, itself creates a substantial risk to election integrity,” Guerrero wrote.

“There is no need to introduce this risk because the Elections Code already contains its own comprehensive procedures for recounting and examining ballots, including for law enforcement purposes, without exposing them to alteration or tampering — unlike the unlawful seizure that occurred here,” the ruling read.

The twin courtroom defeats for the conservative lawman who unsuccessfully ran for governor as a Republican earlier this year represents both a legal and moral victory for voting rights advocates who warned that Bianco’s ballot seizure could serve as a playbook for other right-wing law enforcement officers hoping to upset the outcome of the coming midterm elections.

Bianco went before the California Supreme Court in August to argue that a search warrant obtained by a politically friendly judge was sufficient justification to take the ballots. That’s despite a state law prohibiting the removal of ballots, contested or otherwise, from election officials.

In the second case, Bianco argued that Bonta overstepped his authority in directing him to hold off on executing the warrant.

The justices expressed varying degrees of skepticism about both arguments last month, describing them as “bizarre” and “more than counterintuitive.”

In their rulings on Thursday, the justices adopted a similarly withering tone.

“In short, Bianco’s arguments fail to persuade us that we should interpret (California election law) in a manner inconsistent with its plain text, which mandates that voted ballots remain in the custody of elections officials,” wrote Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero.

Bianco seized the ballots after the November 2025 special election, in which a majority of voters agreed to redraw the state’s political boundaries to favor Democrats. As CalMatters reported shortly after the raid, he did so at the urging of members of the “constitutional sheriff” movement and other local activists who pointed to apparent discrepancies in local election results.

Riverside’s registrar of voters, the county’s top election administrator, has said those claims were based on a misinterpretation of preliminary vote count data.

Secretary of State Shirley Weber argued in a friend-of-the-court brief that California law explicitly dictates that ballots must remain in the custody of an elections official.

“Sheriff Bianco violated (California election law’s) clear mandate when he removed voted ballots from the custody of the Riverside County Registrar of Voters,” Weber said in the brief. “For that reason alone, the court should issue an order compelling the return of those ballots and related materials to the proper custodian dictated by the elections code.

California Democratic leaders passed two new laws after Bianco’s office seized the ballots. Gov. Gavin Newsom signed them last week. One makes it a felony to seize — or order the seizure of — ballots, election records or voting machines before election results are certified. The other expands on existing state election laws and makes it illegal to take election materials or voting machines from elections officials.

With the ruling today, Bianco will be required to give the ballots back to the registrar. But the matter may not be settled yet. In August, Bianco said his office would continue its investigation into the 2025 election, no matter the court’s ruling.

The ruling also helped settle a rarely contested but politically important question at the heart of California’s constitutional order: Do local law enforcement leaders answer to the state attorney general?

The California constitution grants the attorney general “direct supervision” over sheriffs. Past attorneys general have rarely exercised such supervision and when they have it hasn’t been challenged. Bianco argued that “supervision” in this case amounts to more of an advisory role.

In the second of two rulings today, the court disagreed, firmly putting the debate to bed.

“[Bianco’s] arguments all boil down to the unsustainable view that the state’s chief law enforcement officer … must remain a mere bystander to an unprecedented sheriff’s investigation of undeniable statewide significance," the court ruled. "As we have explained, that is not the case.”

CalMatters reporter Lynn La contributed to this story.

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

The long-awaited LAX People Mover train is facing new delays due to issues with the final stage of testing and ongoing disputes with the city of Los Angeles. The contractor’s latest estimate has the train opening in January.

Those delays put LINXS, the lead contractor for the project, teetering on breaching an agreement with the construction funders of the train. That agreement laid out that LINXS had to get the train ready for passengers before Oct. 8.

To avoid breaching that agreement, LINXS successfully secured an agreement this week with lenders to extend that deadline by two months to Dec. 8.

The 2.25-mile-long elevated train designed to transport riders between airport terminals and local transit was initially scheduled to open in 2023. The project is so far $880 million over budget.

The deadline extension

A spokesperson for LINXS said they welcome the agreement with lenders.

“The project is approximately 99% complete, and our focus remains on completing the remaining testing and turnover activities required,” the spokesperson said.

Had the deadline remained unchanged and the train unfinished, LINXS would have been in a state of a technical default, according to Scott Lehman, a senior director at Fitch Ratings, a credit agency monitoring the project.

Under a technical default, Lehman said lenders could have started a process of switching the contractor on the train though that would have proved to be “practically very difficult.”

The same situation could arise if the contractor fails to ready the train for passengers in December or if the deadline is not extended through a settlement in ongoing litigation against the city.

LINXS and the city of L.A. have agreed to extend contract deadlines on five occasions in the past.

Status of testing

In the spring, LINXS began testing how the train will operate when it’s open to the public. Airport officials at the time heralded the start of the testing phase as a “visible milestone” and predicted it would take 60 days to complete. 

According to documents prepared by LINXS requesting the latest deadline extension, recent testing has been paused twice to fix components of the tracks that "accommodate movement resulting from temperature changes, seismic activity and normal structural behavior.”

As of last week, LINXS said those fixes are “ongoing.”

The extension gives the contractor enough time to complete testing by Dec. 8 “as long as they start it within the next several weeks,” Shannon McCue, a director for Fitch Ratings, said in an interview with LAist.

In response to questions about the current testing delays, Los Angeles World Airports said safety and reliability of the train are its top priorities.

“We will not compromise on these stringent safety protocols, as delivering a system that safely, dependably, and durably serves Los Angeles and our upcoming global events is our primary focus,” the statement said.