Sponsored message
Logged in as
Audience-funded nonprofit news
radio tower icon laist logo
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
Subscribe
  • Listen Now Playing Listen
  • Listen Now Playing Listen

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • Why LA officials want to tweak Measure ULA
    Morning sun hits a construction site of a new residential housing project.
    Workers construct new residential housing units on Dec. 19, 2022, in Los Angeles.

    Topline:

    Los Angeles leaders could soon make some changes to the city’s embattled “mansion tax.” But some housing advocates, who blame the tax for a slowdown in apartment development, say the new attempts at reform don’t go far enough.

    What’s new: The city’s housing department released a report last week recommending the City Council make four changes to voter-approved Measure ULA, a tax on real estate sales of $5.3 million or more. The changes, described by the housing department as “narrowly focused,” mainly deal with the financing and regulation of affordable housing projects funded by the tax.

    The context: Critics of the tax say the proposed reforms don’t address the tax’s broader impact on housing development in the city, but they could fix overly restrictive spending rules.

    Read on … to learn where Measure ULA supporters stand on the proposed reforms.

    Los Angeles leaders could soon make changes to the city’s embattled “mansion tax.” But some housing advocates, who blame the tax for a slowdown in apartment development, say the new attempts at reform don’t go far enough.

    The city’s Housing Department released a report last week recommending the City Council make four changes to voter-approved Measure ULA, a tax on real estate sales of $5.3 million or more.

    The changes, described by the Housing Department as “narrowly focused,” mainly deal with the financing and regulation of affordable housing projects funded by Measure ULA. The department recommended the City Council approve those changes by early fall so loans for new affordable housing projects can close later this year.

    Mott Smith, an adjunct professor of real estate at USC and a critic of the tax, said the reforms proposed in the report could fix overly restrictive spending rules. But he said they don’t address the tax’s broader impact on housing development across the city.

    “This is really a form of admission that ULA is not working as designed,” Smith said. “It's frankly about time that the city admits this because we're never going to fix it if they can't admit there's a problem.”

    The report’s conclusions were reviewed and endorsed by the citizen oversight committee tasked with monitoring Measure ULA’s outcomes. Joe Donlin, director of the United to House L.A. coalition, said supporters are in favor of the proposed changes.

    “ULA was written with flexibility to make these exact kinds of amendments,” Donlin said. “We always knew that there would need to be adjustments along the way, and we continue to support efforts to optimize Measure ULA in any way possible.”

    How the tax has worked so far

    Since taking effect, Measure ULA has raised more than $1 billion for tenant aid programs and affordable housing construction. Before voters approved the tax in 2022, proponents said it could produce 26,000 homes in its first decade. So far, the tax has funded the construction of about 800 homes, according to supporters.

    Tax proponents say thousands of new homes are entering the development pipeline. Last year, the city began taking applications for $387 million in funds for housing development and preservation. But according to the Housing Department report, affordable housing lenders have told the city that Measure ULA requirements can discourage them from funding projects.

    Based on those concerns, the report recommends changes that would:

    • Exempt projects built by affordable housing developers from paying the tax
    • Ensure terms for other sources of public funding don’t conflict with terms for Measure ULA funding 
    • Allow foreclosed projects to be sold to other developers
    • Let building owners increase rents if they lose rental subsidies

    Azeen Khanmalek, executive director of Abundant Housing L.A., said those changes would help unlock Measure ULA funding but wouldn’t do much to convince market-rate developers to return to L.A.

    “The biggest thing that we don't see in this report is around addressing the impact measure ULA is having on multi-family housing production across the income spectrum,” Khanmalek said.

    Several economic studies have concluded that because the so-called “mansion tax” applies to new apartment buildings — not just mansions — development has slowed in L.A. more than in nearby cities.

    Tax supporters dispute those findings, blaming high interest rates and other macroeconomic factors for slower building in L.A.

    ‘Mansion tax’ fight headed for the ballot

    The proposed changes come at a time when Measure ULA has come under fire, with multiple efforts to reform the tax — or invalidate it — likely to appear on the November ballot.

    The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association has turned in signatures for a ballot measure to overturn such taxes statewide.

    Meanwhile, the L.A. City Council has set up a committee to develop potential reforms for the November ballot that would alter but not eliminate the tax. The new report from the housing department has been referred to that committee, but it has not yet been scheduled for a vote.

    Miguel Santana, president of the California Community Foundation, said he and other business leaders, academics and affordable housing developers recently formed a new coalition — called Mend It, Don’t End It — to support proposals such as a 15-year tax exemption for new apartment buildings.

    “ULA has created circumstances where investors are deciding not to invest in Los Angeles and are investing in surrounding communities,” Santana said. “We know that at the crux of the affordable housing crisis is supply and to be able to respond to that issue.”

  • Feds seized 15 around SoFi this weekend
    A green soccer pitch sits empty as some people begin to fill the stadium seats.
    A view of L.A. Stadium before the FIFA World Cup match between USA and Paraguay begins.

    Topline:

    The FBI seized about 15 drones flying near SoFi Stadium and L.A. Memorial Coliseum on Friday and Saturday for violating temporary flight restrictions.

    Why it matters: "No Drone Zones" have been put in place by the Federal Aviation Administration on match days at World Cup stadiums and venues hosting official fan festivals.

    The restrictions: Drones are prohibited at SoFi within a three-nautical-mile radius and up to 3,000 feet above ground level. They are also banned at the Coliseum for the official fan festival within a one-nautical-mile radius and up to 1,000 feet above ground level.

    The FBI seized about 15 drones near SoFi Stadium and L.A. Memorial Coliseum on Friday and Saturday for violating temporary flight restrictions, Amir Ehsaei, special agent in charge of counterterrorism and crisis response at the FBI's Los Angeles Field Office, told LAist. Multiple operators were cited.

    Stadiums hosting World Cup games and official fan festival venues are designated as "No Drone Zones" by the Federal Aviation Administration on match days.

    “We have a zero-tolerance policy when it comes to drones violating the temporary flight restrictions," Ehsaei said.

    He said drone detection teams are deployed at all SoFi games. "We will be out at other places depending on the nature — the size, the scope — [and] different intelligence that we'll get based on  threat assessments."

    Drones are prohibited at SoFi within a three-nautical-mile radius and up to 3,000 feet above ground level. They are also banned at the Coliseum for the official fan festival within a one-nautical-mile radius and up to 1,000 feet above ground level.

    Violators could face fines of up to $100,000 and federal criminal charges.

  • Sponsored message
  • Residents debate local impact
    a woman in a sweatshirt and jeans walks along a platform next to a train that says "E EAST LA"
    A woman exits the train at the Metro E Line Indiana station in East L.A. on April 15, 2025.

    Topline:

    Residents in East LA are weighing the promise of a new Metro E Line extension with concerns over construction disruptions, small-business impacts and whether more outreach is needed about the project.

    What is the project: The 4.7-mile extension of the Metro E Line would connect East Los Angeles to Montebello with four new stations. The project would relocate the existing Atlantic and Pomona station underground, and include a mix of underground, aerial and street-level track transit.

    Read on ... for more about the pros and cons locals see for the extension.

    Residents in East LA are weighing the promise of a new Metro E Line extension with concerns over construction disruptions, small-business impacts and whether more outreach is needed about the project.

    The 4.7-mile extension of the Metro E Line would connect East Los Angeles to Montebello with four new stations. The project would relocate the existing Atlantic and Pomona station underground and include a mix of underground, aerial and street-level track transit.

    The $7.9 billion project is expected to open for service between 2035 and 2037, according to Metro.

    Construction will begin in 2029 and last approximately eight to 10 years, pending full funding approval. It’s part of a wider plan to connect the E Line to the city of Whittier, though officials say the work will be built in two phases due to funding constraints.

    While officials say the project is intended to reduce traffic congestion and ease pressure on local roads, residents at a recent community meeting focused more on the immediate impact and communication.

    Concerns over construction and local impact

    “Thirty days for comment on a complex issue like this is ridiculous. … We need better outreach,” said East LA resident Clara Solis about a 30-day public comment period ending June 26.

    Solis and others also raised concerns about how construction could affect traffic and disrupt local commerce, pointing to past transit projects.

    “How is this going to impact the businesses? When the Gold Line went through, a lot of our businesses really suffered economically. We want to see a presentation on that. You should have a presentation just on how it’s going to impact the businesses,” Solis added.

    a series of interconnected dots and lines with city names and station names
    A map shows the Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 project will extend the E Line nearly nine miles east from East Los Angeles to the City of Whittier. ()
    (
    Courtesy Metro
    )

    Calls for broader outreach

    East LA resident Kristie Hernandez said community outreach for the project should also extend to people who do not necessarily live within the immediate 200-foot project radius.

    “We need to understand that folks who don’t necessarily live within that close proximity also frequent that area when they drive,” said Hernandez.

    Hernandez advocated for a 90-day public comment window and also called for presentations on underground infrastructure, especially in the wake of the East LA pipeline that was punctured during construction work in late May.

    “We do not want that to happen again,” she said.

    A promise for greater mobility

    Lucia Martinez spoke favorably about the extension plans, considering that she relies on buses to get around East LA to do her shopping. She said she looks forward to using the Metro to travel to the Citadel as well as to the hospital in Pasadena.

    “As an older woman who became aware of this project, I think it is amazing because I am someone who does not drive,” she said.

    LA Documenter Rafael Cazzorla contributed reporting for this story. LA Documenters trains and pays LA residents to take notes at local government meetings around Los Angeles. You can find meeting notes and audio at losangeles.documenters.org

  • Scientist celebrate FDA approval
    one hand with two bracelets around the wrist reaches up to apply sunscreen to another hand against a blue sky background
    A sunscreen ingredient used in Europe and Asia that blocks UVA and UVB rays has been approved for use in the U.S.

    Topline:

    For the first time in nearly three decades, the Food and Drug Administration approved a new chemical UV filter for use in sunscreens sold in the U.S. And that has many dermatologists cheering.

    Why it matters: The new ingredient is called bemotrizinol, and it has several advantages over the chemical sunscreen ingredients previously available in the U.S., says Dr. Heather Rogers, a dermatologist in Seattle and a fellow of the American Academy of Dermatology.

    The backstory: In the U.S., sunscreens are regulated as over-the-counter drugs rather than cosmetics, as they're classified in Europe. That means ingredients need to undergo rigorous testing for safety and efficacy before they can be approved for use in the U.S.

    Read on ... for four key things to know about this coming change.

    For the first time in nearly three decades, the Food and Drug Administration approved a new chemical UV filter for use in sunscreens sold in the U.S. And that has many dermatologists cheering.

    "This is a very big deal," says Dr. Heather Rogers, a dermatologist in Seattle and a fellow of the American Academy of Dermatology.

    The new ingredient is called bemotrizinol, and it has several advantages over the chemical sunscreen ingredients previously available in the U.S., Rogers says.

    "It hits like really every box for us that we have been waiting for as dermatologists and consumers," Rogers says.

    Here's what you need to know about this new ingredient and how it could lead to better sunscreens sold stateside.

    1. It blocks both UVA and UVB rays

    Rogers says in general, you want to use sunscreens that are broad spectrum, meaning they protect against both UVA rays — the longer wavelengths that cause premature aging and wrinkles — and UVB rays, which lead to sunburns. Both types of UV rays can cause skin cancer.

    She says the sunscreens currently sold in the U.S. do an excellent job of protecting against UVB rays, but the chemical UV filters available in sunscreens in the U.S. until now aren't as good at blocking out UVA rays.

    In general, chemical sunscreens sold in the U.S. rely on an ingredient called avobenzone to block out UVA rays, says Kelly Dobos, a cosmetic chemist who teaches at the University of Cincinnati.

    But avobenzone by itself isn't photo stable, meaning its protection can start to break down rapidly when exposed to sunlight. And as avobenzone breaks down, it can release molecules that lead to skin irritation, says Alexa Friedman, a senior scientist with the nonprofit Environmental Working Group, or EWG.

    By contrast, bemotrizinol offers protection against both UVA and UVB rays all on its own, and it is photo stable, so it breaks down more slowly, offering better protection, Rogers says.

    "So if you go a little longer than two hours to reapply your sunscreen, there will be more protection left," Rogers says. However, she says you should still reapply sunscreen every two hours.

    2. It's long been used in other countries 

    Bemotrizinol has been widely used in European and Asian sunscreens for decades. But it has taken 20 years for the FDA to approve its use in this country.

    That's because in the U.S., sunscreens are regulated as over-the-counter drugs rather than cosmetics, as they're classified in Europe. That means ingredients need to undergo rigorous testing for safety and efficacy before they can be approved for use in the U.S.

    "It's really expensive and time consuming," Dobos says. The European company DSM-Firmenich spent at least $18 million over more than two decades in its push to gain FDA approval for bemotrizinol.

    3. It has a well-documented safety profile

    However, all that testing means bemotrizinol has more safety data to back it up than any other chemical sunscreen ingredient currently approved in the U.S., says Friedman of EWG.

    "This ingredient is exciting because we have that data to support its safety," Friedman says.

    Friedman says animal testing showed bemotrizinol doesn't lead to concerns like reproductive harm, while clinical testing on humans found that it does not irritate the skin, even after repeated application over time, "which is hopefully how people are using sunscreens."

    And because bemotrizinol's molecules are larger, it's not readily absorbed by the skin and into the bloodstream, she says.

    That's important, because studies have shown that some of the other chemical sunscreen UV filters sold in the U.S. can be absorbed in the bloodstream, prompting calls for more safety data and leading to a backlash against sunscreen on social media fueled by misinformation. Rogers says that trend is concerning because skin cancer is the most common form of cancer.

    "We just need to have sunscreen that people will use, that they'll trust," Rogers says. "And this ingredient is going to allow that to happen. And that is very exciting."

    And bemotrizinol is also considered to be non-irritating, Friedman says. That should be welcome news to people who've been put off by chemical sunscreens in the past.

    4. It could lead to sunscreens that look better on you

    Until now, Rogers says, the only sunscreen ingredient available in the U.S. that offered the aforementioned advantages of bemotrizinol — photo stable, non-irritating, minimally absorbed into the skin and with good broad spectrum protection against both UVA and UVB rays — was zinc oxide.

    Both zinc oxide and titanium dioxide are mineral UV filters. Both chemical sunscreens and mineral sunscreens work by absorbing UV rays from the sun. Mineral sunscreens also reflect some UV rays. The bigger difference is that mineral sunscreens sit on the surface of the skin, while chemical sunscreens get absorbed into the skin, Rogers says.

    The downside of mineral sunscreens is that they can leave an unattractive white cast on the skin — think of lifeguards with white paste on their noses. "Particularly if you're a person of color, zinc is going to make you look pale, white or ashy, which really makes it hard to use on a regular basis," Rogers says.

    Bemotrizinol, on the other hand, is transparent on the skin, and because it protects against both UVA and UVB rays on its own, it doesn't have to be mixed with as many other chemical filters and stabilizers to achieve broad spectrum protection, Dobos adds. She says that should lead to more aesthetically pleasing, less greasy sunscreen formulations in the near future.

    "I think it's a real win for public health," Dobos says. "If we can make a sunscreen that consumers like to use and want to use and apply in the proper amounts, I think that's something that's really going to be a win for consumers."

    DSM-Firmenich has exclusive rights to market bemotrizinol in the U.S. for 18 months. It will be sold under the brand name Parsol Shield. The company says the first sunscreen products containing the ingredient should start hitting American store shelves around September.

  • DOJ approves Warner acquisition, CA pushes back

    Topline:

    The Justice Department yesterday approved Paramount's proposed $111 billion takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery.

    How we got here: The decision came after the DOJ concluded its antitrust investigation into the pending merger. The department said in a statement that it found that the deal posed no threat to competition or consumers of film, broadcast television or streaming.

    What's next: The decision clears the way for a merger of two rival Hollywood studio titans: Paramount, the owner of CBS, including CBS News, will swallow the much larger Warner, which includes HBO and CNN. But several states, including California, have raised antitrust concerns. The European Union is investigating as well.

    The Justice Department on Friday approved Paramount's proposed $111 billion takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery.

    After concluding its antitrust investigation into the pending merger, the department said in a statement that it found that the deal posed no threat to competition or consumers of film, broadcast television or streaming.

    The decision clears the way for a merger of two rival Hollywood studio titans: Paramount, the owner of CBS, including CBS News, will swallow the much larger Warner, which includes HBO and CNN.

    The DOJ''s Antitrust Division concluded that a union of two studio giants isn't anti-competitive because the streaming market has expanded the competition for conventional Hollywood studios, which includes Netflix, Apple and Amazon, as well as smaller streamers. The Justice Department's view is that, for the same reason, consumers won't lose out because there are plenty of other places to get entertainment.

    Several states, including California, have raised antitrust concerns. The European Union is investigating as well.

    California Attorney General Rob Bonta, who has been investigating the deal for antitrust violations, said in a post on social media following the Justice Department's approval: "The merger of Warner Bros and Paramount is not a done deal and remains under investigation by my office."

    In a statement following the decision, Paramount described the deal as "pro-competitive," and would result in "a stronger company better positioned to compete against dominant technology platforms in an industry increasingly defined by intense competition for audiences, talent, technology, and investment."

    The company said it planned to complete the merger as soon as possible, "delivering its benefits to consumers, creators, and the entertainment industry as a whole."

    The consolidation will put media mogul David Ellison — son of Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison — at the helm of Warner Bros. studio as well as its cable and streaming properties, including CNN and HBO. The Ellison family took over Paramount and CBS last summer.

    In the months leading up to the regulatory approval, critics in Hollywood feared the deal would consolidate an already concentrated media landscape and lead to fewer jobs and less creative content.

    In April, thousands of directors, actors, writers and other industry talent — including Kristen Stewart, Pedro Pascal and Javier Bardem — signed an open letter opposing the merger.

    The elder Ellison is also a financial backer and adviser to President Trump on artificial intelligence. Critics of recent changes at CBS under the Ellisons' control are concerned that, as they say has happened with CBS News, the acquisition would make CNN more friendly to Trump.

    NPR's Carrie Johnson and Mandalit del Barco contributed to this story.
    Copyright 2026 NPR