The Brief

Even in L.A.’s famously overheated real estate market, the profit — and quick turnaround — on a senior housing complex in the Cheviot Hills neighborhood seemed extraordinary.

The man at the center of the deal, since identified by federal prosecutors as Brentwood landlord and developer Steven Taylor, bought the property on Shelby Drive in 2023 for $11.2 million, purchase records show.

He wasn’t planning to hold on to the complex for long. At the time of his purchase, a company owned by Taylor already was in escrow to sell the complex to Weingart Center, a major homeless housing provider, for more than double what he paid, according to a purchase agreement obtained through a public records request.

The $27.3 million to pay for that acquisition came from taxpayer grant funds authorized by city and state officials, according to grant documentation. L.A. Mayor Karen Bass and Gov. Gavin Newsom touted the purchase as a key tool in the fight against homelessness.

The deal called for Taylor’s involvement to be kept secret, according to a confidentiality clause included in the purchase contract obtained through a public records request.

That changed last month, when federal authorities announced criminal charges against Taylor. He’s accused of submitting fraudulent documents to borrow money from private lenders when he bought this and other properties.

At a news conference, the region’s top federal prosecutor, Bill Essayli, said the investigation is ongoing.

Taylor was arrested in August, when the case was under seal, and pleaded not guilty, court records show. It’s the first of the two known criminal cases brought so far by the federal task force Essayli assembled in April to investigate fraud and corruption around the use of billions of dollars earmarked to combat homelessness in Southern California.

Essayli announced the task force after a court-ordered review and a federal audit found city and state officials have failed to properly track homeless funds and protect against fraud.

Taylor and his attorney, Michael Freedman, have not responded to LAist’s phone messages for comment.

LAist’s review of the Cheviot Hills property deal found the purchase stands out not just for its high price tag but for the complexity and secrecy surrounding it.

The records reviewed by LAist show:

• A purchase agreement shows Taylor was in escrow to buy the property when city and state officials agreed to use taxpayer funds to buy it from him for $27 million.
• Weingart Center’s application for state funding included an appraisal report containing inaccurate information about who owned the property and did not mention the pending sale.
• L.A. Mayor Karen Bass’ office had a “big role” in the city’s process that recommended this property and two others for the government grants, according to an email from a top executive at the city housing department. 
• A Weingart Center leader said the property, now known as Weingart Shelby, isn’t expected to open until next year, despite the grant originally requiring it to be fully occupied by February 2025.

Bass’ office did not answer questions regarding the purchase. In a statement to LAist, the mayor’s office said the Shelby site “remains an important property providing interim housing in an area of the city that has extremely limited interim housing supply” and that the city is cooperating with the ongoing federal investigation.

Weingart Center’s longtime president and CEO, Kevin Murray, whose signature is on the purchase deal, has not responded to LAist’s requests for comment. He previously told the L.A. Times he had “no prior relationship with the seller and no continuing relationship” and that taxpayers paid fair market price.

Murray and Weingart Center’s chief of real estate development, Ben Rosen, have been placed on leave, according to news reports last month. Rosen also has not responded to LAist’s requests for comment.

The nonprofit’s board has elevated Chief Operating Officer Tonja Boykin to lead Weingart Center and has commissioned an outside investigation, a spokesperson for the nonprofit told LAist.

“In light of recent reporting raising questions concerning the valuation of certain homeless housing projects, we have retained an outside law firm to conduct an internal review of related subjects,” said the statement from spokesperson Stefan Friedman.

This summer, city leaders in Torrance publicly raised concerns that the group was massively overpaying for a hotel property under another round of state homelessness grants.

An LAist review also found Weingart Center has received more than $100 million from taxpayers despite failing to comply with audit requirements since 2022. The latest available audit, of the fiscal year ending April 2023, concluded the organization had multiple failures in tracking taxpayer money it was handling.

(Click here to read another LAist article, also published today, about financial concerns around other Weingart Center activities.)

Weingart Center’s spokesperson said the group remains committed to addressing homelessness, including serving almost 2,000 people daily through interim and permanent supportive housing sites across L.A.

Bass’ office had a ‘big role’ in selection process, per city email

In spring 2023, the city of L.A. was on a third round of state Homekey grants — a program launched by California in 2020 as a way to quickly expand the homeless housing supply, initially by buying motels and hotels and renovating them.

Weingart Center was one of about two dozen groups that submitted 31 proposals to the city in March 2023, according to city records.

Under Homekey, cities and counties can partner with nonprofit or for-profit developers to apply for the grants. If chosen, the non-government partner buys the property with the grant money, and the partnering city or county chips in a sizable amount of money too.

Weingart Center initially proposed an existing hotel property in Harbor Gateway, along the 110 Freeway, in their grant application.

Then, in a May email to city officials, Bass' director of affordable housing production said they’d “identified a new potential site for Weingart,” listing the Shelby Drive address. Weingart changed the proposal to the Shelby site in West L.A. in May 2023, records show.

“The mayor's office did play a big role in the selection process,” states an email from Eric Claros, director of housing at the city’s housing department, which LAist obtained as part of an open records request.

Claros and a spokesperson for the housing department declined to speak to LAist about the selection process.

In late May 2023, Bass’ office informed the office of Katy Yaroslavsky — the city councilmember who represents Cheviot Hills — “that they planned to include the Shelby property in the city's application for Project Homekey 3.0 funding,” according to Yaroslavsky’s office.

A few days later, on June 9, 2023, the city’s housing department officially recommended that the City Council approve the Shelby property as one of three projects to receive city funding and to jointly apply for Homekey grants.

Taylor signs deal to buy the property

On June 16, 2023, less than a week after city staff publicly recommended the Shelby project for state funding, Taylor went into escrow to buy the property from Bridge, according to a copy of that purchase agreement the city disclosed to LAist. The price negotiated at that point is redacted in the copy the city disclosed.

Taylor signed the deal to buy the property on behalf of an LLC he later said he was the sole owner of, according to an email disclosed by the city.

Twelve days later, the City Council took the housing department’s recommendation and officially approved the Shelby property as one of three sites the city would partner on to unlock state grant funds. In doing so, the city agreed to pay $20 million toward the purchase to unlock the other $7 million from the state to purchase the property.

The project called for another $15 million in state funds to be set aside for renovating and preparing the property after the acquisition, plus another $15 million in city and state funds to cover at least four years of operations.

The state says the money it gave for the purchase and renovation came from federal dollars given to states during the COVID-19 pandemic.

(Click here to see a breakdown of taxpayer funds the city and state committed to the project.)

The taxpayer-funded deal to buy from Taylor

Murray signed the agreement for the Weingart Center to buy the property from Taylor for $27.3 million in taxpayer funds July 26, 2023, according to a copy of the purchase agreement the city released in response to a public records request. At that time, neither Taylor nor his affiliated companies owned the Shelby site.

The agreement states Murray, on behalf of Weingart Center, acknowledged the seller — Taylor — didn’t own the property but was in escrow to buy it.

As part of the purchase agreement, Murray — one of the two Weingart Center executives now on leave — agreed that Weingart Center — the taxpayer-funded buyer — never would identify Taylor to the public or news media as the seller, nor would it reveal the deal’s terms, outside of narrow exceptions.

The deal also said it was expected that an “affiliate” of Taylor would buy the property from its owner and complete the sale.

Appraisal problems

Ahead of the sale, the Homekey grant application required a property appraisal, which Murray commissioned and received in July 2023. LAist obtained a copy of the appraisal from the city through a public records request.

The Shelby appraisal report doesn’t mention that the property was under contract at the time to be sold. The state’s requirements for Homekey appraisals say the reports should include information about any pending sales of the property being appraised.

Instead, the appraisal states Weingart Center was buying the property directly from its then-owner for $27.3 million. The report incorrectly identifies the owner as an LLC owned by Taylor. As a title report attached to the appraisal shows, the property still was owned at the time by the subsidiary of Bridge.

The appraisal report gave several estimates for the property’s value, depending on the method.

When looking at nearby sales of apartment complexes and adjusting for differences, the appraisal estimated the Shelby property’s value would be $19.4 million — about $8 million less than what taxpayers were paying and $7 million more than Taylor was paying.

Other methods in the appraisal generated higher value estimates, including two estimates right around $27.3 million — the amount the report says Weingart Center already had agreed to pay for the property. Those methods looked at similar sales of assisted living facilities and the estimated income the property would garner as an assisted living facility.

The company that conducted the appraisal, BBG, defended its process to LAist.

“The appraiser handled the appraisal assignment correctly with the information they were given,” said Peter Christensen, BBG’s general counsel and chief compliance officer.

Weingart Center sent a copy of the appraisal to the state housing department July 27, 2023, as part of its application with the city for Homekey funds.

State approves grant

With the appraisal and other application materials in hand, state officials awarded over $22 million in Homekey money toward the purchase and renovation of the Shelby property in November 2023.

Records show a business that had Taylor as its point of contact completed the purchase of the Shelby property for $11.2 million Dec. 26, 2023. It was six months after Taylor entered escrow to buy it and about a month after state officials committed to fund Weingart Center’s purchase for double that amount.

The taxpayer money changed hands in April 2024, when Weingart closed on buying it from the company linked to Taylor. No improvements to the property were documented in city permit records during that time.

The Homekey grants are overseen by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), led since 2020 by Gov. Gavin Newsom appointee Gustavo Velasquez.

The department declined to answer questions about their approval of the Shelby grant, following the federal announcement. A spokesperson cited the ongoing investigation, saying the department is cooperating with the U.S. Attorney’s office, which “has made it clear the department is a mere witness in this matter.”

Delays in opening

In addition to the $27 million in public funds to buy the property, Weingart Center was approved to spend another $15 million in state funds for renovations and other costs to prepare it to become housing for people in need of shelter.

The state grant originally required Weingart Center to finish all construction and rehabilitation work by Nov. 21, 2024, and have the housing units fully occupied by Feb. 21.

Those deadlines have moved significantly, as work on the facility continues and runs into problems like asbestos and mold, according to city permit records and state records.

What’s next

Weingart Center says upgrades aren’t expected to be completed until late February 2026, more than a year later than the original schedule. The state has granted multiple extensions, with the deadline for full occupancy now set at April 21, 2026.

LAist reporters Ted Rohrlich, Jordan Rynning and Elly Yu contributed to this story.

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.

When trailers began to drop around the film “Forgotten Island” earlier this spring, I knew it was already going to be something different. While this isn’t a new story about the power of friendship, it is one of the rare times it tells this story of leaving through an unapologetically Filipino diasporic lens in a mainstream production.

The DreamWorks Animation film from directors Joel Crawford and Januel Mercado centers around two best friends, Jo (voiced by H.E.R.) and Raissa (voiced by Liza Soberano) as they come to a pivotal point in their lives. Raissa is getting ready to leave the Philippines to attend CalTech in Pasadena. Beyond H.E.R and Soberano, the film doesn’t have any shortage in star power in voice talents including Dave Franco, Manny Jacinto, Dolly de Leon, Jo Koy, Ronny Chieng and Lea Salonga. 

Jo (H.E.R.) and Raissa (Liza Soberano) in DreamWorks Animation’s Forgotten Island, directed by Joel Crawford and Januel Mercado.

(

Courtesy of DreamWorks Animation

)

The story is packed with Filipino mythological creatures that Jo and Raissa encounter when they are transported to the magical island of Nakali during their last night together before Raissa departs for America. I was familiar with many of these beings through stories told by my grandmother such as the duwende, tiny spirits that inhabit many of the areas we walk, to others I had never heard of like the kapre, giant tree-like creatures. The great thing is that you don’t have to be Filipino to connect with this film. Its heart is the friendships and memories that keep people close and connected – which encapsulates much of the Filipino diaspora experience.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2020-2024 American Community Survey, about 4.6 million respondents identified their ethnicity as Filipino. The Greater Los Angeles metropolitan area is home to more than half a million people of Filipino descent including 154,000 in Los Angeles city and about 27,000 in Long Beach. 

While the film is set in the Philippines during the 1990s, it intentionally speaks to the Filipino diaspora experience, including the sacrifices that often accompany leaving your motherland for another place – something that immigrants and children of immigrants can relate to all in the backdrop of Filipino folklore and mythology.

(from left) Raissa (Liza Soberano) and Jo (H.E.R.) in DreamWorks Animation’s Forgotten Island, directed by Joel Crawford and Januel Mercado.

(

Courtesy of DreamWorks Animation

)

In the trailer, Raissa says “These are our memories,” to which Jo responds, “And we are going home.” The film connects remembering with belonging and brings up the question of what “home” really means. That is why many Los Angeles area Filipino community organizations and Filipino American student associations at universities are rallying people to the theater this weekend when the film opens nationwide on Friday. 

For any film, especially one that features an underrepresented community in general, the first box office weekend is crucial to show a strong attendance and audience interest. 

Los Angeles based non-profit Cinema Sala is teaming up with Filipinx in Entertainment (FXE) to conduct Operation “StormTheBoxOffice” for the film because “it is about proving that there is an audience for the Philippine diaspora. And that’s one of our biggest missions,” said Mallorie Ortega, co-founder and vice president of Cinema Sala. “It is proving that there is an audience hungry for our stories and that the industry should continue to say yes to us. So that’s why it was so important to organize our community and to sell out theaters.”

Manang (Lea Salonga) in DreamWorks Animation’s Forgotten Island, directed by Joel Crawford and Januel Mercado.

(

Courtesy of DreamWorks Animation

)

SoCal Filipinos, a non-profit network of Filipinos in Southern California, is also organizing screening events. 

“As SoCal Filipinos, we want to support events, artists and films. We decided to do a buyout of a theater. The response was amazing. We sold out of our auditorium in 30 minutes,” said founder Jason Lustina. The group bought out a theater at the AMC at the Grove. 

“We need to show Hollywood, film makers, directors and producers that Filipino stories matter and that our stories are relatable not to just Filipinos but to everyone,” he said. 

“If you’re Filipino whether in the Philippines or part of the diaspora you’ll for sure relate to it. From the characters to the scenes including the Filipino party it was like seeing a piece of our upbringing on the big screen,” Lustina said. 

Leaving doesn’t mean forgetting

Jennifer Adriatico-Westad knew she wanted to see it as soon as she learned that the story was set in the Philippines and incorporated Filipino culture and folklore. This past weekend, she caught an early screening at AMC Universal CityWalk.

“I thought it portrayed Filipino culture in a way that felt recognizable without making the culture itself feel like something that needed to be explained every few minutes. Filipino culture was simply part of the characters’ lives, which I appreciated,” she said. “For me, that also speaks about the diaspora experience. When families leave the Philippines, they don’t leave everything behind. They carry traditions, food, religion, humor, superstitions, folklore, family expectations, and even small mannerisms with them. Those things are then passed from one generation to the next. I think that experience translates across many cultures.” 

“People who leave their home countries in search of new opportunities often carry pieces of home with them. In this story, Filipino culture happens to be at the center…and it’s about time!” she said.

For Ortega, “Forgotten Island” dives even deeper than just representation. 

“Imagine there’s a part of your life that no one could ever understand…It’s not as simple as saying, ‘I feel seen when I watch this movie.’ It’s literally like my body is telling me, I belong,” Ortega said. “What is so important and impactful about this film for our community and for anyone who feels it –  there’s something about me that no one else could ever understand. This is what it is fulfilling for us. This is meant for us to feel like we belong.” 

The people and memories we carry

My family immigrated to the U.S. from the Philippines in the late 1950s and early 60s – first stopping in Compton, then Inglewood and eventually settling in Carson. Unlike most families, my family could not make regular annual trips back to The Philippines once they immigrated because money was tight while settling into a new life in an entirely new country. So they stayed connected with extended family by sending balikbayan boxes (filled with dry goods, gifts) usually around the holidays. However there’s a certain grief being separated by an ocean and once close relationships inevitably change. But what has kept the connections alive is remembering the family and community that continues to shape how we survive even if they are far away. That was confirmed to me when I went to the Philippines for the first time in 2008. 

Leezel Tanglao’s uncle, Oscar Guzman (far left), in front of the house he rented in Inglewood in the late 1950s and early 1960s.

(

Leezel Tanglao

/

The LA Local

)

As a Filipino American born in Long Beach and raised in Lancaster and Carson, I had only heard stories about my mom and my aunts and uncles growing up in this far away land. What little I knew about the Philippines came from them and the old Tagalog movies they would rent from the local Filipino grocery store. So when I went to the Philippines for the first time nearly 20 years ago, I finally understood the heavy feeling and unspoken uncertainty of not knowing when we would see each other again in person. That is what “Forgotten Island” packs and unpacks so seamlessly and reminds us. Remembering isn’t limited to holidays or when someone passes away. Memories are always alive when we care and take the time to remember.

The next time I would return to the Philippines would be more than a decade later in 2019, and this time, I was much older and wiser to not take time for granted. Some of the family members I saw back in 2008 were no longer there but their memories were as strong as if they were still alive today when we sat down to share stories. I would return two more times in 2022 and 2023 and during one of these last trips, one of my uncles had died while I was away. One of the last things my uncle Oscar had told my mom was that he couldn’t wait to hear what I ate during my time in the motherland and he was excited to just imagine all the flavors and smells of home when I returned – that’s what memories have the power to do – to unlock and transport you to another time. 

Leezel Tanglao and her uncle Oscar Guzman in Carson, California.

(

Leezel Tanglao

/

The LA Local

)

So when the film, “Forgotten Island” opens in theaters nationwide on Friday, it’s not just a celebration of Filipino culture or representation. It’s a reminder that not even distance can separate the bonds of community when memories are handled with care and also invites you to, “tayo na” (let’s go) and make more memories together.

The post Leaving home doesn’t mean letting go appeared first on LA Local.