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

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • James is moving to the Philadelphia 76ers
    A basketball player wears the purple and gold uniform of the Los Angeles Lakers. He is pictured running on an indoor court.
    Topline:
    LeBron James is heading to the Philadelphia 76ers. The NBA’s all-time leading scorer made the announcement on social media Friday, saying it will be his “last decision” and that it comes after he strongly considered retirement.


    Historic Lakers run: After playing eight seasons and winning one NBA title with the L.A. Lakers, James announced he was leaving the team earlier this month. During this time he surpassed Kareem Abdul-Jabbar as the league's all-time leading scorer. He also became the first NBA player to play on a team with his son, Bronny.

    The contract: The 41-year-old James is set to sign a modest $8-million, two-year contract with the Sixers, according to ESPN. He made nearly $53 million last season.

    ILADELPHIA (AP) — LeBron James is heading to the Philadelphia 76ers.

    The NBA’s all-time leading scorer made the announcement on social media Friday, saying it will be his “last decision” and that it comes after he strongly considered retirement.

    “I believe I can help make the Philadelphia 76ers a championship team and I am so excited to energize a new fan base and start this incredible journey one last time,” James said.

    A four-time NBA champion, James wrote he was “done” when his 23rd NBA season ended and that it was his last with the Los Angeles Lakers.

    “I was pretty sure I played my last game. I was honest at that last press conference when I said I needed to look at myself and deicide if I still love this game,” James wrote. “I still truly love this game, and I have more to give.”

    The 41-year-old James is set to sign a modest $8-million, two-year contract with the Sixers, according to ESPN. He made nearly $53 million last season.

    “I’m not going for money. I’m not going for family,” James wrote. “What am I really playing for at this point? I still want to sacrifice. I still want to work. I still want to grind. I still want to compete, to win and to have a chance at the feeling of winning.”

    Much as James did for Cleveland when he ended a 56-year championship drought for the city by leading the Cavaliers to the title in 2016, he can snap a lengthy title drought for the Sixers.

  • CA sues Trump over emergency preparedness grants
    A room filled with people inspecting ballots while sitting at tables.
    Election workers process vote-by-mail ballots at the Orange County Registrar of Voters in Santa Ana on June 2, 2026.

    Topline:

    The Trump administration wants to link emergency preparedness grants for states to its preferences on immigration enforcement and the administration of elections.

    More details: California is taking the Trump administration to court a third time over its attempts to tie crucial emergency preparedness funding to the president’s preferences on immigration enforcement and election administration. In a coalition with 24 Democratic-led states, Attorney General Rob Bonta announced the lawsuit over new conditions on U.S. Department of Homeland Security grants.

    Why now: In the lead up to the November midterms, the Trump administration has pushed for stricter election rules, such as voter ID, to fight claims of widespread voter fraud. But Democratic lawmakers and officials have characterized these moves as Trump and the Republican party’s efforts to suppress voter turnout.

    Read on... for more on the lawsuit.

    California is taking the Trump administration to court a third time over its attempts to tie crucial emergency preparedness funding to the president’s preferences on immigration enforcement and election administration.

    In a coalition with 24 Democratic-led states, Attorney General Rob Bonta announced the lawsuit over new conditions on U.S. Department of Homeland Security grants.

    Most of these new rules relate to elections, including mandating states to employ a federal system to verify the citizenship of all their voters; using hand-marked paper voting ballots; and carrying out post-election audits, according to the lawsuit in Rhode Island’s federal court.

    The conditions also require states to assist with federal immigration enforcement and enable federal agencies to terminate states’ funds at their discretion.

    For decades the Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Emergency Management Agency have provided billions of dollars to states to prepare and respond to major disasters, including wildfires and earthquakes. One of these grants is the Homeland Security Grant Program, which Congress created in response to the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. California alone receives $150 million each year from this program to fight terrorism, such as preventing cyberattacks.

    But under the Trump administration, Bonta said the agencies are using public safety as “a bargaining chip,” and unlawfully withholding funds that Congress already appropriated.

    The lawsuit alleges that if states do not comply with the new election rules, for example, they will lose at least 20%, if not all, of their Homeland Security Grant Program funds.

    In the lead up to the November midterms, the Trump administration has pushed for stricter election rules, such as voter ID, to fight claims of widespread voter fraud. But Democratic lawmakers and officials have characterized these moves as Trump and the Republican party’s efforts to suppress voter turnout.

    “Instead of ensuring these critical resources reach the communities that need them, Trump is attempting to use this funding as leverage to force states to adopt his preferred political agenda,” Bonta said at a press conference Thursday.

    In an emailed statement FEMA said the lawsuit is “partisan pushback” from Democratic politicians who “oppose common-sense measures designed to protect election security and safeguard the integrity of American democracy.”

    “Election security is national security, and protecting our critical infrastructure remains a top priority for the Trump Administration. Concerns over voting processes, data security, and registration practices have made it clear that action is required. … These new requirements will preserve election integrity.”

    The Trump administration tried to deny states these same grants twice last year as it pressured states to participate in federal immigration enforcement. Both times California and other states sued and a federal court sided with them.

    In her ruling rejecting the administration’s second attempt, U.S. District Court for Rhode Island Judge Mary McElroy, a Trump appointee, said holding funds hostage “based solely on what appear to be Defendants’ political whims is unconscionable and, at least here, unlawful.”

    This lawsuit is California’s 79th against the second Trump administration.

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

  • Sponsored message
  • Billboard ads, stadium taxes head to ballot
    A large digital billboard of a man wearing a blue and gold suit with a jet in the background and smaller text that reads "Axe my tax."
    A campaign ad targeting Inglewood's stadium owners lights up a video billboard in downtown Inglewood. The ad was paid for by a campaign committee funded by billboard company WOW Media.

    Topline:

    The Inglewood City Council cleared two initiatives to go before voters this fall, but one still faces a court battle.

    Why now: The Inglewood City Council voted 4-0 on Tuesday to send each of the initiatives to the ballot after city staff found each had gathered the required amount of signatures — or more than 10% of the city’s 64,416 voters. Councilmember Dionne Faulk was absent from the afternoon meeting.

    Why it matters: The implications of these initiatives on daily life in Inglewood are real. Each could change how the city engages with stadium visitors and have a multi-million dollar impact on the city’s revenue streams.

    Read on... for more on the initiatives.

    This story first appeared on The LA Local.

    Inglewood voters will weigh in on a pair of ballot initiatives this November that could curtail video billboard advertising and raise taxes on tickets to the city’s stadiums. 

    The Inglewood City Council voted 4-0 on Tuesday to send each of the initiatives to the ballot after city staff found each had gathered the required amount of signatures — or more than 10% of the city’s 64,416 voters. Councilmember Dionne Faulk was absent from the afternoon meeting. 

    The implications of these initiatives on daily life in Inglewood are real. Each could change how the city engages with stadium visitors and have a multi-million dollar impact on the city’s revenue streams.

    Both of the initiatives are offshoots of the ongoing fight over Inglewood’s fleet of video billboards and each has heavy financial backing from a corporate sponsor.

    Mayor James Butts told The LA Local that a third initiative, proposing a cap on fees for commercial parking lots, did not gather enough signatures to make it to the ballot.

    Here’s what the ticket tax initiative would change

    The city pulls in millions of dollars every year through taxes on tickets to SoFi Stadium concerts and games. But the city’s current tax rules put a cap on that revenue.

    The proposed admissions tax measure would remove the annual cap. Inglewood currently slaps a 10% tax on tickets to venues with more than 22,000 seats. The city’s only venue that large is SoFi Stadium, which fits more than 70,000. 

    The annual cap on admissions tax revenue started at $15 million in 2015 and increases with inflation each year. Inglewood is set to pull in an estimated $21.7 million from the admissions tax this fiscal year, according to budget documents, accounting for almost 9% of the city’s total general fund revenue. 

    On top of removing the cap, the initiative would add a new 2.5% ticket tax for venues that have between 10,000 and 22,000 seats.

    Both the Intuit Dome and Kia Forum fit that description, but city staff wrote in a report that the new 2.5% charge would not immediately apply to the Kia Forum, which has a development agreement with the city running until 2041. 

    Read the full initiative here.

    Just under 7,200 verified Inglewood voters signed petitions to support the initiative, according to city records. 

    Bishop Johnny Young of Miracle Temple Church of God Pentecostal, one of the Inglewood locals who supports the initiative, said during the Tuesday meeting that the stadiums need to pay their fair share for the costs Inglewood incurs from stadium visitors. 

    “The stadium is built and the crowds have come,” Young said. “But when the lights dim, I am left with a quiet question: Who is actually carrying the costs for this glory?”

    WOW Media, the company that runs most of Inglewood’s video billboards, has thrown at least $400,000 into campaigns for the admissions tax initiative and the failed parking initiative, according to finance records that run through March 31. 

    The LA Local has reached out to WOW Media, who did not return a request for comment.

    John Shallman, a consultant for the competing, stadium-funded campaign committee Neighbors for Beautiful Inglewood, argued that increased admissions taxes could negatively hit Inglewood’s economy.

    “When a government increases costs, (venues) have to absorb, pass to consumers or reduce expenses,” Shallman said.

    Here’s what the billboard initiative would change

    Inglewood has seen dozens of video billboards and kiosks sprout up along its main roads over the last decade, drawing the ire of some locals who have likened the rows of screens to a mini-Vegas.

    A screenshot of a bar chart showing years from 2014 to 2024, where the peak was in 2022-23 at $7.5M.

    The proposed billboard initiative would ban commercial advertising across a large chunk of those billboards, many of which are built on city land. 

    Proponents argue the initiative would rid Inglewood of “billboard blight,” but the city says it would take a chunk out of the city’s revenue. Since 2018, the billboards have pulled in between $1.6 million and $7.5 million a year in revenue for the city. 

    And, WOW is scheduled to roll out more of its new twisting sidewalk screens in the coming months. 

    Diane Sambrano, an Inglewood local, said she doesn’t think the billboards are worth the money they bring the city.

    “I’d kinda like them all rubbed out,” Sambrano said. “We misuse the money anyway.”

    More than a dozen people gave public comments at Tuesday’s City Council meeting, laying out largely similar arguments against the initiative and asking council members to send it before voters instead of outright approving it.

    “I cannot stand by and watch this council strip millions of dollars from our community just to appease billionaires, stadium developers,” Bishop Young said. “Our partnership with WOW Media generates concrete revenue.”

    Read the full initiative here.

    Neighbors for Beautiful Inglewood, the main campaign behind the initiative, was started with $1 million in contributions from the city’s stadiums and arenas, according to campaign finance records running through March 31.

    Shallman, the campaign’s adviser, said that the billboard initiative is a case of corporate interests aligning with those of Inglewood locals.

    “From a pure citizen perspective, they don’t want these billboards,” he said. “Ultimately, the voters decide how their public space is used.”

    Shallman contended that the stadiums have done significantly more for Inglewood residents than WOW by providing local jobs and a larger chunk of tax dollars.

    “We’ll put that record against the billboard company,” he said. “That’s really the choice here. It’s billboard companies or the sports and entertainment venues.” 

    Even if the initiative is approved by voters, Butts told The LA Local that city officials plan to fight it in court. The city filed a lawsuit in March to block the initiative from the ballot, arguing that it was a product of “avaricious puppeteering” by SoFi Stadium owner Stan Kroenke.

    That lawsuit is ongoing. Butts said any order to stop the initiative is most likely to come after the Nov. 3 election.

  • Weeks from deadline, where do things stand?
    A pile of fire-damaged materials lines the outside of a warehouse as firefighters continue working at the scene of a warehouse fire in the Boyle Heights neighborhood of Los Angeles on Wednesday, June 24, 2026.

    Topline:

    Lineage has said it is racing to meet Mayor Karen Bass’ deadline to remove millions of pounds of spoiled food waste from the burned warehouse in Boyle Heights.

    Why it matters: Residents continue to report strong odors emanating from the warehouse. 

    That date is fast approaching: Keep reading for where things stand ahead of that Aug. 14 deadline.

    Lineage has said it is racing to meet Mayor Karen Bass’ 45-day deadline to remove millions of pounds of spoiled food waste from the burned warehouse in Boyle Heights. That date is fast approaching on Aug 14. Here’s where things stand as we’re more than halfway through. 

    Cleanup progress

    • As of July 20, Lineage has removed approximately 3,520 tons or 7 million pounds of food and building debris. 
    • An estimated 3,195 tons or 6.4 million pounds of that total is food waste that has been removed from inside the building. (Before the fire, the warehouse stored approximately 44,000 tons, aka 88 million pounds, of food inside.)
    • To date, 56% percent of the damaged roof has been removed, according to L.A. County Public Works.
    • This week, Lineage said it increased the number of trucks removing debris from the site.

    What’s left to clean up? 

    • It’s unclear how much food waste and debris are still left to clean up, but an aerial image of the building from Lineage shows that almost half of the building has been torn down and cleared. 
    • At Tuesday’s L.A. County Board of Supervisors meeting, Leslie Luke, deputy director for the county’s Office of Emergency Management, said Lineage is now working to tear down a concrete wall that separates “Freezer 1,” which burned in the fire, and “Freezer 2.”
      • “… by doing so they’ll be able to get to Freezer 2 and rows of product in there. Each one of the rows is about the size of two football fields, and there are about 28 rows in that second freezer,” Luke said.

    Odor mitigation

    • Residents continue to report strong odors emanating from the warehouse. 
    • On Friday, July 17, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (South Coast AQMD) issued a formal demand letter requiring Lineage to strengthen its Odor Management Plan after receiving over 900 odor complaints.
    • This week, Lineage responded to the letter and said:
      • They have implemented misting systems to mitigate odor around the building.
      • Food waste is being sprayed down with odor control, bleach and water.
      • Food waste from Building 2 will be sprayed down with a Posi-Lock odor containment system, but the contents of Building 1 are too wet to do so.  
      • They have wrapped the entire building in plastic sheeting and will repair or replace any that becomes damaged or worn within 72 hours.
      • They are unable to wrap the food being removed from Building 1, as it would add months to the cleanup process.
      • The full response from Lineage is available here.
    • To report the odor call 1-800-CUT-SMOG, file a report online at aqmd.gov/complaints or download the free South Coast AQMD mobile app to submit complaints from your phone.

    LA Documenter Julania Marechal-Raymond 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

    This story appeared first on LA Local.

  • Proposal to add riders passes
    A man wearing a plaid shirt,  a black tshirt underneath, and a light blue baseball cap holds onto a steel pole inside of a subway car. Through open doors, two uniformed police officers stand on the subway platform.
    Zak Nirenberg rides the Metro train from Grand/LATTC Station in Los Angeles to Pico Station in downtown Los Angeles on April 30, 2026. They said their biggest safety concern is not other Metro riders but Los Angeles Police Department officers.

    Topline:

    The Los Angeles Metro Board voted unanimously Thursday to move forward with a plan that would create the first-ever seat for a regular transit rider on the agency’s governing board. Such a plan would need state approval before it becomes final.

    An additional rider seat: Another motion put forward by L.A. Mayor Karen Bass passed on a 12-1 vote. That motion would also reserve a seat — one of the L.A. mayor’s three appointees — for a rider or rider advocate. Both rider seats would have voting power. The make up of the rest of the board would largely remain the same.

    Why it matters: The L.A. Metro Board has an annual budget of nearly $10 billion and facilitates countywide transportation projects.

    What’s next: The board asked Metro staff to further study adding a labor representative. The make up of the Metro Board is codified in the state’s public utilities code, so any proposed changes approved on Thursday will need another vote by legislators in Sacramento before they become official.

    More info: You can read more about the current make up of the Metro Board and the debate over its future composition in our pervious story.

    The Los Angeles Metro Board voted unanimously Thursday to move forward with a plan that would create the first-ever seat for a regular transit rider on the agency’s governing board. Such a plan would need state approval before it becomes final.

    Janice Hahn, an L.A. County supervisor and Metro Board member, introduced the motion.

    Another motion put forward by L.A. Mayor Karen Bass passed on a 12-1 vote. That motion would also reserve a seat — one of the L.A. mayor’s three appointees — for a rider or rider advocate. Both rider seats would have voting power. The make up of the rest of the board would largely remain the same, although members asked Metro staff to further study adding a labor representative.

    The L.A. Metro Board has an annual budget of nearly $10 billion and facilitates countywide transportation projects.

    Earlier this year, a Metro committee began debating the future composition of its board. The discussion was prompted by Measure G, the voter-approved initiative that will expand the county Board of Supervisors from five to nine members, and add a position for an elected countywide executive.

    Five of the Metro Board’s 13 voting seats are reserved for county supervisors. Bass’ motion maintains the five county seats and will leave it up to the Board of Supervisors to decide who, including the county executive, will have a seat on the Metro Board.

    Lindsey Horvath, an L.A. County supervisor and Metro board member, cast the lone dissenting vote Thursday on Bass’ motion. Horvath said she supports the inclusion of a rider voice on the board, but had campaigned for a designated seat for the county executive.

    “ The county executive will be the only elected seat to represent the entire county of Los Angeles,” Horvath told LAist before Thursday’s vote. “For that position to not be at the decision-making table on something as critical as transit solutions for the region ... makes absolutely no sense.”

    The make up of the Metro Board is codified in the state’s public utilities code, so any proposed changes approved on Thursday will need another vote by legislators in Sacramento before they become official.