Frank Stoltze
is a veteran reporter who covers local politics and examines how democracy is and, at times, is not working.
Published August 18, 2026 2:11 PM
L.A. Mayor Karen Bass (left) and Councilmember Nithya Raman (right) at a mayoral debate in May 2026 ahead of the June primary.
(
A cropped still frame of video of the debate from host NBC LA.
)
Topline
The two candidates vying for the job of Los Angeles mayor — incumbent Karen Bass and challenger Nithya Raman — will face off Wednesday in their first debate ahead of the general election in November.
The backstory: Bass finished ahead of Raman in the June primary 34%-29% but is considered a vulnerable incumbent. Rising street homelessness, skyrocketing housing costs and a shortage of basic city services like pothole repair have left some voters disenchanted with Bass, whose unfavorable ratings top 50%.
She’s also been criticized for her handling of the Palisades Fire.
Bass stump speech: The incumbent has said she understands that people are frustrated, but she’s “not done” doing the job of mayor.
“You want to hear frustrated?” Bass said at a recent campaign event. “I’m frustrated too. But I’ll tell you what frustration does to me. Frustration makes me fight even harder.”
She says there’s been progress: fewer homeless encampments in many neighborhoods, more permits issued to build affordable housing, and a drop in crime. Much of the establishment is backing Bass, including the L.A. County Democratic Party, L.A. County Federation of Labor and Chamber of Commerce.
Raman: The District 4 City Council member, who remains relatively unknown to voters, says she’s running against “the political machine.” Raman has touted a 49% drop in unsheltered homelessness in her council district, which runs from Silver Lake to Sherman Oaks, and she says she has a plan to cut street homelessness in half citywide by the Olympics and eliminate it entirely by the end of four years.
Her supporters include City Controller Kenneth Mejia, various local Democratic clubs and the Western States Carpenters Association.
The details: The debate is sponsored by the Sherman Oaks Homeowners Association and will be held at the Sherman Oaks Adult center, 5056 Van Nuys Blvd.
It is expected to run from 7 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. You can listen to the debate live on LAist 89.3 FM.
A resident holds her LADWP bill during a webinar update on the Lineage Warehouse cleanup at Lou Costello Jr Recreational Center.
(
J.W. Hendricks
/
The LA Local
)
Topline:
Hundreds of East Los Angeles households near the site of the Lineage warehouse fire will begin receiving a one-time $200 utility credit on their Southern California Edison bills after weeks of pressure from residents and L.A. County Supervisor Hilda Solis to extend relief beyond Boyle Heights.
Why now: Lineage, the owner of the cold-storage warehouse, initially provided $50,000 in utility assistance to 218 Los Angeles Department of Water and Power customers in Boyle Heights. Residents in unincorporated East L.A., including some who live just blocks from the warehouse, were not included in that support.
More details: On Monday, a Lineage representative told the Boyle Heights Beat that the relief had been expanded to cover hundreds more households in East L.A., extending as far as Herbert Avenue. The company has not yet determined the exact amount of support it will provide and some SCE customers’ credits are still being distributed.
Read on... for more on how to know if you qualify.
Hundreds of East Los Angeles households near the site of the Lineage warehouse fire will begin receiving a one-time $200 utility credit on their Southern California Edison bills after weeks of pressure from residents and L.A. County Supervisor Hilda Solis to extend relief beyond Boyle Heights.
Lineage, the owner of the cold-storage warehouse, initially provided $50,000 in utility assistance to 218 Los Angeles Department of Water and Power customers in Boyle Heights. Residents in unincorporated East L.A., including some who live just blocks from the warehouse, were not included in that support.
Last week, David Eisenhauer, a representative with Southern California Edison (SCE), told Boyle Heights Beat that Lineage provided $26,600 to cover $200 credits for 133 households in East L.A. These residents live within a boundary designated as Zone 2, which stretches between Indiana Street and Hicks Avenue, and Union Pacific Avenue and the 5 Freeway. SCE said customers living within the boundary will receive an automatic $200 credit applied to their accounts.
The expansion came after Solis called on Lineage to provide East L.A. residents with the same level of support that was given to the city.
“Lineage has a responsibility to provide fair and equitable support to everyone affected by this disaster, including delivering the remaining $25,000 in utility assistance that was allocated for East Los Angeles residents,” Solis said in a statement to Boyle Heights Beat.
“After learning that Lineage was working with the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power to provide utility assistance to Boyle Heights residents, I made clear that East Los Angeles residents deserved the same level of support through Southern California Edison,” Solis said.
On Monday, a Lineage representative told the Beat that the relief had been expanded to cover hundreds more households in East L.A., extending as far as Herbert Avenue. The company has not yet determined the exact amount of support it will provide and some SCE customers’ credits are still being distributed.
The utility assistance comes as residents continue to report higher electricity bills after relying on air purifiers and air conditioners to cope with the stench of rotting food inside the warehouse and poor air quality following the June 17 warehouse fire.
Why some residents qualify and others don’t
The boundaries of Lineage’s relief programs have been a source of confusion for residents.
At a virtual community meeting hosted by the mayor’s office last Thursday, a resident sent in a question asking, “Why are not all residents affected by the fire and stench eligible for financial assistance?”
Officials have used a map dividing the area around the warehouse into Zones 1, 2 and 3, with the zones representing the areas closest to the fire. It is unclear who created the map and how those boundaries were established.
A map of Zones 1, 2 and 3 used by Lineage to determine the type of support offered to households closest to the Lineage warehouse.
(
Courtesy of Lineage
)
Lineage has used the map to determine which households are eligible for various forms of relief, including air purifiers, air conditioners, housing support, grocery vouchers, cash assistance and utility credits.
For weeks, residents have called for broader relief, saying the effects of the fire and lingering odors have affected not only homes close to the warehouse, but neighboring areas as well.
In response, Jenny Delwood, deputy chief of staff to L.A. Mayor Karen Bass said that while the areas closest to the warehouse had been prioritized, “… Bass and her partners from the county and city are working to raise additional funding to provide more utility assistance and additional bill payments for a larger geographic area.”
Details on expanded support for households outside of the boundary were not immediately available.
How to know if you qualify:
According to SCE, customers living between Indiana Street, Herbert Avenue, Union Pacific Avenue and the 5 Freeway will begin receiving an automatic credit to their account.
No further action is required from qualified customers.
LADWP customers living between Los Palos Street, Indiana Street, Union Pacific Avenue and Beswick Street received an automatic credit to their account on July 31.
What support is available for residents who live outside of the boundary?
Payment plans, including a long-term installment plan, so customers can spread their balance over time with manageable payments, and the Budget Billing Plan, which helps spread energy costs more evenly throughout the year. (For customers within the impact boundary who enter into a long-term installment plan, the down payment for a new payment plan will be waived.)
The Energy Assistance Fund, which provides one-time bill assistance of up to $200. SCE works with United Way and over 80 community-based organizations to provide the assistance but customers need to apply directly through the organization. To find the partner organization closest to you, click here.
Customers in areas affected by the fire can get more information on SCE’s support programs here.
LADWP customers can request:
Payment arrangements: No down payment, no interest, no fees; A long-term payment option that divides the total account balance evenly across a specified number of billing periods.
Payment extension: A short-term payment option that gives customers additional time, up to one billing period, to pay their full balance.
Level pay: A billing option that helps you plan by providing predictable monthly bills based on average usage. You can also roll in past-due balances.
To inquire about these programs, call 1-800-DIAL-DWP, visit a customer service center or use the online form on LADWP.com/ContactUs.
LADWP customers can also apply for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) through the Maravilla Foundation. But the Maravilla Foundation website says that due to reduced government funding and high demand, fewer applications are being accepted. To qualify for LIHEAP, the monthly income for a family of four must not exceed $6,407.16. A full list of requirements and application instructions can be found here.
The ABC network sued the Federal Communications Commission in federal court today.
Why it matters: The case has major First Amendment implications, arguing that the Trump administration has violated the network's free speech rights by launching investigations and challenging its broadcast licenses in retaliation for its news coverage, late-night satire and views on talk shows.
The backstory: ABC and its corporate parent, the Walt Disney Co., allege that the FCC has taken these actions to appease President Trump, who has repeatedly called for the network to be stripped of its licenses in response to material which has sparked his ire.
FCC reaction: The FCC and its chief, Brendan Carr, did not immediately comment on the suit.
The ABC network sued the Federal Communications Commission in federal court Tuesday in a case with major First Amendment implications, arguing that the Trump administration has violated its free speech rights by launching investigations and challenging its broadcast licenses in retaliation for its news coverage, late-night satire and views on talk shows.
ABC and its corporate parent, the Walt Disney Co., allege that the FCC has taken these actions to appease President Trump, who has repeatedly called for the network to be stripped of its licenses in response to material which has sparked his ire.
The network's lawsuit cites Trump's own social media posts which condemn ABC's news coverage, its talk show The View and late night comedian Jimmy Kimmel — who has frequently mocked the president.
The lawsuit starts: "Government censorship is deeply un-American."
It goes on to note that, in the words of a recent unanimous U.S. Supreme Court decision involving the National Rifle Association, the government may not "use the power of the State to punish or suppress disfavored expression."
"This case concerns the Administration's sustained effort to do just that," the ABC/Disney lawsuit argues. "The Administration has waged a retaliatory campaign against ABC for a single reason: it disapproves of what ABC broadcasts."
ABC and Disney own eight local TV stations which beam out the national network's shows and local programming in specific regions. Among them are stations in six of the nation's largest markets, which contribute significantly to ABC's bottom line.
They require federal licenses because they rely on the public airwaves. The FCC forced all eight of them to undergo early scrutiny of the renewal process of the licenses, years ahead of schedule. It's an essentially unprecedented move in the modern era.
The FCC and its chief, Brendan Carr, did not immediately comment on the suit. The commission has historically acted in a quasi-independent role from presidential administrations, with the president's party holding three seats and the opposing party two. But Trump publicly said before taking office that he saw it as an extension of the executive branch; recent court decisions have reined in the independence of some other semi-autonomous agencies set up by Congress; and Carr has acted as a booster and advocate for Trump's excoriation of the press, including ABC.
For his part, Carr has said he is making sure broadcasters operate in the public interest — a legal requirement — and that they don't violate Trump's executive order on diversity, equity and inclusion.
But he has also been outspoken in his support for Trump's agenda, including specific criticisms of ABC, Kimmel, "The View" and its journalists. In one instance, he warned that ABC and Disney could "do this the easy way or the hard way" amid the president's call for Kimmel to be pulled off the air. The host was suspended and returned days later after a major public outcry.
Ironically, ABC had been the first in a string of major media companies and digital giants to reach settlements with Trump over lawsuits he filed against them as a private citizen. It paid $16 million to settle his defamation case in December 2024, involving remarks by anchor George Stephanopoulos, after Trump had won a return to the White House but before his inauguration.
Given Trump's continuing broadsides against Kimmel, its daytime talk show "The View," and its journalists, however, Disney has taken an increasingly assertive stance against the administration.
"We're very principled on this," Disney CEO Josh D'Amaro told CNBC's Julia Boorstin last week. "We're going to stand up to what we believe is journalistic and integrity, and we're not going to be told how to run that side of our business."
He took over from former Disney Chairman and CEO Bob Iger in March. Iger, who remains on the Disney board, is now a business partner of Josh Kushner — the brother of President Trump's son-in-law and diplomatic adviser, Jared Kushner — in striking a deal to buy the NBA's Los Angeles Lakers.
Other outlets are closely watching the growing ABC-FCC confrontation.
CBS's parent company Paramount, Meta, X and Google all struck deals similar to the one ABC reached to resolve lawsuits filed by Trump. The president has also filed private lawsuits against the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, and the BBC over their reporting. They are ongoing.
Copyright 2026 NPR
Keep up with LAist.
If you're enjoying this article, you'll love our daily newsletter, The LA Report. Each weekday, catch up on the 5 most pressing stories to start your morning in 3 minutes or less.
Newport-Mesa Unified School District is the first in California to ban electric bikes from school property for kindergarten through eighth grade.
(
Destiny Torres
/
LAist
)
Topline:
Students are back at Ensign Intermediate School in Newport Beach this week, but e-bikes are not.
Background: Newport-Mesa Unified School District is the first in California to ban electric bikes from school property for kindergarten through eighth grade.
Read on … for how students and parents are reacting to the change.
Students are back at Ensign Intermediate School in Newport Beach Tuesday morning, e-bikes are not.
The Newport-Mesa Unified School District banned electric bikes from school property for kindergarten through eighth grade, citing a spike in e-bike incidents.
Annette Franco, communications officer with Newport-Mesa, said parents wanted to see more e-bike enforcement. It’s the first district in California to adopt a ban, according to officials.
In Orange County, e-bike and e-motorcycle injuries have gone up 430% in the last four years, according to the District Attorney’s office. Children between the ages of 11 and 14 accounted for more than 60% of crashes.
High schoolers in the district can still ride e-bikes to school, but have to take an e-bike/bicycle safety and training course.
LAist has asked the district for information about how officials will enforce the ban, including possible penalties.
What parents say
Some parents applauded the ban, including Brooke Diehl, who was dropping off her daughter at the middle school.
“ I think it's the best thing for the kids,” Diehl said. “I saw a lot of crazy things that I didn't think were safe, and I think ninth grade and up is a good age group for them.”
Sue Healey, a crossing guard, also told LAist that riding e-bikes is more manageable for high schoolers.
“ For the little ones, in this traffic, at this particular time of day, it's not so safe for them,” Healey said, but she also recognizes the downfalls. “ I know it's going to really hurt the parents because now we have a large influx of cars dropping kids off and picking them up.”
Keiko dropped her goddaughter off at the middle school Tuesday morning, and she told LAist that the ban may have been too rash. Keiko declined to share her last name out of concern for pushback from other parents and officials.
“There could have been more education and dialogue, instead of the school board saying, ‘This is what we’re doing,’” Keiko said. “There are a lot of kids that I know who are upset. … they were learning their independence. We need to encourage safety not just through authority but through practice.”
Students at Ensign Intermediate School in Newport Beach can only ride traditional pedal bikes to school as the district's e-bike ban takes effect.
(
Jill Replogle
/
LAist
)
Some students have mixed feelings
A group of four boys walked their bikes across the street from Ensign after riding up a hill. "It's lame," one said of the e-bike ban. "My legs hurt," another said.
Katherine Martinez, a seventh grader, said the change doesn’t affect her because she has a ride to school, but the same can’t be said for all her peers.
“If someone doesn't have anyone to drop them off, and if they miss the bus, they don't have a form of transportation besides that bike,” Martinez said.
Why now?
The ban comes as more policies across OC crack down on e-bikes.
Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer created an e-bike prosecution unit, “RIDE SAFELY,” to review cases of illegal motorized vehicles. The team would review potential criminal charges for youth and adults, including parents who allow their children to ride illegal e-bikes, according to the department.
What makes an e-bike illegal?
An illegal e-bike does not have pedals or exceeds the speeds listed below in its designated classification.
In California, e-bikes fall into three classifications:
Class 1: pedal-assisted at speeds under 20 mph
Class 2: throttle-assisted e-bikes that go up to 20 mph.
Class 3: pedal-assisted and capped at 28 mph.
In the city of Buena Park, e-bikes, as well as electric skateboards and scooters, are prohibited from being ridden on public city sidewalks. The city of La Palma enforces similar rules.
In Anaheim, Class 3 e-bike riders are not permitted on sidewalks.
Other cities like Santa Ana have seen e-bike incidents. A driver running a red light hit a 44-year-old resident riding an e-bike. He died in the hospital earlier this month, according to Santa Ana police. The day before, a different e-bicyclist was struck by a speeding hit-and-run driver, an incident captured on video provided to KTLA.
More restrictions could be coming
A state lawAB 1569 is in front of legislators that would require the California Department of Education and the California Highway Patrol "to develop a standardized electric bicycle safety and training program for pupils in grades 7 to 12."
On the federal level, the Safe SPEEDS Act would require the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission to develop safety standards, mandatory labeling and to regularly conduct studies on e-bike incidents.
A State Farm insurance office in Pinole on Jan. 3, 2024.
(
Justin Sullivan
/
Getty Images
)
Topline:
Lawyers for a former Los Angeles homeowner find AI-generated “hallucinations” in filings by State Farm.
More details: Lawyers for a Los Angeles firm representing State Farm in a lawsuit involving the rebuilding of a home after a fire have apologized for artificial intelligence hallucinations in their filings. The homeowner’s lawyers discovered in motions filed by State Farm “cases that do not exist, quotes that do not exist, and holdings that do not exist,” according to a filing by Eric Khodadian, who is representing Fa’alagilagi Meni-Siliga.
Why it matters: The legal industry is increasingly turning to AI: 41% of law firms and 47% of corporate legal departments said they are using generative AI, according to one recent survey. That has meant legal hallucinations have become more prevalent, said Daniel Ho, a law professor at Stanford University who has researched the issue. In one paper Ho co-wrote last year, he and fellow researchers found that a couple of companies “overstated” that their legal research tools could guarantee hallucination-free legal citations.
Read on... for more on the lawsuit.
This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.
Lawyers for a Los Angeles firm representing State Farm in a lawsuit involving the rebuilding of a home after a fire have apologized for artificial intelligence hallucinations in their filings.
The homeowner’s lawyers discovered in motions filed by State Farm “cases that do not exist, quotes that do not exist, and holdings that do not exist,” according to a filing by Eric Khodadian, who is representing Fa’alagilagi Meni-Siliga.
Meni-Siliga filed her lawsuit in July 2024, naming a contractor and the contractor’s insurance company, a public adjuster and her homeowners insurance company, State Farm, as defendants.
A fire in her home in the city of Carson in 2020 caused her home to become uninhabitable, according to the lawsuit. While her contractor was working on the home, a storm caused water damage. After what she said were delays getting State Farm’s approval for repairs, the work on her home was never completed, according to a January court filing. She and her husband have drained their savings and retirement accounts, declared bankruptcy and lost their home to foreclosure, she wrote.
“My family and I have lost forever our family home,” Meni-Siliga, a U.S. Postal Service carrier, wrote. “We do not come from money… It took many years and sacrifice for our family to purchase our home.”
In its original answer to her complaints, State Farm said negligence by the plaintiff, her contractor and public adjuster led to the injuries and damages she suffered. The insurer also said she failed to bring her legal action within a year of the original loss or damage.
The case is set to go to trial in October.
The legal industry is increasingly turning to AI: 41% of law firms and 47% of corporate legal departments said they are using generative AI, according to one recent survey.
That has meant legal "hallucinations" have become more prevalent, said Daniel Ho, a law professor at Stanford University who has researched the issue. In one paper Ho co-wrote last year, he and fellow researchers found that a couple of companies “overstated” that their legal research tools could guarantee hallucination-free legal citations.
A database of legal hallucinations around the world maintained by a Paris-based legal researcher has found 1,922 cases so far; most of them occurred in the United States.
Last year, a California attorney was fined a record amount, $10,000, for using ChatGPT in an opening brief that contained 21 made-up quotes out of 23.
Khodadian shared his findings at an Aug. 7 conference in Los Angeles Superior Court. He wrote in a filing later that a State Farm lawyer was “visibly enraged” afterward and followed him and his co-counsel down the hall, “repeatedly demanding to see the list” of mistakes they had found.
That lawyer was Kenneth Katel of the firm Musick, Peeler & Garrett, who in his filing apologized to the court and to the plaintiff, explaining that his co-counsel told him she used AI to help prepare some filings.
“I was not aware that AI had been used, but as lead trial counsel I accept full responsibility for our filings,” Katel wrote. He also told the court that his firm has updated its policy about AI use but did not provide specifics.
Katel disputed Khodadian’s characterization of what happened after the hearing, though he wrote “it is accurate to say I was upset given the seriousness of the allegations.”
Khodadian and Katel declined to answer questions from CalMatters.
The lawyer who used AI in motions on behalf of State Farm, Jacquelene Robinson, wrote in a filing that she confirmed there were seven case citations across eight filings “that simply didn’t exist,” as well as some incorrect titles of cases and quotes that were not found in cases she cited.
Robinson said she used an AI tool called Irys, which she incorrectly thought was tied to her law firm’s subscription to a legal research tool called Westlaw, which she thought “performed an internal cite check.” She was mistaken, she wrote.
State Farm is reviewing what happened, spokesperson Tom Hartmann said. “State Farm expects its external counsel to conform to the highest level of ethical standards and professionalism, including confirming the accuracy of all legal filings,” he said.
Hartmann did not respond to questions about how many external law firms represent State Farm, and whether the company asks about their AI policies before hiring them.