The Brief

It’s been more than four decades yet Rhonda Campbell’s voice still quavered as she stood before a row of television cameras recalling the day in 1981 when a repeat drunk driver killed her 12-year-old sister. She remembers her father crying as he told her what happened, still hears her mother’s scream when the coffin lid closed.

“For our family, 45 years means 45 years of missed birthdays, missed holidays and that empty chair at our table for every holiday gathering. Grief does not fade, it just becomes part of who you are,” Campbell, victim services manager for Mothers Against Drunk Driving California, said Thursday at a press conference.

Campbell joined other victim relatives, lawmakers, advocates, a police chief and a trauma surgeon on a Capitol building stage, all there to build momentum for what’s shaping up to be the biggest legislative effort to address dangerous driving in a generation.

Next to them as they spoke was a table filled with photos of people killed on California’s roads and one old pair of gym shoes belonging to Campbell’s sister.

“Behind every statistic that you will hear today, someone is loved and irreplaceable,” she said.

A bipartisan coalition of state lawmakers has so far introduced 10 bills this year as part of an unprecedented legislative package aimed at confronting California’s permissive roadway safety laws. Many of the proposals directly address issues CalMatters uncovered as part of the ongoing License to Kill series, which revealed how the state has routinely allowed dangerous drivers to stay on the road as its roadway death toll has skyrocketed.

Assemblymember Cottie Petrie-Norris, a Democrat from Irvine, called the package of bills “California’s largest and most significant anti-drunk driving and anti-DUI push in over two decades.”

“This crisis is an urgent call to action,” she said.

Her colleague on the other side of the aisle, Assemblymember Tom Lackey of Palmdale, said “it’s time.”

“We are failing, folks, and I’m so heartened by this big coalition of people. I’ve waited 12 years for this,” he said, referring to his time in the legislature after decades as a CHP officer.

Lawmakers said to expect a few more bills next week before the deadline to propose new legislation. Several Republican legislators also asked for a formal audit into DMV records and Democrats plan to propose a separate audit of how the state spends its traffic safety funds.

At Thursday’s event, lawmaker after lawmaker stepped to the podium to discuss their proposals and call on colleagues to join them in doing something about traffic deaths. They were often followed by grieving parents, there to talk about unfathomable loss.

For one father, Anatoly Varfolomeev, it was almost too much. He struggled to address the audience, at one point gripping the podium and lowering his head, overcome with emotion before gathering the strength to continue.

Varfolomeev said he’d planned to cite some of the statistics regarding motor vehicle fatalities but it was clear listening to the speakers that they were well known.

“That means that this legislative initiative is long-time overdue,” Varfolomeev said.

His daughter and her childhood friend, both 19, were killed in November 2021 by a drunk driver going more than 100 miles per hour, Varfolomeev said. The driver served just three and a half years behind bars, Varfolomeev said.

As we reported last year, vehicular manslaughter isn’t considered a violent felony in California, meaning drivers who kill can serve only a fraction of their sentence behind bars.

“So this is not a violent crime,” he said, holding up a picture of the mangled, charred remains of a car. “If this is not a violent crime what is?”

One of the bills in the package would add vehicular manslaughter to the state’s list of violent felonies.

A mom, Kellie Montalvo, was there to support the change and the rest of the bill package. Her son Benjamin Montalvo had just turned 21 and was riding his bike when a woman with prior reckless crashes ran him over and fled the scene.

The woman who killed Benjamin – “Bean Dip” as his family affectionately called him – is due to be released from prison as early as this weekend. She called on Governor Newsom to do something.

“Please come out now publicly and support these bills. You have an opportunity to lead the charge in supporting victims,” she said. “His name was ‘Bean Dip’, and he mattered.”

Together, the bills are aimed at strengthening the state’s enforcement system and keeping many reckless drivers from behind the wheel for years longer. The package would bring the state more in line with much of the country, particularly when it comes to handling drunk and drugged drivers.

California saw a more than 50% spike in DUI-related deaths over the most recent 10 years for which federal estimates were available, an increase more than twice as steep as the rest of the country. As our investigation has shown, California currently has some of the weakest DUI laws in the country.

“Safer roads are not a partisan or political issue. They are the basic responsibility we owe to every family that travels upon our roadways,” said Alex Gammelgard, past president of the California Police Chiefs Association.

Yet, even as the number of deaths on our roads soared, California leaders have previously failed to confront these issues.

Many of the bills are sure to face significant challenges in the months to come. Financial concerns, for example, have helped doom previous efforts to pass expanded use of the in-car breathalyzers known as ignition interlock devices. A proposal to bring California in line with much of the rest of the nation is back on the table as part of the current package. Increasing criminal penalties could also be a tough sell in a legislature that’s been so focused in recent years on criminal justice reforms and alternatives to incarceration.

It was a challenge some on the stage alluded to.

“I want to align myself with the idea of compassion. I think California has done a lot to try to be on the compassionate side of the justice system,” said Assemblymember Dawn Addis, a Democrat from San Luis Obispo.

“But I think, in this moment,” she added, “we have tragically failed.”

Lawmakers have a little more than a week before the deadline to introduce new legislation for the session.

The bills highlighted at Thursday’s press conference would:

Make vehicular manslaughter a violent felony and increase DUI penalties

(Introduced by Senator Bob Archuleta, a Democrat from Norwalk.)

Issue: Vehicular manslaughter isn’t considered a “violent” felony under state law, our reporting showed, allowing people convicted of the crime to serve only a fraction of their time behind bars.

Proposed changes: This bill would add vehicular manslaughter with “gross negligence” to the list of violent felonies. It would also add prison time for crashes with multiple victims and drivers with a prior felony DUI within 10 years. Finally, the bill would stiffen penalties for hit-and-run collisions where the driver had a prior DUI and expand so-called “Watson advisements” that make it easier to charge repeat DUI offenders with murder if they kill someone.

Close the DMV point loophole for drivers who get diversion after a deadly crash

(Introduced by Assemblymember Lori Wilson, a Democrat from Suisun City.)

Issue: Recent criminal justice reform laws made it easier for judges to wipe misdemeanor convictions — including vehicular manslaughter — from criminal records. In practice, that means some California drivers can get points added to their license for speeding, but not for killing someone, our reporting has shown.

Proposed change: Ensure the DMV adds points to a drivers license in vehicular manslaughter cases where a driver gets off with misdemeanor diversion instead of a criminal conviction.

Ensure deadly drivers don’t get their licenses back as soon as they get out of prison

(Wilson plans to introduce.)

Issue: License suspensions or revocations often start at the time of a conviction and can actually end before someone is released from prison.

Proposed change: Require license suspensions and revocations to start when a driver is released from incarceration as opposed to at the time of a conviction, potentially keeping licenses away from dangerous drivers for years longer than the current law.

Increase DMV points for fatal crashes 

(Introduced by Assemblymembers Tom Lackey, a Republican from Palmdale, and Cottie Petrie-Norris, a Democrat from Irvine.)

Issue: California drivers currently get the same number of points added to their license for killing someone as they do for non-injury DUIs and hit-and-run collisions.

Proposed change: Increase the number of points a vehicular manslaughter conviction adds to a driver’s license from the current two points to three.

Allow prosecutors to charge DUIs as a felony on second offense 

(Introduced by Lackey)

Issue: It currently takes four DUIs within 10 years to be charged with a felony in California. Many other states allow prosecutors to charge a felony after two or three offenses.

Proposed change: This would allow prosecutors to charge a second DUI offense within 10 years as a felony.

Allow prosecutors to charge DUIs as a felony after third offense, increase repeat DUI penalties

(Introduced by Assemblymember Nick Schultz, a Democrat from Burbank)

Issue: Habitual repeat DUI offenders often face few added penalties.

Proposed change: Similar to Lackey’s bill, Schultz’s would let prosecutors charge a driver with a felony for their third DUI in 10 years. Increase the time some repeat DUI offenders need to have an ignition interlock device installed on their car and the amount of time their driving privileges are revoked.

Revoke the licenses of repeat DUI offenders for longer 

(Introduced by Lackey)

Issue: California takes away repeat DUI offenders’ driving privileges for three years, less time than many other places. Some other states revoke licenses for up to 15 years, or even issue lifetime bans.

Proposed change: Increase the amount of time the DMV can revoke the driving privileges of someone who gets a third DUI to eight years.

Bar people convicted of serious or repeat DUIs from purchasing alcohol

(Introduced by Assemblymember Rhodesia Ransom, a Democrat from Stockton.)

Issue: California’s current system allows many repeat DUI offenders to stay on the road with few safeguards.

Proposed change: Let judges essentially bar people convicted of serious or repeat DUIs from purchasing alcohol by adding a “NO ALCOHOL SALE” sticker to their driver’s licenses, similar to a law recently enacted in Utah. A “Severe DUI” would be defined as an offense with a blood-alcohol level at least twice as high as the legal limit , conviction for two DUIs within three years, or a DUI causing great bodily injury, death, or major property damage.

Mandate in-car breathalyzers for all DUI offenders

(Introduced by Petrie-Norris)

Issue: Most states already require all DUI offenders to install an in-car breathalyzer. California does not. State law currently requires the devices, which a driver must blow into for their car to start, for people convicted of two or more DUIs, or a DUI that results in injury.

Proposed change: Require the breathalyzers for all DUI offenders. (A nearly identical measure was gutted late in the legislative process last year after the DMV said it did not have the technology or funding to implement the changes.)

Expand law enforcement DUI training

(Introduced by Assemblymember Juan Alanis, a Republican from Modesto.)

Issue: Local law enforcement training varies widely in California, meaning that officers aren’t always trained in how to test for drunk and drugged driving.

Proposed change: Increase DUI training for police officers who work traffic enforcement to ensure they are proficient in areas like sobriety testing and report writing.

Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman promised at a Tuesday night town hall that MacArthur Park will see “amazing progress” in public safety before the 2028 Olympic Games.

Several community members told LAist they have seen crime return to the Los Angeles park after months of joint drug enforcement operations by the Los Angeles Police Department and federal agencies. Those efforts led to dozens of arrests for alleged drug sales in the area.

An LAPD captain attending the town hall confirmed to LAist that the department is aware of renewed safety problems.

Hochman acknowledged those concerns and said the recent operations made progress and created an opportunity for lasting change.

“If we keep this focus and the energy on this area, MacArthur Park, Skid Row and everything in between,” Hochman said, “then we will see amazing progress before the Olympics, and that is actually a promise.”

Hochman previously promised, during a drug enforcement operation on June 4, to have a picnic at the park on Labor Day. Hochman told attendees he kept that promise when he held an event at the park on Sept. 5 with other local and federal law enforcement officials.

As district attorney, Hochman works with law enforcement agencies to prosecute criminal cases in L.A. County. He said that it will take more work from policymakers and community members to remove the open-air drug market that has been entrenched there for decades.

The area is represented by L.A. City Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez, County Supervisor Hilda Solis, state Assemblymember Mark González and state Sen. María Elena Durazo. Staff members from some of those offices, and the mayor’s office, sat in on the town hall organized by the local nonprofit California Rising.

“Feel free to put the fire under the feet of our politicians,” Hochman told about two dozen residents who attended. “All too often it is easy to spend some effort on something and then get distracted and spend some effort somewhere else.”

'Temporary' relief

Some residents and business owners agreed with Hochman that the large-scale drug enforcement operations from March through June made the area feel safer, at least for a while.

“It was temporary, but we got to see, actually, families at the bus stops with their kids — before it wasn't like that,” Elaine Alaniz told LAist Tuesday. “I think it does help us, but on the other hand I still think that we need more help. It's not just a one, two, three-day thing.”

Alaniz lives nearby and is the president of the Westlake North Neighborhood Council, which begins a block northeast of MacArthur Park.

She said she has seen some crime move away from the park and into the surrounding neighborhoods.

Capt. Ben Fernandes, who leads LAPD’s Rampart Division, said the earlier operations were successful, but there have been some setbacks.

“We made a lot of headway in the beginning,” he said. “There are some issues that we've had some repopulation, especially with addicts.”

Fernandes said that the department will continue to arrest people suspected of selling drugs near the park, while connecting people who are addicted with services to help them get sober and off the streets.

A call for community involvement

Hochman and Fernandes each emphasized that making MacArthur Park a safe and welcoming place can’t be done by law enforcement alone.

“My advice: take the park back — it's your park,” Hochman said at the town hall, calling for community organizations to plan regular outings there. “That starts to send a message that the community really cares about this park.”

He asked that performers like Justin Bieber, who played an impromptu set in the park last month, have more events there as well.

Fernandes said people can get involved to change perceptions about MacArthur Park so it's no longer thought of as a place to go to score drugs.

“What we need to do is — we as a community — come together and show [people using drugs] that it's not their place to go,” he said. “That you're going to be there with your children, with your parishioners, with your friends, with your family.”

Inglewood city officials are launching an audit of their financial relationship with SoFi Stadium and claiming the stadium could owe years of ticket taxes, one month after a judge voided the 2015 contract that brought the stadium to Inglewood. 

The Inglewood City Council voted unanimously Tuesday to commission the audit. Mayor James Butts said the move is a necessary next step after the court ruling, which threw the terms of the financial relationship between the city and Hollywood Park stadium development into question. 

Millions of dollars are at stake for both the city and the stadium businesses. City officials say that the ruling means a cap that limited the amount of admissions tax that Inglewood could collect no longer applies. They also plan to investigate the authenticity of $376 million worth of infrastructure bills Hollywood Park claims the city owes. The findings of the audit could also factor into discussions of how the city will address its current $30.8 million deficit.

The City Council motion — put forward by Butts and co-sponsored by Councilmember Dionne Faulk — requires the city attorney to retain an accounting firm to conduct the audit and report back to the public on its findings within 30 days. It set aside $325,000 from the city’s General Fund to pay for the audit. You can read the city’s full explanation of the audit here.

Butts, who was at the city’s helm a decade ago when developer Stan Kroenke brought his Hollywood Park pitch to Inglewood, said city officials built what they thought was a partnership with their stadium counterparts.

But that partnership has crumbled. Since last summer, the city and stadiums have been slugging it out in a complex series of court cases over the stadium’s contract and Inglewood’s network of video billboards. The conflict has spilled over into the Nov. 3 election via ballot measures that would change the city’s commercial advertising and ticket tax rules. 

The audit approved by the City Council on Tuesday will dig into the entire financial relationship between the stadium and city since 2015, unpacking what is owed and what was received from taxes on everything from tickets to parking. City officials plan to continue auditing the taxes on a quarterly basis into the future.

Still, it’s not guaranteed the city would be able to force the stadium development to pay any debt the audit does claim. Hollywood Park could still appeal the court ruling that voided its contract with Inglewood, while Butts said the city wants to negotiate a new contract to replace it. 

A Hollywood Park spokesperson said the stadium development has lived up to its financial obligations, including paying all of its taxes.

“This is yet another thinly veiled attempt to distract from scrutiny surrounding the City’s own fiscal mismanagement and the questionable actions of its Mayor,” the spokesperson wrote in a statement.

Some locals at Tuesday’s meeting said during public comments they were baffled why the city hadn’t set up an audit process earlier.

“We have needed an audit from day one. We can’t sit here and claim we didn’t know or have an inkling what we were doing with Hollywood Park,” Diane Sambrano said. 

Exterior of Sofi Stadium in Inglewood

(

Gary Coronado

/

The LA Local

)

Speaking during the meeting, Butts said the audit was triggered because of the void left by the development agreement and because major events including the 2027 Super Bowl and 2028 Olympics are about to hit Inglewood.

The mayor first claimed the development agreement was illegal in a letter written directly to Stan Kroenke last year, saying the city’s lawyers made the determination while researching billboard litigation.

Millions in tax revenue at stake

After the judge ruled in agreement with the city, Butts told The LA Local that city officials were still researching the specific implications of the court’s ruling. In Tuesday’s council motion, city staff highlighted what they say is one major change they’ve discovered: There’s no longer a limit on how much admissions tax the city can collect.  

Inglewood collects a 10% tax on tickets sold at SoFi Stadium, but the 2015 initiative that brought the stadium to the city put a cap on that revenue, starting at $15 million a year and increasing annually with inflation. 

The admissions tax cap also happens to be the subject of the current ballot Measure AT. WOW Media, the billboard operator allied with the city in its dispute with the stadium, is funding a campaign in favor of the initiative.

Admissions tax has been a sizable revenue stream for the city — bringing in an average $20 million a year since SoFi Stadium opened — but city officials have said it could be significantly bigger. A city analysis of Measure AT estimated that getting rid of the cap could bring in as much as an extra $50 million in future years. The city did not estimate how much admissions tax revenue it has missed out on while the development agreement was in effect.

The Inglewood audit seeks to clarify basic questions about how taxes are assessed on ticket sales and whether those taxes are actually forwarded to the city. Officials say it will provide transparency about ticket sales, pricing and fees, which have been heavily scrutinized in recent years across the state. 

Gray gets support on proposal for future billboard revenue audit

Councilmember Gloria Gray attempted to amend the audit motion Tuesday, asking the city manager to also audit the revenue the city gets from billboard fees.

“I believe the same standard of financial transparency should apply to every city agreement,” Gray said.

Though her motion didn’t receive a second, Councilmember Eloy Morales said he’d support putting a billboard revenue audit on the council’s agenda in the future. 

“I think we all support all those audits,” Morales said. 

Gray’s move was a rarity for a council that seldom debates motions during public meetings and almost always votes unanimously. The councilmember is currently running for mayor against Butts.

Inglewood pulls in as much as $8 million a year from billboards, according to budget records. Much of that comes from a series of deals the city cut with WOW Media, allowing the billboard company to construct and operate the billboards on public medians and sidewalks. In return, WOW gives the city a cut of ad revenue along with other concessions.

The post Inglewood is investigating if SoFi Stadium owes years’ worth of ticket taxes appeared first on LA Local.