The Brief

Orange County Supervisor Andrew Do, the central figure in an unfolding corruption scandal that saw his home searched by FBI and IRS agents last week, has for months declined to comment to English-language news outlets.

Last week, he spoke out on Vietnamese-language radio, according to a recording of the remarks that LAist had translated. The broadcast took place a few hours after LAist broke the news on Aug. 15 that county officials filed a fraud lawsuit against his daughter, Rhiannon Do, and others involved in a nonprofit she helped lead, according to two people who said they spoke with others who heard the broadcast live.

Supervisor Do directed more than $10 million in public funds to the nonprofit, Viet America Society (VAS), that have gone unaccounted for, despite O.C. officials’ repeated demands for answers about what happened to the money since February.

LAist reached out to Supervisor Do on Friday and Saturday and did not get a response. A county spokesperson declined to comment on the broadcast.

Supervisor Do has declined or not responded to dozens of LAist’s requests for comment since LAist first reported on millions in public funds he’d directed Viet America Society outside of public view.

The Aug. 15 broadcast on VietLink Radio is Supervisor Do’s first — and so far only — known public response to the controversy since the county filed suit alleging that millions of taxpayer dollars were misspent. It is being reported here in English for the first time.

VietLink Radio is owned by Supervisor Do’s former deputy chief of staff Nick Lecong, and broadcasts a few hours per week on 1480 AM from a transmitter in Santa Ana.

Supervisor Do calls recent allegations ‘a slander’

Supervisor Do spoke for 17 minutes on the VietLink Radio segment. He criticized fellow O.C. Republican Janet Nguyen, a state senator currently running for Do's seat, the media and others for what he called slander against his “whole family.” Supervisor Do also defended the Viet America Society, and Peter Pham, the nonprofit group’s founder, from allegations they misused millions of dollars meant to feed vulnerable seniors. He spoke on his own and was not interviewed.

State Sen. Janet Nguyen, a Huntington Beach Republican, votes during session at the state Capitol in Sacramento on Aug. 30, 2022.

(

Rahul Lal

/

CalMatters

)

During his broadcast, Supervisor Do pointed to a financial review that he described as showing Viet America Society “is complying with the law,” according to the translation. He appeared to be referring to a financial review released last week by VAS’ new attorney, Mark Rosen.

Allegations that laws were broken are “just a wrongful accusation, a slander,” Supervisor Do added.

The number of people who have received meals from the group “is very high,” he said, adding that 400,000 meals have been served. Supervisor Do said that number was provided by Rosen.

Rosen first emerged publicly as VAS’ lawyer in an Aug. 12 letter to the county. VAS’ previous attorney, Sterling Scott Winchell, told the Orange County Register he no longer represented the group as of Aug. 13.

County officials recently issued findings that Viet America Society's meal numbers were “questionable” and that the nonprofit failed to prove it served the number of meals required in county contracts. It filed a lawsuit in Orange County Superior Court on Aug. 15 — a few hours before Supervisor Do’s radio segment that night — based in large part on those findings. The case has been transferred to San Diego County Superior Court.

In his broadcast, Supervisor Do said that many people were helped by VAS.

“People came to Phước Lộc Thọ to eat every day, to be helped by Peter Pham's Society,” Supervisor Do said about VAS. Phước Lộc Thọ is the Vietnamese name for the Asian Garden Mall, where Pham’s restaurant Perfume River is located.

An LAist review of VAS’ internal financial ledgers provided to the county and obtained by a public records request, found that VAS paid $1.7 million to Perfume River, the majority of money it received from the county to provide meals to needy seniors in 2021 and 2022.

The payments to Perfume River are labeled as “Food Supplies,” with no further information.

In early April, LAist sent questions to the county and to Viet America Society leaders about those large-scale transfers of funds from the nonprofit to the restaurant. Neither entity has provided answers. A county spokesperson told LAist that the county has not received any details or invoices it has requested from VAS about the restaurant payments.

County officials now say it’s unclear what happened to the taxpayer money that was forwarded to the restaurant. They issued findings, cited in their lawsuit against VAS, that the nonprofit has refused to provide the county with an explanation or documentation about what the funds were used for.

The FBI searched the restaurant Thursday, as well as other locations tied to VAS.

More from VietLink segment

In his Aug. 15 broadcast on VietLink Radio, Supervisor Do said he and his family are victims of a smear campaign by the media and Janet Nguyen, the state senator and a former longtime ally turned political foe. Nguyen, a Republican, had mentored Supervisor Do, a fellow Republican. He served as her chief of staff when she was a county supervisor before they had a bitter falling out. She is currently a candidate to replace him as supervisor in the Nov. 5 election. (Do was termed out of office.)

Supervisor Do also said during the broadcast that slander from the media and “factions that follow” Nguyen are why his wife Cheri Pham — the number two judge in Orange County Superior Court — recently decided not to seek the top judgeship.

“They kept insinuating that there is something dark, something that discredits us and our families, not only is related to us but even with my wife. It slanders our whole family and therefore my wife no longer wants to be the…chief justice of Orange County,” Supervisor Do said on the broadcast.

“Our community has lost an opportunity [for] the first time in the history of the United States since the Vietnamese were refugees, a Chief Justice of such ability, prestige and dignity as my wife has to turn down that position because of a completely unacceptable manner of conduct in our community.”

O.C. Supervisor Andrew Do (center left) in December 2023 with his daughter Rhiannon Do (right) and wife Cheri Pham (between them). Pham is the assistant presiding judge of Orange County Superior Court.

(

Screenshot of a public video posted by Do’s official YouTube channel

)

Through a court spokesperson, Cheri Pham declined to comment on her husband’s description of why she decided not to seek the presiding judge position.

She is currently the assistant presiding judge for a two-year period ending in December. Typically, people in that position run for presiding judge for the next term and win the election among the court’s judges, according to an LAist review of court announcements for the last 14 years.

But Cheri Pham announced to the other judges last month that she had decided not to seek the top seat. She did not give a reason in her announcement, but said it was “not an easy decision” and came “after careful consideration.”

Supervisor Do alleges defamation

In the Aug. 15 radio broadcast, Supervisor Do also said he believes there are people who want to make sure he doesn’t try for elective office again.

“They want to make sure that they have to defame Andrew Do so that he can’t become a candidate who they must fear in the future,” Do said in his broadcast.

Asked for her response, Nguyen, the state senator, said Do has only himself to blame for his troubles. She also reiterated calls she has made for him to resign.

“This is classic Andrew Do, lying to the Vietnamese community in their own language to create divide. Meanwhile, he has been completely silent to the rest of our community,” Nguyen wrote in a statement.

“The reality is that Andrew is solely responsible for ruining his wife’s, Judge Cheri [Pham’s], career. Andrew is solely responsible for his daughter’s [alleged] fraudulent activities. Most importantly, he single-handedly stripped resources for our most vulnerable communities to benefit himself,” she added.

“It’s time he looks in the mirror and takes accountability for his actions.”

Nguyen is running against Frances Marquez, a city council member in Cypress and Democrat for Orange County’s first supervisorial district.

Marquez called for Supervisor Do to resign in a statement to LAist on Saturday.

“Anyone who violates the principles of ethics and betrays the public trust is not fit for holding office,” she wrote. “He had a duty to be honest and transparent with the residents of District 1 and failed us.”

Earlier this year, Supervisor Do endorsed his then co-chief of staff, Van Tran, for his seat, but Tran placed third in the March primary and did not make it to the runoff.

As a two-term supervisor, Do, himself, cannot run for supervisor again.

About the county’s lawsuit

The county’s lawsuit, which followed months of investigative articles from LAist on Supervisor Do’s funding of VAS, alleges his daughter and other leaders of the nonprofit “brazenly plundered” up to $10.4 million Supervisor Do had given them between early 2021 and fall 2023 to build a Vietnam War memorial and feed seniors and people with disabilities during the pandemic.

The lawsuit claims Rhiannon Do and her associates at the nonprofit refused to show how they spent those millions of dollars in public funds, which the county received from the federal government to help respond to the public’s needs during the coronavirus pandemic.

The county’s lawsuit accuses them of spending part of the money to buy million-dollar properties for themselves — but does not cite proof. Three of the six properties cited in the county’s lawsuit were among those that federal agents searched this week.

Rosen, the lawyer for VAS, has disputed the county’s allegations, saying the lawsuit is riddled with errors, “a disgrace” and a “hatchet job.”

FBI officers and Craig Wilke, who identified as O.C. Supervisor Andrew Do's lawyer, at Supervisor Do's house in Orange County the day it was searched.

(

Adolfo Guzman-Lopez

/

LAist

)

On Thursday, a little less than a week after the radio broadcast, Supervisor Do and Cheri Pham’s house was searched by the FBI. Federal officials also searched a house purchased by Rhiannon Do; another purchased by Peter Pham, who is often listed in public records as the chief executive of VAS; other properties owned by people connected to VAS; and the Perfume River restaurant.

Rhiannon Do and Peter Pham deny wrongdoing

Rhiannon Do and Peter Pham have denied doing anything wrong.

In an April email replying to LAist’s inquiries about the county’s payments to VAS, Rhiannon Do said there was nothing improper about how Viet America Society’s funding was used.

Rhiannon Do in a YouTube video posted in August 2021 by the Steinberg Institute where she was an intern.

(

Screenshot via YouTube

)

The “insinuation that there was something untoward with the use of VAS funds is fabricated” and a “false narrative,” she wrote. A lawyer who said he’s representing Rhiannon Do told LAist on Friday that she’s a "very honest, law-abiding, hardworking young woman."

Following the federal search on his house, Peter Pham told the Los Angeles Times that the situation was a "misunderstanding" and that he "didn't do anything wrong."

About VietLink Radio

Nick Lecong, VietLink Radio’s owner, worked for Supervisor Do as his deputy chief of staff from February 2015 to September 2017.

He was then hired as a translation contractor for Do’s county office through his company T&T Consulting, and was paid $72,000 per year for several years through contracts that did not go through a competitive bidding process.

According to county records, VietLink Radio directly received $89,000 in county funds for public service announcements during the pandemic, plus an unknown portion of $150,000 the county paid vendors that have close ties to VAS leaders.

That money made its way to ads on VietLink through private firms associated with VAS leaders Peter Pham, Le Dan Hua, Dinh Mai, and a woman who has lived at the same address as Peter Pham — Thu Thao Thi Vu — according to county invoice records obtained by LAist.

In the second half of 2020, the county paid $75,000 each to Aloha Financial Investment and Hua Development — two companies that have shared leaders with VAS — to fund COVID-19 public service ads on broadcast outlets that included “Vietlink Radio and Vietlink Television,” according to the invoices.

Aloha Financial Investment described itself as an “investments” business in a state filing last year. Hua Development is Peter Pham and Hua’s building contractor business.

The ad payments were in addition to $60,000 the county directly paid VietLink Radio during the same period — also for pandemic public service ads, according to a county contract obtained by LAist. Those ads were supposed to run in newspapers, according to the contract.

County spokesperson Molly Nichelson, who is listed in county records as requesting the Aloha Financial Investment and Hua Development purchase orders, said Friday she was looking into LAist’s questions about the ad payments.

Lecong's ties to earlier investigation of Supervisor Do

Lecong was mentioned in a previous investigation of Supervisor Do by the state Fair Political Practices Commission. That investigation found that Supervisor Do and Lecong used a different nonprofit as a “holding company” to pay for construction of statues of war heroes and former President Ronald Reagan at Mile Square Regional Park in Fountain Valley in 2015 and 2016.

A statue of General Tran Hung Dao in Mile Square Regional Park in Fountain Valley. The statue was cited in an investigation by the California Fair Political Practices Commission.

(

Mary Plummer

/

LAist

)

State investigators concluded that he and Lecong controlled that foundation even though they were not its named leaders.

They issued findings that Supervisor Do had falsely told them under penalty of perjury that he had not asked anyone to donate to the foundation, when he had.

The foundation used donated funds, raised by Supervisor Do, to pay two men who would later become involved with VAS. The two men — VAS founder Peter Pham and Hua, his partner in a general contracting business — were described by the Orange County Register at the time as project managers for the statues’ construction, and were paid $20,800.

Peter Pham went on to found VAS in June 2020, days after Supervisor Do and other county supervisors voted to create the pandemic meals program. Hua — Peter Pham’s business partner — has served as VAS’ president on and off since its founding, according to tax filings and other government documents. Rhiannon Do also has appeared on contracts and other government filings, variously as the group’s president, vice president, executive director, officer and director.

She told LAist, via email in April, that she never served in those roles. Rhiannon Do never responded to follow-up questions about why her name appears in at least nine public titles in top leadership roles at the nonprofit.

Catch up on LAist's investigation

In November 2023, LAist began investigating how millions in public taxpayer dollars were spent. In total, LAist has uncovered over $13 million in public money was approved to a little-known nonprofit that records state was led on and off by Rhiannon Do, the now 23-year-old daughter of Supervisor Do. Most of that money was directed to the group by Supervisor Do outside of the public’s view and never appeared on public meeting agendas. He did not publicly disclose his family ties.

Much of the known funding came from federal coronavirus relief money.

• Read the story that launched the investigation here.
• Since we started reporting, we’ve also uncovered the group was two years overdue in completing a required audit into whether the meal funds were spent appropriately.
• And we found the amount of taxpayer money directed to the nonprofit was much larger than initially known. It totals at least $13.5 million in county funding — tallied from government records obtained and published by LAist. 
• After our reporting, O.C. officials wrote demand letters to the nonprofit saying millions in funding were unaccounted for. They warned it could be forced to repay the funds.
• And, we found the nonprofit missed a deadline set by county officials to provide proof about how funding for meals were spent.
• On Aug. 2, LAist reported O.C. officials were demanding the refund of more than $3 million in public funds awarded by Do to VAS and another nonprofit, Hand to Hand.
• Six days later, LAist reported Orange County officials had expanded demands for refunds of millions in tax dollars from the nonprofits and threatened legal action.
• On Aug. 15, LAist reported O.C. officials sued VAS and its key officers and associated businesses, including Rhiannon Do. The lawsuit alleges that county money was illegally used to purchase five homes and was converted into cash through ATM transactions. 
• Then, on Aug. 19, LAist reported O.C. officials had announced a second lawsuit against Hand to Hand and its CEO to recover millions of taxpayer dollars that were directed by Supervisor Do.
• LAist broke the news on Aug. 22 that federal agents were searching Rhiannon Do's home in Tustin. Later that day, Supervisor Do's home, and other properties, were also raided.

How to watchdog local government

One of the best things you can do to hold officials accountable is pay attention.

Your city council, board of supervisors, school board and more all hold public meetings that anybody can attend. These are times you can talk to your elected officials directly and hear about the policies they’re voting on that affect your community.

• Read tips on how to get involved.
• The next regular meeting of the board is Tuesday, Aug. 27. You can check out the O.C. Board of Supervisors full calendar here.
• Learn how to submit a public comment to the O.C. Board of Supervisors.

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

On most weekday afternoons at the Expo Park/USC Metro station outside the University of Southern California, the platform feels like an extension of campus life. People are usually bunched up in pairs or groups. Many wear USC crewneck sweatshirts and talk about campus life as they straddle the edges between downtown Los Angeles and the classroom. What they aren’t talking about are their cars or debating the pros and cons of taking an Uber versus a Waymo. 

“Ubering is expensive every time I’m going somewhere, it’s at least gonna be $30,” Jaiden Torres told The LA Local. Torres is a third-year student at Hofstra University doing a semester in Los Angeles. 

He said a car is the last thing on his mind as he navigates the city. “That’s money that I could be spending on other things. So I try to opt out to take the train.”

For many young Angelenos, the Los Angeles Metro isn’t a last resort. It’s how they move through the city. They’re embracing transit even as the system evolves and works to rebuild ridership and public trust.

More than 500,000 students, including community college students, across L.A. County now ride Metro through its GoPass program, with nearly 60 million student boardings since 2021. Metro says its overall ridership has also continued to recover since the pandemic, reaching more than 82% of pre-pandemic levels in January 2025 and extending a run of more than two years of growth.

In a statement, Metro attributed that increase in ridership to improvements in service, safety and a return of public confidence in the system. 

For Josh Figueroa, a first-year urban planning major at the USC, transit is both a classroom topic and a daily necessity. Originally from Riverside, he moved to L.A. this year without a car and now relies on Metro to get around.

“In terms of getting where I need to go, the Metro is very reliable,” he told The LA Local. “And, because I’m a student, it’s free.”

And it’s not just USC students. Since 2016, Metro has offered a U-Pass partnership that allows students to get unlimited or discounted rides with their TAP cards. The program went from one major university in 2017 to nearly two dozen schools in 2025. 

Jacob Wasserman is a research program manager at UCLA’s Institute of Transportation Studies. He told The LA Local that by offering passes, schools are helping create a culture of students using the Metro.  

“At UCLA, every undergrad and grad student gets a pass. It makes the transit agency money because [schools] buy it for everybody, and the people who do use it get a ton of value. It’s effectively free,” he said. 

For students juggling tuition, rent and groceries, the savings matter.

“I’m definitely more inclined to take the Metro than an Uber because of finances,” Figueroa said. “It’s way cheaper to take the Metro.”

Figueroa also feels more a part of L.A. when riding. “I feel more in connection with a community or in connection with a city when I’m taking the resources and the transportation that they provide,” he said. 

But there are drawbacks. 

On most weekday afternoons at the Expo Park/USC Metro station outside the University of Southern California, the platform feels like an extension of campus life. People are usually bunched up in pairs or groups. Many wear USC crewneck sweatshirts and talk about campus life as they straddle the edges between downtown Los Angeles and the classroom. What they aren’t talking about are their cars or debating the pros and cons of taking an Uber versus a Waymo.

Trains vs cars

L.A.’s landscape is built around cars and freeways, with many Metro stops located in inconvenient places. “It’s hard to fit a transit system into land use that’s built around the car, because you may have to walk that last mile, and if there isn’t just much around, it can be unsafe,” Wasserman said. 

Figueroa has personally experienced this. “A lot of places I want to go, like a food spot somewhere, I’d need to drive because the Metro stops are in inconvenient places. If I get off at a Metro stop, I might have to walk 30 minutes to an hour,” he said. 

But that may change. New Metro expansions are working to connect the city more efficiently.

Metro’s “28 by 28” initiative aims to complete 28 major public rail transportation projects before the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games, including rail extensions, new light-rail segments and rapid bus transit lines. 

Nine projects have been completed so far, including the A Line (formerly the Gold Line) Foothill Extension to Pomona. “[The A Line] is great for connecting college students out there,” Wasserman said. 

He added that these projects are meant to serve everyday riders. “The difference that we’re seeing for the 28 Olympics is that a lot of these projects, even the bus projects, are designed to be Olympic supporting, but also legacy projects beyond that,” Wasserman said. 

Wasserman hopes Metro’s expansion will help keep Angelenos connected across the city and is optimistic about its future.

“We’re really ambitiously expanding our rail system,” he said. “If it can work in L.A., it can work anywhere in the U.S.”

But another major issue affecting ridership is around safety. 

Commuter safety concerns

Figueroa noted that Metro stations with the fewest riders feel less safe.

“In urban places that don’t have a lot of people, there’s this idea of having less eyes on the street. When you have less eyes and less people watching, people tend to feel unsafe because they feel alone. It’s very prevalent on the Metro,” Figueroa said.

Torres noted the difference between the buses and trains in L.A. 

“I feel a lot safer on the train than on the bus. On trains, if it feels unsafe, I can move to the next car. But on the bus you’re kind of stuck,” he said. 

Transit agencies are paying attention to these concerns. Wasserman conducted a research project into the L.A. Metro Transit Ambassador Pilot Program, which provides a visible, customer-focused presence at stations and on vehicles. 

“I think the ambassador program is working well. They’re just like extra eyes, so you’re not in an empty station,” Wasserman said. “They are also doing more serious stuff. They carry Narcan and address overdoses.” 

Figueroa has noticed the changes. “I definitely feel safer. I don’t feel like I’m in danger or threatened,” he said. 

The UCLA report concluded that Metro was “wise to consider, pilot, and now make permanent” the ambassador program. 

The continuous improvements are also shaping how young people view the city itself. “I feel like [by taking the train] I’m getting to observe the working class or day-to-day people of L.A.,” Torres said.

Most Orange County residents favor offering undocumented residents a pathway to legal status rather than blanket deportation, according to a new poll from the University of California, Irvine School of Social Ecology. But that’s not true for a majority of Republicans (54%), who favor deportation, the poll found.

Jon Gould, dean of the School of Social Ecology, said the poll demonstrates the stark difference in public opinion on immigration between Republicans on one side, and Democrats and independents on the other.

“ Majorities are very much in favor of immigration, paths to legal citizenship, and are hesitant to use the enforcement power too strongly," Gould said of the poll results. “It’s surprising in a purple county that we’re seeing both a strong majority one way, and a cleavage where one of the political parties [Republican] is off by itself compared to independents and Democrats.”

Orange County is considered “purple” because the county’s 2 million voters are nearly evenly split, with one-third each registered as Republican or Democrat, and another third registered as No Party Preference or with a smaller political party.

There was agreement across political parties on some issues, Gould said. The majority of respondents agreed that violent criminals should automatically be deported, and that immigrants who are U.S. veterans should never be deported.

UC Irvine School of Social Ecology polled 1,200 Orange County adults on immigration issues in March 2026.

(

Courtesy UC Irvine School of Social Ecology

/

LAist

)

Gould also said the poll of some 1,200 adults demonstrates the nuanced opinions that most residents have on the subject of immigration. For example, a majority of all respondents (61%) support limiting immigration from countries the government deems dangerous or unstable.

Results of the UC Irvine poll on immigration show agreement across party lines on some nuanced questions.

(

Courtesy: UC Irvine School of Social Ecology

/

LAist

)

Some other key takeaways:

• While 62% of respondents said they disapproved of President Donald Trump’s handling of immigration issues, a smaller margin, 55%, disapproved of his handling of the U.S.-Mexico border.
• A majority said immigration fills essential low-wage jobs (76%) and enhances civic life (67%). A plurality also said immigration strains public services (48%).
• Only small percentages of all respondents said they supported automatic deportation for immigrants convicted of non-violent crimes (23%), unemployed immigrants (16%), recent arrivals (11%), and non-English speakers (10%). 
• On the question of ICE, 73% of Republicans said they supported the agency’s actions, whereas 67% of Democrats and 40% of independents said the agency should be abolished.

Implications for the upcoming elections and immigration reform

Trump’s aggressive immigration enforcement has taken a heavy toll in Orange County. Some families have lost breadwinners to deportation, while others have sought to limit their exposure by quitting jobs and staying indoors. Spending in the county decreased by about one-quarter of a percent immediately after enforcement ramped up last year, according to a separate UC Irvine study. That led to a $4.5 million decline in sales tax over an eight-week period, the study found.

Students protest ICE on Jan. 27, 2026 in front of Anaheim City Hall.

(

Jill Replogle

/

LAist

)

A growing number of cities, plus the county itself, have set aside funds to support immigrant residents with basic needs and legal services.

This support reflects what Gould called a “sea change” in public opinion since 1994, when two-thirds of Orange County voters cast ballots in favor of excluding undocumented immigrants from public education and other public services. That ballot initiative, Proposition 187, was ultimately found to be unconstitutional and never went into effect.

Gould said the majority of respondents’ positive views on immigration in the recent poll shows how much the county has changed. It’s also a reflection of the vast demographic shifts that have occurred in the county in recent decades as a result of immigration and refugee arrivals from countries like Vietnam.

Nearly 40% of residents polled said both of their parents were born in another country; 82% of Asians polled said both parents were born in another country.

Slightly more than one-third of respondents said they personally knew someone who is undocumented.

Gould thinks the results of the polling bode well for the prospects for immigration reform — despite decades of failure in Washington to strike a deal between Republicans and Democrats. The shift in public opinion might not lead to change in policy yet, Gould said, “but politicians generally follow where the wind’s blowing.”

 “At a time where we're being led to believe that immigration pits people against one another, it's intractable, these battles will go on forever," he said. "I actually think what we're seeing in the data here is that there is a supermajority support for a number of policies on immigration. There is actually potentially a solution here.”

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

Jacque Langston was driving down Manchester Boulevard in Inglewood when he came face-to-face with an odd sight: sea creatures floating across one of the city’s new, spiraling digital billboards. 

“Why am I looking at jellyfish? That has nothing to do with me,” said Langston, an Inglewood native. For Langston, the video billboards that have come to dominate stretches of Inglewood’s major roads are a square peg in a round hole.

“The city has never been touched like that,” Langston said. “Now you’ve got a mini-Vegas.” 

A digital billboard is seen on La Cienega Blvd. at Florence Ave. in Inglewood on April 18, 2026, in Los Angeles.

(

Dania Maxwell

/

The LA Local

)

Video billboards have proliferated in Inglewood in recent years, targeting the influx of people driving into the city for concerts and sporting events at SoFi Stadium, the Intuit Dome and the Kia Forum. 

Last summer, though, they became a flashpoint for a series of lawsuits that revealed fractures in the once-close relationship between the city and its major entertainment venues. The various parties are now fighting over lucrative advertising territory as major international sporting events approach.

That legal drama — reported last week by The LA Local — also threatens to undo the contract that underpins SoFi Stadium’s financial relationship with the city. 

Langston and other Inglewood residents might get a chance to weigh in on the billboards in November’s election, due to a proposed ballot initiative that would bar most advertisements on public streets. But that ballot initiative itself has now prompted its own potentially costly legal fight involving the city, which receives a steadily increasing stream of revenue from billboard companies, and people with ties to the billionaire-owned stadiums.

Meanwhile, the bright LED video screens have divided local opinion. 

Vanessa Cowan, an Inglewood resident, said the gleaming screens are a sign of progress in the city. “I like them,” she said. “It has a different look.” 

A person walks past a digital billboard on Prairie Avenue in Inglewood on April 18, in Los Angeles.

(

Dania Maxwell

/

The LA Local

)

Khnum Alexander, owner of Swank Men’s Fashion on Manchester, called the billboards “monstrosities” and said advertising on the screens is too expensive for small businesses like his. He also questioned the new, twisting screens that billboard company WOW Media has recently begun to install in groups of three across the city.

“Do we really need more?” he asked. 

Down the street from Alexander’s menswear store, EZ Will Driving School owner Will McDaniel felt differently.

“I’m all for it,” McDaniel said. “People are afraid of change. Change to them feels awkward.” 

If city leaders have their way, the Billboard Blight Elimination and Neighborhood Preservation Initiative won’t make it to voters this fall.

“What is packaged as an initiative by and for Inglewood residents appears to be a product of avaricious puppeteering by a billionaire developer,” lawyers retained by the city wrote in a March 4 court complaint filed in an attempt to block the initiative. 

That developer, the city’s lawyers contend, was SoFi Stadium owner Stan Kroenke. Attorneys later amended the complaint to include Intuit Dome owner Steve Ballmer.

“Voter suppression”

In February, Inglewood resident Shannon Roberts filed to circulate a petition to prohibit commercial billboards on public streets, sidewalks and medians. The petition, a step towards getting the billboard initiative on the ballot in November, also seeks to prohibit business arrangements for the city to profit from billboard deals. 

“Public spaces belong to people, not billboard companies,” Roberts wrote, adding advertising should instead prioritize public safety messaging, such as emergency alerts, not advertising for profit.

“Inglewood should not be for sale to billboard companies for decades at a time — especially when such arrangements permanently alter the character of our beautiful city and erase the legacy of those who fought to preserve our neighborhoods,” Roberts wrote.

Roberts did not respond to a request for comment. When The LA Local reached out to her lawyer, a veteran campaign spokesperson responded.  

John Shallman has been a consultant in Southern California politics for decades and formerly worked for the Clippers when they moved to the Intuit Dome. 

He is now working with Roberts to get the anti-billboard initiative on the ballot; their website and campaign are called Inglewood Not for Sale.

He said he’s never seen a city sue one of its residents over an idea they’re attempting to put before voters.

“It’s voter suppression,” Shallman told The LA Local. “You can run a campaign against it, but trying to stop it from getting in front of citizens at all, that’s a big red flag. We’re all about voter empowerment. They’re the public’s streets, parks and medians. They control how they’re used and how they’re sold.”

Inglewood Mayor James Butts did not return a request for comment. The city’s lawyers argued in court filings that the initiative shouldn’t be allowed to go before voters because it would unconstitutionally restrict speech, lay out illegal zoning guidelines and hurt the city’s contract with WOW Media, the company that controls many of Inglewood’s billboards. 

Shallman believes that the Inglewood City Council cut a bad deal in April 2025 with WOW Media when the city approved a 20-year contract, which can be extended for decades. “It’s sort of biblical in its length of time,” he said. “The city decided that the profit of one company is far more important than the residents who will have to live with these billboards.”

The campaign has already collected several thousand signatures, Shallman said. 

Shallman dismissed the city’s accusations that the coalition he works with does not authentically represent Inglewood’s residents. Though Roberts’ name is on the initiative, the filing fee was paid for by Gerard McCallum II, a longtime associate of Hollywood Park.

Shallman said the initiative is raising money from all sorts of supporters, including those tied to the Rams and Clippers professional sports teams.

“You’re talking about an insignificant sum of money that pales in comparison to the hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars that will be spent to sue this Inglewood resident,” Shallman said of the filing fee.

Inglewood’s November election could be packed

WOW Media is opposing the billboard initiative through its own campaign, Inglewood Residents for Stadium Accountability. 

CEO Scott Krantz wrote in a statement to The LA Local that the billboard initiative, which does not include stadium billboards, would deprive the city of up to $2 billion in revenue over 40 years.

“The stadiums share none of their advertising revenue with Inglewood residents. We trust the people of Inglewood to see the stadium owner billionaire’s scam for exactly what it is,” Krantz wrote.

Krantz and Inglewood Residents for Stadium Accountability are also backing a pair of initiatives that could have a big impact on stadiums’ bottom line: The initiatives seek to remove admissions tax caps for large venues and limit how much some parking lots can charge during major events. 

Longtime Mayor Butts is also up for reelection in November, as are Councilmembers Gloria Gray and Alex Padilla and a few school board members. 

Wherever the votes land, Inglewood’s rapid transformation doesn’t appear to be slowing down. 

“Times are changing around here,” said Rick Todd, who sat at a table on Manchester Boulevard on Thursday, selling jugs of soursop tea. Up the street, a video billboard flicked between an Inglewood police recruitment poster and an ad for “The Devil Wears Prada 2.” “This goes along with it.”