The Brief

On a recent Thursday morning, Los Angeles City Councilmember Kevin de León walked along a line of hundreds of people outside his Eagle Rock office, greeting them with handshakes and hugs — and boxes of eggs, produce and bread.

The occasion was De León’s monthly food giveaway.

“I'm glad they have this type of service because I don’t know what I would do,” said Barbara Bourland, a retired teacher. This was her first time at the giveaway. Her husband of 61 years died two months ago. Money is tight.

“After paying the bills, it doesn’t leave much money left over,” she said.

Bourland, 79, knew about the secretly recorded audio that surfaced more than a year ago in which De León, who is running for reelection this year, was heard participating in a conversation that included racist and derogatory remarks. In a discussion about redistricting with two other council members and a labor leader, he accused a white colleague of using his adopted Black son like a political prop akin to a luxury handbag.

The recordings prompted a flurry of calls for his resignation, including from President Joe Biden.

Bourland said she recalled receiving a campaign mailer from De León's office a few weeks ago. It was an apology letter. And she said she plans to support him in the March 5 election just like she did four years ago when he first ran for the office.

“Everybody has their faults,” Bourland said. “God is forgiving, so why shouldn’t I be?”

The incumbent council member is counting on the forgiveness of voters like Bourland in his battle to continue to represent the 14th L.A. City Council district, which stretches from downtown L.A. and Boyle Heights to Highland Park and Eagle Rock.

De León faces seven challengers, all of whom are looking to stop his attempted Rocky Balboa-style comeback from a hailstorm of criticism in the wake of the October 2022 leak of the tapes.

(Read more about De León and his challengers in the LAist Voter Game Plan.)

De León apologizes but remains defiant

On the one hand, De León expressed remorse about his role in the conversation. In an interview with LAist, he said he was “profoundly apologetic and deeply sorry to those I hurt.” He said he should have stopped the conversation when racist comments were made by his colleague, former Council President Nury Martinez, who did resign.

He also has admitted what he said about his colleague and his adopted son was wrong.

Los Angeles City Councilmember Kevin de León.

(

Patrick T. Fallon

/

AFP via Getty Images

)

But the 57-year-old longtime politician is also defiant. De León said he believes he is a victim of a “false narrative” that he is a racist. He denied accusations he was engaging in backroom dealing to redraw council district boundaries to keep himself and other allies in power. He pointed out that a majority of the City Council voted in favor of the redistricting maps that were discussed in the meeting.

The protests in the wake of the scandal were intense. Demonstrators calling on De León to resign shut down council meetings. People protested outside his house. There is still a lot of angry sentiment among his constituents.

A 32-year-old man, who identified himself only by his last name, Garza, was one of about 100 people who attended a debate at the Delores Mission in Boyle Heights earlier this month.

“What he said was racist and wrong,” said Garza, who works at a nonprofit. “He disappointed the community not only with his racist remarks but by trying to gerrymander the district so he could stay in power.

He added: “Take the bench, dude.”

Challengers weigh in about the controversy

Eviction defense attorney Ysabel Jurado is among those seeking to unseat De León. In an interview with LAist, she pointed out that he was stripped of all his committee assignments after the entire City Council called on him to resign.

“We, as a district, have suffered while he was being censured and not being on any committees,” she said. “I think this has been a huge distraction for this district.”

Jurado describes herself as a progressive who would have opposed a hefty pay raise for Los Angeles police officers and the lifting of a rent freeze — measures De León supported. She said the police labor contract adds to a projected budget deficit of up to $400 million that will take resources away from other programs and that the rent hike will increase homelessness.

De León has said officers deserved the raise and that he worked to reduce the allowed rent increase from 7 to 4%.

Two Democratic members of the state assembly also are challenging De León in the non-partisan race, both with similar politics to the incumbent.

Assemblymember Wendy Carrillo’s district overlaps much of the council district. She said De León’s participation in the secretly recorded conversation should disqualify him for reelection.

“What I heard was a conversation about benefiting the individual versus the benefits of a community,” she said.

Carrillo came under criticism after she was arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol in November and crashing into two parked cars in Northeast L.A. She pleaded no contest to misdemeanor DUI and is attending a substance abuse program at Kaiser and Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, she said.

“I’m doing the work to be a better version of myself,” she said.

Miguel Santiago is the other assemblymember running. He called De León’s comments on the tape “shameful.”

“I think this district wants change,” he said.

Santiago is the only candidate to benefit from outside money. Independent expenditure committees have spent more than $600,000 on his behalf, including groups representing the L.A. County Federation of Labor and a group of Latino-elected officials.

The other less-well-funded candidates in the race include health care professional Nadine Dias, community advocate Genny Guerrero, attorney Teresa Hillery, public school teacher Eduardo “Lalo” Vargas.

A 'tough election' for De León

Inside his Eagle Rock office last week, De León stood amid a sea of glass statues. They are awards from community groups he’s received over his years as a politician. The wall is adorned with photos of him with other politicians, including two former governors.

“I’ve dedicated my life to the well being of all individuals, regardless of who you are,” he said. “That’s who I am, and that’s why I did not step down.”

De León was once a Democratic Party powerhouse, rising from labor organizer to leader of the California Senate. He unsuccessfully ran for the U.S. Senate and L.A. mayor along the way. His story is compelling. He is the son of an unauthorized immigrant mother who raised him and his siblings alone, cleaning houses for a living. He was the first to graduate high school in his family.

He admits he faces “a tough election … given the circumstances.”

“But we’ve leaned in hard,” he said, touting the building of multiple homeless shelters and nine new playgrounds in the district.

It is the provision of those kinds of city services that may determine his fate.

Joe Gonzalez said he has voted for De Leon multiple times over the years — for state assembly, state senate, and for council member in 2020. The tape scandal is not his top concern.

“Everybody screws up once in a while,” said the retired letter carrier.

But he’s unhappy about the dirty streets he sees in his working class Boyle Heights neighborhood. “I see the lack of effort to do something in this neighborhood,” he said. “We’re being ignored here.”

“Community members have to gather together with their own brooms and mops and trash bags and go clean up areas,” he added.

So this time he’s looking for another candidate to support. “I will not be voting for De León.”

Peter Dreier, professor of politics at Occidental College, said it’s unlikely any of the candidates will win a majority of votes in the primary, meaning the top two finishers would face off in the November general election. He said De Leon has more name recognition on his side than the other candidates, and he has city slush fund money that he’s using to hand out “turkeys and such.”

“The real question is who is going to come in second to De León,” he said.

Gov. Gavin Newsom has proposed record levels of public funding for K-12 schools, but in several Southern California school districts declining enrollment and rising costs may still lead to cuts next school year.

The budget proposal allocates $125.5 billion, the highest-ever level, according to Newsom. That’s $20,427 per student.

“There's an increase in per pupil funding, but I wouldn't be fooled into thinking that those numbers indicate that schools really have more money to work with than in previous years,” said California School Boards Association spokesperson Troy Flint. The organization represents almost 1,000 districts and county offices of education statewide.

That’s because declining enrollment combined with rising teacher salaries, un-funded state mandates and other increased costs are squeezing local school districts.

LAist spoke to Flint and several other school finance experts to understand the financial challenges California districts face as they create their spending plans for next school year.

How does the state fund school districts?

The majority of the state’s general fund comes from personal income, sales tax and corporation tax revenue.

“That's great when the economy is good and state revenues are growing, and it's trickier when the economy is bad and state revenues are small,” said USC education professor Lawrence Picus.

California law guarantees TK-12 schools and community colleges a minimum level of funding each year, usually about 40% of the state’s general fund. (Property tax is a local revenue source, and considered to be less volatile but with limited growth.)

The state provides a base amount of money multiplied by each student and there is additional funding for every low-income, English-language learner, unhoused or foster youth student in the district. This system is called the Local Control Funding Formula.

How does enrollment affect school funding?

Since California sets funding rates per student, it needs a way to count those students. This is average daily attendance — how many students show up for class each day.

Currently, fewer students are enrolling at schools throughout the state, particularly in areas with high costs of living like Los Angeles. Students who are enrolled are also missing more school compared to before the pandemic.

“The intuitive response is, ‘well, if you have declining enrollment, you have fewer students, you should need less money,’” Flint said. “But in practice it doesn't really work that way.”

That’s because a district may lose a few students from each class across several schools each year, which may not justify laying off staff or closing a campus.

California education law blunts the immediate impact of declining enrollment by calculating funding based on the highest of three attendance counts: current year, prior year, or the average of the three most recent years, but over time fewer students means a smaller multiplier for state funding.

Increasing costs

Michael Fine is CEO of Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team (FCMAT), the California agency that supports public schools' financial and business practices. He estimated schools are experiencing an estimated 5-6% cost increase every year.

The sources of that increase can include an increase in sexual assault claims (and the ensuing legal costs), utilities and insurance costs.

California provides money toward these increased costs through the Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA). This year’s proposed COLA is a 2.41% increase, less than half the estimated increase districts are experiencing, Fine said.

“At the state, they can say we are fully funding our commitment to TK through 12 education,” Fine said. “But at the local level, it feels like things are constrained. It feels like a pinch or actually a reduction.”

Another factor is the push to increase educators’ salaries in light of California’s high cost of living.

This year unions representing teachers at 32 school districts, including Los Angeles Unified, are negotiating contracts under a unified platform called “We Can’t Wait.” The campaign has already led to one strike and negotiations have stalled in more than a dozen districts, including LAUSD.

Federal, state budget uncertainty

This year’s state revenue projection is higher than expected, in part because of high salaries tied to artificial intelligence, but there’s no guarantee the funding will last.

Alix Gallagher studies school finance at Policy Analysis for California (PACE) and said that because revenue is unpredictable, lawmakers often opt to fund short-term initiatives rather than make long-term commitments.

“Whatever positive effects we're seeing [from short-term funding] are not the types of positive effects we might see if our funding was more stable,” Gallagher said.

For example, this year there is $1 billion for community schools, $757 million to support learning recovery related to the COVID-19 pandemic and $22.9 million for schools damaged by the January 2025 wildfires in L.A. County.

The budget also includes a one-time $2.8 billion grant that can be used for a variety of purposes from filling in the funding gap left by declining enrollment to supporting teacher training.

“Many districts will use that to mitigate some of their struggles,” Fine said. “All it does is buy time.”

The federal government also provides some money for education, but it’s also unclear how that funding will change in the second year of the Trump Administration’s second term.

In 2025, there were cuts to migrant education, mental health, and some internet access programs, although the courts ordered the administration to restore funding to several programs including teacher-training and afterschool programs.

What’s next for California school funding?

Newsom will present a revised spending plan in May and California lawmakers have until June 15 to pass the state’s budget.

In the meantime, local school districts will begin crafting their own budgets based on the governor’s proposal.

Fine said district administrators and elected school boards will have to manage the financial consequences of declines in enrollment over time.

“They make the hard decisions, their boards make the difficult, hard decisions to make, cuts to services and programs,” Fine said.

How can I monitor my school district’s financial health?

School budget proposals should be presented at public meetings, often the school board, where elected leaders can ask questions and the public can weigh in.

Districts may also create a working group, often called a budget advisory committee, of staff, families, community members and students to come up with a plan to address the district's financial challenges.

One indicator of your school district’s financial health are interim reports due in December and March to the County Offices of Education. These reports show how and whether the district can meet its financial obligations for the current and two following years and are labeled:

• Positive, the district can meet its obligations
• Qualified, the district may not be able to meet its obligations
• Negative, the district cannot meet its obligations without changes

Two of Orange County’s 32 districts filed qualified reports in December— Cypress and Saddleback Valley Unified. LAist has also requested this information from the Los Angeles County Office of Education and will update this article when we hear back.

$8.63 million in emergency grants sent to 562 families.

That’s how much financial assistance the Entertainment Community Fund has provided to performing arts and entertainment industry workers since fires broke out in Southern California in January last year. And the organization still is distributing grants, with the knowledge that needs are likely to increase soon.

 ”We know that the trajectory of the recovery process with homeowners and their insurances is that they will often pay some portion or all of a rent expense while people are displaced from their homes,” says Keith McNutt, the ECF’s Western Regional director. “That usually only lasts nine months to a year, and we're of course coming up on that year.”

Why entertainment workers?

Providing support to the entertainment community is nothing new for the nonprofit Entertainment Community Fund (formerly known as The Actors Fund), a national organization that’s been around since 1882 and is a sort of safety net for arts and entertainment workers in any kind of need or crisis. They also have built some of their own affordable housing.

A significant portion of their work, McNutt says, is making people aware that help is available and also that it’s OK to access it.

“It’s hard for any professional person in their craft to ask for help from anyone,” McNutt says. “But literally, we were created 140 years ago for exactly that reason. Because people work hard in this industry, but the industry doesn't provide regular income, regular benefits, [...] predictability, a standard career ladder.”

On top of the normal unpredictability factors of a career in the performing arts, there’s also the fact that the past five years have been “such a brutal onslaught of crises,” as McNutt describes it, from the COVID-19 pandemic to the WGA and SAG-AFTRA strikes in 2023 to the January 2025 fires, “that people have not had time to recover.”

What help is available?

The Entertainment Community Fund’s staff of social workers, career counselors and health insurance counselors provides a wide range of services (many of them free), like classes on things like building “parallel” or “sideline” careers to supplement income and support groups (including some specifically designed for people impacted by the 2025 fires).

Some services, like emergency financial assistance, require a more formal application to show that a recipient does in fact work professionally in performing arts or entertainment.

From ‘parallel’ careers to career changes

For a long time, McNutt says, he heard from arts professionals who saw their non-arts-related day jobs (ECF calls them “parallel” or “sideline” jobs) as sort of betrayal of their art, but “ our message has always been, ‘No, no, no [...] that's what helps you stay in your creative craft.’”

Over the past couple of years, though, with hardships compounding and  ”profound shifts in the amount of employment, particularly in television and film,” McNutt has seen something different.

“We have seen significant increases in the number of people who are coming to our career center to consider transitioning to other careers," he says. "And that is definitely a change.”

And even for those cases and questions like, “How do you apply for a job that's not in the industry when you've never worked outside the industry?” McNutt says that's "something we can help people with.”

When it comes to renters, Scorpios are “particular,” Libras are “gold,” and Aquariuses “can't make up their mind.” That’s according to Dave Goldstein, the Los Angeles landlord behind the company Art Deco Apartments.

For years, Goldstein has asked prospective tenants to tell him their astrological sign as part of the application process. He said he doesn’t care about credit scores, and he loves tenants with pets. He knows his approach to tenant screening is unusual. But when it comes to picking the right renters for his century-old, tastefully appointed buildings, he said it works.

“It gives me an idea of their personality,” Goldstein told LAist outside The Mauretania, a well preserved example of 1930s Streamline Moderne architecture in Hancock Park.

“I mean, it's impersonal to just get an application,” he said. “You're going to get buildings that aren't that good. You're going to get impersonal people that don't care about anything.”

The question might be helpful to Goldstein, but some housing rights experts say it could be pushing the boundaries of what’s legal.

Why Leos make good tenants

While he hasn’t blacklisted any particular star sign, Goldstein said in his experience, people with certain signs are easier to deal with as tenants.

“If they say that they're a Leo, I go, ‘Great,’” he said. “‘I can't wait to rent to you. You're your own boss. I don't have to do nothing. You'll change every light bulb. You'll never call us.’”

Goldstein also likes to ask tenants where they grew up and the color of their car. He said people are sometimes surprised by the questions, but they tend to like his approach.

“They just can't believe it, because they're used to just texting a management company,” he said. “They're not used to personal service.”

The Mauretania, a 1930s apartment building with distinctive curved windows looking out on the street, is one of the properties Dave Goldstein owns through Art Deco Apartments.

(

David Wagner/LAist

)

Housing rights lawyers weigh in

But is asking a tenant about their astrological sign legal? Housing rights attorneys told LAist they’re not aware of any laws or court rulings that explicitly ban landlords from screening tenants based on their birth month. But they said the question is still legally precarious.

“There's not a specific law against it,” said Rodney Leggett, director of litigation at the L.A.-based Housing Rights Center. “But because of the seemingly arbitrary nature of asking somebody about their astrological sign, it could potentially violate the [California Unruh Civil Rights Act].”

The law bans businesses from discriminating against people based on personal characteristics including sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status or sexual orientation.

It does not specifically mention astrology. But lawyers said depending on how businesses treat people with different signs, an argument could be made that they’re being discriminated against for no legitimate business reason based on a personal characteristic they can’t control.

“Astrological signs are not a traditional ‘protected characteristic’ in most anti-discrimination laws,” said Alisa Randell, a managing attorney with the legal aid organization Public Counsel. “But we do have this expansive law in California that is not limited to the categories that are laid out… So I think this is dicey for him.”

Goldstein said he has tenants of all astrological signs, and he plans to keep asking applicants about their birth charts.

“I don't know if it's legal to ask about it or not,” he said. “But it's fun to. And I know they're not going to lie about it.”

A three-judge panel ruled Wednesday that the new congressional maps created by California voters in the fall are legal and should remain in place, handing a win to state Democrats who hope the new districts will swing five congressional seats for their party next year.

The ruling denies a request by California Republicans and the Trump administration for the federal court in Los Angeles to issue a preliminary injunction blocking the maps created by Proposition 50.

In the 117-page ruling, the federal judges rejected GOP arguments that the new maps amounted to racial gerrymandering, which has been prohibited by the U.S. Supreme Court. The panel ruled 2-1, with the two Democratic appointees ruling for California and Judge Kenneth K. Lee, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, dissenting.

In the opinion, Judge Josephine Staton wrote that the panel’s conclusion “probably seems obvious to anyone who followed the news” about Proposition 50 last year. She noted that during the campaign, no one ever described the new maps as racially motivated — including the Republican plaintiffs.

“No one on either side of that debate characterized the map as a racial gerrymander,” the opinion states, noting that the California Republican Party called it a “political power grab to help Democrats retake Congress and impeach Trump,” and Attorney General Pamela J. Bondi deemed it a “redistricting power grab” for political gain.”

The judges also rejected Republican arguments that the voters’ intent did not matter. The majority wrote that voters clearly were endorsing the argument that both sides were making: that this was a partisan power grab, aimed at giving Democrats a leg up in the midterm elections and counteracting what GOP-led states were doing with their own districts.

Democrats celebrated the ruling.

“Republicans’ weak attempt to silence voters failed. California voters overwhelmingly supported Prop 50 — to respond to Trump’s rigging in Texas — and that is exactly what this court concluded,” Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a statement.

Newsom pushed lawmakers to put Proposition 50 on a special statewide ballot after Trump set off a mid-decade redistricting scramble by demanding Texas redraw its maps to benefit Republicans.

In his dissenting opinion, Lee wrote that race “likely played a predominant role in drawing at least one district because the smoking gun is in the hands of Paul Mitchell,” referring to a Democratic consultant who helped draw the new lines.

Lee argued that Mitchell publicly “boasted” about boosting Latino voting power in the 13th Congressional District in theCentral Valley, and that voter intent should not be the only basis for the court’s decision.

“To be sure, California’s main goal was to add more Democratic congressional seats. But that larger political gerrymandering plan does not allow California to smuggle in racially gerrymandered seats,” said Lee, who wrote that Democrats likely wanted to create a Latino majority district “as part of a racial spoils system to award a key constituency that may be drifting away from the Democratic party.”

The ruling could be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Congressional candidates have until March 6 to file papers to run for office in the June primary.