The Brief

If you’re reading this, there’s a good chance you live in Los Angeles. But do you live in the city of L.A.? An unincorporated area of L.A. County? Or do you actually live in another city entirely, such as Beverly Hills, West Hollywood, Inglewood or Culver City?

There are 88 cities in the county, but not every patch of land under the L.A. County umbrella is a city. Some places have their own police forces. Some don’t. Some have their own fire departments. Some don’t.

Why are things like this? We've been looking into it, and it seems one of the answers is — drum roll — water.

The power of water

More than a hundred years ago, the city of L.A. was already one of the ‘it’ places for development and population growth. Sunshine, open land and a manufacturing boom ruled. Between 1890 and 1900 alone, the city of L.A. more than doubled in size to over 100,000. And it kept doubling in the decades after.

There were other cities around. The city of L.A. was the forerunner, of course, incorporated in 1850, and cities like Pasadena (1886), Santa Monica (1886) and Long Beach (1897) came after. By 1901, there were 12 cities in L.A. County.

But with more people in L.A. came the need for more water. The L.A. River was a reasonably viable water source for the city until about 1900, according to William Deverell, the director of the Huntington-USC Institute on California and the West. To truly become a metropolis, though, city leaders had to get planning.

Civil engineer William Mulholland (yep, that Mulholland), who led the municipal water bureau, was sent to evaluate new and bigger water sources, which is how he came up with the idea of an aqueduct running from Owens Valley in eastern California to Los Angeles.

To do that, L.A. had to secure the rights to the Owens River water, which was a choice that was both fought against and supported. This siphoning, which cost millions of dollars and took years to implement, drained Owens Valley of a vital resource and caused lasting economic and environmental problems.

Panoramic view of the Los Angeles Aqueduct in the Owens Valley near Alabama Hills on November 24, 1928.

(

Herald Examiner Collection/Los Angeles Public Library

)

The aqueduct exists to this day.

“[It] basically sticks a straw into the Owens River up in the Owens Valley and draws that water 250 miles down to L.A. by gravity,” Deverell said.

But when the aqueduct opened in 1913, it ended not in L.A. but in San Fernando, a fair distance away.

So to get that water to L.A. in an easier way, two years later city leaders annexed most of the San Fernando Valley. This annexation put the aqueduct in incorporated L.A. city boundaries.

Annexation and incorporation

This meant if you lived in the city of L.A, you had access to this water. If you didn’t — well, that was unfortunate. No Owens water for you! And because of a legal provision, officials were not allowed to sell the newly available resource to places outside the city.

So, smaller incorporated cities and unincorporated areas nearby clamored to be annexed by L.A., who were, among many reasons, infatuated by the potential of abundant water access.

The city expanded to include the beach areas, like Venice in 1925, and other areas like Eagle Rock and Hyde Park in 1923. The rush to annex made it seem like the city of L.A. would eventually engulf the entire county.

But that came to an end in 1928, when Mullholland’s St. Francis Dam burst, killing nearly 500 people. Annexations pretty much stalled.

“It raised the question in a number of people’s minds whether the city had engineering competence and capability to manage such a large project — in spite of the fact that they built the Owens River Aqueduct,” said Samuel Nelson, a general manager and chief engineer of LADWP, in the historical interview Water for Los Angeles. 

People examine the damaged road and washed away railroad track, caused by excess water flowing down the Santa Clara River after the failure of the St. Francis Dam in 1928.

(

Security Pacific National Bank Collection/Los Angeles Public Library

)

Surrounding cities, including Burbank, Pasadena and L.A., formed the Metropolitan Water District, which jointly funded the Colorado River aqueduct.

From then on, being absorbed by the city of L.A. was out of favor. Instead, areas looked instead to become incorporated cities.

Why become a city in the first place?

It wasn't easy. They had to secure support, which generally meant getting authorization from the county and winning a community vote. They also had to show that the city could stay afloat with taxes and budgets, and provide services like police and fire — a big undertaking.

But if places didn’t become cities, they’d stay under the management of L.A. County, governed by the five-member Board of Supervisors, which would mean a small group of elected leaders making decisions for a vast number of diverse areas stretching from the coast to the Eastside.

And that was problematic as many people didn’t want Big Brother to tell them what to do, according to Tom Sitton, retired curator at the L.A. County Museum of Natural History.

“Usually what you have is a group, an organization or just a group of people who… don’t want the county or anybody else having all of the answers for changing things,” he said.

The Lakewood plan

In 1954, when Lakewood incorporated as an independent municipality, it came up with a different plan, which would be a landmark change. Instead of creating vital services from scratch, it would contract them from county agencies. Since then, 41 other cities have followed that model, including Cerritos, Downey, and South El Monte.

A Lakewood plan city, for example, likely doesn’t have its own police department. Instead, it gets that service from the L.A. County Sheriff’s Department. The same goes for road maintenance and libraries — services contracted from the county.

The city of Lakewood’s website describes how the plan helped communities stop having to pick between resources and local control: It “began with the conviction that unincorporated communities didn’t have to choose between annexation by a big city or building a municipal infrastructure from scratch.”

And it keeps evolving. L.A. County’s newest city is Calabasas, incorporated in 1991. It also follows the Lakewood plan.

So if you ever wondered why you might see LAPD, the Sheriff's Department and, say, Santa Monica PD as you drive around the county — well, now you know.

The National Park Service is asking for public input for its study on whether the L.A. coastline between San Pedro and Santa Monica should qualify for national park designation.

Federal officials held a public meeting Wednesday and outlined the study process.

Congress passed a law in 2022 that called for this study and greenlit funding for the three-year effort.

Lawmakers will use the findings to decide whether to designate the stretch of coastline — which includes the Santa Monica Pier, Ballona Creek and RAT Beach — a national park.

Sarah Bodo, project manager at NPS, said the coastline is interpreted as part of the sea to approximately 200 yards inland.

“The 200-yard number is an effort to include the beach areas and the public lands, while excluding private property from the study area,” Bodo said. “In cases where private property is within 200 yards, those properties are excluded from the study.”

What are the criteria?

To become a national park, the area needs to contain nationally significant resources, not already be in the national park system and require direct NPS management.

Sequoia National Park, for example, was recognized in 1890 to protect the giant trees from logging.

Officials will also consider where the access, cost and size of the area can be managed by the department.

The National Park Service is studying whether the red portions of the L.A. coastline should qualify for national park designation.

(

Courtesy of the National Park Service

)

“A study area must meet all four of the criteria,” Bodo said.

What happens now?

The agency is early in the study process. If you have thoughts on the matter, now is the time to share them.

The public comment period is open until April 6.

In the coming months, the agency will review that feedback before preparing a study report for Congress.

Only Congress and the president have the ability to designate a new national park.

“At that point, it will be up to Congress or the president to take action or not. There is no timeline for further action from Congress or the president,” Bodo said. “The completion of the study does not establish a new park unit.”

The process could take years. The last designation given to Missouri’s Ste. Genevieve National Historic Park in 2018, according to the Associated Press. Congress ordered the study for that park in 2005.

Outstanding questions

One question raised at Wednesday’s meeting was what the benefits and downsides of having NPS manage this area are.

Bodo said that would depend on what the legislation would say if designated and how management would work.

“The National Park Service is required to conserve unimpaired scenery, natural and historic objects, wildlife of parks, and to provide for their enjoyment by the public. That's our overall mission,” Bodo said. “National parks can also generate economic activity in nearby communities.”

And, if designated, how exactly would management of this area work?

It’s also still too early to say, but existing property owners, like the county or city, could continue to own and manage the property, Bodo added.

“If this were to be designated, there maybe wouldn't be significant changes in that arena,” Bodo said. “The Park Service would seek to work collaboratively with local communities and existing agencies on common goals for resource protection and recreational opportunities.”

Another question asked was how might Park Service involvement along the L.A. coast affect fishing and hunting regulations?

“That's really dependent on land ownership, so if land ownership did not change, nothing would change,” Bodo said.

How you can participate

The National Park Service is looking for public input. A second virtual meeting will be held March 11 at 6 p.m. You can join here.

Public comments are also being accepted online here.

Want more Olympics updates? Subscribe here to get our newsletter, Rachel Goes to the Games, delivered to your inbox for a behind-the-scenes look at the 2026 Milan Cortina Winter Olympics.

MILAN — U.S. snowboarder Chloe Kim's quest for a historic Olympic halfpipe three-peat was foiled by none other than her teenage protégé.

Kim took home silver, after 17-year-old Gaon Choi of South Korea rebounded from a dramatic crash to overtake her in the final run.

"It's the kind of story you only see in dreams, so I'm incredibly happy it happened today," Choi said afterward.

Kim, 25, was within arm's reach of becoming the first halfpipe snowboarder to win three consecutive Olympic golds. Despite a last-minute shoulder injury, she cruised easily through Wednesday's qualifiers, which were actually her first competition of the season.

And she was looking like a lock through much of Thursday's final — under a light nighttime snowfall in Livigno — which hinged on the best of three runs.

Kim's strong first showing gave her 88 points and an early lead, which she held for the majority of the competition as many other contenders — including her U.S. teammates Bea Kim and Maddy Mastro — fell on one or more of their runs.

A big crash nearly ended Choi's night early, but after a medical exam she returned to the halfpipe slope for two more runs.

(

Gregory Bull

/

AP

)

Choi also took a heavy fall on her opening run, needing a concussion check. She almost missed her second turn, only to fall again. But an impressive third run propelled her to the top of the leaderboard, with 90.25 points.

"It wasn't so much about having huge resolve," she said later. "I just kept thinking about the technique I was originally doing."

Then all eyes were on Kim, the last rider of the night, with a chance to retake the lead. But she fell on her cab double cork 1080, a trick she had landed cleanly in previous runs, which stuck her with her original score. Choi and her team broke down in happy sobs and cheers immediately.

As Choi wiped her eyes, a beaming Kim greeted her at the photo finish with a warm hug. As they lined up alongside bronze medalist Mitsuki Ono of Japan, Kim stood to Choi's side and pointed at her excitedly.

"I've known [Choi] since she was little, and it means a lot to see that I've inspired the next generation and they're now out here killing it," Kim said afterward.

Choi is the same age Kim was in 2018 when she became the youngest woman to win an Olympic snowboard medal.

The two have known each other for nearly a decade, a bond that began when Choi's father struck up a friendship with Kim's dad — who emigrated from South Korea to the U.S. — in the lead-up to the 2018 Winter Olympics in Pyeongchang.

Kim (R) gave Choi (L) a warm reception after the last run of the night.

(

Patrick Smith

/

Getty Images

)

"Chloe's dad did a lot of mentoring to my dad," Choi said after winning the first World Cup she entered in 2023, at age 14. "I didn't know much because I was young, but Chloe's dad gave my dad a lot of advice. It made me who I am today."

Kim and her dad helped bring Choi to the U.S. to train with at California's Mammoth Mountain, and maintained a supportive relationship. Kim spoke highly of Choi at an earlier press conference, calling it a "full-circle moment" and saying she sees "a mirror reflection of myself and my family."

"We're seeing a big shift to Asians being dominant in snow sports," she added. "I've had aunts telling me that I shouldn't snowboard, get a real career, focus on school. It's cool to see that shift happening."

Choi's victory makes her the first female Korean athlete to win a medal in snow sports. This is also South Korea's first snowboard gold.

"I want to introduce this sport more to my country through my performance at this Olympics," Choi told Olympics.com before the Games. "I also believe that enjoying the Games is just as important as achieving good results."
Copyright 2026 NPR

A federal judge this week ruled against the city of Los Angeles in a long-running lawsuit over the city’s practice of destroying unhoused people’s property during encampment sweeps.

In a rare default judgment, U.S. District Judge Dale S. Fischer found the city willfully fabricated and altered key evidence, ending the case in favor of the plaintiffs without trial. It’s a landmark legal win for six unhoused residents and advocacy organization Ktown For All, who filed the lawsuit in 2019, challenging whether L.A. Sanitation employees violated unhoused residents’ constitutional rights when seizing and discarding belongings during sweeps.

L.A. city code allows employees to remove and impound unattended, abandoned or hazardous items that are in the public right-of-way. In the lawsuit, plaintiffs alleged city sanitation workers arbitrarily seize and destroy property without objective standards or proper notice. With the default judgement, the court accepted those allegations as true.

City’s misconduct 

The judge found that L.A. city employees altered reports or otherwise tainted evidence in more than 90% of the cleanup cases examined by the court in order to justify the city’s legal defenses of unhoused residents’ belongings.

According to the judgement, city employees systematically doctored or falsified records about encampment cleanups, including Health Hazard Assessment Reports, after the lawsuit began. The judge affirmed that city employees rewrote reports to change the reason for seizures, including adding details about “biohazards” and describing property as “surrendered” or “dangerous.”

The L.A. City Attorney’s office hid the misconduct from the court and violated multiple court orders over five years, the judge said.

“The court cannot proceed to trial with confidence that plaintiffs have had access to the true facts,” Fischer wrote.

“Where a party so damages the integrity of the discovery process that there can never be assurance of proceeding on the true facts, a case-dispositive sanction may be appropriate,” she continued, quoting another legal ruling.

Reaction from the attorneys

Shayla Myers with the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, lead attorney for the plaintiffs, said the city’s fabrication and alteration of documents made a fair trial impossible.

“The fabrication of cleanup reports in this case is itself an indictment of the city's practices,” Myers said. “At these sweeps, the city provides unhoused people absolutely no recourse.”

L.A. city officials did not immediately respond to request for comment on the court’s decision.

What’s next?

The plaintiffs are seeking damages and a permanent injunction blocking the city from seizing and discarding personal property during encampment cleanups. They have until March 27 to file a brief in support of a proposed permanent injunction.

BagelFest, the regularly sold-out New York bagel festival, is heading to L.A. for the first time. BagelFest West takes over the Audrey Irmas Pavilion in Koreatown on April 12, featuring 15 specially picked bagel bakers from west of the Rockies, with early bird tickets on sale now through March 1.

The organizers say L.A. was the obvious choice for expansion.

"We are seeing a global bagel renaissance, and there are so many skilled, talented artisans bringing this amazing food into their local communities on the West Coast," said BagelUp founder Sam Silverman. "We wanted to lower the barrier to entry and give all of these incredible shops a chance to get some of the spotlight they so deserve."

Silverman pointed to L.A.'s range of styles as a draw — "ranging from a classic New York style to Courage Bagels paving the way of this new wave, to Calic Bagel doing a Korean stuffed bagel. There's just so much diversity."

The local angle

Carlos Perez, owner of Boil and Bake in Costa Mesa, was the first West Coast vendor to exhibit at BagelFest in New York two years ago.

"It was fun to get feedback from New Yorkers, especially 'cause bagels have always been their thing," Perez said. "They would go, 'California?' and then they would try it and go, 'Oh, that's actually pretty good.'"

Now that the festival is coming to his turf, Perez sees it as validation.

"Having them put this project together here, it speaks to the culture that L.A., Southern California has built in bagels," he said. "When they told me, 'Are you interested?' I said, 'What do I sign? Let's go.'"

Silverman says this West Coast iteration is an experiment of sorts.

"This first event is going to be a much tighter, high-touch, curated version of what we've built in New York, with the goal of dipping our toes into the market and then eventually building up to that same scale," Silverman says.

The weekend begins with a Saturday night mixer at Wilshire Boulevard Temple, part of a new partnership with the temple's Jewish Food Lab to "celebrate the bagel's origins as a Jewish food," Silverman said. Sunday features a morning industry session followed by a public session from 1 to 5 p.m., with sampling, demos, panels and competitive awards, including Best of the West, Best Bagel, Best Sandwich, Most Creative, Rising Star and Schmear of the Year.

The awards carry weight. Past BagelFest winners include PopUp Bagels, which took Best Bagel in 2021 and 2022 and is now scaling toward 300 locations nationwide, and Starship Bagel, a two-time James Beard nominee that won Best Bagel in 2023 and 2025. A dedicated kids' area rounds out the afternoon with hands-on activities.

"The response from the bagel shops, the businesses and the media has been frankly overwhelming," Silverman said. "It's such a testament to how actively people on the West Coast want to engage and participate."

Perez sees the scene only heading in one direction.

"I can only see it growing," he says. "For the longest time, all we had were the chains. It's nice that now we have other options."

The full exhibitor lineup will be released in the first week of March. Tickets start at $65 (use code EARLYBAGEL for 18% off through March 1), with $199 all-access passes that include parking. Find them at https://www.bagelfest.com/tickets.