The Brief

The city of Santa Ana gave up a $7 million grant from the state of California that would have created after-school programming and child care facilities — all outside the public eye and without consulting or informing the City Council. The move now is raising questions on why the city gave up on the much-needed funding for its youth.

Santa Ana Parks and Rec commissioner Roberto Herrera said the grant was a substantial amount of money and necessary for child care, tutoring, and youth centers.

“All of these things are what our youth need, especially in a poor park city, when so many of our youth are underserved, when so many of our youth need access and resources like this,” Herrera told LAist.

Why was this grant so important?

Santa Ana was awarded $6.7 million by the state in 2023 for child care and development programming. The money would pay for new staff, licensing, training, program equipment, community engagement, and state-required facility upgrades. That includes maintaining the overall operation of the program.

Santa Ana Mayor Valerie Amezcua, who did not respond to LAist’s request for comment, applauded the milestone in her 2023 State of the City address.

“It’s almost $7 million,” Amezcua said. “What are we going to do with it? I have a list.”

According to the department’s grant application, the program would have created seven child care facilities, serving more than 500 children, according to city documents.

The city was also set to use the funds for afterschool care for children ages 5 to 13 years old. The money was earmarked for full-day summer camp programming with a focus on serving low-income youth and kids at risk for drug use, gang violence, and crime.

The department originally was planned to start programming in fall 2023 but didn’t move on the funding until a year later.

In November 2024, the City Council unanimously approved $915,583 as the first round of funding to jumpstart the program.

Then, six months later, with no public discussion and without informing the City Council, the city gave up on the contract.

Why did the city quit? 

Three months after giving up on the funds, City Manager Alvaro Nuñez explained to the mayor and the City Council in an Aug. 18 email that the Parks and Rec department was not adequately prepared to handle a program of this magnitude.

“While Parks & Recreation staff were actively working toward implementation, it became apparent that Title 22 regulations, which had not been previously addressed, would impose significant administrative and programmatic challenges to the agency,” Alvaro told council members.

Title 22 regulations are state rules that govern the licensing and operation of child care facilities, and when programs receive CDSS funding, they must follow those requirements. The requirements, Nuñez added, would have required “extensive” changes to the operation and staffing of the parks department.

Although Nuñez told the council that Title 22 regulations “had not been previously addressed,” records obtained by LAist show that the city had known about the requirements since June 2023 and that the city already was in the process of hiring a certified program director to license the park’s facilities.

Nuñez declined to speak with LAist.

Budget woes

Like many local governments, Santa Ana is looking for ways to tighten its budget amid slowing revenues and the looming threat of losing federal funds. The city is facing a $35 million budget deficit in the next four years.

In Nuñez’s email to the mayor and city council, he cited these fiscal uncertainties.

“Furthermore, with the potential for a reduction in the city’s sales tax revenue, the financial outlook does not indicate sufficient capacity to make the necessary physical improvements and sustain the program if restricted funding is reduced or eliminated,” Nuñez wrote to the council.

City Councilmember David Penaloza said he supports the city’s decision to give up on the money.

“All of these grants that we often get come with so many strings that municipalities across the state, not just Santa Ana, cannot commit to, and it's an ongoing burden on the city,” Penaloza said. “It is very wise for our city staff to take a pause and look at all these grants and look at the strings that are attached to it and say, 'Is this really worth it?'”

The move to return the grant money to the state was irresponsible, City Councilmember Johnathan Ryan Hernandez told LAist.

“I cannot say that is good governance, for us to relinquish $7 million in funding at a time where we desperately need it,” Hernandez said.

Unanswered questions

City Councilmember Jessie Lopez told LAist that Nuñez’s Aug. 18 email is not enough to make her understand how the city could give up on such significant funding.

“We've had such a can-do attitude, but when it comes to this, we couldn't do it. I don't know that I necessarily believe that,” Lopez said. “I would have wanted us to see this through because it would have been better, I think, for us to learn along the way than to say, well, we're not even going to entertain this because we don't think that we can do it.”

Lopez also questioned the lack of transparency before and after the city decided to pull out of the child care agreement. If the city manager's office did not feel they could take this on, “then they should have communicated that to the full council,” Lopez added, “The city is at a point where there isn't a lot of public trust and the city has done that to itself.”

What has the city lost? 

In the city’s bid to California’s Department of Social Services, the city’s parks department said the grant would relieve parents who otherwise cannot afford after-school care or similar programming.

“Our City has a significant growing homeless and unhoused population, more than 30,000 students meet the criteria for being considered homeless and live highly unstable and often unsafe housing situations,” according to Santa Ana’s application for the grant.

Lopez said she consistently hears from constituents who are impacted by the cost of living and who can’t afford child care. In California, child care costs even more than in-state college tuition.

This state-funded program could have been life-changing, she added, and local governments should be thinking outside the box to address critical needs.

“It is about … understanding that there is a serious problem in our community and we must turn every stone to be able to provide the proper support for our families and the kids of our community that need it,” Lopez said.

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

Since 1977, Richard Santillan has been to every Opening Day game at Dodger Stadium. 

“The tradition goes from my father, to me, to my children and grandchildren. Some of my best memories are with my father and children here at Dodger Stadium,” Santillan told The LA Local, smiling under the shade of palm trees near the entrance to the ballpark Wednesday morning. He was there to protest the team less than 24 hours before Opening Day.

Santillan, like countless other loyal Dodgers fans, is grappling with his fan identity over the team’s decision to accept an invitation to the White House and owner Mark Walter’s ties to ICE detention facilities.

More than 30 people joined Santillan on Wednesday morning for a press conference held near 1000 Vin Scully Drive to convey a message directly to the team. 

“We are demanding the Dodgers stop participating in funding of inhumane treatment of families and do not go to the White House to celebrate with the criminal in chief,” Evelyn Escatiola told the crowd. “Together, we have the power to make a change.”

Escatiola, a former dean of East Los Angeles College and longtime community organizer, urged fans to flex their economic power by “letting the Dodgers know that we do not support repression.”

Jorge “Coqui” Rodriguez, a lifelong Dodgers fan, spoke to the crowd and called on Dodgers ownership to divest from immigration detention centers owned and operated by GEO Group and CoreCivic.

Jorge Coqui H Rodriguez speaks at a press conference outside Dodger Stadium on March 25, 2026, to demand the Dodgers not to visit the White House following their 2025 World Series win.

(

J.W. Hendricks

/

The LA Local

)

In a phone interview a day before the protest, Rodriguez told The LA Local he did not want the Dodgers using his “cheve” or beer money to fund detention centers. 

“They can’t take our parking money, our cacahuate money, our cheve money, our Dodger Dog money and invest those funds into corporations that are imprisoning people. It’s wrong,” Rodriguez said. 

Rodriguez considers the Dodgers one of the most racially diverse teams and said the players need to support fans at a time when heightened immigration enforcement has become more common across L.A.

The team’s 2025’s visit to the White House drew ire from the largely Latino fan base, citing the Trump administration’s ongoing attacks on immigrants. 

In June, the team came under further scrutiny when rumors swirled online that federal immigration agents were using the stadium’s parking, which immigration authorities later denied in statements posted on social media accounts.

The team again came under fire after not releasing a statement on the impacts of ICE raids on its mostly Latino fan base at the height of immigration enforcement last summer. The team later agreed to invest $1 million to support families affected by immigration enforcement.

When he learned the Dodgers were pledging only $1 million to families in need, Rodriguez called the amount a  “slap in the face.” 

“These guys just bought the Lakers for billions of dollars and they give a million dollars to fight for legal services? That’s a joke,” Rodriguez said. “They need to have a moral backbone and not be investing in those companies.”

According to reporting from the Los Angeles Times, former Dodgers pitcher Clayton Kershawsaid last week that he is looking forward to the trip.

“I went when President [Joe] Biden was in office. I’m going to go when President [Donald] Trump is in office,” Kershaw said. “To me, it’s just about getting to go to the White House. You don’t get that opportunity every day, so I’m excited to go.”

The Dodgers have yet to announce when their planned visit will take place. 

Santillan sometimes laments his decision to give up his season tickets in protest of the team. His connection to the stadium and the memories he has made there with family and friends will last a lifetime, he said. On Thursday, he will uphold his tradition and be there for the first pitch of the season, but with a heavy heart.

“It’s a family tradition, but the Dodgers have a lot of work to do,” he said.

A local favorite mom-and-pop bookshop in Eagle Rock is facing displacement due to a steep rent hike. The owners say theirs is just one of several small businesses along Eagle Rock Boulevard struggling to keep up with lease increases.

Over the past 19 years, many in the neighborhood have come to love READ Books for its eclectic collection of used titles and shop dog Florence.

Co-owner Jeremy Kaplan said it’s been a delight to grow with the community over the years.

“Like seeing kids come back in, who were in grade school and now they’re in college,” Kaplan said.

But the building where Kaplan and wife Debbie rent was recently sold, and the rent increased by more than 130% to $2,805 a month, Kaplan said. He told LAist it was an increase his small business simply could not absorb.

Kaplan said he originally was given 30 days notice of the rent increase. After some research, assistance from Councilmember Ysabel Jurado’s office and some pro-bono legal help, Kaplan said he pushed back and got the 90-day notice he’s afforded by state law.

California Senate Bill 1103 requires landlords to give businesses with five or less employees 90 days’ notice for rent increases exceeding 10%, among other protections.

Systems Real Estate, the property management company, did not immediately respond to LAist’s request for comment.

What can small businesses do? 

Nadia Segura, directing attorney of the Small Business Program at pro bono legal aid non-profit Bet Tzedek said California law does not currently allow for rent control for commercial tenancies.

Outside of the protections under SB 1103, Segura said small businesses like READ Books don’t have much other recourse. And even then, commercial landlords are not required to inform their tenants of their protections under the law.

“There’s still a lot of people that don’t know about SB 1103. And then it’s very sad that they tell them they have these rent increases and within a month they have to leave,” Segura said.

She said her group is seeing steep rent hikes like this for commercial tenants across the city.

“We are seeing this even more with the World Cup coming up, the Olympics coming up. And I will say it was very sad to see that also after the wildfires,” Segura said.

Part of Bet Tzedek’s ongoing work is to advocate for small businesses, working with landlords who are increasing rents to see if they are willing to give business owners longer leases that lock in rents.

What’s next 

After READ Books posted about their situation on social media, commenters chimed in to express their outrage and love for the little shop.

While he looks for a new spot, Kaplan says he’s forming a coalition of local businesses and activist groups to see what can be done to help other small businesses facing similar displacement. He wants to address the displacement issue for businesses like his, which have made Eagle Rock the distinctive neighborhood that it is today.

Owl Talk, a longtime Eagle Rock staple selling clothing and accessories in a unit in the same building as READ Books, is facing a “more than double” rent increase, according to a post on their Instagram account.

Kaplan said he’s been in touch with the office of state Assemblywoman Jessica Caloza and wants to explore the possibility of introducing legislation to set up protections for small businesses like his, including rent-control measures or a vacancy tax for landlords. Kaplan said he also reached out to the office of state Sen. Maria Durazo.

By his count, Kaplan said there are about a dozen businesses within surrounding blocks that are at risk of closing their doors or have shuttered due to rent increases or other struggles.

When READ Books was founded during the Great Recession, Kaplan said he knew it was a longshot to open a bookstore at the same time so many were struggling to stay in business.

“It was kind of interesting to be doing something that neighborhoods needed. That was important to me growing up, that was important to my children, that was important to my wife growing up,” Kaplan said.

“And then somebody comes in and says, ‘We’re gonna over double your rent.”

Topline:

Frozen budget: Most of the city’s Bureau of Street Lighting budget comes from an assessment that people who own property illuminated by lights pay on their county property tax bill. The amount people pay depends on the kind of property they own and how much they benefit from lighting. A typical single-family home currently pays $53 annually, and in total, the assessments bring in about $45 million annually for the city to repair and maintain streetlights. Changing the amount the Bureau of Street Lighting gets from the assessment requires a vote among property owners who benefit from the lights.

Ballots: L.A. City Council’s vote gives city staff the green light to prepare and send out those ballots. Miguel Sangalang, who oversees the bureau, said at a committee meeting earlier this month that he expects to send out ballots by April 17. Notices about the ballots will be sent out prior to the ballots themselves.

Near unanimous vote: L.A. City Councilmember Monica Rodriguez was the only “No” vote Tuesday, saying she wanted to see a more current strategic plan for the bureau. Sangalang said the bureau developed a plan in 2022 that lays out how money will be spent. Councilmember Imelda Padilla was absent for the vote.

Vote count: Votes will be weighted according to the assessment amount. Basically, the more you’re asked to pay yearly to maintain streetlights, the more your vote will count. Ballots received before June 2 will be tabulated by the L.A. City Clerk.

How much more money: According to a report, the amount needed in assessments from property owners to meet the repair and maintenance needs of the city’s streetlighting in the next fiscal year is nearly $112 million.

Use of the money: Sangalang said at a March 11 committee meeting that the extra funds would be used to double the number of staff to handle repairs and procure solar streetlights, which don’t face the threat of copper wire theft. That would all potentially reduce the time it takes to repair simple fixes down to a week. Currently, city residents wait for months to see broken streetlights repaired. The assessment would come with a three-year auditing mechanism.