Kavish Harjai
writes about how people get around L.A.
Published July 22, 2026 5:00 AM
Passengers wait to board a Metro train.
(
Samanta Helou Hernandez
/
LAist
)
Topline:
For decades, the Los Angeles Metro Board has operated without a member of the public who regularly rides trains and buses among its members. Now, calls to change that are growing. Tomorrow, the Metro Board is set to vote on what the future make-up of the governing body should look like.
Background: In light of the L.A. County voter-approved Measure G, which expands the Board of Supervisors and adds an elected county-level executive, the L.A. Metro Board has been considering how to reconfigure its make-up. Agency staff have recommended maintaining the size and geographic split of the governing body and expanding the pool of people who can be appointed to serve.
Hahn’s motion: While the recommendations would theoretically allow for a transit rider to be appointed to the board, there would be no guarantee. A separate motion from L.A. County Supervisor Janice Hahn would expand the Metro Board to include a dedicated voter seat. Both items, and a motion that competes with staff’s recommendation, are scheduled for a vote tomorrow.
Read on … for more information about the composition of Metro’s Board and the diverging perspectives on adding a transit rider seat.
For decades, the Los Angeles Metro Board, which runs the countywide public transit system that sees more than 1 million daily riders, has operated without a member of the public who regularly rides trains and buses among its members.
Now, calls to change that are growing. On Thursday, the Metro Board is set to vote on what the future make-up of the governing body should look like, and there are several options on the table:
Allow politicians who select Metro Board appointees the flexibility to appoint transit riders or subject matter experts to the Metro Board — a recommendation from Metro staff.
Currently, there are 13 voting members of the Metro Board: the five L.A. County Supervisors, the mayor of L.A. and her three appointees, and four regional representatives from across the county chosen by a selection committee.
There’s no requirement that they have transit expertise or public ridership experience.
At the beginning of this year, the Metro Board formed a committee that convened monthly to discuss how the Metro Board could be reformatted in light of Measure G. That’s the measure L.A. County voters passed in 2024, which expands the Board of Supervisors from five to nine members by 2032 and adds an elected countywide executive.
The make-up of the Metro Board is codified in the state’s public utilities code, so any proposed changes approved on Thursday will need another vote by legislators in Sacramento before they go into effect.
Metro staff’s recommendation and Bass’ competing motion
Under that proposal, they also recommended expanding the pool of people who could serve on the Metro Board to include riders and experts in relevant subjects, like engineering or finance. If ultimately approved, these members could be chosen by the L.A. County Board of Supervisors, the mayor of L.A. or the city selection committee.
In its recommendation, Metro officials notably shied away from adding a seat to the board, saying an extra person would impose “administrative and financial burdens on the agency.”
Metro’s media relations office did not answer a request for more information on what additional administrative and financial burdens the addition of a board member would impose on the agency.
A competing motion introduced by Bass would not allow the L.A. County Board of Supervisors or the committee that selects the four regional representatives to appoint a transit rider or subject matter expert.
Instead, it would designate one of the mayor’s four seats for a for a transit advocate or rider, and it would add a 14th voting member of the board who would also be a rider.
Currently, all five of the L.A. County Supervisors are guaranteed a spot on the L.A. Metro Board.
(
Courtesy L.A. County Board of Supervisors
)
A guaranteed seat for a transit rider versus an optional seat
Hahn’s motion does not directly conflict with staff’s recommendation, and similar to Bass’ motion, would add a transit rider to the Metro Board.
Hahn said a dedicated seat for a transit rider would be more powerful than an appointed one.
“I worry that if [the rider] was just an appointed position by an elected official … [the rider] would feel loyalty to the appointing elected official as opposed to loyalty to their fellow riders,” she said in an interview with LAist.
She said it’s clear that there’s a community desire for a guaranteed rider seat on the Board.
During a public outreach period between February and May, Metro gathered input from 1,300 people. The clearest and most consistent piece of feedback was that the public wants to see a “formal rider voice on the Metro Board,” according to a Metro report.
While the staff recommendation to expand who can sit on the Metro Board would theoretically allow for the appointment of a transit rider, if not several transit riders, some officials have questioned whether elected officials would voluntarily cede political power to a member of the public if that option moves forward.
L.A. County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath characterized a future under Metro staff’s recommendation as a “political game of chicken.”
“ Who's going to take the responsibility and give up the power that they hold?” Horvath told LAist.
Why don’t the Metro Board members … just ride transit themselves?
Michael Schneider, the head of the influential transportation advocacy group Streets for All, warned that reserving a seat for a transit rider on the Metro Board could backfire.
He said adding a seat for a rider, or any interest group, risks creating a situation where Metro Board members defer leadership to the representative.
“The rider experience should be top of mind for all board members,” Schneider said. “If there’s a specific seat for a rider, then board members may decide to not pay as much attention to the rider experience.”
Schneider argues Metro Board members should all be mandated to use Metro at least once a week. It’s a metric that could be tracked using TAP cards, he suggested.
“It’s hard to improve a system that you don’t have experience with,” Schneider said. “Experience is not sitting in a chair in a boardroom. It’s on a train or on a bus or using Metro bike share.”
A large part of the L.A. Metro Board's responsibility is overseeing L.A. County's public transit system.
(
David McNew
/
Getty Images North America
)
Transit rider appointment just one part of broader conversation
The debate over a dedicated transit rider on the Metro Board is just one of several thorny questions, some politically charged, that officials are weighing as they decide what the Metro Board should look like.
Here’s what else will likely be discussed on the topic on Thursday:
How many seats should the city of L.A. have on Metro’s Board? Under state law, if the city’s population falls below 35% of L.A. County’s entire population, then one of the city’s four seats would be transferred to the other 87 cities. Some, including Horvath and John Fasana, a former mayor of Duarte and previously a longtime Metro Board member, have urged that the threshold be increased to 43.75%.
Should the county executive have a dedicated seat on the Metro Board? With the number of county-level seats remaining at five despite an upcoming L.A. County Board of Supervisors expansion to nine seats, some have argued that parts of the county could be underrepresented without additional representation.
Thursday's Metro Board meeting
Metro's Board meeting starts at 10 a.m. Thursday.
If you're attending in person, head to the 3rd floor of Metro's HQ. The address is One Gateway Plaza, Los Angeles.
If you want to listen by phone, dial (888) 978-8818 and enter one of the following access code when prompted: 5647249# (English) or 7292892# (Spanish).
You can provide comment IRL, by phone or send written comment prior to the meeting. More instructions can be found here.
Outside the Melbourne Cricket Ground ahead of the NFL game between the Rams and 49ers. (AP Photo/Asanka Brendon Ratnayake)
(
Asanka Brendon Ratnayake
/
Associated Press
)
Topline:
The longest road trip in NFL history has brought the San Francisco 49ers and the Los Angeles Rams to Australia’s sports capital for a season opener in front of more than 100,000 football-hungry fans packed into the Southern Hemisphere’s largest stadium.
Why it matters: The NFC West rivals are playing Australia’s first NFL game, and the starkly differing ways in which they made this epic journey have attracted almost as much attention as the two star-studded rosters preparing to put on a show.
The backstory: The 49ers have been Down Under for more than a week, adjusting their body clocks and winning over thousands of Aussie fans who appreciate their commitment to the historic moment. The Rams were only scheduled to arrive in Melbourne around dawn Thursday, roughly 28 hours before the Friday morning kickoff that’s necessary to play the game Thursday night in prime time in the U.S. That’s because head coach Sean McVay is convinced they can thwart jet lag and optimize their game readiness by staying home on California time.
What's next: The Rams and 49ers kick off at 5:35 p.m. Thursday night on Netflix.
The longest road trip in NFL history has brought the San Francisco 49ers and the Los Angeles Rams to Australia’s sports capital for a season opener in front of more than 100,000 football-hungry fans packed into the Southern Hemisphere’s largest stadium.
The NFC West rivals are playing Australia’s first NFL game, and the starkly differing ways in which they made this epic journey have attracted almost as much attention as the two star-studded rosters preparing to put on a show.
The 49ers have been Down Under for more than a week, adjusting their body clocks in the traditional manner and winning over thousands of Aussie fans who appreciate their commitment to the historic moment.
The Rams were only scheduled to arrive in Melbourne around dawn Thursday, roughly 28 hours before the Friday morning kickoff that’s necessary to play the game Thursday night in prime time in the U.S. That’s because head coach Sean McVay is convinced they can thwart jet lag and optimize their game readiness by staying home on California time.
Both teams agree this contrast in preparation is not a referendum on the best way to handle a pair of 16-hour flights with a football game in between — even if the rest of the world might see it that way after the final whistle.
Instead, this game is primarily a difficult early test for both the Super Bowl favorite Rams and the talent-laden 49ers, who also intend to be a title challenger. The coaching staffs and veteran players all know each other thoroughly after a decade of competition between Shanahan and McVay, who are both constantly looking for an edge.
“I don’t think there’s any right way to do it,” said defensive end Myles Garrett, who will make his Rams debut in Australia. “They have a plan, and I’m sure they consulted different teams and people to find out a way to combat jet lag and such long travel. We’ve done the same thing. I think we’re both riding our methodologies.”
Garrett will be joined by star cornerback Trent McDuffie and cornerback Jaylen Watson in their debuts with Los Angeles’ revamped defense.
Gab Chabrán
covers what's happening in food and culture for LAist.
Published September 10, 2026 5:00 AM
A fruit vendor sells on Whittier Boulevard in East L.A.
(
Andrew Lopez
/
Boyle Heights Beat
)
Topline:
A recent AirTalk segment highlights the decades-long debate over street vending in Los Angeles. Despite efforts by the City Council and statewide law, enforcement remains murky at best, even though it's a fixture of Los Angeles culture.
Why now? During a recent debate, Mayor Karen Bass made a series of comments that cast street vending in an unsavory light, prompting an almost immediate backlash from her opponent, Nithya Raman, who has devised her own nine-point plan to address street vending if elected.
Why is it important? Street vendors are as much a part of L.A.'s identity as its restaurants — but the system meant to support them is so broken that only a fraction operate with full legal standing. As this becomes a defining issue in the mayor's race, it's worth knowing the difference between political rhetoric and how the rules actually work on the ground.
Last month, street vending became a flashpoint during one of the recent debates for L.A. mayor when incumbent Karen Bass said, "I do not think that you should have a food vendor in front of a restaurant. Period," drawing a comparison to unhoused encampments.
The remarks set off an almost immediate backlash. Mayoral candidate Nithya Raman, who has her own 9-point plan to support street vendors, said Bass "took a shot" at the street vending community and reiterated her commitment to work toward regulations and legalizing their operations.
Bass's office later eased its stance, saying it had directed the LAPD to stop issuing criminal citations to street vendors — and to dismiss any that had been issued in error.
Street vending remains part of the Los Angeles landscape, and the backlash from the debate brought to light just how confusing its legality can be. To understand how we got here, it helps to start with the basics.
Is street vending legal?
Yes. Since SB 946 in 2018, state law has decriminalized it. That means cities and counties can't criminally cite vendors or ban them from specific zones. They can, however, still enforce health and safety rules — things like sidewalk clearance and ADA access.
So why does it feel unregulated?
On a recent segment forAirTalk, Memo Torres ofL.A. Taco pointed to a stark gap between L.A.'s vending population and its permitted vendors. According to an email from the California Restaurant Association reported byFOX 11, an estimated 50,000 street vendors operate across Los Angeles — yet only 53 hold permits specifically for food sales.
Why so few permits?
Vending requirements largely mirror restaurant-grade standards — large refrigeration units, multi-basin sinks — that don't fit the reality of most vendor setups: flat-top griddles, folding tables, pop-up tents.
That isn't to say there haven't been efforts by the city to address the permitting gap. In 2024, the City Council, with Raman's backing, voted to drop the annual permit fee from $541 to $27.51.
Raman's mayoral campaign has since proposed another potential fix: extending a state permit category — currently used by vendors at farmers markets who share equipment like a communal three-compartment sink — to street vendors, so operators wouldn't need their own restaurant-grade setup to qualify.
What about health and safety?
County health inspectors technically oversee street food vendors, but both industry and vendor advocates agree enforcement is inconsistent — leaving reliable data on violations hard to come by.
Are vendors and restaurants actually enemies?
A 2015 Economic Roundtable study found that businesses located near street vendors were more likely to see job growth than those without nearby vendors.
What’s next
Proposals like Raman's permitting reforms aim to close the gap — but for now, most of L.A.'s vendors remain outside the formal system.
Keep up with LAist.
If you're enjoying this article, you'll love our daily newsletter, The LA Report. Each weekday, catch up on the 5 most pressing stories to start your morning in 3 minutes or less.
Frank Stoltze
is a veteran reporter who covers local politics and examines how democracy is and, at times, is not working.
Published September 9, 2026 6:36 PM
The Jail complex in downtown Los Angeles
(
Robert Garrova / LAist
)
Topline:
The U.S. Department of Justice announced Wednesday that it has opened an investigation into the Men’s Central Jail in downtown Los Angeles, specifically looking into whether L.A. County has failed to provide environmentally safe, humane and habitable conditions for people held there.
The details: The jail has long been plagued by allegations of poor conditions. Monitors from the American Civil Liberties Union have documented problems including overcrowding, severe mold and mildew, and rodent infestations.
The context: The federal investigation is expected to focus on conditions within the facility and not the actions of the county sheriff’s deputies who staff it, according to the Justice Department. The new investigation is separate from a 2015 settlement between the county and federal government, which stemmed from allegations of inadequate mental health care provided at county jails.
What happens next: Investigators will determine whether the county has violated the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects against cruel and unusual punishment, and 14th Amendment, which guarantees equal protection under the law.
Reaction: L.A. County Supervisor Kathryn Barger welcomed the investigation, and said she had said for year that the jail was “antiquated, inhumane, and unfit for our workforce and those incarcerated there.”
Jason Wells
manages the daily news product that you hear and read every day.
Published September 9, 2026 5:13 PM
Smoke rises from a brush fire near the Getty Center on Sept. 9, 2026.
(
CBS LA
)
Topline:
Firefighters appeared to make quick progress against a brush fire the broke out Wednesday near the Getty Center.
What we know so far: As of 5 p.m., evacuation warnings had been issued for zones LFD-0895 and LF-0967, although the LAFD said no structures were immediately threatened as the water-dropping helicopters attacked the fire from above.
Read on ... for more on evacuations and weather conditions.
This story is no longer being actively updated. For the most up-to-date information about the fire you can check:
Firefighters appeared to make quick progress against a brush fire the broke out Wednesday near the Getty Center.
As of 5 p.m., evacuation warnings had been issued for zones LFD-0895 and LF-0967, although the LAFD said no structures were immediately threatened as the water-dropping helicopters attacked the fire from above. Forward progress of the fire was reported stopped shortly after 6 p.m. at a little over 20 acres.
