Sponsored message
Logged in as
Audience-funded nonprofit news
radio tower icon laist logo
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
Subscribe
  • Listen Now Playing Listen
  • Listen Now Playing Listen

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • U.S. judge found CA officials in contempt
    A barbed wire fence with a cloudy sky
    A federal judge has found top California officials in contempt for failing to hire enough mental health professionals to adequately treat tens of thousands of incarcerated people with serious mental disorders. The judge ordered the state to pay $112 million in fines.

    Topline:

    Chief U.S. District Judge Kimberly Mueller on June 25 ordered the state to pay $112 million in fines for failing to hire enough mental health professionals to adequately treat tens of thousands of incarcerated people with serious mental disorders.

    The backstory: The fines have been accumulating since April 2023, after Mueller said she was fed up with the state prison system’s inadequate staffing despite years of court orders demanding that the state address the issue. The $112 million in pending fines for understaffing is one of three sets of fines Mueller imposed.

    What's next: Mueller had ordered state officials to calculate each month what they owe in fines for each unfilled position exceeding a 10% vacancy rate among required prison mental health professionals. CA Dept of Corrections and Rehabilitation spokesperson Terri Hardy said the state will appeal Mueller’s order.

    A federal judge has found top California prison officials in civil contempt for failing to hire enough mental health professionals to adequately treat tens of thousands of incarcerated people with serious mental disorders.

    Chief U.S. District Judge Kimberly Mueller on June 25 ordered the state to pay $112 million in fines at a time when the state is trying to close a multibillion-dollar budget deficit. The fines have been accumulating since April 2023, after Mueller said she was fed up with the state prison system’s inadequate staffing despite years of court orders demanding that the state address the issue.

    “The sanctions imposed here are necessary to sharpen that focus and magnify defendants’ sense of urgency to finally achieve a lasting remedy for chronic mental health understaffing in the state’s prison system,” Mueller said in her order in the long-running class-action lawsuit.

    The ongoing harm “caused by these high vacancy rates is as clear today as it was thirty years ago and the harm persists despite multiple court orders requiring defendants to reduce those rates,” she added.

    Mueller ordered the state to pay the fines within 30 days and said they “will be used exclusively for steps necessary to come into compliance with the court’s staffing orders.” She ordered California to keep paying additional fines for each month the state remains in violation of court orders.

    The ruling was unwelcome news for Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is struggling with a budget deficit that’s forcing reductions in numerous state programs.

    The contempt finding “is deeply flawed, and it does not reflect reality,” said Diana Crofts-Pelayo, a Newsom spokesperson. “Amid a nationwide shortage of mental health therapists, the administration has led massive and unprecedented efforts to expand care and recruit and retain mental health care professionals.”

    California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation spokesperson Terri Hardy said the state will appeal Mueller’s order. Prisoners “often have greater access to mental health care in custody than what presently exists for people outside” because of the state’s “extraordinary steps to expand access to mental health care,” Hardy said.

    Mueller’s contempt finding comes as Newsom, a Democrat, has prioritized improving mental health treatment statewide, partly to combat California’s seemingly intractable homelessness crisis. His administration has argued that Mueller is setting impossible standards for improving treatment for about 34,000 imprisoned people with serious mental illnesses — more than a third of California’s prison population.

    Attorneys representing prisoners with mental illness vehemently disagree.

    “It’s very unfortunate that the state officials have allowed this situation to get so bad and to stay so bad for so long,” said Ernest Galvan, one of the prisoners’ attorneys in the long-running litigation. “And I hope that this order, which the judge reserved as an absolute last resort, refocuses officials’ attention where it needs to be: bringing lifesaving care into the prisons, where it’s urgently needed.”

    As part of her tentative contempt ruling in March, Mueller ordered Newsom personally, along with five of his top state officials, to read testimony by prison mental health employees describing the ongoing problem during a trial last fall.

    The other five were the directors of his departments of Corrections and Rehabilitation, State Hospitals, and Finance; the corrections department’s undersecretary for health care services; and the deputy director in charge of its statewide mental health program.

    Mueller limited her formal contempt finding to Corrections Secretary Jeff Macomber and two aides, Undersecretary Diana Toche and Deputy Director Amar Mehta.

    “Fundamentally, the overall record reflects defendants are following a ‘business as usual’ approach to hiring, recruitment and retention that does very little if anything to transform the bureaucracy within which the hiring practices are carried out,” Mueller wrote.

    Mueller had ordered state officials to calculate each month what they owe in fines for each unfilled position exceeding a 10% vacancy rate among required prison mental health professionals. The fines are calculated based on the maximum annual salary for each job, including some that approach or exceed $300,000.

    The 10% vacancy limit dates to a court order by Mueller’s predecessor more than 20 years ago, in 2002, in the class-action case filed in 1990 over poor treatment of prisoners with mental disorders.

    The $112 million in pending fines for understaffing is one of three sets of fines Mueller imposed.

    She imposed $1,000-a-day fines in 2017 for a backlog in sending imprisoned people to state mental health facilities. But that money, which now tops $4.2 million, has never been collected, and Mueller postponed a planned hearing on the fines after prisoners’ attorneys said the state was making improvements.

    In April 2023, Mueller also began assessing $1,000-a-day fines for the state’s failure to implement court-ordered suicide prevention measures. A court-appointed expert said his latest inspection of prisons showed the state was not in full compliance.

  • Council OKs new housing in some low-density zones
    A for-sale sign hangs outside a $1.6 million house on L.A.’s Westside.
    A for-sale sign hangs outside a $1.6 million house on L.A.’s Westside.

    Topline:

    The Los Angeles City Council decided Tuesday to put off the full effects of a major new state housing law by allowing low-rise apartment buildings in some neighborhoods where such housing has long been banned.

    The details: All council members voted in favor of those plans except for Traci Park, who was absent from the meeting. California’s Senate Bill 79 is set to take effect July 1.

    What is SB 79? The law overrides local limits on housing development by allowing apartment buildings between five and nine stories tall near train stations and rapid bus stops. However, cities are allowed to postpone those changes until 2030 by developing their own incremental plans for more housing. L.A. elected leaders have chosen to delay. They’re doing so through the city’s new Low-Rise Ordinance, which aims to allow buildings up to four stories tall in 57 neighborhoods near transit lines.

    Why it matters: L.A. lawmakers have tried many approaches to bring down L.A.’s high rents. But they have consistently voted to stop apartment developers from encroaching on the nearly three-quarters of city residential land reserved for single-family homes. Pushed by state lawmakers, city leaders are now having to accept some changes in single-family neighborhoods located near public transit lines.

    Read more... to learn whether new apartment buildings could be allowed in your neighborhood.

    The Los Angeles City Council decided Tuesday to put off the full effects of a major new state housing law by allowing low-rise apartment buildings in some neighborhoods where such housing has long been banned.

    All council members voted in favor of those plans except for Traci Park, who was absent from the meeting.

    California’s Senate Bill 79 is set to take effect July 1. The law overrides local limits on housing development by allowing apartment buildings between five and nine stories tall near train stations and rapid bus stops.

    However, cities are allowed to postpone those changes until 2030 by developing their own incremental plans for more housing. L.A. elected leaders have chosen to delay. They’re doing so through the city’s new Low-Rise Ordinance, which aims to allow buildings up to four stories tall in 57 neighborhoods near transit lines.

    Why it matters

    L.A. lawmakers have tried many approaches to bring down L.A.’s high rents. But they have consistently voted to stop apartment developers from encroaching on the nearly three-quarters of city residential land reserved for single-family homes.

    Pushed by state lawmakers, city leaders are now having to accept some changes in single-family neighborhoods located near public transit lines.

    The reaction

    Some local officials and homeowners have expressed frustration over new state limits on their ability to stop development in low-density zones. But advocates for more development said the council’s decision will help address high rents by allowing more housing in areas that have long been off-limits to new apartments.

    “The City Council voted to open up high-resource single-family neighborhoods near transit stations,” said Scott Epstein, policy director with Abundant Housing L.A. “This reform is long overdue and will help build a future where Angelenos of all incomes can find homes in the neighborhoods of their choice.”

    Where will the projects be allowed?

    Officials with the city’s planning department said residents can see whether Low-Rise Ordinance projects will be allowed in their neighborhood by clicking on this interactive map and making two selections from the “layer list” menu: “Opportunity Station Sites Eligible for Low Rise” and “Sites Eligible for Low Rise Outside of Opportunity Station.”

    The map shows that some of the areas eligible for new apartment buildings under this plan include Westside neighborhoods within a half-mile of the E Line’s Westwood/Rancho Park station, pockets of the San Fernando Valley near G Line stops, and parts of Eagle Rock along Colorado Boulevard’s planned North Hollywood to Pasadena rapid bus line.

    Is this a done deal?

    Both plans — the decision to delay full SB 79 implementation, and the new Low-Rise Ordinance — now go to Mayor Karen Bass for final approval. Council members are also considering some tweaks they say would help Low-Rise Ordinance projects get built.

    Those changes would include letting developers build denser projects if they reserve more units for low-income renters, as well as rules that would let developers build ground-level parking instead of costlier underground parking. The council’s planning committee voted Tuesday to forward those suggestions to the full City Council for further debate.

  • Sponsored message
  • A new system for illegal firework use
    A small drone is set on a table in the foreground in front of a row of nameplates and people talking amongst themselves out of focus in the background.
    A drone is on display at a Los Angeles Police Commission meeting earlier this year. You might spot one overhead this Fourth of July.

    Topline:

    SoCal is adopting a new form of surveillance to monitor illegal firework use: drones.

    Why now: The devices are now an easier way to patrol local neighborhoods after a call to the police department has been made, allowing officers to determine if someone should be sent to the scene or a citation should be given.

    Read on… for more information about this system.

    There’s a new tool to fight illegal fireworks this Fourth of July: drones.

    “A drone’s real-time aerial view can help officers assess situations faster, improve safety, support faster response times and ensure the right resources are sent where they’re needed most,” the Anaheim Police Department stated in an Instagram post.

    Anaheim's department is the latest law enforcement agency using the technology to quickly identify illegal fireworks use. The Downey City Council is expected to vote Tuesday night on potential new fines and new rules that would allow local law enforcement to use drones to patrol neighborhoods for illegal fireworks usage.

    How it works

    Here's how the tech is put to use: Seconds after authorities receive a call reporting illegal fireworks activity, drones can take to the air, hovering above neighborhoods and businesses to find a specific location and an offender. The surveillance devices are equipped with night vision and zoom lenses that allow first responders to record high definition videos right from their Real Time Crime Center at the station.

    Then, officers can determine whether to send out a patrol car or issue a citation for the incident.

    Why it matters

    The city’s drone usage comes as law enforcement agencies across Southern California brace for the annual flood of complaints about illegal firework use at this time of the year. Drones make the most effective use of time and resources, experts say.

    “We'll typically see about 2,000 calls and about 300 related to fireworks,” Anaheim’s chief communications officer Mike Lyster explained about the Fourth of July. “It really is a better use of resources on what is always a very, very busy holiday for us.”

    Drones allow officials to collect enough evidence to issue these citations. In Anaheim, the punishment starts at $1,000 and climbs to $3,000 by the third offense. But authorities say the goal is to curb illegal fireworks use altogether due to the risk of injury and wildfires.

    Lyster hopes that people will think twice about using illegal fireworks this holiday — not just because of the fines — but because of its negative impact on local communities.

    “The Palisades fire was ultimately started by illegal fireworks, and sadly, not in our city, but in our neighboring city, a young Anaheim girl died in an illegal fireworks incident last year,” Lyster said.

    Where are drones already in use?

    More cities are testing this method in order to crack down on illegal firework use. Sacramento, San Bernardino and Riverside are just a few of the other areas that have adopted this technology in recent years.

    How do I know what's legal?

    If you have any questions about what is legal or not in your community, a quick Google search can help.

    Each county goes by different regulations for the types of fireworks you can use — if at all.

    For example, parts of Anaheim allow “safe and sane” fireworks to be used only on the Fourth of July between 10 a.m and 10 p.m. This includes non-explosive, non-aerial devices like fountains, sparklers and smoke balls. State-approved fireworks will have a State Fire Marshal seal.

    LAist staffer Anjanette Gile also contributed to this report.

  • Meet LAist, local news at coffee shops
    Two people wearing LAist t-shirts and merch stand in front of a restaurant behind a table with merch and a table cloth that reads "LAist. 89.3 FM. LAist.com" and a spinning wheel.
    The LAist community engagement team spoke with Altadena residents outside Fair Oaks Burger in Altadena on January 17.

    Topline:

    Your neighborhood has a reporter. Have you met them yet? On Saturday, coffee shops across L.A. are turning into places where you can tell a journalist exactly what’s been bugging you about your block…while drink amazing coffee.

    More details: From Boyle Heights to Silver Lake to Inglewood to Long Beach, local reporters will be set up at neighborhood coffee shops from from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. — to hear what’s on your mind. Got a tip about a pothole that’s been eating tires for years? A landlord the city keeps ignoring? A community hero nobody’s written about? We want to hear it all!

    Connect with us: LAist has been meeting community members in person through LAist Listens tabling events by popping up at local businesses.

    Read on ... for more on where LAist and other local news outlets will be across L.A.

    The story first appeared on The LA Local.

    Your neighborhood has a reporter. Have you met them yet?

    On Saturday, coffee shops across L.A. are turning into places where you can tell a journalist exactly what’s been bugging you about your block … while drinking amazing coffee.

    From Boyle Heights to Silver Lake to Inglewood to Long Beach, local reporters will be set up at neighborhood coffee shops from from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. — to hear what’s on your mind. Got a tip about a pothole that’s been eating tires for years? A landlord the city keeps ignoring? A community hero nobody’s written about? We want to hear it all!

    It’s part of Local News Day LA, a pop-up series organized by The LA Local that connects you with your local reporter and give you a chance to become the source instead of just the reader.

    LAist has been meeting community members in person through LAist Listens tabling events by popping up at local businesses.

    See below for the full list of participating media outlets and coffee shops — The LA Local and our media partners hope you’ll join us:

    A graphic showing location, media partner, and coffee list and a list underneath each section. LAist will be at Cafe Calle in South Central.
    LAist will be joining The LA Local and other local media partners for Local News Day LA on June 27.
    (
    The LA Local
    )

    Where to find a journalist

    1. The LA Local – Koreatown, Pico Union, Westlake will be hosted by Open Market
    2. The LA Local – Inglewood and South LA will be hosted by Asteroid Vinyl Cafe
    3. Boyle Heights Beat will be hosted by Picaresca Cafe
    4. CalMatters will be hosted by Yia Caffe 
    5. Calo News will be hosted by Cruzita’s Deli and Cafe
    6. The Eastsider will be hosted by Rosebud Coffee (Highland Park location)
    7. LAist will be hosted by Cafe Calle
    8. Los Angeles Radio Collective will be hosted by Spoke Bicycle Cafe
    9. LA Sentinel will be hosted by Patria Coffee
    10. LA Taco will be hosted by Cafecito Organico (Silverlake location)
    11. LA Public Press will be hosted by Holy Grounds Coffee & Tea
    12. Long Beach Post will be hosted by Wrigley Coffee
    13. Q Voice News will be hosted by Hot Java
    14. USC Annenberg Media will be hosted by South LA Cafe (Western location)

    Come enjoy a cup of coffee (or tea) with us while supplies last. 

  • 17 states and trade group sue CA over strict law
    Rows of shampoo bottles on a store shelf.
    Bottles of Pantene conditioner are displayed at a Costco in San Diego.

    Topline:

    A coalition of 17 states and a trade association representing U.S. wholesalers and distributors have sued California to block the enforcement of a stringent recycling law that aims to reduce plastic packaging waste.

    The backstory: The lawsuit, filed yesterday in federal court, argues that California’s recently finalized regulations that will gradually require companies to scale back single-use plastics and ensure all packaging is recycling or compostable should be struck down.

    Why now: The plaintiffs called the regulations “onerous mandates” that will cause steep price increases in everyday necessities that will be passed on, at least in part, to consumers.

    What California officials say: Melanie Turner, a spokesperson for CalRecycle, said in an emailed statement that the agency does not comment on pending litigation and that it remained focused on implementing the law.

    A coalition of 17 states and a trade association representing U.S. wholesalers and distributors have sued California to block the enforcement of a stringent recycling law that aims to reduce plastic packaging waste.

    The lawsuit, filed Monday in federal court, argues that California’s recently finalized regulations that will gradually require companies to scale back single-use plastics and ensure all packaging is recycling or compostable should be struck down. The plaintiffs called the regulations “onerous mandates” that will cause steep price increases in everyday necessities that will be passed on, at least in part, to consumers.

    “Once again, California is trying to enact a policy that negatively impacts the rest of the country. If California goes unchecked, consumers will be forced to pay more for basic necessities,” Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers, who led the coalition, said in a news release.

    The law, called the Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act, was enacted in 2022.

    “Virtually every product packaged or shipped in plastic containers, as well as a significant number of other types of packaging materials that merely incorporate plastics, fall into the Act’s remarkable sweep,” the lawsuit said.

    The National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors, which represents companies that import and distribute goods in California, also joined the lawsuit.

    “California is not entitled to pronounce nationwide policies,” Eric Hoplin, the trade association’s president and CEO, said in a statement. “Because the Act extends California’s regulatory reach far beyond its borders and brings within its sweep conduct wholly unconnected to California, the Act violates principles of federalism, the horizontal separation of powers, and due process.”

    The lawsuit argues the law violates both the U.S. and California constitutions. It asks the court to declare California’s law invalid and unenforceable, and halt its implementation.

    The lawsuit names as defendants Zoe Heller, director of California’s recycling agency known as CalRecycle, and the Circular Action Alliance, a nonprofit involved with implementing the law.

    Melanie Turner, a spokesperson for CalRecycle, said in an emailed statement that the agency does not comment on pending litigation and that it remained focused on implementing the law.

    The alliance said in a statement that it was aware of the lawsuit and closely monitoring developments while at the same time working to implement the law’s “ambitious goals.”

    In a May news release announcing regulations under the law, state officials said the changes would fight plastics pollution while protecting the interests of taxpayers and local governments.

    “California is shifting the responsibility of managing single-use plastic and packaging onto the producers. New packaging reforms lower waste costs for communities and decrease garbage and pollution across the state,” Environmental Protection Secretary Yana Garcia said in a statement. “This approach pushes producers to innovate and design packaging that truly supports a circular economy.”

    Joining Nebraska in the lawsuit were 16 other states with Republican attorneys general: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and West Virginia.Environmental groups also have sued over the law. A coalition that included the Natural Resources Defense Council recently filed a complaint over what it said in a news release were “weakened” final regulations for the “landmark” law.