Los Angeles City Council Meeting (Los Angeles, CA)

The City Council convened with 15 members present and approved several batches of items largely by unanimous votes, then heard extended public testimony (a queue announced as ~100 speakers, later referenced as 135). Major actions included: (1) continuing a contested Harbor City RV park land-use item to the next day for a closed session discussion of litigation risk; (2) debating—but ultimately sending back to committee—an ordinance direction on Palisades fire rebuilding permit-fee waivers, with cost estimates ranging from $86 million (limited waiver) to $278 million (broad waiver), and many public speakers urging inclusion of condos/townhomes/mobile homes and relief for seniors and underinsured residents; and (3) proceeding on ED1/affordable-housing streamlining while referring multiple amendments (especially around RSO demolition thresholds and HACLA-related standards) back to committee for further work.

Consent Calendar

• Approved in one vote (15-0): Items 12–14, 18, and 20.
• Approved in one vote (15-0): Items 2–10, 25, 27, 28, 30–34, 36, 37, 39–42, 44, and 46.
• Item 47: Councilmember Curren Price recused due to a conflict involving his wife’s employer; item passed 14-0.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Palisades fire rebuild fee relief (Item 23 discussion during general public comment): Numerous speakers identified as Palisades fire survivors described being underinsured/uninsured, many on fixed incomes or seniors, and urged permit/plan-check fee waivers to help rebuild. Several explicitly asked that waivers cover condos/townhomes/apartments/mobile homes, not only single-family homes.
  • Speakers cited the burden of permit costs (one speaker stated “$60,000 to $100,000” for permit fees; another cited “$20,000 to $40,000” even for smaller homes), and described carrying mortgages/property taxes plus rent/HOA fees after loss.
  • One speaker referenced the Northridge earthquake as precedent for relief.
  • Some speakers expressed support for Councilmember Tracy Park and the Ad Hoc LA Recovery Committee approach.
• Harbor City RV park (Item 15): Multiple Harbor City residents opposed ministerial approval and argued a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is required, raising concerns including lack of Title 25 required facilities (restrooms/showers/laundry/ADA), alleged fence/setback noncompliance, and claims that the buildout exceeded what was approved.
• Tenant advocacy / rent policy (referenced in general public comment): Speakers associated with tenant advocacy (e.g., identifying as ACE members) opposed a motion attributed to Councilmember Lee that they said would allow certain landlords to increase rent by an additional 1%, and urged stronger tenant protections.

Discussion Items

Item 11 — Continued

• Continued to Jan. 20, 2026 (no objection).

Item 15 — Harbor City RV Park / Ministerial Approval vs CUP (continued)

• Councilmember Tim McOsker held Item 15 for comment and introduced an amendment (McOsker-Park) arguing the RV park use is defined as requiring a CUP, and that even under staff’s reading of the code, Performance Standards 3, 4, and 5 were not met, which should trigger CUP.
• Councilmember Bob Blumenfield stated that in committee the appeal was denied after (1) litigation loss in trial court and (2) a closed-session briefing on liability; he requested the full Council receive similar closed-session information before acting.
• Council decision: Item continued to Wednesday, Dec. 3, 2025, along with the McOsker-Park amendment, with a closed session companion item promised on the continuation agenda.

Item 22 — ED1 / Affordable Housing Streamlining; RSO and HACLA-related amendments

• Multiple amendments voted:
  • 22C (Rodriguez–Lee): adopted 15-0.
  • 22B (Blumenfield–Rodriguez): adopted 14-1.
• 22A (Jurado–Hernandez) amendment on RSO threshold:
  • Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez argued the proposal’s RSO protections (exempting only RSO buildings with 12+ units) would not reflect CD14 housing patterns; she stated that in Boyle Heights 4,400 RSO properties exist and under the 12-unit threshold only 10 would be excluded from streamlined processing, creating displacement risk. She proposed lowering the exemption threshold to 5 units.
  • City Planning staff stated ED1 has approved about 32,000 affordable units across about 450 projects; about 168 projects involved demolition of RSO units, averaging ~4.7 units per site (~780 units), described as roughly 40 affordable units created per RSO unit lost. Staff estimated changing the threshold could affect about 8% of ED1 projects.
  • Action: Rather than adopting the threshold change immediately, Council referred 22A to PLUM and Housing & Homelessness committees for further analysis.
• Reconsideration and referral of 22B: After adoption, Councilmember Hernandez requested reconsideration due to concerns impacting HACLA properties.
  • Reconsidered (15-0), then referred to PLUM and Housing & Homelessness (vote recorded as 15-0).
• Final on Item 22: Item 22 (PLUM report) adopted as amended by 22C 15-0.

Item 23 — Palisades Fire Permit-Fee Waiver Ordinance Direction (sent back)

• Moved for consideration after public comment earlier by Councilmember Park (with seconds).
• CAO briefing: Council was told the fiscal impact differs depending on scope:
  • A limited approach estimated up to $86 million (plus borrowing costs).
  • A broad approach estimated up to $278 million (plus borrowing costs).
• Key policy disputes discussed:
  • Whether to limit waivers to rebuilds up to 110% of original structure size.
  • Whether waivers cover only single-family/duplex or all structures (including multifamily, condos/townhomes, mobile homes, and potentially commercial).
  • Whether to create a pro-rata approach if rebuild exceeds 110% (unclear without explicit drafting instructions).
• Councilmember Park argued rebuilding was not voluntary and urged not “picking winners and losers,” emphasizing inclusion of mobile home parks, condos/townhomes, apartments, and removal of the 110% limit for some homes due to rebuild realities.
• Amendments proposed but not adopted:
  • A Park–Nazarian amendment concept (including a sunset date concept, inclusion expansion, and fee treatment beyond 110%) was sent to committee due to lack of cost estimates.
  • A Rodriguez–Yaroslavsky amendment (labeled 23C) proposed requiring fee-waiver recipients to reimburse the City if property is transferred within 60 months of construction completion.
• Outcome: Council opted to refer the entire Item 23 package to Budget & Finance for a comprehensive fiscal analysis and coherent ordinance instructions, rather than piecemeal votes.

Item 24 — AB 481 “Military Equipment” Policy Renewal; amendment failed

• Councilmember Soto-Martinez introduced an amendment (24A, Soto-Martinez–Hernandez) to restrict authorization of 40mm projectiles and tear gas, citing protest-related incidents and asserting the City should withhold approval where statutory standards are not met.
• LAPD Chief (speaking as Chief): urged rejection, describing 40mm and chemical agents as less-lethal/de-escalation tools used to avoid deadly force and to restore order in violent conditions; referenced June unrest and stated officers faced assaults including fireworks.
• Vote: After a vote-recording correction and re-vote, the amendment failed 4-8.
• Final Item 24 vote: Adopted 9-3 (initially announced 10-2, then adjusted when a member clarified their vote).

Other Actions / Motions

• Item 1 (held for comments by Nazarian): approved 15-0; Nazarian noted a $2 fee change (from $2.87 to $2.85) and flagged upcoming work on film permitting.
• Item 16: continued to the next day (“tomorrow”) by Blumenfield.
• Item 17: continued one week to Tuesday, Dec. 9 (McOsker).
• Item 19: referred back to committee per Blumenfield.
• Item 21 (technical amendment): adopted 15-0.
• Item 26: continued one month to Jan. 13, 2026 (Hernandez).
• Item 35: referred back to committee (Housing & Homelessness) for more discussion (Lee); multiple recusals were mentioned on different items (e.g., Yaroslavsky stated intent to recuse on 35).
• Items 29 and 43: taken as a separate vote; adopted 10-2.
• Item 38: substitute motion adopted in two steps (12-0 to substitute; 12-0 to adopt substitute).
• Item 45: adopted 12-0.

Key Outcomes

• Continuations/Referrals
  • Item 11 continued to Jan. 20, 2026.
  • Item 15 continued to Dec. 3, 2025 with a promised closed session companion item.
  • Item 23 (Palisades fee-waiver ordinance direction) referred to Budget & Finance for consolidated fiscal analysis and drafting direction.
  • ED1-related amendments: 22A and 22B referred to PLUM and Housing & Homelessness.
• Votes (selected)
  • Items 12–14, 18, 20: 15-0.
  • Large batch (2–10, 25, 27, 28, 30–34, 36, 37, 39–42, 44, 46): 15-0.
  • Item 47: 14-0 with Price recused.
  • Item 24 amendment (restrict 40mm & tear gas): failed 4-8; Item 24 adopted 9-3.
• Next steps
  • Closed session discussion scheduled for Dec. 3 to inform the Council’s decision on Item 15.
  • Budget & Finance to return with fiscal estimates and ordinance language options for Item 23, including potential scope and “110%/pro-rata” mechanics.

Meeting Administration Notes

• Public comment rules were repeatedly stated (items open: 1–10, 15, 25–34, 36–47; Item 11 continued; Item 35 referred).
• Council leadership announced they would not reach all public speakers due to time; public comment lasted over an hour.
• Meeting adjourned with an announcement that Council would reconvene “in the morning” (Dec. 3, 2025).