Wed, Jan 28, 2026·Los Angeles, California·City Council

Los Angeles City Council Meeting - January 28, 2026

Discussion Breakdown

Community Engagement25%
Procedural21%
Parks and Recreation12%
Affordable Housing8%
Transportation Safety6%
Engineering And Infrastructure5%
Homelessness5%
Economic Development4%
Pending Litigation4%
Miscellaneous3%
Technology and Innovation2%
Land Use And Zoning2%
Public Safety2%
Personnel Matters1%

Summary

Los Angeles City Council Meeting - January 28, 2026

The Los Angeles City Council convened on Wednesday, January 28, 2026, with 11 members initially present, later increasing to 14. The meeting addressed several key issues ranging from economic development, housing policy, public safety, and community celebrations.

Opening and Introductions

Council President Marquees Harris-Dawson opened the meeting at approximately 10:00 AM. Roll call confirmed a quorum with 11 members present initially. The council approved the minutes from January 27, 2026, and commendatory resolutions. All items on the agenda were designated to go "forthwith," requiring ten votes for consideration.

Discussion Items

Item 1: Support for Vertical Content and Micro-Drama Production

Councilmember Blumenfield introduced legislation to support the emerging micro-drama and vertical content industry, which represents a $15 billion market by 2028. The motion addresses the reality that 78% of local independent producers now shoot projects outside Los Angeles due to insufficient incentives. Key provisions include:

  • Creating new financial incentives for productions under $200,000 that don't qualify for California tax credits
  • Streamlining permitting processes for smaller, nimble productions
  • Establishing a grant program to provide upfront funding
  • Supporting content created in 9:16 aspect ratio tailored for mobile viewing

Blumenfield noted that in recent months, there are 30-40 vertical short productions monthly in Los Angeles, with each episode lasting 1-2 minutes and series running 20-100 episodes. The item passed with 14 ayes.

Item 5: Woodland Hills Country Club Development Concerns

Councilmember Blumenfield raised alarms about a proposed 400-unit development at Woodland Hills Country Club located in a "very high fire severity zone." The concerns include:

  • State bills AB 2011 and subsequent legislation allow the project to be "fast-tracked and approved ministerially" with no CEQA review, no public hearings, and no discretion by the council
  • The location features "tangled spaghetti streets" in hillsides with evacuation concerns
  • Recent state bills redefined "commercial corridor" based on street width alone, divorcing it from actual commercial uses
  • The application was temporarily paused as "incomplete" by City Planning

Blumenfield is working with State Senator Henry Stern on legislation to address unintended consequences and directed the planning department and city attorney to analyze whether the city has any legal leverage over the proposal, particularly regarding fire safety. The item passed with 14 ayes.

Item 9: Transit-Locked Subsidies (TLS) and Shared Housing

Councilmember Blumenfield amended legislation to explicitly authorize shared housing as an option for TLS funding. Key points:

  • Current TLS provides $1,700 for rental assistance
  • Shared housing model: four people sharing a two-bedroom apartment at the cost of two TLS slots ($3,400 total), with each client paying $850
  • Amendment adds ED1 affordable housing units to TLS eligibility to prevent the county from "gobbling up" city-created affordable units
  • Rodriguez raised concerns about equitable distribution across all council districts, noting past inequities in Inside Safe operations

The item passed with 14 ayes as amended.

Item 11: TLS Funding Expansion

Building on Item 9, this item expands TLS funding options and passed with 14 ayes as amended to include shared housing provisions and ED1 units.

Item 20: Open Streets/Ciclovía Funding

The item recommended committing almost $2 million in matching funds to accept $3 million from Metro for nine open streets events. Blumenfield cast a protest vote because:

  • Only one of nine events is in the San Fernando Valley, where 40% of Angelenos reside
  • That single Valley event received less than half the requested funding
  • In Metro's previous cycle, seven events received funding with none in the Valley

Rodriguez joined the protest vote, stating Valley residents deserve their "fair share." The item passed with 12 ayes and 2 noes.

Item 22: Venice Del Community Affordable Housing Legal Funding

The council voted in closed session to authorize $650,000 in additional funding to law firm Nossaman LLP through March 2026, related to ongoing litigation regarding the Venice Del affordable housing project. Multiple public commenters opposed the expenditure:

  • Sarah Letts (Hollywood Community Housing) stated the project was approved by council between 2016-2022
  • Allison Riley (Venice Community Housing) noted the city has already spent $620,000 fighting the project
  • Linda Lux and Susan Millman emphasized Venice needs the 120 units of 100% low-income housing
  • Commenters warned the city risks losing its pro-housing designation from the state

Councilmember Lee recused himself from the vote. The amended motion passed with 9 ayes and 3 noes.

Item 23: Gibson Dunn Legal Services Funding

The council authorized an additional $1.8 million transfer to the contract with Gibson, Dunn, and Crutcher law firm. Public commenter "Drew" noted this represents the third increase, following an initial $900,000 and subsequent $5 million authorization. The item passed with 9 ayes and 4 noes.

Items 25-42: Settlement and Closed Session Items

The council approved numerous settlements in closed session, including:

  • Item 25: Waiving $601,152.91 in business license taxes for Downtown Natural Caregivers Inc.
  • Items 26-42: Various settlements ranging from $150,000 to $3.2 million for cases against the city, primarily involving police incidents and personal injury claims
  • Notable settlements included $3,237,268.72 for Paimani Haydarpour v. City of Los Angeles

All items passed with 14 ayes.

Item 43 (Special Meeting): LASA Funds

During a brief special meeting, the council approved Item 43 related to Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LASA) funding with 14 ayes. Public commenters expressed skepticism that funds would be properly allocated to housing and services rather than enforcement activities.

Public Comments

Numerous members of the public provided testimony:

  • Multiple speakers opposed Item 22 (Venice Del legal funding), arguing the city should support rather than fight affordable housing
  • George Bocanegra (Western States Regional Council of Carpenters) raised concerns that Item 5 could undermine AB 2011's intent to create housing and good-paying jobs
  • Fast food workers testified about workplace safety issues and urged passage of a Fast Food Fair Work Ordinance
  • Edgar Resinas testified about being terminated from Wingstop after filing OSHA complaints about burn hazards and working sick with COVID
  • Alejandra from Taco Bell described being sexually harassed at work and having hours cut after speaking up
  • Several speakers criticized city spending on LAPD while neglecting other needs
  • Speakers discussed Scientology's property holdings and alleged infiltration of city programs

Key Outcomes

  • Micro-drama industry support: Approved analysis and framework to support emerging vertical content production industry
  • Woodland Hills development: Directed staff to analyze options for city discretion on large hillside development in high fire zone
  • Shared housing for TLS: Explicitly authorized shared housing model to stretch homeless services funding further
  • Legal spending: Authorized $650,000 for Venice Del litigation and $1.8 million for Gibson Dunn contract despite public opposition
  • Settlements: Approved over $10 million in various settlements against the city
  • Open streets funding: Accepted $3 million from Metro despite Valley underrepresentation

Special Recognition

Councilmember Nazarian delivered remarks with video presentation about ongoing protests and violent crackdown in Iran, noting thousands have been killed. The council observed a moment of silence for those who perished. Councilmembers Yaroslavsky and Rahman expressed solidarity with Iranian-American constituents in Los Angeles, particularly in the Westwood/Tehrangeles community.

Closing

The meeting adjourned with no session scheduled for Friday. Council President Harris-Dawson noted that members could participate in a national day of protest on February 30th (likely an error in the transcript). The meeting also included extensive discussion during a closed session segment addressing Items 22 and 23.

Meeting Transcript

That's right, that's right. And what we have now is a unique collection of over 400 different designs. Wow! And that's spread throughout the 470 square miles of the city, right? And it pretty much, as you said, kind of grew up with the city. Different neighborhoods as they would rise and they would want street lights, they would design their own. So you have Wilshire Specials, you would have things like the Broadway Special, Hollywood Special, Van Nuys Special. So there's just different ones that the neighborhoods would kind of adopt and say, this is the one that we wanted. I think they could legitimately be called art. I mean, some of them have turned into art pieces. Obviously, I think most people know Urban Light, which is in front of LACMA. Are there other art installations that have been done with former practical lights that are now not practical but still worth our attention? Yes, Sheila Klein's Vermonica that actually shows the progression, and a time progression of all the different street lights. With all of the diversity of street lamps to choose from, what is, as the executive director, your favorite? Well, if you're gonna put me on the spot like that, I would say the Wilshire special that we have is an amazing piece, again, just because it kind of harkens back to that origin of us. And it's huge. You would never expect, we have them in the field right now. You would never expect that while you're walking on a sidewalk, there's this five foot tall, you know, two foot wide, like gargantuan street light. When you have it next to you, it's that big, right? But when it's up there, it just looks like any other street light, not to say nondescript, but, you know, like unassuming kind of light that has a great history. One of the things that most people don't know about the Beirah Street Lighting, we're one of the largest municipal deployments of EV chargers on the right of way. I was going to ask you. So about 700, we expect to have about 900 by the end of this fiscal year. And those are great opportunities for us to ensure that we are approaching transportation electrification in an equitable way. And is it being rolled out in certain neighborhoods? As you said, you were looking for an equitable solution to something like this when EV chargers may not be able to go into a neighborhood that had the resources for it. So is it specific? We're looking for existing markets and hoping to create emerging markets. What I mean by that is we're going to places where there have been requests, high demand, where we've placed chargers. we're looking at our analytics and seeing should we place another one close by right in order for for people to have more usage but we're also trying to get into places that we we don't necessarily see what i would say the private sector so we're trying to go into places like Hyde Park right like South LA like the valley right so get away from just what traditionally people would think that that is not just a privilege to have that's something that we should all have. Are we ahead of the game when it comes to technology and advancements for something like the Bureau of Street Lighting or are we looking to other cities to see how they are doing it and then following soon? When you look at the world as a whole there's obviously going to be some places that might do things better here or there and different types of technology. On average though, I'd say LA is on the cutting edge, the further ahead than the pack. And I'll say this for a couple things.