The Los Angeles City Council met on July 1, 2026, to consider several items including a tax exemption ordinance for Palisades fire survivors, a motion to note and file a report on the ULA transfer tax, and various amendments to a charter amendment measure. Councilmembers also made announcements regarding district staff transitions, labor history commemorations, and ongoing fire recovery efforts in Boyle Heights.
Councilmember Park introduced an ordinance to provide a narrow tax exemption for original owners of residential properties in the Palisades who are forced to sell due to fire recovery hardships. The exemption applies to first transactions within five years for residential properties only. Park argued that many survivors lack insurance or resources and are forced to sell, and that the exemption is a necessary relief. A previous speaker (unnamed) opposed the measure, stating it creates a loophole for the ultra wealthy while reducing funding for affordable housing, homelessness prevention, and tenant protections. The council voted and the ordinance passed its first reading and will be held over for a second reading on August 4, 2026.
Councilmember Rosowski moved to note and file a report on the ULA (mansion tax) program, expressing deep concerns about the program's sustainability. She criticized closed-door negotiations in Sacramento that nearly resulted in severe cuts to ULA, and argued that the program's unintended consequences—such as stifling housing production and reducing property tax reassessments—must be addressed proactively. She stated that the committee's proposed reforms did not go far enough and that without meaningful change, ULA faces repeal in the future. The motion was seconded by Councilmember McCoskar. Councilmember Jurado supported the note and file, emphasizing that both sides need to compromise. Councilmember Park registered a no vote. The motion passed 13–1, noting and filing the item.
Councilmember Hernandez called a special item for comments on the Bureau of Street Lighting, with no further discussion. The item was approved by a vote of 14–9 (transcript notes "149" but tally appears to pass).
A substitute motion for item 123 was presented. Councilmember Rodriguez offered an amendment to change a charter amendment from "RP" to "PRK" (Park), seconded by Hernandez. Councilmember McCoskar offered an amendment to change another measure from "PX" to "PRT" (Park Ranger Train), seconded. The substitute motion as amended passed with 14 ayes.
The meeting was adjourned in memory of Barbara Jordan, a longtime community volunteer and friend of the mayor, who passed away at age 81. Councilmembers expressed condolences.
Note: No consent calendar or public comments were evident in the transcript.
And that died in council. It's hard not to notice when wealthy property owners need relief. Um, we're willing to bend over backwards, jump through hoops, do flips, whatever it takes to meet their needs and desires. But when working class people and tenants need protection, suddenly our hands are tied and the political will is not there. I support relief for fire survivors. I believe it is our responsibility, but I do not support creating another loophole for the ultra wealthy while reducing funding for affordable housing, homelessness prevention, and tenant protections. So I'm voting no because the city facilitates everything and anything for the super rich while it buries the working people of Los Angeles in process and protocols, and I cannot in good conscience support that. Thank you. Councilmember Park. Thank you, Council President, colleagues. All the way back to last February. I want to thank the Palisades community, many of whom I know are listening, for their advocacy and patience as we fought to make this promise of relief a reality. I especially want to thank Councilwoman Yara Scott Slavsky for waiving this and council president for ensuring that we could hear this today before our recess. And colleagues, I want to thank you all as well for your continued support of this devastated community. For those of you who came to the Palisades in the aftermath of the fire to stand with me and to bear witness, after the worst disaster in our city's history, like me, you will never forget what you saw. That wreckage still lingers, and as I've said many times before, this rebuild is not voluntary, not for anyone. Palisades residents weren't able to plan ahead or save up for what happened on January 7th. Thousands were dropped by their insurance companies prior to the fire, and those who were lucky enough to still have insurance, for many of them it wasn't enough. Time options and money are running out. For some victims, because of the lack of insurance or access to resources, or just because of timelines, bureaucracy, the regulatory hell that so many are still trapped in, or because of family status or age or any other multitude of reasons, they have no choice but to sell. They're not selling because they want to, they are selling because they have already lost everything, and there's nothing left. Putting this tax on these folks who are trying to recover and reckoning with the fact that some of them just aren't coming home. It's just unspeakably cruel. The exemption is already narrow. It is the product of hundreds of community meetings, extensive legal advice, and extensive policy development. This ordinance is already strategically narrowed and customized. It's an exemption that applies in very narrow circumstances to original owners and first transactions for five years only for residential properties. This is the least we can do as this community continues to recover. I know it has been a long road, and I appreciate your continued support. I ask for your eye votes today. Thank you. Thank you, seeing no other speakers. Uh, let's open the roll on this item, close the roll, tabulate the vote. All right. Thank you for item 117. The ordinance will be held over for a second reading to Tuesday, August 4. All right. Next, I understand there is a new motion for 118. Hold on one second, everybody, we're gonna figure out what's happening here. Thank you. Item number 118 is before council. All right, Councilmember Rosowski. Thank you, Council President. I'm gonna ask colleagues that we note and file this, but first I just want to speak um briefly to the ULA process and where we are. So over the last few weeks, uh we came closer than many people want to admit to losing ULA outright and severely limiting our ability to levy new local transfer taxes in the future because of closed door negotiations in Sacramento. People were willing to gamble on one of the most progressive revenue tools this city has, and all California cities have a transfer tax, and we only barely avoided what I think was a bad outcome. The whole thing was reckless and entirely avoidable. And one of the worst parts of the whole process was we weren't even at the negotiating table on behalf of Los Angeles. We abdicated that responsibility to Sacramento and to special interests, as we too often do, and got entirely cut out of those negotiations. I'm thankful that the statewide measure is off the ballot for now because I think it went too far.