On a beautiful, sunny day, community members took to the streets in Councilmember Traci Park’s neighborhood to send a powerful message against her anti-immigrant stance. As Park aligns herself with Donald Trump’s politics of fear and punishment, her constituents are making it clear that they reject her vision. They marched not just for justice, dignity, and immigrant protections but also to preserve the diverse, working-class roots of Venice, a neighborhood increasingly under threat from gentrification and displacement.
The march was an act of collective defiance and a celebration of community power. Protesters took over the northbound lane of Lincoln Boulevard, marching from California Avenue to Rose Avenue, reclaiming space in a city that has often ignored the voices of the most vulnerable. The energy was electric—cars passing by honked in solidarity, drivers raised their fists in support, and the crowd's chants echoed through the streets. For longtime Venice residents, the march was a poignant reminder of the neighborhood’s historic diversity and the urgent need to fight against the forces pushing out poor and working-class people of color. Venice has long been a cultural crossroads, home to immigrants, artists, activists, and working-class families. But over the years, intense gentrification has pushed out many of the very people who built this vibrant community. Rent hikes, evictions, and aggressive policing have erased Black and Brown communities from Venice’s streets, with developers and wealthier newcomers replacing affordable homes with luxury apartments. Traci Park has aligned herself with law-and-order politics that prioritize criminalization over community support, putting immigrants and unhoused residents at even greater risk. While other Los Angeles leaders have reaffirmed the city’s commitment to sanctuary protections, Park has opposed these efforts, aligning herself with right-wing fear-mongering and divisive rhetoric. The march was not only a demonstration of resistance but also a platform for powerful voices within the community. A diverse lineup of speakers addressed the crowd, each emphasizing the importance of standing in solidarity with immigrants and defending the right to live without fear. The speakers’ words resonated deeply with the crowd, a stark contrast to Traci Park’s stance, which has left many families feeling unsafe and unsupported. The rally’s momentum extended beyond the streets. Organizers are circulating a petition demanding that Traci Park support Los Angeles’ sanctuary policies—a protection overwhelmingly supported by other councilmembers but opposed by Park. Advocates have made it clear that the fight does not end with the march; they are urging community members to sign and share the petition to ensure Park hears their demands. This policy is about more than just symbolic protections—it directly impacts whether immigrants in LA feel safe seeking healthcare, reporting crimes, or accessing city services without fear of deportation. Park’s failure to support these basic protections speaks volumes about who she truly represents—and it isn’t the working-class, immigrant families of her district. The success of this march was a collective effort, made possible by the dedication of numerous grassroots organizations committed to social justice, labor rights, housing security, and immigrant protections. These groups continue to fight every day to build a more inclusive and just Los Angeles:
As the march came to a close, the crowd left with more than just the echoes of their chants—they carried forward a renewed commitment to the fight for justice. The message was clear: Venice belongs to its people—not to developers, not to law-and-order politicians, and certainly not to those who would abandon immigrant families in their time of need.
0 Comments
What good is saving a celebrity’s house if the entire neighborhood is at risk of burning down?2/15/2025 LA Times reports today that "LAFD could have had at least 10 engines patrolling Palisades hills" according to a former department chief. And since everyone is in the business of pointing fingers, perhaps we should take a closer look at CD11 Councilmember Traci Park.
When the Palisades Fire ignited on the morning of January 7, it was a disaster waiting to happen. Eight months of drought had turned the hillsides into a tinderbox. The National Weather Service issued dire warnings about the strongest Santa Ana winds in recent years. Fire officials had all the information they needed to anticipate a major fire event in the region. Yet when the flames erupted, there was no firefighting force on the ground to stop them. Why? Because city officials, including Los Angeles Councilmember Traci Park, failed to act. Park, who represents Council District 11, has cultivated a close relationship with the Los Angeles Fire Department (LAFD)—one of her largest campaign donors. But when it came time to ensure that fire crews were deployed in her district ahead of an inevitable catastrophe, she was nowhere to be found. The first 911 call came in at 10:29 a.m., reporting flames flickering over a ridge near Piedra Morada Drive. It took 18 minutes for the first fire engine to arrive. By then, the blaze was already spreading out of control. Former fire chiefs have stated that the LAFD had ample resources to deploy additional engines to the Palisades before the fire started. That’s what was done in previous years when extreme fire conditions were predicted. Engines patrolling the hillsides could have detected the fire early and hit it hard before it had a chance to grow. But this time, the decision was made to send pre-deployed crews elsewhere—leaving one of L.A.'s most fire-prone neighborhoods dangerously unprotected. Where was Traci Park? Why wasn’t she demanding that LAFD pre-deploy engines to her district, as they had in past fire seasons? As a councilmember who enjoys close ties with the LAFD—one of her biggest campaign donors—why didn’t she use her influence to ensure that firefighters were on the ground before disaster struck? While real fire threats loomed over her district, Traci Park was busy playing dress-up. She dedicated more time and energy to stopping the demolition of Marilyn Monroe’s former home in the Palisades than she did to fighting for fire safety measures. She posed in a black dress, pearls and a fancy hairdo for a press release celebrating the home's preservation—ignoring the reality that the Palisades is not just a playground for nostalgia but one of the most fire-prone areas in the state. What good is saving a celebrity’s house if the entire neighborhood is at risk of burning down? Park should have been fighting for resources to protect her district. Instead, she allowed her own donors at LAFD’s leadership level to leave the Palisades exposed. If she truly had the community’s best interests at heart, she would have demanded answers when fire engines weren’t staged in advance. She would have held LAFD accountable for prioritizing other areas over her district. She would have ensured that residents weren’t left to fend for themselves when the inevitable disaster struck. Instead, she remained silent. The Palisades is a beautiful community, but it is also an extremely dangerous one. Decades of unchecked development have placed thousands of homes directly in the path of inevitable fires and floods. Scientists and fire experts have warned time and again that the Palisades, like other wildland-urban interface areas, is not sustainable in its current form. A responsible leader would have been honest with residents about the risks. A responsible leader would have pushed for stronger fire safety measures, better evacuation plans, and stricter regulations on development in high-risk zones. Instead, Traci Park chose the easy path: pretending everything was fine. Now, after 7,000 structures have been lost and at least 12 people have died, we’re left asking: why didn’t Traci Park act? Traci Park Joins Conservative Majority in Rejecting Protections for Renters Affected by the Fires2/14/2025 On Friday, LA City Council failed to pass a measure that would have protected renters facing eviction after January’s devastating fires. The proposal, led by Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez, needed eight votes to move forward but fell short—thanks in part to Traci Park, who once again sided with landlords over struggling Angelenos.
Instead of acting to keep people in their homes, Park and conservative ally John Lee argued that more study was needed, a classic delay tactic. As renters reel from economic hardship, Park has made it clear where she stands—with corporate landlords and wealthy homeowners, not the majority of working-class residents in her district. Park’s opposition to renter protections isn’t new. She’s consistently worked to benefit corporate landlords while ignoring the needs of everyday Angelenos. Despite the fact that 75% of renters in LA live in properties owned by large investment firms, she’s refused to support strong tenant protections and has instead blocked necessary reforms. During her campaign, Park courted wealthy homeowners’ associations while ignoring renters. She even refused to attend a debate at Mar Vista Gardens, the only public housing complex in her district. Once in office, she introduced policies to give secretive homeowner groups more influence while renters continued to struggle. It’s no surprise that Park prioritizes landlords—her campaign was bankrolled by them. In 2022, she accepted $1.2 million from real estate giants like Douglas Emmett, Kilroy Realty, and the California Apartment Association. Douglas Emmett alone funneled $566,000 into her campaign. Now, she’s paying them back by standing aside while they carry out mass evictions. Park has been instrumental in allowing Douglas Emmett’s eviction of 700+ tenants at Barrington Plaza, a rent-stabilized building. After two deadly fires, instead of installing fire sprinklers while keeping tenants housed, Douglas Emmett opted to empty the building to jack up rents. When former Councilmember Mike Bonin opposed the plan, Douglas Emmett dumped cash into Park’s campaign—knowing she’d support their eviction plan. Since taking office, Park has refused to challenge the legality of these evictions or push the City Attorney to intervene. Instead, she has left hundreds of tenants to fight on their own. Los Angeles City Councilmember Traci Park is doubling down on her vision of a heavily policed and surveilled city, with her push to install a Real-Time Crime Center (RTCC) on the Westside. This move follows her long-standing pattern of expanding law enforcement’s presence in everyday life, despite increasing concerns about privacy violations, racial profiling, and the effectiveness of mass surveillance.
Traci Park has consistently supported policies that reinforce police power at the expense of civil liberties. In February 2023, she introduced a motion to encourage teachers and social workers to become police officers, a move widely criticized for further entrenching law enforcement in community spaces meant for support and rehabilitation. The following month, she urged her colleagues to support LAPD’s purchase of the controversial “robot dog,” a quadruped military surveillance robot manufactured by Boston Dynamics. The proposal was ridiculed by civil rights groups and even mainstream media, with Vice's Motherboard commenting that Park’s support for the device “highlights the power of well-funded police lobbyists to purchase influence in local governments.” By February 2024, Park had expanded her surveillance ambitions, introducing a motion to establish a Real-Time Crime Center on the Westside after LAPD secured $15 million for an integrated surveillance network. These centers aggregate live surveillance feeds from a vast array of sources, including Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs), gunshot detection systems, police helicopters, and even private homeowners' security cameras. The data is funneled into central monitoring hubs where officers can watch in real time, often using predictive policing software and AI-enhanced video analytics to assess threats—raising major concerns about civil liberties and the unchecked expansion of surveillance technology in public spaces. With the expansion of Real-Time Crime Centers across U.S. cities, law enforcement agencies are amassing unprecedented amounts of data on people’s everyday movements. These centers create a permanent, large-scale surveillance infrastructure that is ripe for abuse. In Los Angeles, LAPD is actively seeking access to 10,000 cameras across the city as part of its growing surveillance network. Their grant application for state funding was submitted in October 2023, and a month later, the City Council and Board of Police Commissioners approved the budget item. However, extensive research has shown that mass surveillance does not equate to increased safety. Instead, it disproportionately targets marginalized communities, leading to over-policing, racial profiling, and the erosion of civil liberties. Real-Time Crime Centers have been criticized for relying on biased AI and predictive policing algorithms that reinforce existing patterns of discrimination, falsely identifying people of color as suspects at higher rates. Despite overwhelming evidence that surveillance-heavy policing leads to more harm than good, Traci Park remains a staunch advocate for expanding LAPD’s technological arsenal. Rather than investing in proven crime reduction strategies like mental health services, housing, and education, Park is pushing for more police cameras and real-time monitoring, effectively treating all residents as potential criminals. Her motion prioritized the rollout of a Real-Time Crime Center in what she calls a “high-crime” area of the Westside, a classification that will likely lead to increased racial profiling of Black and Brown residents in communities already over-policed. With Traci Park championing the expansion of LAPD’s surveillance apparatus, Los Angeles is on track to become one of the most heavily monitored cities in the country. Her insistence on prioritizing law enforcement technology over social services reveals a disturbing trend: an ever-growing police state where privacy is sacrificed in the name of security theater. Traci Park's top campaign contributor caught in another scandal that will cost us millions2/14/2025 Another day, another LAPD scandal. This time, officers in the department’s recruiting division have been accused of making racist and sexist remarks—exposing yet again the deep-seated culture of bigotry within the force. While the department claims to be working on diversity and inclusion, these latest revelations show how little has changed. Yet, even as LAPD continues to disgrace itself on a national stage, one of its most loyal supporters in City Hall, Traci Park, remains silent. Her unwavering allegiance to the department isn’t just about ideology—it’s about power, influence, and money.
Traci Park, the Los Angeles City Councilmember for District 11, has proven time and again that she is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) and its so-called union, the Los Angeles Police Protective League (LAPPL). While our city struggles under the weight of homelessness, skyrocketing rent, and underfunded public services, Park has made it her mission to funnel as much power and funding as possible into the hands of an agency infamous for brutality, corruption, and financial drain on taxpayers. The latest scandal engulfing the LAPD—supervisors accused of making racist and sexist remarks—adds yet another stain to the department’s long history of misconduct. But for Park, none of this matters. She remains one of LAPD’s most loyal servants, despite the department’s astronomical liability costs, which have forced the city to consider borrowing $80 million just to cover legal settlements. Between July 2019 and June 2023, the city spent nearly $472 million on lawsuits, with the LAPD responsible for the lion’s share. Park has remained silent on this financial disaster while ensuring that LAPD remains the best-funded arm of city government. Park’s Record on Police Brutality: Silence and Excuses If Park’s allegiance to LAPD wasn’t clear enough, her response to police killings speaks volumes. One month after taking office, LAPD tased Keenan Anderson to death less than a mile from her Venice home. Anderson’s murder was the third LAPD killing in the first few days of 2023, igniting national outrage. Park remained silent for a full week before issuing a statement that blamed Anderson’s death on his mental health rather than police violence. When confronted by Black organizers at City Hall about the killing, she refused to engage and instead called the police on them. Just days after LAPD murdered Anderson, Memphis police brutally killed Tyre Nichols. In response, Black Lives Matter LA led a vigil for both men, which turned into a march to Park’s home. Once again, she refused to engage with the community she claims to represent. And when Black Lives Matter street art in Venice was vandalized in April 2023, she said nothing. None of this is surprising, given her deep financial ties to the police. Park received a staggering $1.5 million from a LAPPL-backed PAC and was endorsed by eight different law enforcement agencies. She doesn’t just support LAPD—she works for them. Police and corporate interests didn’t back Park’s campaign on a whim. They knew exactly who they were buying: a lawyer who spent her career defending police brutality, racism, and union-busting. Park built her legal career at Littler Mendelson, one of the world’s leading union-busting firms, and continued this work at Ogletree Deakins—a firm that defended racist Sheriff Joe Arpaio, backed North Carolina Republicans in gerrymandering lawsuits, and fights labor unions across the country. She later joined Burke, Williams & Sorensen, where she exclusively represented management, helping cities and corporations fight civil rights claims. One of her most disturbing cases was Harrell v. City of Anaheim (2021), in which she argued that a white employee repeatedly using the n-word and making sexual jokes around a Black coworker did not constitute harassment. Fortunately, the judge disagreed. Now, as a councilmember, she continues to funnel money into her former firm. Since taking office, legal contracts between Burke, Williams & Sorensen and the City of LA have ballooned from $100,000 to $1.335 million—mostly for defending LAPD misconduct. In other words, LA taxpayers are paying over a million dollars to the law firm that Park built her career in, all to shield abusive officers from accountability. Park’s unwavering loyalty to law enforcement extends beyond funding. She actively pushes policies that expand LAPD’s power while eroding civil rights. In February 2023, she proposed a motion to encourage teachers and social workers to become police officers, further entrenching law enforcement in spaces meant to support the community. The next month, she made headlines for supporting LAPD’s purchase of a military surveillance robot, or “robot dog.” The move was widely ridiculed, with Vice noting how it underscored “the power of well-funded police lobbyists to purchase influence in local governments.” By 2024, Park had only doubled down on her commitment to an all-encompassing surveillance state. She introduced a motion pushing for a “real-time crime center” on the Westside, backing LAPD’s push for a $15 million integrated surveillance network. These centers aggregate video surveillance from license plate readers, gunshot detection systems, helicopters, and even private homeowners’ security cameras—all fed into central hubs where police monitor them in real time, often using predictive policing algorithms. Civil rights groups warn that these centers serve as tools for racial profiling and mass surveillance, but Park is eager to see them expanded in her own district. Traci Park launched her bid for City Council in the wake of the George Floyd uprisings, as cities across the country debated the future of policing. While communities demanded investments in housing, healthcare, and education—real solutions for public safety—Park aligned herself with reactionaries desperate to increase police budgets. She ran as LAPD’s candidate, won with their backing, and now governs as their most loyal operative in City Hall. Los Angeles City Council meetings are usually filled with the usual bureaucratic drudgery—motions signed, policies debated, votes cast. But today, Traci Park did something so grotesque, so openly cruel, that it deserves everyone’s attention: she put a smiley face on a motion criminalizing homelessness.
Out of the half-dozen motions she signed, the only one that got this little flourish was a 41.18 motion from Councilmember Katy Yaroslavsky, expanding the city's already punitive law against sitting, sleeping, or lying in certain public spaces. This law does nothing to address the root causes of homelessness. It simply forces people to move from one place to another, making it harder for them to survive. And Traci Park, who has built her career on demonizing the unhoused, thought this was worth celebrating. Traci Park Built Her Political Career on Hate None of this should come as a surprise. Park didn’t run for office on a platform of solutions. She ran on a wave of anger from wealthy property owners who didn’t want to see poor people near their multimillion-dollar homes. She moved to Venice in 2021, at a time when homelessness on the Westside was more visible than ever due to the pandemic. When COVID-19 hit, the CDC recommended that unhoused people be allowed to stay in place to slow the spread of disease. At the same time, shelters had to cut their capacity in half to allow for social distancing. Sweeps were temporarily paused, while job losses and evictions pushed more people into homelessness. The response from some of the Westside’s wealthiest residents was outrage. They were forced to confront the housing crisis in a way they never had before, and instead of pushing for real solutions, they demanded that encampments be cleared without any thought for where people were supposed to go. Many of them spent their work-from-home days complaining about homelessness on NextDoor and convincing themselves that visible poverty was the biggest threat to their quality of life. Traci Park saw an opportunity and ran with it. She described Venice as a lawless dystopia. She posted images of encampments with no regard for the people living in them. She built a campaign around the idea that homelessness wasn’t a humanitarian crisis, but a public safety threat that could be solved with more police and more punishment. That false, dangerous narrative helped her win a seat on the City Council. Now she’s making sure the city doubles down on cruelty. A Career in Criminalizing Poverty Since taking office, Park has wasted no time in enacting policies that push unhoused people further to the margins. She has expanded LAMC 41.18 zones across her district, creating dozens of new areas where sitting, sleeping, or lying down is banned, including one at the beach. The city had to remove that provision after legal advocates pointed out that it was blatantly illegal, but the fact that she tried to pass it in the first place says everything about her priorities. She has pushed oversized vehicle bans that make it illegal for people to sleep in their RVs or cars, even though there are no realistic alternatives for them. So far, she has banned parking on 68 street segments, knowing full well that the people displaced have nowhere else to go. She led an aggressive encampment sweep on Jefferson Boulevard, where she oversaw the towing of RVs with all of their owners’ possessions inside. Instead of working to get people housed, she made sure they lost what little stability they had left. Before the sweep, she blocked a motion that would have allocated over two million dollars to house the people living in RVs along Jefferson. Shortly after, one of the residents of the encampment burned to death in his RV. She also used a fire under the 10 Freeway as an excuse to push for more anti-homeless measures. Even though there was no proof that unhoused people were responsible for the fire, she immediately used it as justification to propose banning encampments from freeway underpasses, bridges, and tunnels. These are places where people seek shelter because they have nowhere else to go, and Park’s response was to suggest making them completely off-limits. Inside Safe as Political Cover Even when Park claims to support housing, her actions tell a different story. At first, she tried to undermine Mayor Karen Bass’ Inside Safe program by using city resources to conduct her own aggressive sweeps. But once she saw that Inside Safe could be used to clear encampments, she quickly aligned herself with it. The program has been widely criticized for being poorly managed and ineffective. People are forced to give up their tents on the promise of temporary shelter, then moved from one motel to another, often far from their support networks. The conditions in these motels are often unlivable, and there is no clear pathway to permanent housing. Park has repeatedly told constituents that Inside Safe has “housed” people when, in reality, many participants are still stuck in limbo, cycling through temporary placements with no real stability. But for Park, the important thing is that the encampments are gone. Whether the people displaced end up in permanent housing or back on the streets is not her concern. That Smiley Face Says It All Traci Park didn’t just vote for another cruel and ineffective policy today. She went out of her way to show that she was happy about it. The smiley face on that motion is not just a childish doodle. It is a deliberate message to her base, letting them know that she is still committed to making life harder for unhoused people. It is a mockery of those who are struggling to survive. It is a sign that she does not see unhoused people as human beings worthy of dignity and protection. This is not leadership. This is not problem-solving. This is cruelty for cruelty’s sake. At her recent town hall in Westchester, CD11 Councilmember Traci Park made one thing abundantly clear: she is governing for affluent homeowners, not the renters and working-class residents who make up the majority of Los Angeles. While she framed her remarks as a community update, her speech revealed an agenda rooted in exclusion, criminalization, and an aversion to real solutions for housing and homelessness. Instead of using her position to fight for affordability, renters' rights, and humane policies for the unhoused, Park doubled down on her commitment to policing, displacement, and fearmongering. NIMBY to the Core: Protecting Homeowners, Ignoring Renters Throughout her remarks, Park repeatedly emphasized her desire to "protect" single-family neighborhoods from increased density, demonstrating her alignment with NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) homeowners who prioritize exclusivity over affordability. She falsely framed state housing laws as the enemy, blaming Sacramento for allowing new housing developments rather than acknowledging the urgent need to expand affordable housing stock in one of the least affordable cities in the country.
Park's obsession with maintaining the "character" of single-family neighborhoods translates to shutting renters and lower-income families out of these communities. Instead of using her power to demand more affordable housing and community benefits from developers, she positions herself as a barrier to progress. Criminalizing Homelessness Instead of Solving It Park spent a significant portion of her remarks boasting about the expansion of anti-homeless 41.18 zones, which criminalize people for sleeping in public spaces instead of offering them real housing solutions. She openly celebrated the fact that CD11 has gone from having “years of literally no 41.18 zones on the west side to now having over 50 of them.” This is not a victory—it’s a disgrace.
Park’s approach to homelessness is fundamentally about exclusion and optics. She is more concerned with keeping unhoused people out of sight than actually addressing the root causes of homelessness: lack of affordable housing, stagnant wages, and the criminalization of poverty. Endless Police Funding, No Investment in Community Solutions If there’s one thing Traci Park is willing to invest in, it’s policing. Her speech was filled with references to new surveillance measures, increased LAPD funding, and expanded police presence across the district. Rather than advocating for alternatives like community-based safety programs or mental health crisis response teams, she continues to funnel resources into a broken, carceral system.
Her reliance on law enforcement as the primary tool for public safety ignores proven alternatives that reduce crime without criminalization. Studies show that investing in housing, mental health care, and job programs is more effective than increased policing, yet Park refuses to acknowledge these facts. Traci Park’s tenure has been defined by her commitment to NIMBY politics, punitive policies, and maintaining a status quo that works for the wealthy and no one else. If CD11 wants to move forward, it needs leadership that will fight for housing, equity, and real community safety—not more sweeps, cops, and surveillance.
The City of Fremont has just passed one of the most extreme and draconian anti-homeless laws in California, criminalizing the act of "aiding and abetting" unhoused individuals. This ordinance not only bans encampments but also makes it illegal to provide basic humanitarian aid like food, water, blankets, or even legal support to those in need. It’s a stunningly cruel policy that sets a dangerous precedent—and if we don’t take action, Los Angeles could be next.
Councilmember Traci Park has made it clear that she supports harsher crackdowns on homelessness, favoring punitive measures over real solutions. With cities across California increasingly emboldened after the Supreme Court’s Grants Pass decision, politicians like Park will look to Fremont’s ordinance as a blueprint to further criminalize homelessness in Los Angeles. We must resist this shift before it’s too late. Fremont’s ordinance is as vague as it is cruel. By prohibiting “aiding and abetting” homelessness, the law can be broadly interpreted to criminalize those providing basic survival necessities to unhoused individuals. Nonprofits and advocacy groups fear that even handing out tents or legal aid could be considered a crime. Vivian Wan, CEO of Abode Services, expressed concern that distributing essential items in extreme weather could result in fines or legal penalties under the new law. These policies don’t just fail to solve homelessness—they actively make it worse. When people are pushed further into the margins of society, denied aid, and have their few possessions seized in sweeps, they become even more vulnerable to violence, illness, and death. This isn’t a solution; it’s systemic cruelty disguised as governance. This ordinance is part of a larger trend of reactionary, punitive policies sweeping across California. Following the Grants Pass decision, which allows cities to fine or jail people for sleeping in public spaces, local governments have been racing to implement stricter anti-homeless laws. Governor Gavin Newsom has doubled down on encampment sweeps and has pressured cities to take more aggressive actions, despite the fact that housing remains unaffordable and scarce across the state. Cities like San Diego and San Francisco have already begun ramping up police enforcement against unhoused communities. Reports have surfaced of police destroying personal belongings, arresting people for simply existing in public, and even harassing volunteers and outreach workers attempting to provide aid. Fremont’s ordinance gives even more power to criminalize survival itself—an approach that Los Angeles politicians like Traci Park would be eager to replicate if given the opportunity. Councilmember Traci Park has repeatedly advocated for increasing police presence and sweeps targeting unhoused people. She has supported the aggressive expansion of anti-camping laws and worked to push unhoused individuals out of public spaces without offering real solutions. With Fremont setting a new legal precedent, Park and other right-wing councilmembers will likely attempt to bring similar ordinances to Los Angeles, further criminalizing those who have nowhere else to go. The consequences of such policies are dire. We’ve already seen the results of criminalizing homelessness—tent cities are bulldozed, belongings are confiscated, and unhoused individuals are displaced from one neighborhood to the next with no actual path to housing. Meanwhile, the root causes of homelessness—skyrocketing rents, evictions, lack of affordable housing, and inadequate mental health services—remain unaddressed. This is a pivotal moment for Los Angeles. If we allow ordinances like Fremont’s to become the norm, we will be paving the way for more cruelty, more suffering, and more deaths on our streets. We must demand that our city leaders reject punitive measures and instead invest in real, proven solutions like permanent supportive housing, rental assistance programs, and expanded mental health care. Traci Park and other politicians will try to sell these measures as necessary for “public safety,” but we know the truth: these laws are about pushing poor and unhoused people out of sight, not solving homelessness. Los Angeles must not follow Fremont’s lead. As Los Angeles braces for another powerful storm, Councilmember Traci Park issued a public safety warning, urging residents to prepare for heavy rainfall, potential flooding, and mudslides, particularly in burn-scarred areas like the Pacific Palisades. Her newsletter provides information on sandbags, road safety, and the importance of staying informed. But conspicuously absent from her message is any mention of the most vulnerable members of her district: the thousands of unhoused residents who will be left to weather the storm with no shelter, no protection, and no support from her office.
Traci Park’s omission is not an oversight; it is a deliberate pattern. Despite multiple opportunities to provide emergency shelter in Council District 11, she has consistently refused to open additional emergency beds, expand access to safe sleeping sites, or implement short-term solutions like warming shelters during extreme weather events. Instead, her office has prioritized policies that criminalize homelessness, such as encampment sweeps that displace people rather than offering them housing solutions. The consequences of this inaction are dire. Torrential rain, dropping temperatures, and high winds create life-threatening conditions for people living in tents, under overpasses, or in makeshift shelters. Hypothermia, exposure, and the risk of being swept away by flash floods are real and preventable dangers. And yet, while Park urges housed constituents to take cover and prepare, she extends no such warning—or aid—to those with nowhere to go. Park’s failure to address this crisis in her storm advisory speaks volumes about her approach to governance. A leader truly committed to public safety would ensure that all constituents, including those without permanent housing, have access to emergency shelter during extreme weather events. Other cities and council districts have implemented crisis response plans that open recreation centers, libraries, and public buildings to serve as temporary shelters. Why is CD11 not doing the same? If Traci Park truly believes in keeping people safe, her office must act immediately to protect the unhoused residents of her district. That means opening emergency shelters, ensuring outreach teams provide adequate supplies, and prioritizing long-term housing solutions over punitive displacement tactics. Ignoring the plight of unhoused people during a severe storm is not just negligence—it’s a choice. And as the rains come down, that choice could mean the difference between life and death for some of the most vulnerable Angelenos. City Council Committee Sides with Developers, Moves Forward with Reckless Olympics Exemptions2/12/2025 Despite overwhelming public opposition, the Los Angeles City Council’s Planning and Land Use Management (PLUM) Committee has advanced a dangerous motion that would exempt Olympics-related projects from standard city planning approval, zoning regulations, and environmental review. Introduced by Councilmember Traci Park, the proposal faced sharp criticism from community members, neighborhood councils, and advocacy groups who warned that it would prioritize private development over public interest, sideline community voices, and create a massive loophole for unchecked construction across the city.
Rather than listen to Angelenos who will be directly impacted by these projects, the committee voted to move forward with drafting an ordinance that effectively guts essential oversight mechanisms in the name of Olympic urgency. While the committee included a so-called “kill switch” that would allow the City Council to revoke the expedited permitting process if problems arise, this does little to address the core issue—the ordinance never should have been considered in the first place. By approving this framework, the committee has signaled that it is willing to gamble with the city’s future while giving developers a blank check to reshape Los Angeles on their terms. A Giveaway to Developers at the Expense of Communities At Tuesday’s meeting, residents made it abundantly clear that this motion is not just bad policy—it is an open invitation for corruption and exploitation. Phyllis Ling, chair of the Historic Cultural North Neighborhood Council, warned that the motion was “vague and wide-reaching”, creating a fast-track for Olympics-related projects without requiring transparency or community input. “Major permanent infrastructure and development must not be forced on our communities without transparency and community engagement,” she said. Her neighborhood council, which represents Chinatown, El Pueblo, Solano Canyon, and Victor Heights, overwhelmingly opposed the motion in a 15-1 vote, with zero public comments in support of the exemption. Residents from these neighborhoods—some of the city’s most historically significant and culturally rich communities—know all too well the dangers of unchecked development. Past waves of Olympic-driven displacement have left scars on low-income and working-class communities, and this exemption only paves the way for history to repeat itself. Opponents also pointed to the suspiciously broad language in the motion, which extends exemptions not only to Olympics-related projects but also to “other major events.” This ambiguity raises serious questions about what qualifies under this exemption and who will have the authority to make that determination. With no clear answers from city officials, concerns over potential abuse were impossible to ignore. A Convenient Excuse for the City’s Failure to Plan One of the most glaring contradictions in this motion is that the 2028 Olympics were awarded to Los Angeles in 2017—more than seven years ago. Yet now, city officials are claiming that they have run out of time to follow the normal planning process? That is not a valid reason to strip away oversight—it is a reflection of mismanagement and incompetence. “This proposal introduces too many opportunities for abuse and corruption,” Ling stated during the meeting. “We should not have to deal with the consequences of poor planning, especially not for games that were sold to us as a ‘no-build’ Olympics.” That so-called “no-build” promise was a major selling point for bringing the Olympics to LA, with organizers pledging to use existing venues rather than embark on massive new construction projects. Now, those same organizers—and the city officials backing them—are flipping the script and saying that not only does new construction need to happen, but that it also shouldn’t be subject to normal review processes. This bait-and-switch is an insult to the public and a direct contradiction of what was originally promised. A Trojan Horse for Controversial Projects Like the Dodger Stadium Gondola Among the most vocal opponents of the motion were residents fighting against controversial transit projects that could slip through under the guise of Olympic urgency. Julie Wong of the Stop Gondola Coalition specifically pointed to the Dodger Stadium Gondola project, which remains a deeply contentious issue in the city. “The Hernández Commission’s traffic study hasn’t even been completed,” Wong noted during public comment. “There are Metro-assigned conditions that must be met before this project is approved. This motion would let them bypass all of that.” Despite ongoing concerns about its environmental and community impact, the gondola project could now receive a fast-tracked exemption under this new ordinance, allowing developers to sidestep critical review processes. The same risks apply to a wide range of projects, from hotel expansions to transit infrastructure that could fuel gentrification and displacement. One speaker at the meeting likened this motion to a Trojan horse for development interests, hiding in plain sight under the banner of Olympic preparations. “This is an overly broad attempt to evade oversight and accountability,” he said. “They’re sneaking through all these exemptions, hoping we won’t notice.” Where Is This Energy for Real Crises? Many speakers at the meeting expressed frustration with the city’s priorities. While officials are bending over backward to rush through exemptions for Olympic construction, they have failed to take bold action on urgent crises like homelessness and housing affordability. “We never see the city move like this for real emergencies—like housing the homeless or even a simple rent freeze and eviction moratorium,” Wong said. “Now they’re trying to ram this through for a two-week event that was forced on us in the first place?” Time and again, LA’s elected officials have shown that they can move quickly when corporate interests are at stake, yet when it comes to protecting tenants, expanding affordable housing, or improving social services, their urgency suddenly disappears. The contrast is glaring, and it speaks volumes about whose interests are truly being prioritized. A Kill Switch Won’t Stop the Damage The “kill switch” added to the motion may sound like a safeguard, but it does not erase the fundamental problem—by the time the City Council might decide to shut down the expedited permitting process, the damage could already be done. Once exemptions are granted and construction is underway, reversing course will be nearly impossible. The only responsible decision would have been to reject the motion outright—but instead, the committee has opened the floodgates for reckless, unaccountable development. By advancing this ordinance, the PLUM Committee has made it abundantly clear that corporate profits and Olympic spectacle take priority over the needs of LA’s communities. This fight is far from over, and residents have vowed to keep holding their elected officials accountable. But for now, City Hall has once again shown its willingness to sell out Los Angeles in the name of the Olympics—and Angelenos will be left to deal with the consequences. A recent "article" in City Watch by Deegan on LA attempts to paint Traci Park as a bold, independent leader standing up for her constituents in Pacific Palisades. But scratch beneath the surface, and this is little more than a glorified puff piece designed to prop up a failing councilmember who has actually made her district less prepared for future wildfires.
Park’s much-touted "leadership" centers around opposing Mayor Karen Bass’s decision to lift checkpoints in Pacific Palisades after the devastating fires. The implication? That Bass was recklessly exposing the community to danger while Park rode in like a savior, bypassing the mayor to appeal directly to Governor Newsom. This narrative is not only misleading but deeply cynical. The checkpoints were not some critical lifeline preventing crime and chaos—they were temporary measures, and keeping them indefinitely does nothing to address the root issues of disaster preparedness. Park’s grandstanding wasn’t about securing real resources for fire prevention or recovery but about posturing for political gain, signaling to a wealthy constituency that she would stand against the mayor, no matter the cost. The article touts Park as “bold” and “decisive” for circumventing the mayor. But what it fails to mention is that under Park’s leadership, resources that should have been allocated to actual fire prevention—such as brush clearance, fire-resistant infrastructure, and emergency preparedness programs—have been neglected in favor of theatrics. Fire experts agree that long-term mitigation, not checkpoints, is the key to protecting communities. Where is Park’s advocacy for that? Moreover, her self-serving political maneuvering undermines coordinated disaster response efforts. Emergency management relies on collaboration, not grandstanding. By sidestepping the mayor, Park set a precedent that could make future crises even harder to manage. If every councilmember lobbied the governor individually rather than working through the city’s unified response, disaster relief would turn into a fragmented, politically driven mess. The article also conveniently glosses over Park’s broader failures when it comes to protecting Angelenos from climate-fueled disasters. Has she fought for increased funding for the Los Angeles Fire Department’s understaffed wildfire units? No. Has she pushed for more resilient infrastructure in fire-prone areas? No. Has she prioritized long-term strategies to combat climate change, which is fueling more frequent and severe wildfires? Again, no. Instead, we get performative opposition to the mayor, a hollow "ad hoc committee" that sounds impressive but will likely accomplish little, and a PR blitz designed to elevate her profile rather than actually serve the people of District 11. Traci Park’s allies, including billionaire developer Rick Caruso, are clearly laying the groundwork for a political challenge to Bass. But make no mistake: what’s happening here is not about good governance. It’s about using crises as opportunities to score political points, even when it means making LA’s disaster response weaker in the long run. Real leadership would mean focusing on fire prevention, supporting emergency responders with the tools they actually need, and working with—not against—the broader city and state response efforts. Instead, Park has chosen political gamesmanship over public safety, and her constituents will be the ones who pay the price the next time disaster strikes. Los Angeles Residents Push Back Against Traci Park’s Reckless Olympics Development Exemption2/11/2025 At Tuesday’s City Council Planning and Land Use Management (PLUM) Committee meeting, community members forcefully rejected a proposal from Councilmember Traci Park that would have given Olympics-related construction projects a free pass from all city planning approval, zoning regulations, and environmental review. The motion, which many described as a blatant giveaway to developers, was met with overwhelming opposition from residents, neighborhood councils, and advocacy groups who warned that it would fast-track projects without accountability and open the door to unchecked abuse.
Phyllis Ling, chair of the Historic Cultural North Neighborhood Council, was among those who testified against the motion, calling it “vague and wide-reaching” and warning that it would “roll out the red carpet for abuse, while placing the burden of the consequences on our communities.” The neighborhood council, which represents Chinatown, El Pueblo, Solano Canyon, and Victor Heights—four historic communities deeply impacted by past waves of displacement and development—had already submitted a Community Impact Statement opposing the motion. The council voted nearly unanimously against it, 15-1, after receiving only public comments in support of their opposition. “Major permanent infrastructure and development must not be forced on our communities without transparency and community engagement,” Ling said. The scope of the exemption raised alarms, not only for its application to the Olympics but also for its inclusion of what the motion vaguely called “other major events.” Ling pressed city officials to define what exactly would qualify under this exemption and to explain who would determine which projects were essential for the Olympics. No clear answers were given. “This proposal introduces too many opportunities for abuse and corruption,” she said. “We should not have to deal with the consequences of poor planning, especially not for games that were sold to us as a ‘no-build’ Olympics.” Another speaker at the meeting criticized the motion as an “overly broad attempt to evade oversight and accountability” by city leaders who had failed to properly plan for the 2028 Olympics despite having more than seven years to prepare. Julie Wong, a member of the Stop Gondola Coalition, raised concerns that this motion could be used to sidestep necessary impact studies for the controversial Dodger Stadium Gondola project. “The Hernández Commission’s traffic study hasn’t even been completed,” she pointed out. “There are Metro-assigned conditions that must be met before this project is approved. This motion would let them bypass all of that.” The concern over transit projects slipping through under the guise of Olympic urgency was echoed by multiple speakers, with many highlighting how private developers could use the exemptions for their own gain. Frustration also mounted over the city’s misplaced priorities. While officials were quick to push through special exemptions for Olympic construction, residents noted the stark contrast in the city’s sluggish response to real crises. “We never see the city move like this for real emergencies—like housing the homeless or even a simple rent freeze and eviction moratorium,” Wong said. “Now they’re trying to ram this through for a two-week event that was forced on us in the first place?” What was billed as a necessary measure to ensure Olympic preparations stayed on schedule was, in reality, a dangerous loophole that would have allowed developers and corporate interests to bypass regulations designed to protect communities. The backlash at the meeting made it clear that Angelenos are not willing to accept blanket exemptions that would prioritize the Olympics over their neighborhoods. While the committee has yet to make a final decision on the motion, the public response sent a clear message: residents are demanding transparency, accountability, and real community engagement—not backroom deals and giveaways to private developers. The fight to keep Los Angeles livable doesn’t end here, and community members have vowed to continue holding their elected officials accountable in the months ahead. Traci Park Opposes LA’s Sanctuary Status—Will She Back New Immigrant Protections or Side with Trump?2/9/2025 Los Angeles City Councilmember Traci Park has made it clear that she does not support the city’s sanctuary status, raising concerns about whether she will back additional measures to protect immigrant communities from the latest threats of mass deportations under President Donald Trump. While the Los Angeles City Council took a bold stand last year by officially declaring LA a sanctuary city, Park opposed the move, warning of potential consequences from the Trump Administration. Now, with new protections on the table, will she stand with immigrant Angelenos or continue to side with Trump’s anti-immigrant agenda?
Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez has introduced a comprehensive legislative package aimed at bolstering protections for the city's immigrant population. His proposals build upon LA’s sanctuary status, reinforcing the city’s commitment to shielding immigrants from federal overreach and ensuring legal support in the face of renewed ICE enforcement actions. Key Components of the Proposed Legislation: 1. Immigration Support at LAX: Directing Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) to establish designated spaces for non-profit legal service providers. This would ensure immediate assistance for travelers affected by potential travel bans, similar to the 2017 Muslim Ban. 2. Notification of ICE Enforcement: Exploring policies requiring businesses to notify the city of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) actions. This initiative would help workers access legal support and understand their rights during enforcement activities. 3. Know Your Rights Campaign: Launching a citywide public education effort to inform immigrants about their rights, nondiscrimination protections, and Los Angeles' sanctuary city policies. 4. Support for State Legislation: Urging the State of California to increase funding for deportation defense, enhancing legal support for immigrants facing removal proceedings. 5. Funding for Legal Services: Investigating how the city can maintain immigration legal services that have been frozen by the Trump Administration, ensuring continued support for vulnerable populations. Councilmember Soto-Martínez emphasized the personal significance of this legislation, stating, "My own parents were undocumented, and they built a life here without the constant fear that a trip to work or taking me to school could tear our family apart. Every Angeleno deserves that same safety and dignity." This legislative package follows the Los Angeles City Council's unanimous vote in November 2024 to adopt a sanctuary city ordinance, prohibiting city resources or personnel from being used to assist federal immigration enforcement. The ordinance was enacted in anticipation of potential mass deportations under President Trump. But not everyone on the City Council has stood behind these protections. Traci Park, who represents much of the Westside, opposed the sanctuary ordinance and warned that it could put federal funding at risk. Critics argue that her stance aligns her with President Trump's immigration policies, making the Westside less safe for immigrants. Her absence during the sanctuary city ordinance vote has been interpreted by some as a lack of support for immigrant protections. With deportation threats ramping up, will Traci Park support any of these new measures to defend immigrant Angelenos? Or will she continue to align herself with Trump’s anti-immigrant policies? As these motions move forward, all eyes are on Park and whether she will take a stand to protect the diverse communities she represents. Councilmember Traci Park is quick to point fingers, but when it comes to taking responsibility for the issues in her own district, she falls short. Case in point: the empty Santa Ynez Reservoir that could have helped put out the Palisades Fire but was bone dry when firefighters needed it most. Instead of owning up to her role in overseeing key infrastructure, she’s blaming everyone else.
The Santa Ynez Reservoir, which holds 117 million gallons of water meant to support firefighting efforts in areas like the Pacific Palisades, had been out of commission since February 2024 due to repairs. That meant when the Palisades Fire broke out, firefighters had nowhere to pull water from—a massive failure that put homes and lives at risk. As the elected representative of Council District 11, Park should have been on top of this long before the fire erupted. But now, instead of explaining why she failed to act, she’s shifting blame to city and state officials. And let’s not forget—Park voted to cut funding for emergency services. The Los Angeles Fire Department’s budget was slashed by $17.6 million for the 2024-2025 fiscal year, limiting its ability to prepare for and respond to emergencies. Instead of making sure essential services were properly funded, she prioritized bloated police budgets while firefighters were left scrambling when it mattered most. Sure, Park is right that officials need to be held accountable. But real accountability starts with taking responsibility for your own failures. A real leader would be working to fix these systemic failures—not just using them as an opportunity to score political points. If Park actually wants to make sure this never happens again, she needs to stop dodging blame and start doing her job: keeping her constituents safe. That means funding emergency services, staying on top of infrastructure issues, and taking proactive action before disaster strikes—not after. Councilmember Traci Park is at it again—talking a big game about public safety while making decisions that do the exact opposite. Recently, she took to the right-wing New York Post to complain about how LA’s budget is being handled. But let’s be real—Park’s track record makes it clear she’s not actually interested in fixing anything, unless “fixing” means throwing even more money at the LAPD while cutting funding for the services that actually keep people safe.
Let’s talk about why the New York Post gave Park this platform. The Post is owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp, the same conservative media giant that controls Fox News. It has a long history of pushing right-wing narratives, attacking progressive policies, and propping up tough-on-crime politicians. The paper has consistently backed Republican candidates, amplified fear-based crime reporting, and smeared movements for social justice and police accountability. When Park wanted to bash social services and justify more spending on police, she knew exactly where to go for a sympathetic audience. Park’s latest gripe? That emergency services like the fire department aren’t getting enough funding. Sounds reasonable, right? Except she voted to defund the fire department and other critical social services while making sure the LAPD got a massive payday. In 2023, she helped push through a $1 billion police spending increase over four years, including big raises for LAPD officers. Meanwhile, funding for mental health programs, housing initiatives, and yes, the fire department, has been slashed. It’s not hard to see where her loyalties lie. Park has deep ties to police unions, with the Los Angeles Police Protective League pouring $500,000 into her City Council campaign. When it comes to making policy, she’s looking out for their interests—not the everyday people of LA. And what do we get for all this police spending? More of the same old failed strategies. Park keeps pumping money into policing while cutting resources that actually prevent crime, like affordable housing, mental health care, and emergency services. Public safety isn’t just about more cops—it’s about making sure people aren’t pushed into desperate situations in the first place. But Park would rather criminalize poverty than address its root causes. Take her stance on homelessness. Instead of backing real solutions like permanent housing and support programs, she’s helped push cruel ordinances that criminalize people for simply existing near schools or daycare centers. These policies do nothing but increase confrontations between police and vulnerable people while making it even harder for them to get back on their feet. And now, after gutting fire department funding and ignoring social services, she wants to act like she cares about them? Give us a break. Park’s selective outrage is nothing more than hypocrisy. She’s not fighting for public safety—she’s using budget debates to justify her pro-police, anti-community agenda. LA deserves leadership that actually invests in people, not just policing. If Park really cared about making the city safer, she’d be putting money into fire services, housing, and mental health—not another blank check for the LAPD. Traci Park’s Business-First Agenda: Tax Relief for Corporations, Neglect for Renters and Immigrants2/8/2025 Councilmember Traci Park is leading the passage of a business tax relief program aimed at aiding businesses affected by wildfires. While supporting local businesses in times of crisis is certainly important, Park’s swift action in passing this measure stands in stark contrast to her reluctance—or outright opposition—when it comes to providing relief for renters, immigrants, and other vulnerable members of our community.
Park’s business tax relief plan offers financial reprieve to businesses that have suffered economic hardship due to wildfires, reducing their tax burdens to help them recover. However, when it comes to protecting struggling renters, Park’s stance has been much less proactive. In the wake of recent wildfires, the Los Angeles City Council considered implementing emergency rental protections for displaced tenants, but the proposal was delayed due to calls for further review. Meanwhile, those forced out of their homes due to disaster remain in limbo. This delay is a cruel and unnecessary burden on working-class families who, unlike business owners, do not have the luxury of financial reserves or tax breaks to help them recover. This is not an isolated case—it is a clear pattern in Traci Park’s tenure as a councilmember. She has repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to prioritize business and law enforcement interests while ignoring or actively opposing measures that support the most vulnerable in our community. Park aligned herself with landlords and developers when the rent freeze proposal was brought before the City Council to protect tenants from soaring housing costs—she refused to support it. The result? Tenants are left with only limited protections, as Park once again proved that the needs of corporate interests come before the needs of everyday people in her district. Her record on immigrant protections is equally concerning. Park openly opposed City Council's decision to make LA a sanctuary city, and she has been notably silent when it comes to denouncing attacks on immigrant communities, including recent incidents of violence against student protesters advocating for immigrant rights. This silence speaks volumes about whom she chooses to fight for—and whom she is willing to ignore. While she is quick to support police funding and business-friendly tax breaks, she refuses to extend the same urgency to policies that would protect undocumented workers, immigrant families, and marginalized renters from economic devastation. It is clear that Traci Park’s priorities lie with the powerful, not the people. Her quick action to pass business tax relief while renters remain unprotected and immigrants are left vulnerable is not an accident—it is a reflection of who she serves. As the next election cycle approaches, voters should remember that Park has shown us exactly where she stands: with corporations, landlords, and law enforcement, and against working-class tenants, immigrants, and the most vulnerable members of our community. On February 6, students from Venice High School joined a city-wide walkout to protest President Trump’s cruel immigration policies, as well as to advocate for reproductive rights, LGBTQ+ protections, and democracy itself. The demonstration was organized via social media and, like many student-led protests, was intended to be peaceful.
But instead of being met with support, these students were faced with violence. An unidentified man confronted the young demonstrators in anger. When he noticed a student filming the interaction, he rushed at the minor and physically assaulted them. In a separate but related moment, another student attempting to retrieve an object from the street was shoved by a second individual. Witnesses say other students had to intervene to deescalate the situation. The response from local leadership should have been swift and unequivocal. A grown man attacking a minor for exercising their First Amendment rights is not just disturbing—it is a blatant act of political violence. And yet, in the days following this attack, Los Angeles City Councilmember Traci Park, whose district includes Venice High School, has remained completely silent. This silence is not just a failure of leadership; it is a statement in itself. When crime and violence occur in her district, Park is usually quick to issue statements, particularly when incidents fit into her well-documented tough-on-crime messaging. But when a student—one of her own young constituents—was physically attacked for standing up for justice, she has offered nothing. No condemnation. No call for accountability. No words of support for the students who were targeted. The contrast is glaring and raises serious concerns about Park’s priorities. Her refusal to speak out suggests that she is either indifferent to or complicit in the growing hostility toward young people, immigrants, and those who oppose Trump’s policies. Her silence sends a dangerous message: that political violence against those who challenge right-wing policies is tolerable. At a time when democracy and basic civil rights are under attack, our elected officials should be standing up for those who exercise their rights—not turning a blind eye when they are harmed. Councilmember Park’s failure to denounce this violence is more than an oversight; it is a betrayal of the young people in her district who deserve a leader willing to defend them. If Traci Park cannot even condemn an act of violence against a student protester, what does that say about her commitment to protecting all of her constituents? And more importantly, how much longer will our community tolerate leaders who only speak up when it is politically convenient for them? Traci Park is Undermining Public Safety by Siding Against Immigrant Communities on the Westside2/7/2025 Los Angeles City Councilmember Traci Park has positioned herself as a staunch advocate for “public safety,” but when it comes to protecting some of the most vulnerable residents of Council District 11—immigrant families—she is nowhere to be found. Her refusal to support sanctuary policies and her failure to push back against the impending federal crackdown on immigrants make it clear: Park is actively undermining the safety of the Westside’s immigrant community, and in doing so, she is failing all of us.
The Westside of Los Angeles is home to tens of thousands of immigrants, many of whom have lived and worked in the district for decades. In neighborhoods like Mar Vista, Venice, and Del Rey, immigrant families form the backbone of the local economy, working in hospitality, construction, domestic labor, and countless other essential industries. These are not just statistics—these are our neighbors, small business owners, and workers who keep Los Angeles running. Despite this reality, Traci Park has chosen to align herself with anti-immigrant policies that leave these families vulnerable. Her refusal to support Los Angeles’ sanctuary city status means she is effectively giving federal immigration authorities the green light to target our communities. That is not just bad policy—it is an outright betrayal of the district’s working families. When the Los Angeles City Council voted to officially codify sanctuary protections in November 2024, Park was absent from the vote. But her absence wasn’t just symbolic—it was an act of political cowardice. Afterward, she made it clear she opposed the measure, dismissing it as "symbolic resistance" and fear-mongering about potential federal retaliation. Let’s be clear: Sanctuary status is not a symbolic act. It is a vital protection that ensures city resources are not used to help federal agencies tear families apart. By refusing to stand up for sanctuary status, Traci Park has made her priorities clear—she is more concerned with appeasing anti-immigrant forces than with protecting the people who actually live in her district. For someone who constantly touts her “public safety” agenda, Park’s stance on immigration makes one thing clear—her definition of safety is exclusionary. Public safety isn’t just about policing and criminalization. True public safety means ensuring that all residents, regardless of immigration status, can live without fear of being torn from their families or detained simply for existing. By refusing to support sanctuary status, Park is increasing fear and distrust among immigrant communities, making it harder for residents to report crimes, access emergency services, or seek help when they need it. When people fear that any interaction with local government could lead to deportation, they disengage—and that makes all of us less safe. The hypocrisy is staggering. Park claims to champion public safety, yet she actively endangers thousands of residents by siding with federal immigration crackdowns. She says she supports working families, yet she is willing to let ICE terrorize them in their homes and workplaces. She argues that she is looking out for the district’s well-being, yet she refuses to stand up for the very communities that make Los Angeles strong. The residents of Council District 11 deserve leadership that stands up for all Angelenos—not just the privileged few. We need leaders who will fight for immigrant protections, not cower in fear of federal retaliation. We need representatives who understand that public safety is about more than law enforcement—it’s about keeping families together and making sure everyone, regardless of status, can thrive in their communities. Traci Park has made her position clear. She stands against sanctuary protections. She refuses to fight back against mass deportations. She is making our community less safe. And come election time, the people of the Westside will remember exactly who failed them. Los Angeles voters spoke loud and clear when they overwhelmingly passed Measure HLA, a landmark initiative mandating the city to integrate safe streets infrastructure, including bus lanes, bike lanes, and pedestrian improvements, into road projects. The message was clear: Angelenos want safer, multimodal streets that prioritize people over cars. Yet, despite this landslide victory, Councilmember Traci Park and her allies—including City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto—are working behind the scenes to weaken and delay its implementation.
Traci Park’s Anti-Safe Streets Agenda Park, who has consistently aligned with car-centric interests, attempted to defeat Measure HLA, claiming that safe street infrastructure would negatively impact drivers. But the electorate rejected her fearmongering and voted decisively for a more pedestrian- and cyclist-friendly city. Despite this, she continues to oppose the necessary reforms, making excuses for why HLA-related projects remain stalled. Over the past ten months, despite the legal mandate, only a single tiny HLA project has been implemented. The city’s Bureau of Street Services has largely put the measure on hold, failing to integrate bike and pedestrian improvements into street work. This inaction is not accidental; it is part of a broader effort to resist the shift towards a safer, more sustainable Los Angeles. City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto’s Role in Sabotaging HLA Park’s ally in this obstruction is City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto, who is responsible for drafting the implementation ordinance for HLA. Rather than creating a strong, clear framework for executing the measure as voters intended, she has inserted multiple loopholes designed to water it down. The proposed ordinance:
Park and Feldstein Soto’s attempts to subvert Measure HLA are part of a broader pattern of resistance to progressive policies that prioritize public safety, sustainability, and mobility equity. Their actions demonstrate a fundamental disregard for the democratic process and the urgent need for change in Los Angeles’ leadership. With the 2026 election on the horizon, it is imperative to replace both Traci Park and Hydee Feldstein Soto with leaders who will respect the will of the people and take decisive action to make our streets safer. The overwhelming support for Measure HLA proves that Los Angeles is ready for a future where walking, biking, and public transit are viable, safe options. It’s time for elected officials who will actually deliver on that vision. What’s Next for Measure HLA? On Wednesday, February 12, the City Council’s Transportation and Public Works Committees will formally discuss the next steps for implementing Measure HLA. Safe streets advocates must continue to show up and demand accountability. Los Angeles is no stranger to disaster, but the city’s recovery from the recent wildfires is exposing deepening inequality. While some communities—especially wealthier enclaves like the Pacific Palisades—are pushing for swift rebuilding efforts, others are facing a slow, fragmented recovery marked by bureaucratic inefficiencies and financial barriers. The result is a widening gap between those who can afford to rebuild and those left struggling in the aftermath.
A Disjointed Recovery Effort One of the major obstacles to an equitable recovery is the lack of coordination among various rebuilding commissions. As reported by The New York Times, L.A. has an abundance of “reconstruction czars,” each with their own jurisdiction and priorities, leading to a disjointed response. With multiple agencies involved, navigating the recovery process has become a challenge—especially for lower-income residents who lack the resources to advocate for themselves effectively. Meanwhile, CD11 Councilmember Traci Park has exacerbated this inequality by pressuring the city to prioritize the concerns of Pacific Palisades fire victims—who are among the most affluent and politically influential residents—rather than ensuring a fair recovery effort for all affected Angelenos. Pacific Palisades: Rebuilding for the Wealthy The affluent Pacific Palisades neighborhood exemplifies how post-disaster reconstruction can deepen economic divides. Residents in the area are using their political influence to speed up rebuilding, but concerns over affordability are surfacing. As the neighborhood reconstructs, there is a growing fear that it will become even more exclusive, pricing out long-time residents and lower-income families. Traci Park’s focus on expediting recovery efforts for this wealthy enclave, rather than advocating for an equitable citywide response, underscores the disparities in post-disaster relief. The New York Times highlights the pressure city officials face from these communities to prioritize their recovery over broader, citywide rebuilding efforts. The Insurance Divide: Who Can Afford to Rebuild? Beyond governmental inefficiencies, California’s growing insurance crisis is further exacerbating inequality. According to Fast Company, homeowners who have private insurance receive significantly higher payouts for rebuilding, while those relying on the state’s FAIR Plan—a last-resort insurance option—face limited coverage and financial shortfalls. This disparity leaves lower-income and middle-class households at a severe disadvantage, as they must contend with soaring construction costs and bureaucratic hurdles without adequate financial support. Rather than pushing for reforms that would assist all affected residents, Traci Park has remained focused on ensuring a rapid rebuilding process for the wealthiest victims of the fires. What Needs to Change? The wildfires have underscored the need for systemic reform in L.A.’s recovery and rebuilding process. As CalMatters argues, one of the most meaningful steps the county can take is to streamline its sprawling government agencies to provide a more coordinated and equitable response. Additionally, reforms in the insurance industry are critical to ensuring that all residents—regardless of income—have access to fair rebuilding resources. However, these changes will only happen if city leadership, including Traci Park, shifts focus from catering to the most affluent communities and instead works toward an inclusive recovery for all Angelenos. Without meaningful change, Los Angeles risks emerging from this disaster even more economically divided than before. Recovery should not be a privilege reserved for the wealthy; it must be an inclusive effort that prioritizes the needs of all Angelenos, ensuring that no one is left behind in the wake of catastrophe. |
Archives |