Mayor Karen Bass is worried federal authorities could remove unhoused people from the streets of Los Angeles around venues ahead of the 2028 Summer Olympics.
It was one of several issues Bass discussed in a sit-down interview with 21 student reporters from The LA Local’s Youth Journalism Program on Wednesday. The students from Boyle Heights, East LA, South LA, Koreatown, Pico Union and Westlake pressed Bass on issues affecting their communities, including homelessness, immigration, street vending, MacArthur Park, youth services and accountability after the Lineage fire.
She expressed concern that federal authorities could overstep their reach into Los Angeles if the city does not present a plan to protect Angelenos, including people experiencing homelessness.
“If we don’t find a way to dramatically house hundreds, if not thousands, of people, I’m very worried that Trump will,” she said. “I am worried that if we don’t figure it out, the Trump administration will just send in whoever and just sweep people away, and take them to federal land, maybe a military base, and hold them there for a month.”
A spokesperson for Bass clarified the federal government has already withheld federal funding for homeless services in the region and could take drastic measures to house people living on the streets without following any due process.
During her 30-minute interview, Bass, 72, took several pointed swipes at her opponent, Councilmember Nithya Raman and presented her vision for LA’s future to the student journalists.
“I started and began interest in politics when I was a child, and became an activist in middle school, and I’ve never looked back,” Bass said. “I just want you to know that I think it’s wonderful that you’re starting as high school students, and I think that the next generation of journalists is just going to be so critical because the world is changing by the minute.”
Voters will head to the polls on Nov. 3 to determine if Raman will be the next mayor of Los Angeles or if Bass will stay in office.
This story was produced under The LA Local’s Youth Journalism Program. To learn more or to get involved, click here.
Read the full Q&A below. Questions and answers have been lightly edited for clarity.
Q: All of us live in communities that have been affected by the ICE raids, and federal immigration agents have racially profiled people that look like us. While you have issued a directive restricting Los Angeles Police Department involvement with federal immigration enforcement, community members and activists have documented times where LAPD officers were seen at the perimeter of operations and claim their presence is a form of collaboration.
What are you doing to build trust between the LAPD and immigrant communities like Boyle Heights, and how will you measure whether that trust is improving?
A: I just came from signing an ordinance with all the immigrant rights organizations just a couple hours ago. That basically makes it law that ICE can’t come on city facilities. So I did it as an executive order, but that is only temporary. Another mayor could come in and eliminate my executive order. The council made it a law. I will tell you that when the ICE raids happened, you know, I went into action immediately on that day and did everything that I could possibly do to push back and to protest. The reality that we all face is that the federal government is above all of that, and we can push back to the extent we can. But one of the issues that LAPD gets into is that when there is an ICE raid that is happening and then LAPD is not notified about it.
When a crowd assembles, LAPD has to be there because they cannot not be there and then have you guys directly deal with ICE. I think in this situation it’s been particularly dangerous because we don’t know who these yahoos are. They come from other places, they’re masked, all of that. And so they [LAPD] do have to have a perimeter to control the situation, and to the average person, I can completely understand that looks like collaboration. But if people violate the perimeter or start throwing things, then LAPD is going to intervene, and they are going to make arrests. we’re very fortunate in our city that we have a very longstanding immigrant rights infrastructure, and so they’ve been dealing with issues like this for decades.
Q: As you know, street vendors are a vital part of our community. Your opponent has created a plan for street vending that includes permitting, legal advice, and microloans. She also said that she would create opportunities for vending zones near areas hosting the Olympics. Besides ending LAPD criminal citations for vendors, how do you plan on supporting these local businesses, especially during the Olympic Games?
A: So, well, let me tell you about the Olympics, and she [Nithya Raman] didn’t have anything to do with this, but LA28 is already setting up areas for street vendors to take advantage of the economic opportunities with the games and the people that will be here. So I think we work a little differently. So the way I do plans and the way I do legislation is I work directly with the people who are the street vendors. They come up with policies. They give those policies to me, and I adapt them. We go back and forth about them. I just met with the street vendor organization maybe two weeks ago, and we’re working collaboratively. And by the way, I believe in really supporting street vendors, especially those vendors that might want to move up to brick and mortar.
One of the problems we have with some of the street vending locations is that, and it’s really a sad situation, but where they, how do I put it, are held hostage by criminal elements, and they are forced to sell illegal stuff against their will. I think we have to protect them and understand the difference too, and make sure that we remove the criminal element, so that they’re not forced to be a cover for drugs and other things.
Q: While the Inside Safe program has been successful in getting the unhoused off the streets, research shows that more than 40% of its participants ultimately return to the streets. The city of Los Angeles also has a shortage of long-term affordable housing and permanent supportive apartments. What, if any, are your plans to make the Inside Safe program help the unhoused find permanent stable housing rather than a temporary situation?
A: In terms of affordable housing, in the last four years, we have built more affordable housing – 10,000 units that are ready to be occupied today. If you want to look at council districts and see where most of the affordable housing has been built and where it hasn’t been built, I would suggest you take a look. You might be surprised who is number 14 in terms of the number of affordable housing in her district versus citywide. We also are converting empty offices into housing. So, right in Koreatown on Wilshire Boulevard, if you look up, you know those office towers. In terms of Inside Safe and the 40% that leave, 60% stay. We are in the process of understanding why 60% stay and what happens to them. The 40% that leave, to me that’s not rocket science. We are successful in moving you off the street and into temporary housing. Where we fail is providing adequate services when you’re in temporary housing.
One of the problems we have is that it’s dual jurisdiction. The city’s responsible for the housing. The county is responsible for the services. I’m proposing in term two to get a divorce from the county and run the system ourselves, so that we can control who is placed in permanent supportive housing. Do you know we have no control over that? The county controls who moves from interim into permanent support. So we build the housing, but the county can come in and put in people from Lancaster and Palmdale in the housing that our taxpayers paid for. I worked as a nurse in the newborn ICU, and I worked at County General Hospital in the emergency room. So I think one of the differences between me and a lot of the people that work in the homelessness space is that a lot of people that work [there] know housing. I know the people, and we do not provide the services that the people need. I believe that housing first says the only thing that people need is a house. I think that is a fallacy, and that sets people up to fail.
Q: Many of us in Boyle Heights spent sleepless nights after the lineage fire, first with the smoke and ash, and then the smell. Your opponent has said she would have ordered evacuations for people living in close proximity to the fire. Is that something you wish you would have done? And is there anything else you would have done differently?
A: Lineage was horrific. Lineage is a perfect example of an environmental injustice because you only have residential areas near industrial areas in Black and Brown communities. What it led me to do is to call for a survey of all of those areas: South LA, East LA, and the Valley, where you have residential next to industrial. We don’t even know what’s going on in those buildings. I mean, the City does; it’s filed away somewhere. But what we are doing now is an analysis to say what threats are in those buildings, what arrangements do these folks, these businesses, have in case of an emergency like Lineage.
So you should know that immediately we called for voluntary evacuations. We did not mandate evacuations, so we had places for people to go. I walked the streets [near] Lineage. I’m not a tourist to Boyle Heights.
One of the differences between me and my opponent is that I have a long history in these areas. I haven’t lived in Boyle Heights, but I worked in Boyle Heights. I worked at White Memorial. I told you I worked at County General Hospital. I worked at health clinics on Indiana Boulevard. So we ordered, I’m sorry, we provided voluntary evacuation for people. I walked the streets of the neighborhoods immediately. I’ve been there late at night, early in the morning, working with the people who live next door. They basically told us, “This is what we want from you. This is what we need,” and we provided it.
The collaboration between Supervisor Solis and Councilwoman (Ysabel) Jurado, Senator (Elena) Dorazo and Assembly Member (Mark) González. We all worked in collaboration to provide resources for the community. We provided cash assistance. We provided food. We provided healthcare. We provided relocation. Again, I don’t come up with what the community wants. I respond to what the community says they want.
Q: You have said MacArthur Park is “no place for drug use, violence, or organized crime.” But while it is one of the only parks in one of the most densely populated areas, even nearby schools don’t use it because it is considered unsafe. Other than increased police presence, what will you do to make MacArthur Park a usable green space for the youth?
A: First of all, I think MacArthur Park is a usable green space. There are parts of the park where families are in the park all the time. I believe in public safety and the need for police, but I also believe in preventing crime. And there’s a lot of it. When I started the Community Coalition many, many, many years ago, I started it because of the crack, the Crips, and the Bloods. We were immediately trying to find ways to reduce violence without involving law enforcement. Some of the programs and strategies that we pioneered then were adopted by Mayor (Antonio) Villaraigosa and became GRYD, which stands for Gang Reduction Youth Development.
I took the GRYD program, I expanded it. I brought it to the Mayor’s office, and GRYD is very active in MacArthur Park. I was in MacArthur Park, not last Friday, I think the Friday before. There were 300 people there at night, there was dancing going on at the amphitheater. The park has a reputation, and absolutely there are problems there. because of our work with GRYD and our other non-law enforcement strategies, we’ve had a dramatic reduction in homicides, because most of the homicides are related to gang violence. So I think that MacArthur Park has a lot of problems, but I do not think that it is what people paint as; otherwise, you wouldn’t see families there all the time. Does it need to be better? Absolutely. So I work in close partnership with Councilwoman Eunisses Hernandez and a number of community-based organizations, including a number of criminal immigration-related organizations.
Q: We’ve been reading about the Sanitation Sweeps before the 1984 Olympics- the sweeps that targeted homeless encampments. So there are nearly 6,000 unhoused residents nearby competition venues. venues, nearby competition venues. So, I’m wondering what exactly is your plan for those people, and where are they going to go?
A: I’m very worried about this because if we don’t find a way to dramatically house hundreds, if not 1,000s of people, I’m very worried that Trump will. The federal government can come in and sweep everybody up if they want to. There’s not a darn thing we can do about it. We don’t control the security of the Olympics. Any Olympics in any country in the world is controlled by security that is controlled by its federal government. And so I am worried that if we don’t figure it out, the Trump administration will just send in whoever and just sweep people away, and take them to federal land, maybe a military base, and hold them there for a month.
I’m trying to look at a way to massively house people, but not put everybody back on the street the day after the Olympics. I was actually listening to my opponent. I was listening to her talk about how we should have negotiated a better deal with the federal government, Totally not understanding that we don’t have that power. The Olympic Games is considered a national security special event, and that designation provides resources, but also because you’re going to have over 200 heads of state here. my point that I’m trying to register to you is that if we don’t figure it out, they’re going to. And I think we have to massively house people, and that’s going to make a lot of people uncomfortable. But I’m way more uncomfortable if Trump does it.
Q: Last year, the Youth Development Department budget was cut by 30% when it was merged into the Community Investment for Families Apartment. Many criticized the decision that youth services were the largest funding pack, while law enforcement was protected. How will you ensure that underserved youth are still prioritized, especially when youth are entering a competitive labor market?
A: First of all, the change that was made with the youth development department – it was a standalone department that was very anemic, was not really receiving anything. I don’t believe in having youth representatives on certain bodies where they’re just there as tokens. I believe youth leadership is seriously sitting down with young people and giving them the power and the authority to make decisions. So what we did with the Youth Development Department was we absorbed it in a bigger department that had the capacity to actually support the youth. By the way, I have a whole youth component to my campaign called Youth for Bass, and my last campaign I had Youth for Bass too. They were high school and college students, and.
One of the young women you remember who was in charge of it right after I won, she came to me and she said, “Well, now I want to run for office,” and her name is Sade Elhawary. She’s a state assembly member. So that’s not token.
Q: We know residents of Boyle Heights want accountability in the aftermath of the Lineage fire. A recent LAFD report couldn’t determine the fire’s cause, which leaves the question of who will be held responsible unresolved. Current city attorney candidates have both said they would have already opened a corporate accountability investigation of the fire. Why hasn’t that type of investigation happened yet? And will you ask the current city attorney to open one before election day?
A: I asked her (Los Angeles City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto) to open one quite a while ago. I also asked Attorney General (Rob) Bonta to open one. I am not in charge of them. They are independent elected officials. They can choose to do it or not. So far, they have not chosen to do it. But I will tell you though that the investigation that LAFD did was a preliminary one. There’s other investigations coming. I really want those investigations because you know I’m blocking them (Lineage Logistics) from rebuilding.
Technically, they have the right to rebuild. I technically cannot stop it, but I can surely slow it down. And I am challenging their by-right status. I think this is a fight we had in South LA for years over nuisance properties, where they had the right to be a nuisance, and we challenged that by saying they were a danger to our public health and public safety, and we were able – we won in court and lawsuits and all of that –but we were able to prevent them from continuing. And so I’m using the same logic.
Everybody told us we couldn’t do it in South LA, and we did. So I don’t know why we can’t do it in Boyle Heights. ■
A spokesperson for the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office clarified that their office has been conducting an “ongoing and active” investigation into the Lineage warehouse fire since July.
Student journalists Angie Sepulveda, Edgar Vasquez, Camilla Lahmeyer, Alyssa Lopez, Hawaii Utterbach, Nathan Reyes, Charlotte Padilla, Miloh Nwankwo, Vanessa Ramos, Aozora Asano, Kira Kovaleva, Lluvia Reyes, Terin Lee and Miles Kwon contributed to this interview.
