latimes--2020-02-14--Would a California takeover of PG&E make energy cheaper and safer? Maybe not

Trinity County did in the 1990s what Gov .
Gavin Newsom is threatening to do today : It wrested control of the power grid from Pacific Gas & Electric .
The origin story of Trinity Public Utilities District , which now serves several thousand customers in Northern California , is an encouraging precedent for advocates of replacing PG & E with a government-run utility .
Trinity customers pay half as much for electricity as PG & E customers do .
The public utility ’ s rates , set by a locally elected board , have hardly changed over the years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faces several lawsuits and $ 138 million in claims stemming from a 2017 wildfire — the same type of financial liability that landed PG & E in bankruptcy court .
Trinity is contesting those claims , saying its equipment didn ’ t cause the fire .
As Newsom considers a government takeover of PG & E , Trinity ’ s experience illustrates both the promise and the perils of public ownership .
Although the potential benefits are significant , there ’ s no guarantee a government entity could provide safer , cleaner or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ replaces .
“ It really depends on the governance or management of the utility , whether it be public or private , ” said Ed Smeloff , a former board member at Sacramento Municipal Utility District .
Californians have grown increasingly disenchanted with PG & E since 2010 , when one of its gas pipelines exploded in the Bay Area city of San Bruno , killing eight people .
More recently , the San Francisco-based company ’ s transmission lines ignited several devastating wildfires , including the Camp fire , which killed 85 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ town of Paradise .
Public pressure for some kind of government action has only grown since October , when PG & E intentionally shut off power to millions of people in an effort to prevent more fires .
Nobody has ever transferred a utility as large as PG & E from private to public ownership .
But a growing number of state and local lawmakers are calling for a public takeover of the sprawling company , which serves as the power provider for 16 million people across a vast territory stretching from Redding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the south .
Proponents say a publicly owned PG & E would offer lower rates because it wouldn ’ t have to generate profits for shareholders and would be more responsive to customers and elected officials .
They point to public utilities serving Los Angeles , Sacramento and other parts of California as proof that government can provide safe , clean and affordable electricity .
S. David Freeman , a seven-decade veteran of the energy business , is skeptical .
A self-described “ public power guy , ” Freeman has led several @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , including the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power , Sacramento Municipal Utility District , Tennessee Valley Authority and New York Power Authority .
He said replacing PG & E with a public utility wouldn ’ t solve the company ’ s toughest challenge : fireproofing rural transmission lines in an era when rising global temperatures and hotter droughts have primed California ’ s mountains and forests for increasingly devastating infernos .
“ It ’ s all well and good to blame PG & E , and Lord knows I could join @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ But that wouldn ’ t solve the problem.
” What would a publicly owned PG & E look like ?
San Francisco offered to buy PG & E ’ s power lines in the city for $ 2.5 billion last year , joining three other government agencies that have made similar offers or are considering forming their own local electric utilities .
Separately , a coalition of more than 100 mayors and local elected officials — led by San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo , and representing more than half of PG @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a proposal to convert the company to a customer-owned cooperative .
State Sen. Scott Wiener ( D-San Francisco ) joined the fray last week , introducing legislation that would replace PG & E with a private contractor reporting to public management at a new state agency .
A seven-member board of directors , elected by the new utility ’ s customers , would set rates .
The public-private structure is modeled after New York ’ s Long Island Power Authority , a government agency that contracts with a private firm to operate its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bill , a reconstituted version of PG & E — sans current management — could play the contractor role , with California paying the company a fixed fee rather than guaranteeing shareholders a rate of return on their investments .
The state agency would be subject to California laws requiring transparency and open meetings .
The California Municipal Utilities Assn.
, a trade group for public utilities , advised Wiener ’ s office , although it ’ s neutral on the legislation .
Barry Moline , the association ’ s executive director , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ while noting that smaller public utilities can respond more nimbly to local priorities .
With a larger entity , “ you definitely get the public accountability , but you might not have as much community buy-in , ” Moline said .
Newsom has repeatedly threatened to lead a public takeover of PG & E if he determines its restructuring plan doesn ’ t fundamentally transform the company .
So far , the governor isn ’ t satisfied .
He has criticized the financing element of PG & E ’ s plan , arguing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ too much debt to spend billions of dollars on needed safety improvements .
He has also called for PG & E to replace its board of directors , and to do more to ensure customers aren ’ t burdened with big rate increases .
In November , Newsom asked one of his top advisors to begin developing a government-led contingency plan to take over PG & E .
But the governor hasn ’ t released any details , nor has he taken a position on the proposals being floated by Wiener and various @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over PG & E , at least for the next few months .
Under Assembly Bill 1054 , which was approved last year , the company must emerge from bankruptcy by June 30 in order to tap a $ 21-billion fund that will help investor-owned utilities handle claims from future fires .
To exit bankruptcy , PG & E must first persuade the California Public Utilities Commission , whose members are appointed by the governor , to approve its reorganization plan — essentially giving Newsom veto power .
Without the governor ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ PG & E to meet the June 30 deadline .
“ If PG & E can ’ t access the wildfire fund , it doesn ’ t have a private-sector future , ” said Michael Wara , an energy and climate law professor at Stanford University .
Still , the political barriers to public ownership are immense .
The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers , one of the most powerful lobbying forces in Sacramento , has opposed proposals to take PG & E public .
The labor union says a government takeover could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the 20,000 or so employees and contract workers it represents at California ’ s largest utility .
After Wiener introduced his legislation , IBEW Local 1245 began circulating a two-page flier warning that “ STATE TAKEOVER OF PG & E IS EXPENSIVE AND DANGEROUS.
” Wiener ’ s office says his bill is designed to protect PG & E employees by handing over the utility ’ s day-to-day operations to a new , privately owned enterprise that could employ the existing workforce and maintain the same benefits .
But the union fears @ @ @ @ @ @ @ survive the transfer from private to public oversight , since those funds would then be governed by different laws and regulations .
“ Our lawyers and our accountants and actuaries have not figured out how you can take an investor-owned pension , transfer those assets to the state and preserve exactly the benefits that people have , ” said Tom Dalzell , business manager for IBEW Local 1245 .
PG & E could try to block a takeover Even without opposition from labor , transferring PG & E to public ownership might not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officials hold the power of eminent domain , and the Public Utilities Commission can revoke an investor-owned utility ’ s license to operate .
But none of that would stop PG & E from fighting back , as it did when Sacramento Municipal Utility District attempted to take over parts of its service territory in the 1930s .
PG & E delayed the public utility ’ s launch for more than a decade , in part by arguing that the government ’ s offer price for its system didn ’ t reflect fair @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s when life was far simpler , ” said Mike Gatto , a former state lawmaker who led the Assembly ’ s utilities committee .
“ There was no such thing as consultants , and lawyers weren ’ t quite as fancy .
And the politics weren ’ t as harsh as they are now.
” Today , as in the 1930s , PG & E insists it is not for sale .
“ While recent proposals for state or municipal ownership of PG & E ’ s infrastructure are not new concepts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the outcomes of this type of framework will benefit customers , taxpayers , local communities , the state or our economy , ” company spokesman James Noonan said in an email .
How long would it take ?
Especially if PG & E fights back , a state takeover attempt could delay the company ’ s exit from bankruptcy — a potentially unwelcome prospect for wildfire victims and other groups .
PG & E ’ s proposed reorganization plan includes settlements to pay $ 25.5 billion to individuals , insurance companies , local @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The money is slated to be paid out when the utility emerges from bankruptcy , so a delay could mean wildfire victims have to wait additional months or years for compensation .
Wiener ’ s legislation is designed to take effect after the utility exits bankruptcy , meaning that at least under his plan , payments to wildfire victims would not be postponed .
Some clean energy advocates are also concerned about the possibility of an extended delay .
PG & E is one of the country ’ s largest buyers of solar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been praised by environmental groups for its advocacy on energy efficiency .
California will need to accelerate its transition to those types of clean resources if it hopes to reduce planet-warming emissions 40 % below 1990 levels by 2030 , as required by state law .
“ For all their faults as a company , and they have many , PG & E actually has a pretty good track record when it comes to embracing climate change as a serious priority , ” said Michael Colvin , who leads the California energy program @ @ @ @ @ @ @ How much would customers pay ?
Statewide , homes served by publicly owned utilities pay less for electricity than homes served by investor-owned utilities .
Data compiled by the American Public Power Assn .
show that in 2018 , California ’ s investor-owned utilities collected 19.3 cents in revenue , on average , for every kilowatt-hour of electricity they sold to residential customers .
The revenue figure for publicly owned utilities was much lower : 16.4 cents .
Still , experts caution that the ability of a publicly owned PG & E to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the price California pays to acquire the company ’ s assets , since ratepayers would be on the hook for those costs .
A higher purchase price could cut into the cost savings from eliminating guaranteed returns on investment for shareholders .
Another complicating factor is the need to invest tens of billions of dollars in PG & E ’ s poles and wires in the coming years , to harden that aging infrastructure against starting fires .
Shon Hiatt , a professor of management at USC ’ s Marshall School of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ takes over PG & E , the utility would no longer be able to issue common stock to help pay for those infrastructure projects .
That means the money would need to come from either taking on more debt or raising rates .
“ The question is , how high will these rates go ?
” Hiatt asked .
A more existential question is whether a publicly owned PG & E would be any more up to the task of stemming wildfires and keeping the lights on than the current version .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could hardly do worse than PG & E has in recent years , arguing the stockholder-owned company has consistently put profits ahead of safety .
“ They have no credit .
Their cost of capital is horrendous .
Their insurance is horrendous , ” said Jeff Shields , a public power veteran who helped form Trinity Public Utilities District .
But revamping PG & E ’ s massive electric system — which includes more than 18,000 miles of transmission lines across a 70,000-square-mile service territory — won ’ t be an easy task @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Some experts aren ’ t sure a government agency would do any better at the gargantuan undertaking than the current iteration of PG & E .
“ The state taking it over doesn ’ t mean it ’ s going to run it more efficiently , ” said John Coffee Jr. , a professor at Columbia Law School .
Supporters of taking PG & E public say the obstacles are surmountable .
Public utilities , they say , are subject to the same clean energy mandates as their private counterparts .
Laws @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The elected officials running a reformed PG & E can choose to dedicate sufficient funds to safety , rather than paying dividends to shareholders and wining and dining regulators .
And a transfer to public ownership wouldn ’ t have to take as long as the Sacramento battle of the 1930s and 1940s , not with PG & E facing enormous political and financial pressures of its own making .
“ I wouldn ’ t underestimate the power that this governor has to speed things along , ” said Catie Stewart , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government-run utility wouldn ’ t be immune from the kinds of problems that have plagued PG & E .
Paul Hauser , general manager of Trinity Public Utilities District , pointed out that California ’ s “ strict liability ” standard — under which utilities can be held responsible for fires ignited by their equipment , even if they weren ’ t negligent — applies to public and private entities alike .
It ’ s a sword of Damocles hanging over anyone who owns a piece of the power grid .
What does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want to take over a private utility ?
Hauser pointed to the small part of Trinity County that is still served by PG & E .
“ Under today ’ s strict liability standard , I don ’ t know if we ’ d want it , ” he said .
“ I don ’ t know if we ’ d want it if it were given to us .
”

Trinity County did in the 1990s what Gov. Gavin Newsom is threatening to do today: It wrested control of the power grid from Pacific Gas & Electric.
The origin story of Trinity Public Utilities District, which now serves several thousand customers in Northern California, is an encouraging precedent for advocates of replacing PG&E with a government-run utility. Trinity customers pay half as much for electricity as PG&E customers do. The public utility’s rates, set by a locally elected board, have hardly changed over the years.
At the same time, Trinity faces several lawsuits and $138 million in claims stemming from a 2017 wildfire — the same type of financial liability that landed PG&E in bankruptcy court. Trinity is contesting those claims, saying its equipment didn’t cause the fire.
Advertisement
As Newsom considers a government takeover of PG&E, Trinity’s experience illustrates both the promise and the perils of public ownership. Although the potential benefits are significant, there’s no guarantee a government entity could provide safer, cleaner or cheaper electricity than the reviled company it replaces.
“It really depends on the governance or management of the utility, whether it be public or private,” said Ed Smeloff, a former board member at Sacramento Municipal Utility District.
Californians have grown increasingly disenchanted with PG&E since 2010, when one of its gas pipelines exploded in the Bay Area city of San Bruno, killing eight people. More recently, the San Francisco-based company’s transmission lines ignited several devastating wildfires, including the Camp fire, which killed 85 people and largely destroyed the Sierra foothills town of Paradise.
Public pressure for some kind of government action has only grown since October, when PG&E intentionally shut off power to millions of people in an effort to prevent more fires.
Nobody has ever transferred a utility as large as PG&E from private to public ownership. But a growing number of state and local lawmakers are calling for a public takeover of the sprawling company, which serves as the power provider for 16 million people across a vast territory stretching from Redding in the north to Santa Barbara County in the south.
Proponents say a publicly owned PG&E would offer lower rates because it wouldn’t have to generate profits for shareholders and would be more responsive to customers and elected officials. They point to public utilities serving Los Angeles, Sacramento and other parts of California as proof that government can provide safe, clean and affordable electricity.
Advertisement
S. David Freeman, a seven-decade veteran of the energy business, is skeptical.
A self-described “public power guy,” Freeman has led several of America’s largest public utilities, including the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, Sacramento Municipal Utility District, Tennessee Valley Authority and New York Power Authority. He said replacing PG&E with a public utility wouldn’t solve the company’s toughest challenge: fireproofing rural transmission lines in an era when rising global temperatures and hotter droughts have primed California’s mountains and forests for increasingly devastating infernos.
“It’s all well and good to blame PG&E, and Lord knows I could join that crowd easily,” Freeman said. “But that wouldn’t solve the problem.”
What would a publicly owned PG&E look like?
San Francisco offered to buy PG&E’s power lines in the city for $2.5 billion last year, joining three other government agencies that have made similar offers or are considering forming their own local electric utilities. Separately, a coalition of more than 100 mayors and local elected officials — led by San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo, and representing more than half of PG&E’s customers — released a proposal to convert the company to a customer-owned cooperative.
State Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) joined the fray last week, introducing legislation that would replace PG&E with a private contractor reporting to public management at a new state agency. A seven-member board of directors, elected by the new utility’s customers, would set rates.
The public-private structure is modeled after New York’s Long Island Power Authority, a government agency that contracts with a private firm to operate its electric system. Under Wiener’s bill, a reconstituted version of PG&E — sans current management — could play the contractor role, with California paying the company a fixed fee rather than guaranteeing shareholders a rate of return on their investments. The state agency would be subject to California laws requiring transparency and open meetings.
The California Municipal Utilities Assn., a trade group for public utilities, advised Wiener’s office, although it’s neutral on the legislation. Barry Moline, the association’s executive director, praised the senator’s overall concept while noting that smaller public utilities can respond more nimbly to local priorities.
With a larger entity, “you definitely get the public accountability, but you might not have as much community buy-in,” Moline said.
Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, who appoints the board members of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, outside LADWP headquarters in 2019. (Al Seib / Los Angeles Times)
Newsom has repeatedly threatened to lead a public takeover of PG&E if he determines its restructuring plan doesn’t fundamentally transform the company.
So far, the governor isn’t satisfied. He has criticized the financing element of PG&E’s plan, arguing that it would leave the utility with too much debt to spend billions of dollars on needed safety improvements. He has also called for PG&E to replace its board of directors, and to do more to ensure customers aren’t burdened with big rate increases.
In November, Newsom asked one of his top advisors to begin developing a government-led contingency plan to take over PG&E. But the governor hasn’t released any details, nor has he taken a position on the proposals being floated by Wiener and various city officials.
Newsom has immense leverage over PG&E, at least for the next few months. Under Assembly Bill 1054, which was approved last year, the company must emerge from bankruptcy by June 30 in order to tap a $21-billion fund that will help investor-owned utilities handle claims from future fires.
To exit bankruptcy, PG&E must first persuade the California Public Utilities Commission, whose members are appointed by the governor, to approve its reorganization plan — essentially giving Newsom veto power. Without the governor’s blessing, it would be tough for PG&E to meet the June 30 deadline.
“If PG&E can’t access the wildfire fund, it doesn’t have a private-sector future,” said Michael Wara, an energy and climate law professor at Stanford University.
Organized labor is skeptical
Still, the political barriers to public ownership are immense.
The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, one of the most powerful lobbying forces in Sacramento, has opposed proposals to take PG&E public. The labor union says a government takeover could result in job losses and diminished benefits for the 20,000 or so employees and contract workers it represents at California’s largest utility.
After Wiener introduced his legislation, IBEW Local 1245 began circulating a two-page flier warning that “STATE TAKEOVER OF PG&E IS EXPENSIVE AND DANGEROUS.”
Wiener’s office says his bill is designed to protect PG&E employees by handing over the utility’s day-to-day operations to a new, privately owned enterprise that could employ the existing workforce and maintain the same benefits. But the union fears its members’ pensions wouldn’t survive the transfer from private to public oversight, since those funds would then be governed by different laws and regulations.
“Our lawyers and our accountants and actuaries have not figured out how you can take an investor-owned pension, transfer those assets to the state and preserve exactly the benefits that people have,” said Tom Dalzell, business manager for IBEW Local 1245.
State Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), shown in 2019, is proposing to replace PG&E with a private contractor reporting to public management at a new state agency. (Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)
PG&E could try to block a takeover
Even without opposition from labor, transferring PG&E to public ownership might not be quick, or easy.
State officials hold the power of eminent domain, and the Public Utilities Commission can revoke an investor-owned utility’s license to operate.
But none of that would stop PG&E from fighting back, as it did when Sacramento Municipal Utility District attempted to take over parts of its service territory in the 1930s. PG&E delayed the public utility’s launch for more than a decade, in part by arguing that the government’s offer price for its system didn’t reflect fair market value.
“And that’s when life was far simpler,” said Mike Gatto, a former state lawmaker who led the Assembly’s utilities committee. “There was no such thing as consultants, and lawyers weren’t quite as fancy. And the politics weren’t as harsh as they are now.”
Today, as in the 1930s, PG&E insists it is not for sale.
“While recent proposals for state or municipal ownership of PG&E’s infrastructure are not new concepts, we don’t agree that the outcomes of this type of framework will benefit customers, taxpayers, local communities, the state or our economy,” company spokesman James Noonan said in an email.
How long would it take?
Especially if PG&E fights back, a state takeover attempt could delay the company’s exit from bankruptcy — a potentially unwelcome prospect for wildfire victims and other groups.
PG&E’s proposed reorganization plan includes settlements to pay $25.5 billion to individuals, insurance companies, local governments and others with wildfire-related claims. The money is slated to be paid out when the utility emerges from bankruptcy, so a delay could mean wildfire victims have to wait additional months or years for compensation.
Wiener’s legislation is designed to take effect after the utility exits bankruptcy, meaning that at least under his plan, payments to wildfire victims would not be postponed.
Some clean energy advocates are also concerned about the possibility of an extended delay.
PG&E is one of the country’s largest buyers of solar and wind power, and it has been praised by environmental groups for its advocacy on energy efficiency. California will need to accelerate its transition to those types of clean resources if it hopes to reduce planet-warming emissions 40% below 1990 levels by 2030, as required by state law.
“For all their faults as a company, and they have many, PG&E actually has a pretty good track record when it comes to embracing climate change as a serious priority,” said Michael Colvin, who leads the California energy program at the nonprofit Environmental Defense Fund.
How much would customers pay?
Statewide, homes served by publicly owned utilities pay less for electricity than homes served by investor-owned utilities.
Data compiled by the American Public Power Assn. show that in 2018, California’s investor-owned utilities collected 19.3 cents in revenue, on average, for every kilowatt-hour of electricity they sold to residential customers. The revenue figure for publicly owned utilities was much lower: 16.4 cents.
Still, experts caution that the ability of a publicly owned PG&E to offer lower rates would depend in part on the price California pays to acquire the company’s assets, since ratepayers would be on the hook for those costs. A higher purchase price could cut into the cost savings from eliminating guaranteed returns on investment for shareholders.
Another complicating factor is the need to invest tens of billions of dollars in PG&E’s poles and wires in the coming years, to harden that aging infrastructure against starting fires.
Shon Hiatt, a professor of management at USC’s Marshall School of Business, said that if the state takes over PG&E, the utility would no longer be able to issue common stock to help pay for those infrastructure projects. That means the money would need to come from either taking on more debt or raising rates.
“The question is, how high will these rates go?” Hiatt asked.
A more existential question is whether a publicly owned PG&E would be any more up to the task of stemming wildfires and keeping the lights on than the current version.
The company’s critics say the state could hardly do worse than PG&E has in recent years, arguing the stockholder-owned company has consistently put profits ahead of safety.
“They have no credit. Their cost of capital is horrendous. Their insurance is horrendous,” said Jeff Shields, a public power veteran who helped form Trinity Public Utilities District.
But revamping PG&E’s massive electric system — which includes more than 18,000 miles of transmission lines across a 70,000-square-mile service territory — won’t be an easy task no matter who is responsible for it. Some experts aren’t sure a government agency would do any better at the gargantuan undertaking than the current iteration of PG&E.
“The state taking it over doesn’t mean it’s going to run it more efficiently,” said John Coffee Jr., a professor at Columbia Law School.
Supporters of taking PG&E public say the obstacles are surmountable.
Public utilities, they say, are subject to the same clean energy mandates as their private counterparts. Laws can be written to protect workers. The elected officials running a reformed PG&E can choose to dedicate sufficient funds to safety, rather than paying dividends to shareholders and wining and dining regulators.
And a transfer to public ownership wouldn’t have to take as long as the Sacramento battle of the 1930s and 1940s, not with PG&E facing enormous political and financial pressures of its own making.
“I wouldn’t underestimate the power that this governor has to speed things along,” said Catie Stewart, a spokeswoman for Wiener.
Still, a government-run utility wouldn’t be immune from the kinds of problems that have plagued PG&E.
Paul Hauser, general manager of Trinity Public Utilities District, pointed out that California’s “strict liability” standard — under which utilities can be held responsible for fires ignited by their equipment, even if they weren’t negligent — applies to public and private entities alike. It’s a sword of Damocles hanging over anyone who owns a piece of the power grid.
What does that mean for public officials who might want to take over a private utility? Hauser pointed to the small part of Trinity County that is still served by PG&E.
“Under today’s strict liability standard, I don’t know if we’d want it,” he said. “I don’t know if we’d want it if it were given to us.”
Times staff writer Taryn Luna contributed to this report.


latimes--2020-02-14--Cannabis farm was a model for California's legal industry. Then came a sheriff's raid

To marijuana industry boosters and Santa Barbara County officials , Barry Brand was one of the “ good players , ” a longtime Gerbera daisy grower who pitched cannabis as just a new type of flower in the greenhouse .
When county officials gave reporters a tour of a licensed grow last year , they picked Brand ’ s operation on Foothill Road to showcase how their regulations were working and would make it all but impossible to divert marijuana to the black market .
Last month the Santa Barbara County sheriff revealed a crease in this tidy snapshot .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ search warrant at the farm and reported finding a stash of more than 100 gallons of concentrated cannabis oil , an extraction lab and evidence of “ off-book ” sales ” — all illegal .
“ They were considered to be sort of the models , ” said Bernard Melekian , the former undersheriff who became the county ’ s cannabis czar last month .
He chuckled about his predecessor taking The Times on a tour of the farm in May .
“ I realize there is a certain irony there.
” He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nowhere near up and running ” and had nothing to do with the sheriff ’ s search .
Lionel Neff , a critic of the proliferation of cannabis in the area , said “ no one was surprised ” by the raid at Brand ’ s Arroyo Verde farm , one of many operations accused of fouling the air in Carpinteria .
“ If they were good operators , they would have taken the community into account from the beginning.
” Neff is hopeful that the raid is a sign that Melekian is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the politically connected farmers than county officials have in the past .
Brand , 57 , is a prominent member of one of the two Dutch families — the Brands and Van Wingerdens — who brought the cut-flower industry to the Carpinteria Valley decades ago .
The clans are intertwined and now growing marijuana in their numerous sprawling greenhouses north of town .
Barry Brand has been an influential figure in this town of just 13,000 .
He is active in the Lions and Rotary clubs , and was one the 15 members @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cannabis Assn .
for Responsible Producers ) .
In August , the group agreed to donate $ 189,000 to the Carpinteria Unified School District .
In September , he and his wife co-hosted a fundraiser for the local Girls Inc. and donated $ 10,000 for their table .
The gala brought in over $ 250,000 .
The Jan. 22 raid highlights how little officials knew about the operations they approved for state licensing .
In the last two years , county supervisors voted to allow grows of unlimited size and number , with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ county famous for its wine-tasting and scenic coastline into California ’ s new and unexpected breadbasket of marijuana cultivation .
Brand and other growers were heavily involved in developing the cannabis policy , hiring lobbyists , attorneys and communications firms , making donations to political campaigns .
Brand contributed $ 10,000 to the two county supervisors leading the effort : $ 8,000 to Das Williams and $ 2,000 to Steve Lavagnino .
The unregulated rush of planting sparked clashes from the south coast to Santa Maria .
In this seaside town , neighbors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s skunk-like odor , while other residents and some businesses counter that the jobs and tax revenue are good for the local economy .
By summer of last year , growers in Santa Barbara County had obtained more state licenses than places like Humboldt and Mendocino .
Humboldt now slightly edges out Santa Barbara , which after a backlash put a cap on the total number of acres that could be cultivated with pot countywide .
On Jan. 20 , attorneys for a coalition of critics of the industry sent a letter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ asking to launch “ an investigation of commercial cannabis cultivators that are operating within 1,000 feet of schools.
” The petition sought enforcement against the county , under the Civil Rights Act , citing “ pernicious impacts near schools attended by predominantly Hispanic children.
” When The Times toured the facility , Dennis Bozanich , the county executive who worked with supervisors to create the cannabis policy , said a tracking system and regular inspections would make it difficult for growers to divert even 2 % of their crop to the black market @ @ @ @ @ @ @ asked not to be named at the time , was more skeptical .
“ Depending on how the operator wants to game the system , I ’ m sure there are ways to do it , ” he said .
“ All of this depends on a partnership between the good operators and the county and the state.
” The stated goal of Santa Barbara ’ s cultivation program was to bring tens of millions in tax revenue .
But the Board of Supervisors , guided by Bozanich , Williams and Lavagnio , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one , they voted for a 4 % tax on gross receipts instead of a tax based on licensed square footage of the crop .
Because the county has no access to the state tracking data , and growers operate in a cash world with little or no banking records , the tax collector ’ s office has had to rely on their word about how much they made .
Consultants said in February 2018 that the county could expect to collect between $ 15 million and $ 22 million annually from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ point .
Nearly six times that number of acres , 275 , are licensed now , records show .
But in the last year and a half , the county received only $ 9.76 million .
As an indicator to how much of the cannabis is flooding the underground market : Sheriff searches of 29 unlicensed operators and 15 licensed ones turned up $ 294 million worth of illegal product , Melekian said .
And with multiple crop cycles , those operators could have had several times that amount over the course of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , licensed growers reported only $ 167 million in legal revenue in the last fiscal year to the county .
Sheriff ’ s spokeswoman Raquel Zick said the investigation into Brand was continuing .
The sheriff searched Brand ’ s four parcels on suspicion that he was “ growing and processing marijuana outside of the licensed parcel as well as possessing and selling cannabis crude ( oil ) without a license.
” Detectives discovered “ off-book [ black market ] marijuana sales associated with the farm , ” a small volatile extrication lab @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cannabis and “ 1,000 pounds of cannabis crude.
” That amount of crude oil sold wholesale would be worth between $ 1.1 million to $ 1.6 million in California ’ s legal market , much more out of state , according to industry insiders .
CARP Growers , which was heavily involved in crafting the county ’ s marijuana policy , said Brand resigned his membership after the raid .
Brand did not return calls and emails seeking comment .
Just four days before the sheriff ’ s search , Brand opened his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a tour that presumably did not include the extraction lab , which are known to explode , if not done to professional standards .
“ We love to share how our plants have helped bring relief to those in need , ” Brand told Coastal View magazine .
“ I had a great day sharing our wonderful farm with the public .
”

Barry Brand’s Arroyo Verde farm in Carpinteria was depicted as a model of how Santa Barbara County was regulating the marijuana industry. Last month, the sheriff raided it and reported finding evidence it was selling to the black market.
To marijuana industry boosters and Santa Barbara County officials, Barry Brand was one of the “good players,” a longtime Gerbera daisy grower who pitched cannabis as just a new type of flower in the greenhouse.
When county officials gave reporters a tour of a licensed grow last year, they picked Brand’s operation on Foothill Road to showcase how their regulations were working and would make it all but impossible to divert marijuana to the black market.
Sprawling rows of marijuana grow in 300,000 square feet of greenhouses at Arroyo Verde in Carpinteria. (Al Seib/Los Angeles Times)
Advertisement
Last month the Santa Barbara County sheriff revealed a crease in this tidy snapshot. On Jan. 22, detectives served a search warrant at the farm and reported finding a stash of more than 100 gallons of concentrated cannabis oil, an extraction lab and evidence of “off-book” sales” — all illegal.
“They were considered to be sort of the models,” said Bernard Melekian, the former undersheriff who became the county’s cannabis czar last month. He chuckled about his predecessor taking The Times on a tour of the farm in May. “I realize there is a certain irony there.”
He added that the tracking system is “nowhere near up and running” and had nothing to do with the sheriff’s search.
Marijuana plants in the Carpinteria Valley, where officials have permitted the densest concentration of pot farms in the U.S. (Al Seib/Los Angeles Times)
Lionel Neff, a critic of the proliferation of cannabis in the area, said “no one was surprised” by the raid at Brand’s Arroyo Verde farm, one of many operations accused of fouling the air in Carpinteria.
Advertisement
“If they were good operators, they would have taken the community into account from the beginning.”
Neff is hopeful that the raid is a sign that Melekian is going to take a harder look at the politically connected farmers than county officials have in the past.
Brand, 57, is a prominent member of one of the two Dutch families — the Brands and Van Wingerdens — who brought the cut-flower industry to the Carpinteria Valley decades ago. The clans are intertwined and now growing marijuana in their numerous sprawling greenhouses north of town.
Barry Brand has been an influential figure in this town of just 13,000. He is active in the Lions and Rotary clubs, and was one the 15 members of the industry group CARP Growers (Cannabis Assn. for Responsible Producers). In August, the group agreed to donate $189,000 to the Carpinteria Unified School District. In September, he and his wife co-hosted a fundraiser for the local Girls Inc. and donated $10,000 for their table. The gala brought in over $250,000.
Dennis Bozanich, the Santa Barbara County official who implemented the county’s marijuana program, inspects a pungent bud at Arroyo Verde in May. (Al Seib/Los Angeles Times)
The Jan. 22 raid highlights how little officials knew about the operations they approved for state licensing.
In the last two years, county supervisors voted to allow grows of unlimited size and number, with little or no vetting, turning a county famous for its wine-tasting and scenic coastline into California’s new and unexpected breadbasket of marijuana cultivation.
Brand and other growers were heavily involved in developing the cannabis policy, hiring lobbyists, attorneys and communications firms, making donations to political campaigns. Brand contributed $10,000 to the two county supervisors leading the effort: $8,000 to Das Williams and $2,000 to Steve Lavagnino.
The unregulated rush of planting sparked clashes from the south coast to Santa Maria. In this seaside town, neighbors and school children complained about the plant’s skunk-like odor, while other residents and some businesses counter that the jobs and tax revenue are good for the local economy.
By summer of last year, growers in Santa Barbara County had obtained more state licenses than places like Humboldt and Mendocino. Humboldt now slightly edges out Santa Barbara, which after a backlash put a cap on the total number of acres that could be cultivated with pot countywide.
On Jan. 20, attorneys for a coalition of critics of the industry sent a letter to the U.S. attorney in Los Angeles asking to launch “an investigation of commercial cannabis cultivators that are operating within 1,000 feet of schools.” The petition sought enforcement against the county, under the Civil Rights Act, citing “pernicious impacts near schools attended by predominantly Hispanic children.”
When The Times toured the facility, Dennis Bozanich, the county executive who worked with supervisors to create the cannabis policy, said a tracking system and regular inspections would make it difficult for growers to divert even 2% of their crop to the black market.
Brand’s manager, who asked not to be named at the time, was more skeptical.
“Depending on how the operator wants to game the system, I’m sure there are ways to do it,” he said. “All of this depends on a partnership between the good operators and the county and the state.”
Fertilizer is blended with water at the greenhouse to feed the cannabis plants. Teachers at schools near such operations have complained about the smell. (Al Seib/Los Angeles Times)
The stated goal of Santa Barbara’s cultivation program was to bring tens of millions in tax revenue. But the Board of Supervisors, guided by Bozanich, Williams and Lavagnio, created a system with loopholes.
For one, they voted for a 4% tax on gross receipts instead of a tax based on licensed square footage of the crop. Because the county has no access to the state tracking data, and growers operate in a cash world with little or no banking records, the tax collector’s office has had to rely on their word about how much they made.
Consultants said in February 2018 that the county could expect to collect between $15 million and $22 million annually from the 47 acres licensed to grow at that point.
Nearly six times that number of acres, 275, are licensed now, records show.
But in the last year and a half, the county received only $9.76 million.
As an indicator to how much of the cannabis is flooding the underground market: Sheriff searches of 29 unlicensed operators and 15 licensed ones turned up $294 million worth of illegal product, Melekian said. And with multiple crop cycles, those operators could have had several times that amount over the course of a year. At the same time, licensed growers reported only $167 million in legal revenue in the last fiscal year to the county.
Sheriff’s spokeswoman Raquel Zick said the investigation into Brand was continuing. The sheriff searched Brand’s four parcels on suspicion that he was “growing and processing marijuana outside of the licensed parcel as well as possessing and selling cannabis crude (oil) without a license.”
Detectives discovered “off-book [black market] marijuana sales associated with the farm,” a small volatile extrication lab, about 20 pounds of illegally stored cannabis and “1,000 pounds of cannabis crude.” That amount of crude oil sold wholesale would be worth between $1.1 million to $1.6 million in California’s legal market, much more out of state, according to industry insiders.
CARP Growers, which was heavily involved in crafting the county’s marijuana policy, said Brand resigned his membership after the raid. Brand did not return calls and emails seeking comment.
Just four days before the sheriff’s search, Brand opened his farm to 100 “community members” for a tour that presumably did not include the extraction lab, which are known to explode, if not done to professional standards.
“We love to share how our plants have helped bring relief to those in need,” Brand told Coastal View magazine. “I had a great day sharing our wonderful farm with the public.”


latimes--2020-02-13--Garcetti and Trump officials enter a new phase of finding a fix for homelessness in L.A.

Taking the next step in months of negotiations over ways to combat L.A. ’ s homelessness crisis , Mayor Eric Garcetti and U.S. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson on Thursday announced the formation of a joint working group .
Although much about the collaboration remains unknown , the mayor and secretary said their staffs would be working together to identify red tape and other impediments to getting people off the streets and housed quickly .
As recently as last month , Garcetti and Carson said they were close to a deal that would allow Los Angeles to receive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ land on which to build shelters .
The mayor warned at the time that “ there ’ s no cavalry coming from Washington.
” On Thursday , however , Garcetti was more optimistic .
He and Carson spoke with The Times at the Getty House , hours after both men addressed an event on homelessness at USC ’ s Schwarzenegger Institute for State and Global Policy .
“ In the next , I would say , two to three weeks , we will have an idea of what federal land will work for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some state funds , and federal funds together with county programs , to essentially open more beds , ” Garcetti said alongside Carson at the mayor ’ s official residence .
Garcetti said he expected L.A. County officials would also participate in whatever deal emerged from the negotiations and working group .
Both Carson and Garcetti declined to say how large the potential injection of funding could be or how many beds might open in new shelters .
Carson said some of the federal aid might come in the form of medical services @ @ @ @ @ @ @ specific .
“ We ’ re examining pieces of property , ” Garcetti said .
“ We can ’ t discuss it yet , but we ’ re talking about which resources we would both bring to the table to help build things .
But we ’ ve all recognized all this could slow down to a snail ’ s pace if we have regulatory barriers.
” Slashing regulations has been a theme of Carson ’ s in recent days as he toured Southern California , most recently in San Diego and Riverside @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
On Thursday morning , he told a room of state and local politicians that there was no place for the NIMBYism that often blocks development of affordable housing in California , and he decried burdensome regulations that make it hard to build .
Still , Carson offered few concrete proposals about how the city , county and federal government might better grapple with homelessness or the affordable housing crisis .
He did , however , say his agency would soon be rolling out a plan asking churches and other religious institutions across @ @ @ @ @ @ @ homeless person , with the goal of getting people off the streets .
“ Can you imagine what the impact of that will be ?
” he said .
“ Pretty much wipe out homelessness.
” After the speech , he boarded a large bus and headed to the neighborhood of Crenshaw in South L.A. , where he toured a recently completed accessory dwelling unit — apartments built from converted garages or standalone properties in the backyards of single-family homes .
It was , in fact , the same unit that Gov .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ sign several housing bills aimed at easing the state ’ s housing crisis by expediting the building of such homes .
Even as local and state officials have taken steps to reduce regulations and make these apartments easier to build , federal officials , including President Trump , have been critical of the state ’ s housing policies .
Carson has been no exception .
On Thursday , he said California and other states needed to take a hard look at changing more policies , such as zoning neighborhoods for single-family homes only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time when housing was ample .
“ That might ’ ve been appropriate 50 years ago or a hundred years ago , but really it is not accommodating what ’ s going on today , ” he told The Times , somewhat contradicting statements he made during his USC speech , in which he questioned the value of putting apartments in single-family neighborhoods .
The federal government has limited authority over local zoning practices .
Carson declined to say whether single-family zoning should be done away with entirely , saying , “ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a way that we can accommodate a lot of the tremendous innovation that has been made . ''
Trump , in addition to criticizing the state ’ s housing policies , has repeatedly castigated cities for not being able to reduce swelling homeless populations .
The White House recently released its proposed spending plan for the next fiscal year , calling for cuts of $ 8.6 billion to the Department of Housing and Urban Development ’ s budget , which would amount to 15 % of last year ’ s budget .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , saying it would mean tens of thousands of Americans would lose rental assistance and be forced from their homes .
The National Low Income Housing Coalition estimates that 160,000 families could be threatened by reductions to the federal housing voucher program .
Carson on Thursday dismissed the budget plan as just a negotiating position and said no one would be forced out of their home .
“ It ’ s not going to happen .
It never does , ” he said .
“ But you have to start the negotiations at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the president wants to make clear that we can ’ t just keep ignoring the federal debt.
” Still , the mixed messages have made some elected officials and homeless advocates wary of the federal government ’ s overtures to Garcetti and Los Angeles .
“ I think it ’ s clear that [ Carson ] wants to work with California , ” said Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg , co-chair of the governor ’ s task force on homelessness .
“ I just don ’ t know and it ’ s right to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ associated with this administration and Trump will actually be constructive or helpful.
” Newsom says he has been trying to get help from the Trump administration in a quieter manner , even as Garcetti ’ s negotiations with Carson have progressed more publicly .
During an appearance on “ Late Night with Seth Meyers , ” Newsom said he met with federal officials this week in Washington to see whether they ’ d be willing to support California ’ s efforts .
“ This is a humanitarian crisis , and we have got @ @ @ @ @ @ @ governor said .
Carson on Thursday said solving the problem will take working across political parties and multiple levels of government .
“ We have agreed that we need to stop talking about homelessness and do something about it and recognize that that ’ s going to require cooperation , ” he said .
“ It ’ s too big of a problem for anybody to handle by themselves.
” Garcetti , speaking at USC , seemed aware of the political optics .
He joked about what he called “ a strange buddy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But he said he was “ surprised ” how well they had been working together , despite their profound political and ideological differences .
“ Instead of punching back at the president , which I ’ m happy to do when I need to , I said this is more important than partisanship , ” Garcetti said .
Times staff writers Liam Dillon and Dakota Smith contributed to this report .

Taking the next step in months of negotiations over ways to combat L.A.’s homelessness crisis, Mayor Eric Garcetti and U.S. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson on Thursday announced the formation of a joint working group.
Although much about the collaboration remains unknown, the mayor and secretary said their staffs would be working together to identify red tape and other impediments to getting people off the streets and housed quickly.
As recently as last month, Garcetti and Carson said they were close to a deal that would allow Los Angeles to receive more federal resources, including money and land on which to build shelters. The mayor warned at the time that “there’s no cavalry coming from Washington.”
Advertisement
On Thursday, however, Garcetti was more optimistic. He and Carson spoke with The Times at the Getty House, hours after both men addressed an event on homelessness at USC’s Schwarzenegger Institute for State and Global Policy.
“In the next, I would say, two to three weeks, we will have an idea of what federal land will work for us to put city funds, hopefully some state funds, and federal funds together with county programs, to essentially open more beds,” Garcetti said alongside Carson at the mayor’s official residence.
Garcetti said he expected L.A. County officials would also participate in whatever deal emerged from the negotiations and working group.
L.A. Mayor Eric Garcetti has seemed optimistic about the city’s collaboration with the federal government on reducing homelessness. (Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)
Both Carson and Garcetti declined to say how large the potential injection of funding could be or how many beds might open in new shelters. Carson said some of the federal aid might come in the form of medical services, but he declined to be more specific.
“We’re examining pieces of property,” Garcetti said. “We can’t discuss it yet, but we’re talking about which resources we would both bring to the table to help build things. But we’ve all recognized all this could slow down to a snail’s pace if we have regulatory barriers.”
Slashing regulations has been a theme of Carson’s in recent days as he toured Southern California, most recently in San Diego and Riverside. He visits Long Beach on Friday. On Thursday morning, he told a room of state and local politicians that there was no place for the NIMBYism that often blocks development of affordable housing in California, and he decried burdensome regulations that make it hard to build.
Still, Carson offered few concrete proposals about how the city, county and federal government might better grapple with homelessness or the affordable housing crisis. He did, however, say his agency would soon be rolling out a plan asking churches and other religious institutions across the country to “adopt” a homeless person, with the goal of getting people off the streets.
“Can you imagine what the impact of that will be?” he said. “Pretty much wipe out homelessness.”
After the speech, he boarded a large bus and headed to the neighborhood of Crenshaw in South L.A., where he toured a recently completed accessory dwelling unit — apartments built from converted garages or standalone properties in the backyards of single-family homes. It was, in fact, the same unit that Gov. Gavin Newsom visited in the fall to sign several housing bills aimed at easing the state’s housing crisis by expediting the building of such homes.
Advertisement
HUD Secretary Ben Carson, middle, sits down for an interview with Times reporter Benjamin Oreskes, right, on Thursday. (Francine Orr / Los Angeles Times)
Even as local and state officials have taken steps to reduce regulations and make these apartments easier to build, federal officials, including President Trump, have been critical of the state’s housing policies. Carson has been no exception.
On Thursday, he said California and other states needed to take a hard look at changing more policies, such as zoning neighborhoods for single-family homes only, because they are vestiges of another time when housing was ample.
“That might’ve been appropriate 50 years ago or a hundred years ago, but really it is not accommodating what’s going on today,” he told The Times, somewhat contradicting statements he made during his USC speech, in which he questioned the value of putting apartments in single-family neighborhoods. The federal government has limited authority over local zoning practices.
Carson declined to say whether single-family zoning should be done away with entirely, saying, “I’d like to see it altered in a way that we can accommodate a lot of the tremendous innovation that has been made.”
Trump, in addition to criticizing the state’s housing policies, has repeatedly castigated cities for not being able to reduce swelling homeless populations. The White House recently released its proposed spending plan for the next fiscal year, calling for cuts of $8.6 billion to the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s budget, which would amount to 15% of last year’s budget.
Housing advocates have criticized the proposed cut, saying it would mean tens of thousands of Americans would lose rental assistance and be forced from their homes. The National Low Income Housing Coalition estimates that 160,000 families could be threatened by reductions to the federal housing voucher program.
Carson on Thursday dismissed the budget plan as just a negotiating position and said no one would be forced out of their home.
“It’s not going to happen. It never does,” he said. “But you have to start the negotiations at a place, and you know, the president wants to make clear that we can’t just keep ignoring the federal debt.”
Still, the mixed messages have made some elected officials and homeless advocates wary of the federal government’s overtures to Garcetti and Los Angeles.
“I think it’s clear that [Carson] wants to work with California,” said Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg, co-chair of the governor’s task force on homelessness. “I just don’t know and it’s right to be skeptical about whether or not anything associated with this administration and Trump will actually be constructive or helpful.”
Newsom says he has been trying to get help from the Trump administration in a quieter manner, even as Garcetti’s negotiations with Carson have progressed more publicly. During an appearance on “Late Night with Seth Meyers,” Newsom said he met with federal officials this week in Washington to see whether they’d be willing to support California’s efforts.
“This is a humanitarian crisis, and we have got to turn it around,” the governor said.
Gov. Gavin Newsom exits an accessory dwelling unit in South L.A. last year after signing a package of housing bills. The unit is the same one HUD Secretary Ben Carson visited Thursday. (Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)
Carson on Thursday said solving the problem will take working across political parties and multiple levels of government.
“We have agreed that we need to stop talking about homelessness and do something about it and recognize that that’s going to require cooperation,” he said. “It’s too big of a problem for anybody to handle by themselves.”
Garcetti, speaking at USC, seemed aware of the political optics. He joked about what he called “a strange buddy movie” of his working with Carson. But he said he was “surprised” how well they had been working together, despite their profound political and ideological differences.
“Instead of punching back at the president, which I’m happy to do when I need to, I said this is more important than partisanship,” Garcetti said.
Times staff writers Liam Dillon and Dakota Smith contributed to this report.


latimes--2020-02-13--Garcetti calls himself an 'older, straighter' Pete Buttigieg

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti ’ s dream of a 2020 presidential run may be over , but he ’ s still comparing himself to the field of Democratic candidates .
Garcetti , 49 , quipped that he ’ s an “ older , straighter Pete ” Buttigieg during a speech Thursday , likening himself to the former South Bend , Ind.
, mayor because they both served in the Navy Reserve .
Both politicians also are Rhodes scholars and play the piano .
It wasn ’ t the first time Garcetti has linked himself to Buttigieg , 38 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in second in this week ’ s New Hampshire primary .
“ It ’ s nice to have Pete be like my mayoral avatar , to show that the theory was correct and that there is , I think , a hunger for a new , outside-Washington mayoral leadership , ” Garcetti told .
If elected , Buttigieg would be the youngest president in U.S. history , the first openly gay chief executive and the first candidate ever to go directly from City Hall to the White House .
He has joked that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Maltese American Episcopalian gay millennial war veteran in the race.
” He stood alongside Garcetti in 2017 in South Bend at the launch of Accelerator for America , a nonprofit founded by the L.A. mayor to spur transportation and “ opportunity zones , ” areas where developers and other businesses receive tax breaks in return for investments .
Buttigieg served as an advisor to the nonprofit .
Despite his friendship with Buttigieg , Garcetti is backing former Vice President Joe Biden for the Democratic nomination .
The L.A. mayor spent two years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the White House , but announced last year he would stay out of the race .
“ What we have right here in Los Angeles sets the pace for the nation , ” he said at the time , drawing a contrast with the partisan fighting that blocks action in Washington .

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, with Councilman Curren Price, right, speaks at a news conference Thursday about the city’s efforts to address the homelessness crisis.
Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti’s dream of a 2020 presidential run may be over, but he’s still comparing himself to the field of Democratic candidates.
Garcetti, 49, quipped that he’s an “older, straighter Pete” Buttigieg during a speech Thursday, likening himself to the former South Bend, Ind., mayor because they both served in the Navy Reserve. Both politicians also are Rhodes scholars and play the piano.
It wasn’t the first time Garcetti has linked himself to Buttigieg, 38, now a top-tier presidential candidate who came in second in this week’s New Hampshire primary.
Advertisement
“It’s nice to have Pete be like my mayoral avatar, to show that the theory was correct and that there is, I think, a hunger for a new, outside-Washington mayoral leadership,” Garcetti told the Atlantic earlier this year .
If elected, Buttigieg would be the youngest president in U.S. history, the first openly gay chief executive and the first candidate ever to go directly from City Hall to the White House. He has joked that he is “definitely the only left-handed, Maltese American Episcopalian gay millennial war veteran in the race.”
He stood alongside Garcetti in 2017 in South Bend at the launch of Accelerator for America, a nonprofit founded by the L.A. mayor to spur transportation and “opportunity zones,” areas where developers and other businesses receive tax breaks in return for investments. Buttigieg served as an advisor to the nonprofit.
Garcetti’s longtime political consultant, Rick Jacobs, attended Buttigieg’s 2018 wedding.
Despite his friendship with Buttigieg, Garcetti is backing former Vice President Joe Biden for the Democratic nomination.
The L.A. mayor spent two years weighing whether to make a bid for the White House, but announced last year he would stay out of the race.
“What we have right here in Los Angeles sets the pace for the nation,” he said at the time, drawing a contrast with the partisan fighting that blocks action in Washington.


latimes--2020-02-13--Three leaders of Philippines-based church in Van Nuys indicted on human trafficking, immigration cha

Three leaders of Philippines-based church in Van Nuys indicted on human trafficking, immigration charges

When FBI agents raided the Van Nuys compound of a Philippines-based church late last month , they found 80 passports , seven wedding rings and a folder titled “ Traitor ” — the makings of a decade-long human trafficking conspiracy , federal prosecutors said in an indictment unsealed Thursday .
Officials with the Davao City , Phillipines-headquartered church — whose leader calls himself “ The Appointed Son of God ” — had lured Filipino followers to Los Angeles , where they were promised roles in church concerts , the indictment alleges .
But once the followers arrived in Southern California @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were forced to beg and solicit donations for an organization called the Children ’ s Joy Foundation , which purported to help poor Filipino kids , the court documents said .
Instead , funds were used to purchase Armani suits for the church ’ s leader and lingerie for his assistants , among other luxury purchases , according to the indictment and other documents .
Three officials with the church called Kingdom of Jesus Christ , The Name Above Every Name were charged late Wednesday with one count of conspiring to commit forced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and marriage fraud .
Guia Cabactulan 59 , was the church ’ s top official in the United States , the indictment said .
Marissa Duenas , 41 , allegedly handled immigration matters as the “ human resources leader ” and investigators believe Amanda Estopare , 48 , tracked fundraising and funneled money to the church ’ s leadership in the Philippines .
A magistrate judge had ordered all three women detained after their arrests last month .
Attorneys for Cabactulan and Duenas didn ’ t immediately respond to requests for comment .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Estopare had retained a lawyer .
Israelito Torreon , an attorney for the church in the Philippines , previously said the U.S. charges stemmed from a campaign , waged by disgruntled ex-members , “ to exact revenge ” and drag the church and its leader , Apollo Quiboloy , “ into a quagmire of shame , blatant humiliation and defeat.
” Quiboloy was neither charged nor identified by name in court documents ; prosecutors and agents have referred only to the church ’ s “ leader.
” Nearly every day , all year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ volunteers ” or “ miracle workers , ” in the church ’ s words — were forced to raise money , often by begging on the street , the indictment says .
One woman told the FBI she solicited money by singing in restaurants and selling baked goods ; another described begging outside malls , Walmarts and Home Depots .
Any money they spent on themselves for food , lodging or medical needs came out of their daily cash quota .
“ For that reason , ” the indictment says , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their vehicles while fundraising.
” Victims who did not meet quotas were abused , according to the indictment and an FBI agent ’ s affidavit .
Some were forced to fast and listen to the church leader ’ s recorded sermons for days in a locked room in the Van Nuys compound , the documents say .
One victim told the FBI that after her relationship with a non-church member became known , she was paddled 100 times , forced to wear an orange shirt with the letters SOS for “ Son of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shaved .
To ensure those victims “ who proved to be good at soliciting money ” could remain in the United States , officials forced them to marry church members with U.S. citizenship in sham ceremonies , and kept wedding rings at the Van Nuys compound for that purpose , according to the indictment and an affidavit signed by Anne Wetzel , an FBI agent .
Others were enrolled at universities in Hacienda Heights and Garden Grove , making them eligible for student visas .
The FBI has interviewed at least a dozen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ affidavit .
Several have received temporary immigration status allowing them to remain in the United States .
At the Van Nuys compound , agents found a memo listing the church ’ s “ fundraising goal ” for the United States in 2018 as 23,050,000 Philippine pesos , or about $ 457,000 dollars .
Estopare and other church officials sent cash to the Philippines , rolled into the socks of church workers and flown in bulk on private jets , the indictment says .
From 2014 to mid-2019 , $ 20 million in cash @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bank accounts , Wetzel wrote in the affidavit , citing bank records subpoenaed by investigators .
Most of the money came from “ street-level solicitation , ” Wetzel wrote .
Witnesses have told the FBI that the church ’ s leader enjoyed a sumptuous lifestyle .
He drives a Bentley , Mercedes and bullet-proof Cadillac in Davao City , one former member said , and the church is building a sports stadium there called the “ KJC King Dome.
” Torreon , the Filipino attorney representing the church , said the FBI had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conspiracy of lies , ” concocted by embittered members who had since left the church .
During the raid at the Van Nuys compound , the indictment said , agents seized a file containing information on members who had fled the church , titled “ Traitor.
” The Associated Press contributed to this report .

When FBI agents raided the Van Nuys compound of a Philippines-based church late last month, they found 80 passports, seven wedding rings and a folder titled “Traitor” — the makings of a decade-long human trafficking conspiracy, federal prosecutors said in an indictment unsealed Thursday.
Officials with the Davao City, Phillipines-headquartered church — whose leader calls himself “The Appointed Son of God” — had lured Filipino followers to Los Angeles, where they were promised roles in church concerts, the indictment alleges.
But once the followers arrived in Southern California, their passports were confiscated and they were forced to beg and solicit donations for an organization called the Children’s Joy Foundation, which purported to help poor Filipino kids, the court documents said. Instead, funds were used to purchase Armani suits for the church’s leader and lingerie for his assistants, among other luxury purchases, according to the indictment and other documents.
Advertisement
Three officials with the church called Kingdom of Jesus Christ, The Name Above Every Name were charged late Wednesday with one count of conspiring to commit forced labor trafficking, document servitude and immigration and marriage fraud. Guia Cabactulan 59, was the church’s top official in the United States, the indictment said. Marissa Duenas, 41, allegedly handled immigration matters as the “human resources leader” and investigators believe Amanda Estopare, 48, tracked fundraising and funneled money to the church’s leadership in the Philippines.
A magistrate judge had ordered all three women detained after their arrests last month. Attorneys for Cabactulan and Duenas didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment. It was unclear from court records if Estopare had retained a lawyer.
Israelito Torreon, an attorney for the church in the Philippines, previously said the U.S. charges stemmed from a campaign, waged by disgruntled ex-members, “to exact revenge” and drag the church and its leader, Apollo Quiboloy, “into a quagmire of shame, blatant humiliation and defeat.”
Quiboloy was neither charged nor identified by name in court documents; prosecutors and agents have referred only to the church’s “leader.”
Nearly every day, all year long, the alleged trafficking victims — “volunteers” or “miracle workers,” in the church’s words — were forced to raise money, often by begging on the street, the indictment says. One woman told the FBI she solicited money by singing in restaurants and selling baked goods; another described begging outside malls, Walmarts and Home Depots.
Any money they spent on themselves for food, lodging or medical needs came out of their daily cash quota. “For that reason,” the indictment says, they “often skipped meals and slept in their vehicles while fundraising.”
Victims who did not meet quotas were abused, according to the indictment and an FBI agent’s affidavit. Some were forced to fast and listen to the church leader’s recorded sermons for days in a locked room in the Van Nuys compound, the documents say. One victim told the FBI that after her relationship with a non-church member became known, she was paddled 100 times, forced to wear an orange shirt with the letters SOS for “Son of Satan,” and her head was shaved.
To ensure those victims “who proved to be good at soliciting money” could remain in the United States, officials forced them to marry church members with U.S. citizenship in sham ceremonies, and kept wedding rings at the Van Nuys compound for that purpose, according to the indictment and an affidavit signed by Anne Wetzel, an FBI agent. Others were enrolled at universities in Hacienda Heights and Garden Grove, making them eligible for student visas.
Advertisement
The FBI has interviewed at least a dozen victims, according to Wetzel’s affidavit. Several have received temporary immigration status allowing them to remain in the United States.
At the Van Nuys compound, agents found a memo listing the church’s “fundraising goal” for the United States in 2018 as 23,050,000 Philippine pesos, or about $457,000 dollars. Estopare and other church officials sent cash to the Philippines, rolled into the socks of church workers and flown in bulk on private jets, the indictment says.
From 2014 to mid-2019, $20 million in cash was deposited in the church’s bank accounts, Wetzel wrote in the affidavit, citing bank records subpoenaed by investigators. Most of the money came from “street-level solicitation,” Wetzel wrote.
Witnesses have told the FBI that the church’s leader enjoyed a sumptuous lifestyle. He drives a Bentley, Mercedes and bullet-proof Cadillac in Davao City, one former member said, and the church is building a sports stadium there called the “KJC King Dome.”
Torreon, the Filipino attorney representing the church, said the FBI had been taken in by “a grand conspiracy of lies,” concocted by embittered members who had since left the church. During the raid at the Van Nuys compound, the indictment said, agents seized a file containing information on members who had fled the church, titled “Traitor.”
The Associated Press contributed to this report.


latimes--2020-02-13--New data show nearly 10% of California is in moderate drought

The latest U.S. Drought Monitor map released Thursday shows that 9.5 % of California is considered to be in moderate drought .
The abnormally dry area , which includes the drought area , has expanded from about 34 % to 46 % .
The dry area on the new map has spread southward to include most of Los Angeles County , much of Kern and San Luis Obispo counties and all of Santa Barbara and Ventura counties .
A large patch in the central part of the state is now in moderate drought .
It stretches from Tuolumne and Mono @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fresno , Kings and Tulare counties into north-central Kern County .
Coastal California north of San Francisco and swaths of interior Northern California , as well as the southeastern part of the state , including San Bernardino , Riverside , Orange , San Diego and Imperial counties , are in the 53.9 % of the state that aren ’ t categorized as being in drought conditions .
February , which is normally the wettest month of the year in Los Angeles , has been dry like January before it , and the prospect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a close looks dim , according to forecasts .

The latest U.S. Drought Monitor data show about half of California is either abnormally dry or in moderate drought.
The latest U.S. Drought Monitor map released Thursday shows that 9.5% of California is considered to be in moderate drought. The abnormally dry area, which includes the drought area, has expanded from about 34% to 46%.
The dry area on the new map has spread southward to include most of Los Angeles County, much of Kern and San Luis Obispo counties and all of Santa Barbara and Ventura counties.
A large patch in the central part of the state is now in moderate drought. It stretches from Tuolumne and Mono counties south through Mariposa, Madera, Fresno, Kings and Tulare counties into north-central Kern County.
Advertisement
Coastal California north of San Francisco and swaths of interior Northern California, as well as the southeastern part of the state, including San Bernardino, Riverside, Orange, San Diego and Imperial counties, are in the 53.9% of the state that aren’t categorized as being in drought conditions.
February, which is normally the wettest month of the year in Los Angeles, has been dry like January before it, and the prospect for rain before the month draws to a close looks dim, according to forecasts.


latimes--2020-02-13--Juvenile who fled to Armenia arrested on suspicion of attempted murder after road rage incident

A juvenile who fled to Armenia after punching a man with brass knuckles during a road rage incident , leaving the man in a coma , has been arrested on suspicion of attempted murder , authorities said Thursday .
About 9:30 p.m. New Year ’ s Day , a black Jeep was driving erratically in the Valley Glen neighborhood when it got behind another man ’ s vehicle .
Both vehicles pulled to the curb near Woodman Avenue and Victory Boulevard , and both drivers and the Jeep ’ s passengers got out .
Witness video recorded from a nearby @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exchanging words , and then one of the Jeep ’ s occupants — the juvenile arrested this week , according to the Los Angeles Police Department — quickly strikes the driver of the other vehicle .
The driver collapses to the ground as the Jeep ’ s occupants flee .
The victim has been hospitalized since the attack .
LAPD worked with the FBI , U.S. Department of Homeland Security , Interpol and the Los Angeles County district attorney ’ s office to bring the juvenile back to the United States .
Another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Robert Hovhannisyan , was not returned from Armenia by law enforcement because he did not assault the driver , according to the LAPD .

A juvenile who fled to Armenia after punching a man with brass knuckles during a road rage incident, leaving the man in a coma, has been arrested on suspicion of attempted murder, authorities said Thursday.
About 9:30 p.m. New Year’s Day, a black Jeep was driving erratically in the Valley Glen neighborhood when it got behind another man’s vehicle.
Both vehicles pulled to the curb near Woodman Avenue and Victory Boulevard, and both drivers and the Jeep’s passengers got out.
Witness video recorded from a nearby car shows two men from separate vehicles exchanging words, and then one of the Jeep’s occupants — the juvenile arrested this week, according to the Los Angeles Police Department — quickly strikes the driver of the other vehicle. The driver collapses to the ground as the Jeep’s occupants flee.
The victim has been hospitalized since the attack.
LAPD worked with the FBI, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Interpol and the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office to bring the juvenile back to the United States.
Advertisement
Another suspect, identified by the LAPD as Robert Hovhannisyan, was not returned from Armenia by law enforcement because he did not assault the driver, according to the LAPD.


latimes--2020-02-14--ICE plans to deploy more resources in sanctuary cities, citing lack of cooperation

Federal immigration officials confirmed Friday that border agents and officers , including those in tactical units , will be deployed in Los Angeles and other so-called sanctuary cities to assist in the arrests of immigrants in the country illegally .
A U.S. Customs and Border Protection spokesman confirmed details of the planned deployment that were first reported in the New York Times .
The agency referred further questions to Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Department of Homeland Security .
CBP will deploy 50 Border Patrol agents and 50 field operations customs officers in nine areas , according to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sent to cities including Chicago and New York .
Additional agents are expected to be sent to San Francisco , Boston , New Orleans , Detroit and Newark , N.J. and other cities , according to the agency .
The deployment of the teams will run from February through May .
CBP agents and officers being detailed to help ICE will come from different sectors and job positions , including some trained in tactical operations , according to the agency .
“ ICE is utilizing CBP to supplement enforcement activity in response to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policies , ” ICE Director Matthew Albence said in a statement .
Albence said in the statement that the action was being taken in response to sanctuary-city law enforcement agencies not cooperating with federal authorities by turning over immigrants being held in local jails .
As a result , the statement continued , federal officers “ are forced to make at-large arrests of criminal aliens who have been released into communities.
” “ This effort requires a significant amount of additional time and resources , ” Albence said .
“ When sanctuary cities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it increases the occurrence of preventable crimes , and more importantly , preventable victims.
” The number of non-detained cases increased from 2.6 million in fiscal year 2018 to over 3.2 million in the following fiscal year , according to DHS .
“ With 5,300 ERO [ Enforcement and Removal Operations ] law enforcement officers — some of whom were detailed to the border — ICE does not have sufficient resources to effectively manage the sustained increase in non-detained cases which is exacerbated by the rise of sanctuary jurisdictions , ” the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being deployed include those within the Border Patrol Tactical Unit ( BORTAC ) , an official confirmed .
The unit “ provides an immediate response capability to emergent and high-risk incidents requiring specialized skills and tactics , ” according to the CBP website .
John Sandweg , who headed ICE during the administration of former President Obama , called the latest move by the Trump administration “ dangerous.
” “ You ’ re pulling critical manpower off the border and you ’ re doing it really candidly for a political show of force @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re also forcing the BORTAC units to operate in a dramatically different environment than what they ’ re used to .
It takes different skill sets to operate in an urban environment than it does in a border environment.
” Sandweg called it a move “ to offend so-called sanctuary cities ... by deploying a bunch of Army-looking Border Patrol agents.
” “ No ICE agent who is honest to you would ever say they need Border Patrol to bail them out .
Ever , ” he continued .
“ It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than capable enough to take care of any threats out there and have and do.
” An official familiar with the deployment said BORTAC teams were sent not because they ’ re tactical units , but rather because they could deploy the quickest .
“ Everybody ’ s going to be dressed similar to an ICE officer , ” the official said , and Border Patrol agents will follow the lead of ICE counterparts .
“ They ’ re being led by ICE .
These are ICE-led daily operations.
” He said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where ICE needed help , not based on local sanctuary city policies , and noted that Houston is not a sanctuary city .
“ The reason those cities were chosen is because that ’ s where there was a greater need for additional staffing , ” he said .
“ Our goal is not to concern people.
” But the planned deployment could set up another clash between the Trump administration and cities such as Los Angeles and San Francisco that have vowed their law enforcement officials would not aid ICE in its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deployment may look like in Los Angeles .
An L.A.-area ICE spokesperson said the agency would not discuss planned operations or specific resource allocations .
Last year , ICE launched a national operation aimed at making thousands of arrests .
Agencies such as the L.A. Police Department pushed back .
Mayor Eric Garcetti , who stood alongside LAPD Chief Michel Moore , told residents they did not have to open their doors for an ICE agent who did not have a warrant signed by a judge .
In a statement released Friday afternoon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ received no information from ICE regarding any special deployments in the Los Angeles region .
Consistent with our long-standing practices , we have not and will not participate in any immigration enforcement activities .
We continue our work building relationships with all immigrant communities in our shared effort to keep Los Angeles safe.
” L.A. County Sheriff Alex Villanueva also released a statement Friday saying , “ I strongly oppose this irresponsible deployment of federal SWAT agents in Los Angeles County for civil immigration enforcement .
“ This poorly thought-out plan can only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an already vulnerable population and drive them deeper into the shadows , ” the statement said .
“ We are not any safer if an entire segment of our population is afraid to report crimes to local law enforcement.
” The relationship between ICE and many local law enforcement agencies has long been fraught .
Since Trump took office , it has grown only more tenuous as police grapple with maintaining communication with ICE while also balancing transparency with community and civic leaders .
Those tensions are especially evident in California , where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ sanctuary ” law , Senate Bill 54 , which went into effect last year to provide protection for immigrants in the country illegally .
In L.A. , the Police Department stopped engaging in joint operations with ICE that directly involve civil immigration enforcement and no longer transfers people with certain minor criminal convictions to ICE custody .
“ This is transparent retaliation against local governments for refusing to do the administration ’ s bidding , ” Naureen Shah , senior policy and advocacy counsel on immigrants ’ rights for the American Civil @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ It will put lives at risk by further militarizing our streets .
Local governments should not face reprisals for focusing on local community needs and using taxpayer money responsibly , instead of helping to deport and detain community members.
” Advocates said that rapid response networks , which provide hotlines for immigrants facing arrest by immigration officers and dispatch trained legal observers to raids , will be on high alert over the weekend .
Hamid Yazdan Panah , advocacy director of Immigrant Defense Advocates in the Bay Area , said the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the Trump administration of using fear for political gain .
“ This administration has a practice of trying to bully people into obtaining what it wants .
But I think sanctuary cities stand on firm legal ground , ” Yazdan Panah said .
“ Sanctuary policies are a reflection of the shared values and the fabric of that community .
This escalation isn ’ t going to stop that.
” Times staff writers Andrea Castillo and Leila Miller contributed to this report .

Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers looking for a fugitive migrant question his mother during a morning raid on his residence in Riverside.
Federal immigration officials confirmed Friday that border agents and officers, including those in tactical units, will be deployed in Los Angeles and other so-called sanctuary cities to assist in the arrests of immigrants in the country illegally.
A U.S. Customs and Border Protection spokesman confirmed details of the planned deployment that were first reported in the New York Times. The agency referred further questions to Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Department of Homeland Security.
CBP will deploy 50 Border Patrol agents and 50 field operations customs officers in nine areas, according to the agency. Specially trained officers will be sent to cities including Chicago and New York.
Additional agents are expected to be sent to San Francisco, Boston, New Orleans, Detroit and Newark, N.J., and other cities, according to the agency. The deployment of the teams will run from February through May.
Advertisement
CBP agents and officers being detailed to help ICE will come from different sectors and job positions, including some trained in tactical operations, according to the agency.
“ICE is utilizing CBP to supplement enforcement activity in response to the resource challenges stemming from sanctuary city policies,” ICE Director Matthew Albence said in a statement.
Albence said in the statement that the action was being taken in response to sanctuary-city law enforcement agencies not cooperating with federal authorities by turning over immigrants being held in local jails. As a result, the statement continued, federal officers “are forced to make at-large arrests of criminal aliens who have been released into communities.”
“This effort requires a significant amount of additional time and resources,” Albence said. “When sanctuary cities release these criminals back to the street, it increases the occurrence of preventable crimes, and more importantly, preventable victims.”
The number of non-detained cases increased from 2.6 million in fiscal year 2018 to over 3.2 million in the following fiscal year, according to DHS.
“With 5,300 ERO [Enforcement and Removal Operations] law enforcement officers — some of whom were detailed to the border — ICE does not have sufficient resources to effectively manage the sustained increase in non-detained cases which is exacerbated by the rise of sanctuary jurisdictions,” the agency said in a statement.
Advertisement
Agents being deployed include those within the Border Patrol Tactical Unit (BORTAC), an official confirmed. The unit “provides an immediate response capability to emergent and high-risk incidents requiring specialized skills and tactics,” according to the CBP website.
John Sandweg, who headed ICE during the administration of former President Obama, called the latest move by the Trump administration “dangerous.”
“You’re pulling critical manpower off the border and you’re doing it really candidly for a political show of force,” Sandweg said. “You’re also forcing the BORTAC units to operate in a dramatically different environment than what they’re used to. It takes different skill sets to operate in an urban environment than it does in a border environment.”
Sandweg called it a move “to offend so-called sanctuary cities ... by deploying a bunch of Army-looking Border Patrol agents.”
“No ICE agent who is honest to you would ever say they need Border Patrol to bail them out. Ever,” he continued. “It’s insulting to ICE agents who are more than capable enough to take care of any threats out there and have and do.”
An official familiar with the deployment said BORTAC teams were sent not because they’re tactical units, but rather because they could deploy the quickest.
“Everybody’s going to be dressed similar to an ICE officer,” the official said, and Border Patrol agents will follow the lead of ICE counterparts. “They’re being led by ICE. These are ICE-led daily operations.”
He said the BORTAC teams were sent to cities where ICE needed help, not based on local sanctuary city policies, and noted that Houston is not a sanctuary city.
“The reason those cities were chosen is because that’s where there was a greater need for additional staffing,” he said. “Our goal is not to concern people.”
But the planned deployment could set up another clash between the Trump administration and cities such as Los Angeles and San Francisco that have vowed their law enforcement officials would not aid ICE in its sweeps.
It is unclear what the deployment may look like in Los Angeles. An L.A.-area ICE spokesperson said the agency would not discuss planned operations or specific resource allocations.
On Friday, in a move not seen before in California, ICE officials served four administrative subpoenas to the San Diego County Sheriff’s Department for information on four Mexican nationals wanted for deportation. The tactic was used Jan. 15 in Denver for what was believed to be the first time, then subsequently in New York and Connecticut. The subpoenas are not court-ordered or signed by a judge, but ICE said it could pursue such a court order if compliance is not forthcoming.
Last year, ICE launched a national operation aimed at making thousands of arrests. Agencies such as the L.A. Police Department pushed back. Mayor Eric Garcetti, who stood alongside LAPD Chief Michel Moore, told residents they did not have to open their doors for an ICE agent who did not have a warrant signed by a judge.
In a statement released Friday afternoon, Moore wrote, “LAPD has received no information from ICE regarding any special deployments in the Los Angeles region. Consistent with our long-standing practices, we have not and will not participate in any immigration enforcement activities. We continue our work building relationships with all immigrant communities in our shared effort to keep Los Angeles safe.”
L.A. County Sheriff Alex Villanueva also released a statement Friday saying, “I strongly oppose this irresponsible deployment of federal SWAT agents in Los Angeles County for civil immigration enforcement.
“This poorly thought-out plan can only be seen as a tactic to intimidate an already vulnerable population and drive them deeper into the shadows,” the statement said. “We are not any safer if an entire segment of our population is afraid to report crimes to local law enforcement.”
The relationship between ICE and many local law enforcement agencies has long been fraught. Since Trump took office, it has grown only more tenuous as police grapple with maintaining communication with ICE while also balancing transparency with community and civic leaders.
Those tensions are especially evident in California, where local law enforcement must abide by a “sanctuary” law, Senate Bill 54, which went into effect in 2018 to provide protection for immigrants in the country illegally. In L.A., the Police Department stopped engaging in joint operations with ICE that directly involve civil immigration enforcement and no longer transfers people with certain minor criminal convictions to ICE custody.
“This is transparent retaliation against local governments for refusing to do the administration’s bidding,” Naureen Shah, senior policy and advocacy counsel on immigrants’ rights for the American Civil Liberties Union, said in a statement. “It will put lives at risk by further militarizing our streets. Local governments should not face reprisals for focusing on local community needs and using taxpayer money responsibly, instead of helping to deport and detain community members.”
Advocates said that rapid response networks, which provide hotlines for immigrants facing arrest by immigration officers and dispatch trained legal observers to raids, will be on high alert over the weekend.
Hamid Yazdan Panah, advocacy director of Immigrant Defense Advocates in the Bay Area, said the operation is part of a repeated pattern by the Trump administration of using fear for political gain.
“This administration has a practice of trying to bully people into obtaining what it wants. But I think sanctuary cities stand on firm legal ground,” Yazdan Panah said. “Sanctuary policies are a reflection of the shared values and the fabric of that community. This escalation isn’t going to stop that.”
Times staff writers Andrea Castillo and Leila Miller contributed to this report.