SACRAMENTO — A week after a Minnesota woman was fatally shot by a federal immigration officer, California legislators moved forward a bill that would make it easier for people to sue federal agents if they believe their constitutional rights were violated.
A Senate committee passed Senate Bill 747 by Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), which would provide Californians with a stronger ability to take legal action against federal law enforcement agents over excessive use of force, unlawful home searches, interfering with a right to protest and other violations.
California law already allows such suits against state and local law enforcement officials.
Successful civil suits against federal officers over constitutional rights are less common.
Wiener, appearing before Tuesday’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, said his bill has taken on new urgency in the wake of the death of Renee Nicole Good in Minnesota, the 37-year-old mother of three who was shot while driving on a snowy Minneapolis street.
Good was shot by an agent in self-defense, said Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who alleged that Good tried to use her car as a weapon to run over the immigration officer.
Good’s death outraged Democratic leaders across the country, who accuse federal officers of flouting laws in their efforts to deport thousands of undocumented immigrants. In New York, legislators are proposing legislation similar to the one proposed by Wiener that would allow state-level civil actions against federal officers.
George Retes Jr., a U.S. citizen and Army veteran who was kept in federal custody for three days in July, described his ordeal at Tuesday’s committee hearing, and how immigration officers swarmed him during a raid in Camarillo.
Retes, a contracted security guard at the farm that was raided, said he was brought to Port Hueneme Naval Base. Officials swabbed his cheek to obtain DNA, and then moved him to Metropolitan Detention Center in Los Angeles. He was not allowed to make a phone call or see an attorney, he said.
“I did not resist, I did not impede or assault any agent,” Retes said.”What happened to me that day was not a misunderstanding. It was a violation of the Constitution by the very people sworn to uphold it.”
He also accused Department of Homeland security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin of spreading false information about him to justify his detention. DHS said in a statement last year that Retes impeded their operation, which he denies.
Retes has filed a tort claim against the U.S. government, a process that is rarely successful, said his attorney, Anya Bidwell.
Lawsuits can also be brought through the Bivens doctrine, which refers to the 1971 Supreme Court ruling Bivens vs. Six Unknown Federal Agents that established that federal officials can be sued for monetary damages for constitutional violations. But in recent decades, the Supreme Court has repeatedly restricted the ability to sue under Bivens.
Wiener’s bill, if passed by the legislature and signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, would be retroactive to March 2025.
“We’ve had enough of this terror campaign in our communities by ICE,” said Wiener at a news conference before the hearing. “We need the rule of law and we need accountability.”
Representatives for law enforcement agencies appeared at Tuesday’s hearing to ask for amendments to ensure that the bill wouldn’t lead to weakened protections for state and local officials.
“We’re not opposed to the intent of the bill. We’re just concerned about the future and the unintended consequences for your California employees,” said David Mastagni, speaking on behalf of the Peace Officers Research Assn. of California, which represents more than 85,000 public safety members.
Wiener’s bill is the latest effort by the state Legislature to challenge President Trump’s immigration raids. Newsom last year signed legislation authored by Wiener that prohibits law enforcement officials, including federal immigration agents, from wearing masks, with some exceptions.
SAN FRANCISCO — State Sen. Scott Wiener couldn’t wait any longer. The once-in-a-generation political opening he’d eyed for years had arrived, he decided — whether the grand dame of San Francisco politics agreed or not.
On Wednesday, Wiener, 55, a prolific and ambitious lawmaker, formally announced his candidacy for the San Francisco congressional seat held for nearly four decades by Rep. Nancy Pelosi, 85, who remains one of the party’s most powerful leaders and has yet to reveal her own intentions for the 2026 race.
“The world is changing, the Democratic Party is changing, and it’s time,” Wiener said in an interview with The Times. “I know San Francisco, I have worked tirelessly to represent this community — delivering housing, health care, clean energy, LGBTQ and immigrant rights — and I have a fortitude and backbone to be able to deliver for San Francisco in Congress.”
State Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) announced Wednesdat that he will run for the congressional seat currently held by former Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
(Josh Edelson/For The Times)
Wiener’s announcement — which leaked in part last week — caught some political observers off guard, given Wiener had for years seemed resigned to run for Pelosi’s seat only once she stepped aside. But it stunned few, given how squarely it fit within the broader political moment facing the Democratic Party.
In recent years, a long-simmering reckoning over generational power has exploded into the political forefront as members of the party’s old guard have increasingly been accused of holding on too long, and to their party’s detriment.
Long-serving liberal Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg ruffled many Democratic feathers by declining to step down during Barack Obama’s presidency despite being in her 80s. She subsequently died while still on the court at the age of 87 in 2020, handing President Trump his third appointment to the high court.
Visitors walk past a bust of U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein at San Francisco City Hall. The former mayor of San Francisco served in the Senate until she died in 2023 at age 90.
(Stephen Lam/San Francisco Chronicle via Getty Images)
As a result, age has become an unavoidable tension point for Democrats heading into next year’s midterm elections.
It has also been an issue for Republicans, including Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), 83, the former Senate majority leader who has faced health issues in recent years and is retiring in 2026 after more than 40 years in the Senate. Other older Republicans are facing primary challenges for being perceived as too traditional or insufficiently loyal to Trump or the MAGA movement — including Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), 73 and in office since 2002, and Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), 68 and in the Senate since 2015.
For decades, many conservatives have called for congressional term limits in opposition to “career politicians” who cling to power for too long. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, and David Trone, a Maryland Democrat, renewed those calls on Wednesday, announcing in an op-ed published in the New York Times that they would co-chair a national campaign to push for term limits.
However, perhaps because they are in power, the calls for a generational shake-up in 2026 have not been nearly as loud on the Republican side.
Democratic Party activists have sounded the alarm about a quickening slide into gerontocracy on the political left, blamed it for their party’s inability to mount an energetic and effective response to Trump and his MAGA movement, and called for younger candidates to take the reins — while congressional leaders in their 70s and 80s have increasingly begun weighing their options in the face of primary challenges.
“It’s fair to say the political appetite for octogenarians is not high,” said Eric Jaye, a veteran Democratic strategist in San Francisco.
“The choice in front of people is not just age,” said Saikat Chakrabarti, a 39-year-old tech millionaire and Democratic political operative who is also running for Pelosi’s seat. “We need a whole different approach and different candidates.”
“There’s like this unspoken rule that you don’t do what we’re doing in this moment. You sit out and wait your turn,” said Sacramento City Councilmember Mai Vang, 40, who has launched a primary challenge to Rep. Doris Matsui (D-Sacramento), who is 81 and has been in Congress since 2005. “But I’m not going to wait on the sidelines, because there is an urgency of now.”
A national trend
The generational shift promises to reshape Congress by replacing Democrats across the country, including some who are leaving without a fight.
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, 78 and a senator representing New Hampshire since 2009, said in March that it was “time” to step aside.
In Illinois, Sen. Richard Durbin, 80 and a senator since 1997, and Rep. Jan Schakowsky, 81 and in the House since 1999, both announced in May that they would not run again. Durbin said it was time “to pass the torch,” while Schakowsky praised younger “voices” in the party as “so sharp.”
Rep. Jerry Nadler of New York, 78 and in the House since 1992, announced his retirement last month, saying that “watching the Biden thing really said something about the necessity for generational change in the party.”
New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani speaks at a news conference.
(Michael Nagle/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Other older Democrats, meanwhile, have shown no intention of stepping aside, or are seeking out new roles in power.
Maine Gov. Janet Mills, 77, recently announced she is running to challenge Republican Sen. Susan Collins, who is 72 and has been in the Senate since 1997. Mills has tried to soften concerns about her age by promising to serve just one term if elected.
Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts, 79 and in the Senate since 2013, has stiffly rebuffed a primary challenge from Rep. Seth Moulton, 46, accusing Moulton of springing a challenge on him amid a shutdown and while he is busy resisting Trump’s agenda.
In Connecticut, Rep. John Larson, 77, who has been in office since 1999 and suffered a complex partial seizure on the House floor in February, has mocked his primary challengers’ message of generational change, telling Axios, “Generational change is fine, but you’ve got to earn it.”
David Hogg, a survivor of the 2018 mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., speaks at the 2022 March for Our Lives.
(Leigh Vogel / Getty Images for March For Our Lives)
David Hogg, a 25-year-old liberal activist who was thrust into politics by the 2018 mass shooting at his Parkland, Fla., high school, is among the party’s younger leaders pushing for new blood. He recently declined to seek reelection as the co-vice chair of the Democratic National Committee to bring primary challenges to older Democratic incumbents with his group Leaders We Deserve.
When he announced that decision in June, Hogg called the idea that Democratic leaders can stay in power until they die even if they don’t do a good job an “existential threat to the future of this party and nation.” His group fundraises and disperses money to young candidates it backs.
When asked by The Times about Pelosi and her primary challengers, however, Hogg was circumspect, calling Pelosi “one of the most effective and consequential leaders in the history of the Democratic Party.”
A shift in California
Pelosi is not the only older California incumbent facing a primary challenge. In addition to Matsui, the list also includes Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Porter Ranch), who is 70 and has been in office since 1997, and Rep. Mike Thompson (D-St. Helena), who is 74 and has been in office since 1999.
But Pelosi’s challenges have attracted more attention, perhaps in part because her departure from Congress would be the clearest sign yet that the generational shift sought by younger party activists is fully underway.
Nancy Pelosi is sworn in as House speaker in 2007, surrounded by her grandchildren and children of other members of Congress.
(Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images)
A trailblazer as the first female speaker of the House, Pelosi presided over two Trump impeachments. While no longer in leadership, she remains incredibly influential as an arm-twister and strategist.
She played a central role in sidelining Biden after his debate meltdown, and for the last couple months has been raising big money — a special skill of hers — in support of California’s Proposition 50. The measure seeks voter approval to redraw California’s congressional districts to better favor Democrats in response to Trump’s pressure campaign on Texas and other red states to redraw their lines in favor of Republicans.
Pelosi has used Prop. 50 in recent days to deflect questions about her primary challengers and her plans for 2026, with her spokesman Ian Krager saying she “is fully focused” on the Prop 50 fight and will be through Nov. 4.
Chakrabarti, who helped Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) unseat a longtime Democratic incumbent in 2019, said he sees even more “appetite for change” among the party’s base today — as evidenced by “mainstream Democrats who have voted for Nancy Pelosi their whole life” showing up to his events.
And it makes sense, he said.
For decades, Americans have watched the cost of essentials skyrocket while their wages have remained relatively flat, Chakrabarti said, and that has made them desperate to support messages of “bold, sweeping economic change” — whether from Obama or Trump — even as long-serving, mainstream Democrats backed by corporate money have worked to maintain the status quo.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez leaves a news conference at the Capitol in 2019. At left is Saikat Chakrabarti, who was her chief of staff and is now a candidate for the congressional seat held by Rep. Nancy Pelosi.
(Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Imag)
He said it is time for Democrats to once again push bold, big ideas, which he plans to do — including Medicare for all, universal child care, free college tuition, millions of new units of affordable housing, a new economy built around climate action, and higher taxes on billionaires and mega-millionaires like him.
Wiener, who also backs Prop. 50 and would be the first out gay person to represent San Francisco in Congress, said he cannot speak to Pelosi’s thinking — or to Politico reporting Wednesday that Pelosi is considering her options and has been seen “publicly elevating” San Francisco Supervisor Connie Chan in the race — but is confident in his readiness for the role.
Wiener agreed with Chakrabarti that big ideas are needed from Democrats to win back voters and make progress. He also said that his track record in the state Legislature shows that he has “been willing to take on very, very big fights to make significant progressive change.”
“No one has ever accused me of thinking small,” he said — citing his success in passing bills to create more affordable housing, reform health insurance and drug pricing, tackle net neutrality, challenge telecommunications and cable companies and protect LGBTQ+ and other minority communities and immigrants.
“In addition to having the desire to make big progressive change, in addition to talking about big progressive change, you have to be able to put together the coalitions to deliver on that change, because words are not enough,” Wiener said. “I’ve shown over and over again that I know how to do it, and that I can deliver.”
Political analysts said a message of big ideas will clearly resonate with some voters. But they also said that Pelosi, if she stays in the race, will be hard to beat. She will also face more serious questions than ever about her age and “her ability to function at the extraordinarily high level” she has worked at in years past, Jaye said, and will “have to answer those questions.”
If Pelosi decides not to run, Chakrabarti has the benefit of self-funding and of the current party enthusiasm for fresh faces, they said, and anyone — Chan or otherwise — would benefit from a Pelosi endorsement. But Wiener already has a strong base in the district, a track record for getting legislation passed and, as several observers pointed out, a seemingly endless battery.
“Scott Wiener is an animal. The notion of work-life balance is not a concept he has ever had. He is just like a robotic working machine,” said Aaron Peskin, who served 18 years on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, some alongside Wiener.
Rep. Lateefah Simon (D-Oakland) speaks to reporters at the Capitol in September.
(Kayla Bartkowski/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Amanda Litman, the president of Run for Something, which supports young progressive candidates, said there is pent-up demand for a new generation of leaders, and “older Democrats, especially those in Congress, need to ask themselves, ‘Am I the best person to lead this party forward right now?’”
Rep. Lateefah Simon (D-Oakland), 48, won her seat in 2024 after longtime Rep. Barbara Lee, 79, who had been in the seat since 1998, decided to run for Oakland mayor. Simon said that to her, “it’s not necessarily about birthdays” but who can do the job — “who can govern, who can mentor and who can hold this administration accountable.”
As a longtime community activist who worked with youth, Simon said she is “extremely excited” by all the energy of young Democratic office seekers. But as a freshman in Congress who has leaned on Lee, Pelosi and other mentors to help her learn the ropes, she said it’s also clear Democrats need to “have some generals who are really, really tried and tested.”
“What is not helpful to me in this moment,” Simon said, “is for the Democrats to be a circular firing squad.”
State Sen. Scott Wiener is a strategic and effective legislator who rarely lets emotion make his decisions — much like Nancy Pelosi, whose congressional seat he would like to take.
It has been a wide-open secret for years that Wiener wanted to make a run for federal office when or if Pelosi retired, but he’s also been deferential to the elder stateswoman of California politics and has made it equally clear that he would wait his turn in the brutal and parochial machine of San Francisco politics.
Until now.
The San Francisco Standard broke the news Thursday that Wiener is running on the 2026 ballot, though he has yet to formally announce.
It is news that shocked even those deep in the dog-eat-dog world of S.F. politics and ignited the inevitable news cycle about whether Pelosi (who was instrumental in removing President Biden from the 2024 race for age-related issues) is being Bidened herself. It also ensures a contentious race that will be nationally watched by both MAGA and the progressive left, both of which take issue with Wiener.
Oh, the drama.
Take it for what you will, but a few months after having hip replacement surgery, Pelosi is (literally) back in her stiletto heels and raising beaucoup dollars for Proposition 50, the ballot initiative meant to gerrymander California voting maps to counteract a GOP cheat-fest in Texas.
Yes, she’s 85, but she’s no Joe. She is also, however, no spring chicken. So the national debate on whether Democrats need not just fresh but younger candidates has officially landed in the City by the Bay, though Wiener remains both practical and polite enough to not frame it that way.
He’ll leave that to the journalists, who have hounded Pelosi for months to announce whether she will seek another term, a question she has declined to directly answer. Instead, her team has focused on the looming election for Proposition 50 and said any announcement on her future has to wait after the ballots are counted.
To be fair to Pelosi, she’s gone all-in to both fundraise and campaign for the redistricting effort, and its passage is essential to Democrats having even a shot at winning back any power in the midterms.
If Prop. 50 fails, there is no non-miracle path, except perhaps an unexpected blue wave, through which Democrats can retake a chamber. So Nov. 4 isn’t an arbitrary date. It will determine if there is any possibility of checking Trump’s power grab, and preserving democracy. Personally, I don’t fault Pelosi for being engaged in that fight.
To also be fair to Wiener, his decision to announce now was probably driven more by money and political momentum than by Pelosi’s age.
That’s because Pelosi already has a challenger — the ultra-wealthy progressive Saikat Chakrabarti, a startup millionaire who served as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s campaign manager during her first upset win for Congress in 2018. Chakrabarti has long been an antagonist to Pelosi, and recently announced his candidacy, positioning himself as a disrupter.
In 2019, before the House impeached Trump over his questionable actions involving Ukraine, Chakrabarti tweeted, “Pelosi claims we can’t focus on impeachment because it’s a distraction from kitchen table issues. But I’d challenge you to find voters that can name a single thing House Democrats have done for their kitchen table this year. What is this legislative mastermind doing?”
Chakrabarti, who was born the year before Pelosi was first elected to Congress in 1987, has self-funded his campaign with $700,000 and has the financial ability to spend much more. Wiener, in his on-the-down-low shadow campaign, has raised a bit over $1 million, not nearly enough. The primary will be in June and it will be expensive.
Though we have yet to reach Halloween, a stroll down the aisles of any big box store can tell you that Christmas is neigh, a season when fundraising becomes harder — putting pressure on Wiener to raise money as quickly as possible before the winter freeze.
Add to that pressure the fact that Chakrabarti has political skills and growing popularity. He was the tech architect behind a successful push to activate volunteers for both AOC and Bernie Sanders.
An internal poll released a few months ago (and any internal poll must be viewed skeptically) showed Chakrabarti drawing 34% of voters to Pelosi’s 47%. His numbers increased as voters learned more about him — a few have even compared him to New York’s socialist wonder-kid Zohran Mamdani, currently running for mayor against Andrew Cuomo.
The problem with that is that Wiener is not Cuomo. He’s a progressive himself, and one with an established track record of getting stuff done, often progressive stuff.
I’ve watched him for years push ambitious agendas through the statehouse, including bills where I would have bet against him.
Most recently, he wrote the state’s ban on cops, including ICE, wearing masks. Although the feds have said they will ignore the new law, recently signed by Newsom, and it will almost certainly end up in court, it is a worthy message to send about secret police in America.
Wiener also this term passed a controversial housing bill that will increase density around transit hubs, and spearheaded a bill to regulate artificial intelligence.
He has also passed numerous laws protecting immigrant and LGBTQ+ rights, which has made him a favorite target of the far right. He has received death threats on a regular basis for years, including one from an anti-vaxxer who was convicted on seven counts in 2022 after threatening Wiener and being found in possession of weapons. Wiener doesn’t have Pelosi’s charisma, but he has receipts for getting the job done and handling the vicious vitriol of modern politics.
Unlike Chakrabarti, Wiener has also been a part of San Francisco’s insular community for decades, and has his own base of support — though he is considered a moderate to Chakrabarti’s progressiveness. This is where San Francisco gets wonderfully weird. In nearly any other place, Wiener would be solidly left. But some of his constituents view him as too developer-friendly for his housing policies and have criticized his past policies around expanding conservatorships for mentally ill people.
But still, a recent poll done by EMC research but not released publicly found that 61% of likely primary voters have a favorable opinion of Wiener. That vastly outpaces the 21% that said the same about Chakrabarti or even the 21% who liked Pelosi’s daughter, Christine Pelosi, who has also been mentioned as a possible successor.
Which is all to say that Wiener is in a now-or-never moment. He has popularity but needs momentum and cash. The Democratic Party is in a mess, and the old rules are out the window, even in San Francisco.
So waiting for Pelosi had become a little bit like waiting for Godot, a self-imposed limbo that was more likely to lead to frustration than victory.
The Rev. Paul Anthony Daniels knows the names and life stories of the people who sleep in their cars near St. Mary, a century-old church in Palms.
In the past, homeless people have spent the night in St. Mary’s Sunday school room.
So it wasn’t a huge leap for Daniels to think about building affordable housing on the church property.
A place to sleep, bathe and cook “provides a basic dignity” that can turn around someone’s life and also help the neighborhood, said Daniels.
“The unhoused are a part of this community,” he added. “Not only in the sense that we shelter them, but also in the sense that they live literally around the property.”
Across Los Angeles, some religious leaders are sizing up their own properties, encouraged by new legislation making it easier to develop the land.
A California law that went into effect Jan. 1 allows affordable housing projects on property owned by churches, temples, mosques and other religious institutions to bypass an extensive review process and to be built in single-family neighborhoods. The city of Los Angeles is considering even more exemptions.
An aerial view of St. Mary in Palms, center, where some of the land owned by the church may eventually be leased for affordable housing.
(Allen J. Schaben/Los Angeles Times)
In L.A., which has little vacant land, sky-high rents and a homeless population that topped 45,000 at last count, affordable housing proponents view religious institutions — often land-rich but cash-poor — as an untapped resource.
For religious leaders, building their own housing could be a way to fulfill their missions of helping needy people. And with many congregations shrinking as Americans become less religious, revenue from the developments would help make up for dwindling collection boxes.
But some real estate experts question whether many religious organizations will ultimately seek to build, considering the buy-in required from their members and governing boards. Years of construction near their sanctuaries could be a deterrent, as could opposition from neighbors.
Some cities, including Chino, Rancho Palos Verdes, Santa Clarita and Thousand Oaks, opposed the new state law as it was being debated in Sacramento. Then-Beverly Hills Mayor Lili Bosse said it would strip local governments of their power to control development, “overriding carefully crafted, locally informed plans.”
Leaders at St. Mary, an Episcopal church in the Anglo-Catholic tradition, are in the early stages of studying the idea. The small congregation is close-knit, with a few dozen people attending a typical Sunday service in the diminutive, brown-shingled church. An affordable housing project would enrich church coffers, probably through leasing fees paid by the developer.
The St. Mary property includes two main buildings, a house and six parking spaces on a narrow strip of land in a neighborhood of apartment buildings. Daniels, who has led St. Mary since 2022, said it’s too soon to say where on the property the new housing would go.
The Rev. Paul Anthony Daniels, the rector of St. Mary in Palms.
(Allen J. Schaben/Los Angeles Times)
In South Los Angeles, with its abundance of historically Black churches, many congregations are still reeling from the pandemic and a decline in attendance.
Regina Fair, a board member at Bethel AME-Los Angeles, said her church draws a few hundred people on Sundays but has cut back to a single sermon.
Like other churches, Bethel AME, which was founded in 1921, relied on livestreaming during the pandemic lockdown and uses social media to reach younger people. That all means fewer dollars in the collection plate.
“People became OK with doing church in their home, on their couch,” Fair said. “And when you’re not in the church, it makes a big impact on the giving.”
Bethel AME, which faces a stretch of South Western Avenue lined with businesses and apartment buildings, has embarked on a multiyear plan to develop affordable housing on its parking lot.
The 53-unit project, which benefited from city rules intended to fast-track affordable housing, will cater to some of the homeless men who sleep in the church on cots during the winter. The church also plans to build housing on two nearby parcels it owns.
Logos Faith Housing, which is co-developing the property, was started by a pastor to help churches build affordable housing. Bethel is leasing the land to a collection of backers in what the church’s leader, the Rev. Kelvin T. Calloway, describes as a “perfect model” to bring in revenue over a long period.
Calloway has seen gentrification change other neighborhoods in South L.A., leaving fewer worshipers in church pews. That isn’t happening much yet in Bethel AME’s neighborhood of Manchester Square, but “it’s a real possibility,” he said.
Pastor Martin Porter, managing partner of Logos Faith Development LLC, a real estate development company focused on partnering with religious entities, on the parking lot of Bethel AME Church in Los Angeles.
(Myung J. Chun/Los Angeles Times)
“Christianity is in crisis,” said Logos founder Pastor Martin Porter, who leads Quinn African Methodist Episcopal in Moreno Valley. “You’re seeing a lot of empty pews. The natural question is: What do we do with excess property that’s not being used?”
Bethel AME didn’t need the new state law, sponsored by state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), to develop its property.
But in L.A., at least 600 sites owned by faith-based groups in single-family neighborhoods are now eligible to build affordable housing, according to the city Planning Department. City officials couldn’t provide information about whether any applications have been filed under the law in the last eight months.
Wiener predicted it will take a few years for a substantial number of projects to launch — particularly as religious institutions figure out how to approach the opportunity.
“They’re typically not major financial players,” he told The Times. “They’re a church or synagogue, not a development company.”
“This is a big deal,” said Pastor John Oh, project manager of faith in housing at L.A. Voice, a community organization that supported the law.
Oh sees it as a potential “domino” that could lead to more zoning changes in single-family neighborhoods, which have long been treated by political leaders as off-limits for multi-unit development.
The city of L.A.’s planning department has put forward a version that, unlike Wiener’s law, does not require paying construction workers prevailing wages, or, on larger projects, providing them with healthcare.
The proposal, which is expected to come before the City Council in the next six months, is meant to appease affordable housing developers who say that the higher wages and benefits can add 30% to their costs.
Labor unions, including the United Brotherhood of Carpenters, are opposed.
Pete Rodriguez, the brotherhood’s western district vice president, called the proposal “outrageous” and suggested it could worsen the homelessness crisis by impoverishing workers.
“When will the city of L.A. realize that so many of our problems, from homelessness to budget deficits, are caused by the simple fact that too many Angelenos cannot make ends meet?” he said.
Wiener declined to comment on the city’s proposal. He said his law prioritizes protections for construction workers, who can be targets of wage theft.
Some development experts privately question whether religious entities in single-family neighborhoods will want to build affordable housing, in the face of possible resistance.
In Laguna Beach, some residents are protesting a church’s plans to build affordable housing under Wiener’s law. A petition against the development on the property of Neighborhood Congregational Church has collected about 1,500 signatures.
“It affects the entire community by altering the neighborhood’s character and exacerbating existing issues such as traffic congestion and parking shortages,” the petition said.
But Bishop Lovester Adams, who heads Greater New St. Matthew Missionary Baptist Church in a single-family residential area in South L.A., isn’t shying away. He called Wiener’s law and the city proposal “a game changer.”
Adams, who is also a senior associate at Logos Development, said he can’t afford to build housing on his church’s parking lot at 36th and Crawford streets unless the city passes the labor exemption.
The church, which dates to the 1960s, is nestled between homes and duplexes. Church leaders regularly give out food and toys to needy residents.
Attendance has fallen since the pandemic, Adams said. Sunday services draw 50 to 70 people, who fill fewer than half the seats. Some older people stay away because of concerns about COVID-19.
Adams said he wants veterans to live in the new housing: “There is a great need there.”
IKAR CEO Melissa Balaban stands in the foundation’s parking lot where affordable housing will be developed in Los Angeles.
(Genaro Molina/Los Angeles Times)
On South Fairfax Avenue in Mid-Wilshire, the Jewish congregation IKAR is building an affordable housing complex for formerly homeless senior citizens on its parking lot.
The project was built through Mayor Karen Bass’ Executive Directive 1, which fast-tracks affordable housing, said IKAR executive director Melissa Balaban. State legislation pushed by IKAR reduced the amount of required parking.
Balaban said IKAR isn’t relying on the project, which is being funded by a nonprofit developer, to generate revenue for the congregation.
“My hope is that what we’re doing isn’t just going to provide 60 homes but hopefully inspire other faith-based communities,” she said.
In Palms, St. Mary member Julia Bergstrom, 72, is enthusiastic about the idea of affordable housing on the church property.
She has noticed the number of people living in RVs rise and fall, and she finds the years-long wait for Section 8 housing vouchers to be “immoral.”
While she worries about changes to the “very beautiful little church” she has attended since 2008, “it doesn’t stop me, and it doesn’t make me sad about the whole thing,” she said.
While the Democratic National Convention may not be a boon for Chicago’s restaurant industry, local politicians, journalists, and comedians are still planning on sampling the city’s culinary delights this week. Some point to a lack of variety in those diets (we have some suggestions for that); there’s certainly a tendency to stay close to downtown and visit the same North Side neighborhoods. Still, there’s some fun to be had, even if these visitors have limited taste buds and stick with pizza and hot dogs. Eater scoured the convention floor and asked politicians what they put on their hot dogs.
Lori Lightfoot
Former Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot.Scott Olson/Getty Images
After taking a nearly year-long hiatus, Lightfoot returned to the media circuit this week with DNC analysis on CBS Chicago. The former mayor, who chose an unorthodox smorgasbord for her Super Bowl spread in 2019, prefers a “modified Chicago-style” dog.
“Brown mustard, dill pickle slices, tomatoes, sport peppers, and celery salt,” Lightfoot says, “Sometimes also giardiniera instead of the sport peppers. But sometimes if the hot dog is really good and grilled right, just a dog in a bun.”
Jaime Harrison
DNC chair Jamie Harrison.Alex Wong/Getty Images
The DNC chair kept his restaurant plans under wraps but his spokespeople tell us he’s a slaw dog fan. Harrison tops his dog off with chili, coleslaw, relish, ketchup, mustard, and onions.
The Daily Show correspondent Grace Kuhlenschmidt.Arturo Holmes/Getty Images for Tribeca Festival
“I was living in Chicago when the pandemic hit and on the news they started talking about how we were going to go into lockdown,” she says. “My roommate Andrew and I turned to each other like ‘We need to order The Roost NOW.’ So we did and that was the last thing I ate before I started wiping down my groceries.”
During the DNC, Kuhlenschmidt will return to her old favorite and order the House-Style fried chicken sandwich with cheese on a biscuit, plus the chocolate chip bread pudding. When it comes to hot dogs, Kuhlenschmidt took a swipe at Chicago tradition: “When it comes to hot dogs, I need ketchup,” she says. “I really don’t care what Chicago or the National Hot Dog Association say. Ketchup is a divine condiment.”
DNC senior advisor Keiana Barrett (the chief diversity & engagement officer for developer Sterling Bay) plans on sticking close to McCormick Place and patronizing Williams Inn, the pizzeria and sports bar in the South Loop, owned by the same Black family as Jeffery Pub, one of the oldest queer bars in the country. She’ll start with the hot wings, “fried hard” with ranch dressing, and deep-dish pizza with mushrooms. Barrett only eats turkey hot dogs and prefers them grilled with mustard, barbecue sauce, relish, pickle, and a dash of seasoned salt.
Christy George
DNC executive director Christy George.Brian Cassella/Chicago Tribune/Tribune News Service via Getty Images
Winner of the 2022 Banchet Award for Best Alternative Dining, Sinhá should expect a visit from the DNC’s executive director Christy George (Gov. Pritzker’s first assistant deputy governor for budget and economy). Among her top picks at the Brazilian restaurant: mango salsa, plantains, chicken curry, and steak.
“Best Brazilian food in the city recently had it and can’t wait to go back,” George tells Eater — not that there are a ton of Brazilian options in Chicago. “Their patio is intimate and beautiful, it’s a local woman-owned restaurant, and the food is killer.”
When it comes to hot dogs, George ignores Chicago-style rules.
“Ketchup and mustard, unapologetically,” she says.
Don Harmon
Illinois Senate President Don Harmon.Brian Cassella/Chicago Tribune/Tribune News Service via Getty Images
The Illinois state senate president hasn’t had much time to sit down and dine during the DNC.
“I wish I had been eating anywhere but off the fat of the land, wherever food is put in front of me from reception to reception,” Harmon says on the convention floor on Tuesday before the delegates cast their vote for Vice President Kamala Harris.
“Hot dogs you’ve only got three choices: you can eat it Chicago-style, you can eat it with mustard and onions, or you can eat it plain,” Harmon says, adding that he’ll eat any of those three options depending on the circumstance.
“If I can’t spill I’m not above a plain hot dog, mustard, and onions when I’m low-key and Chicago style if someone else is fixing it,” he says.
A controversial bill that seeks to protect Californians from artificial intelligence-driven catastrophes has caused uproar in the tech industry. This week, the legislation passed a key committee but with amendments to make it more palatable to Silicon Valley.
SB 1047, from state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), is set to go to the state Assembly floor later this month. If it passes the Legislature, Gov. Gavin Newsom will have to decide whether to sign or veto the groundbreaking legislation.
The bill’s backers say it will create guardrails to prevent rapidly advancing AI models from causing disastrous incidents, such as shutting down the power grid without warning. They worry that the technology is developing faster than its human creators can control.
Lawmakers aim to incentive developers to handle the technology responsibly and empower the state’s attorney general to impose penalties in the event of imminent threat or harm. The legislation also requires developers to be able to turn off the AI models they control directly if things go awry.
But some tech companies, such as Facebook owner Meta Platforms, and politicians including influential U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont), say the bill would stifle innovation. Some critics say it focuses on apocalyptic, far-off scenarios, rather than the more immediate concerns such as privacy and misinformation, though there are other bills that address these matters.
SB 1047 is one of roughly 50 AI-related bills that have been brought up in the state Legislature, as worries have grown about the technology’s effects on jobs, disinformation and public safety. As politicians work to create new laws to put guardrails on the fast-growing industry, some companies and talent are suing AI companies in hopes that courts can set ground rules.
Wiener, who represents San Francisco — the home of AI startups OpenAI and Anthropic — has been in the middle of the debate.
On Thursday, he made significant changes to his bill that some believe weaken the legislation while making it more likely for the Assembly to pass.
The amendments removed a perjury penalty from the bill and changed the legal standard for developers regarding the safety of their advanced AI models.
Additionally, a plan to create a new government entity, which would have been called the Frontier Model Division, is no longer in the works. Under the original text, the bill would have required developers to submit their safety measures to the newly created division. In the new version, developers would submit those safety measures to the attorney general.
“I do think some of those changes might make it more likely to pass,” said Christian Grose, a USC political science and public policy professor.
Eight California House members — Khanna, Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose), Anna G. Eshoo (D-Menlo Park), Scott Peters (D-San Diego), Tony Cárdenas (D-Pacoima), Ami Bera (D-Elk Grove), Nanette Diaz Barragan (D-San Pedro) and Lou Correa (D-Santa Ana) — wrote a letter to Newsom on Thursday encouraging him to veto the bill if it passes the state Assembly.
“[Wiener] really is cross pressured in San Francisco between people who are experts in this area, who have been telling him and others in California that AI can be dangerous if we don’t regulate it and then those whose paychecks, their cutting edge research, is from AI,” Grose said. “This could be a real flash point for him, both pro and con, for his career.”
Some tech giants say they are open to regulation but disagree with Wiener’s approach.
“We are aligned with the way (Wiener) describes the bill and the goals that he has, but we remain concerned about the impact of the bill on AI innovation, particularly in California, and particularly on open source innovation,” Kevin McKinley, Meta’s state policy manager, said in a meeting with L.A. Times editorial board members last week.
Meta is one of the companies with a collection of open source AI models called Llama, which allows developers to build on top of it for their own products. Meta released Llama 3 in April and there have already been 20 million downloads, the tech giant said.
Meta declined to discuss the new amendments. Last week, McKinley said SB 1047 is “actually a really hard bill to red line and fix.”
A spokesperson for Newsom said his office does not typically comment on pending legislation.
“The Governor will evaluate this bill on its merits should it reach his desk,” spokesperson Izzy Gardon wrote in an email.
San Francisco AI startup Anthropic, which is known for its AI assistant Claude, signaled it could support the bill if it was amended. In a July 23 letter to Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland), Anthropic’s state and local policy lead Hank Dempsey proposed changes including shifting the bill to focus on holding companies responsible for causing catastrophes rather than pre-harm enforcement.
Wiener said the amendments took Anthropic’s concerns into account.
“We can advance both innovation and safety,” Wiener said in a statement. “The two are not mutually exclusive.”
It is unclear whether the amendments will change Anthropic’s position on the bill. On Thursday, Anthropic said in a statement that it would review the new “bill language as it becomes available.”
Russell Wald, deputy director at Stanford University’s HAI, which aims to advance AI research and policy, said he still opposes the bill.
“Recent amendments appear to be more about optics than substance,” Wald said in a statement. “It looks less controversial to appease a couple of leading AI companies but does little to address real concerns from academic institutions and open-source communities.”
It is a fine balance for lawmakers that are trying to weigh concerns about AI while also supporting the state’s tech sector.
“What a lot of us are trying to do is figure out a regulatory environment that allows for some of those guardrails to exist while not stifling innovation and the economic growth that comes with AI,” Wicks said after Thursday’s committee meeting.
Times staff writer Anabel Sosa contributed to this report.
Imagine a California where you can buy a beer at your favorite bar or restaurant, take it outside and drink it on the street with a friend. That could soon be a reality, if state and local officials clear the way.
A bill proposed by California Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) would allow the consumption of alcohol on public streets in zones designated for tippling.
The proposed legislation, Senate Bill 969, would give municipalities and counties the power, starting in 2025, to designate local “entertainment zones” where people could consume “alcoholic beverages on public streets, sidewalks, or public rights of way,” according to the bill.
Wiener says the legislation could help revitalize California’s downtown districts, where businesses have struggled since the pandemic eviscerated foot traffic.
“People want to be outdoors; they want to gather with their community,” said Wiener. “We have these very strict alcohol laws in California that sometimes need to be made more flexible.
“This is really about giving cities the ability to decide what works for their public spaces,” he added. “And for some cities, whether it’s in the downtown area or a town square or a particular block, they should have the ability to create an entertainment zone to allow bars and restaurants to sell both food and alcohol onto the street. Let’s allow people to enjoy themselves with their friends and neighbors.”
Current laws allow street festivals to get one-day permits for vendors to sell alcohol for consumption on public streets. Wiener believes that should be extended to local businesses.
A University of Toronto study showed that many downtown areas in California are getting 60% to 90% of the traffic they saw in 2019. For downtown Los Angeles, the figure is 83%; San Francisco has 67%; and Sacramento is at 66%.
San Francisco and San Jose have given the bill their support.
“When safely implemented, SB 969 would make it easier for local businesses to host block parties, wine walks and events that bring us all together to help drive the vibrant future of our downtown,” said San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan in a statement.
The entertainment zones designated by municipalities would have specific days and hours of operation, like any business; people wouldn’t be free to imbibe in the street whenever they please. And California Penal Code Section 647(f) would continue to make it a crime to be intoxicated in public. Bars and restaurants would still be subject to state law that does not allow for the sale of alcohol between 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m.
Wiener proposed similar legislation in 2021 and last year; both passed the Senate unanimously. But they ran into trouble in the Assembly’s Appropriations Committee, which blocked the entertainment zone provisions in 2022, then watered down and limited them to San Francisco County in 2023.
The 2024 bill has not yet been referred to a committee.
That’s the premise of a new bill in the California Senate that would require vehicles sold in the state to be equipped with speed governors to limit how fast they can go.
The proposal from Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) is part of a package of bills that he hopes will reduce traffic injuries and deaths in the Golden State.
“There’s no reason why people should routinely be allowed to drive more than 10 miles per hour above the speed limit,” Wiener said in an interview with The Times. “You can want whatever you want. But that doesn’t mean you’re allowed to do it and that doesn’t mean you should be physically able to do it.”
The measure, Senate Bill 961, would require every passenger vehicle, truck and bus manufactured or sold in California to have speed governors starting in 2027. The devices would use GPS technology or cameras to verify the speed limit in a particular area and slow a speeding vehicle down if it approaches 10 mph over the limit.
Wiener said he is open to changes in the bill — for example, whether to require active or passive speed governors.
Active speed governors would actually reduce the speed of cars that hit the 10 mph limit, while passive ones would make some sort of annoying sound or buzz to warn drivers to slow down.
The European Union passed legislation that will require passive speed governors in all cars sold in member countries starting in July.
The legislation is likely to be met with some opposition from certain trucking groups that have similarly opposed federal legislation regarding speed governors.
Todd Spencer, president of the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Assn., opposes the legislation, which he believes is not the correct way to make roads safer. Spencer advocates for increased police presence to monitor speeders, but said that changes in speed are sometimes necessary to drive safely.
“There are times drivers may want to speed up enough to switch lanes, to move away from certain unsafe situations. Our preference is for drivers to have the maximum ability to do that. We don’t think technology or even most well-intentioned regulations should obstruct that,” Spencer said.
But Wiener says surging traffic deaths in California — 4,400 people died in crashes in 2022, a 22% increase from 2019 — make the legislation a safety imperative.
In Los Angeles, there were more traffic deaths in 2023 than homicides — the first time that has occurred in a decade.
“This is a technology that exists. It’s in operation right now, and it will save lives,” Wiener said.
While the senator acknowledged there would be pushback, he noted that every car safety requirement has run into some degree of opposition when proposed, before becoming a given. Wiener cited requirements for seat belts, child car seats and motorcycle helmets as examples.
Weiner’s package of bills introduced this week — which he has dubbed Speeding and Fatality Emergency Reduction (SAFER) on California Streets — would also require underride guardrails on trucks to prevent cars and motorcycles from being pulled under the bigger vehicles in a crash.
NEW YORK—Concluding a protracted legal battle in which the popular singer-songwriter stood accused of plagiarism, a federal jury found Thursday that singer-songwriter Ed Sheeran did not infringe upon anyone’s intellectual property with his song “I Wish I Were An Oscar Mayer Wiener.” “What you need to understand is that pop songs are harmonically and lyrically very simple, so yes, my song may use a similar chord progression and the exact same lyrics as a famous jingle used to sell hot dogs, but that doesn’t make it a copyright violation,” said Sheeran, who testified in his own defense, telling the Manhattan courtroom that ruling in favor of the plaintiff, processed meat purveyor Oscar Mayer, would have a chilling effect on artistic expressions of wanting to be an Oscar Mayer wiener. “It’s all part of the folk music process. Long before anyone thought of advertising hot dogs on television, Leadbelly and Woody Guthrie sang of how an Oscar Mayer wiener is what they’d truly like to be, and you can trace this through to the Beatles and Bob Marley, who each in their own way sang about how, if they were Oscar Mayer wieners, everyone would be in love with them. The theme of envying an Oscar Meyer wiener continues today, especially in hip-hop, and will be here long after we’re gone.” Shortly after the verdict was read, Sheeran reportedly attended a ceremony at which multiplatinum certification was awarded to his album My Bologna Has A First Name.
:format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25583036/2167476619.jpg)
:format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25583029/2156575581.jpg)
:format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25583042/2160837780.jpg)
:format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25583045/2161970876.jpg)
