Council debates Measure ULA changes, authorizes City Attorney to draft narrow wildfire exception after daylong public comment

The Los Angeles City Council spent much of its June 17 meeting weighing whether to change the voter-approved Measure ULA and how to protect funding the measure provides for eviction prevention, affordable-housing construction and tenant legal defense.

After hours of public testimony from labor unions, tenant advocates and residents, the council voted to instruct the City Attorney to prepare ballot language for a narrowly defined exception to ULA to aid homeowners who lost property in the recent Palis fires. Council President announced the motion passed and the vote to send the item for drafting carried in a recorded roll call of those present.

Why it matters: Measure ULA is the citys primary locally controlled revenue stream for affordable housing and eviction-prevention programs. Dozens of speakers told the council the measure is either essential to preventing homelessness or, alternatively, is slowing housing production and needs technical changes. The councils action keeps a narrowly scoped relief measure on the table while preserving the larger policy debate for future consideration.

Public testimony was extensive and sharply divided. Miguel Guzmn, speaking for the carpentersunion, told the council he and colleagues support changes that would accelerate construction but insisted any reform must follow legal guidance: "If it needs to go to the ballot, let the voters decide," he said. Dozens of tenant advocates and users of eviction-defense services urged the council to avoid rolling back the measures protections; one tenant advocate said those programs had kept families off the street.

Council members framed the choice as one of protecting services while exploring fixes. Several members said committee work had produced technical proposals to improve implementation and speed up housing production; others warned that changes could weaken long-term protections and reduce funds for legal defense and prevention programs.

Council procedure and next steps: Councilmembers instructed the City Attorney and staff to draft language for a narrow wildfire recovery exception, and asked the City Administrative Officer and Chief Legislative Analyst to provide a legal and fiscal memorandum on the likely budgetary and implementation effects of any proposed amendment or ballot measure. The council also referred several broader charter amendments and governance proposals to ad hoc committees and requested further analysis before any final ballot decision.

Other items: The meeting also advanced several charter reform items and a parks funding amendment that phases in increased park designations over 10 years with an emergency escape clause. The parks amendment won support after councilmembers negotiated an implementation plan and asked staff for a fiscal impact memo. The council also adopted referrals to study changes to airport and port governance to increase local representation and add workforce-accountability provisions.

What the votes show: On the narrow wildfire exception, the councils direction to the City Attorney carried with a broad majority. Separate amendments and ballot referrals advanced in committee votes or were remanded for more legal and fiscal work; one council amendment that would have put a broader package directly on the ballot failed in committee, while other items passed for further drafting.

Whats next: City attorneys and analysts will return with draft ballot language and fiscal and legal analyses; several items remain in committee. The council repeatedly emphasized it was not making final policy changes in the chamber that day but was preserving options for legal drafting and public review.

Reporting note: Quotes and attributions in this article come from speakers identified on the public record and from the council chamber transcript of the June 17 meeting. Where speakers were not named in the record, statements are reported descriptively and left unattributed.