Category: US

The Los Angeles City Council voted Tuesday to prohibit homeless people from setting up tents within 500 feet of schools and day-care centers, during a raucous meeting where protesters shouted down council members and, at one point, brought the meeting to a halt.

The new restrictions, approved on an 11-3 vote, dramatically expand the number of locations where sleeping and camping are off-limits. And they come amid a furious debate about how the city should respond to encampments that have taken hold in many parts of the city.

Audience members repeatedly chanted “shut it down” as Councilmember Joe Buscaino, a longtime proponent of increased enforcement, attempted to speak in favor of the restrictions. Council President Nury Martinez then stopped the meeting for more than an hour so police could clear the room.

After audience members had exited, council members reconvened, discussed the measure and voted.

“I think people were trying this morning to shut this place down and keep us from doing the very job that we were all elected to do,” Martinez said before the vote. “And that, I think, is incredibly disturbing.”

Under the new restrictions, people would be prohibited from sitting, sleeping, lying or storing property within 500 feet of every public and private school, not just the few dozen selected by the council over the last year.

Councilmember Marqueece Harris-Dawson, who represents South Los Angeles, voted against the restrictions, telling reporters they would move the city toward an “inhumanity that is beneath the citizens of the city.”

Councilmember Mike Bonin, another opponent of the restrictions, said city leaders should devote their energy instead toward improving programs that aid homeless Angelenos, such as those that help people with housing vouchers secure an apartment.

“We need to have a relentless, exclusive focus on getting people indoors,” said Bonin, who represents coastal neighborhoods from Los Angeles International Airport north to Pacific Palisades.

Councilwoman Nithya Raman, whose district includes the Hollywood Hills, also voted against the proposal. A second and final vote will be required next week.

Bonin predicted the changes would result in a roughly tenfold increase in the number of sites subject to enforcement, taking it from more than 200 to about 2,000. The city’s supporting documents on the proposal did not give a clear figure showing how many sites would be covered.

Los Angeles Unified School District officials told The Times that about 750 school sites are within the city limits, a figure that does not include private or parochial schools. Nearly 1,000 commercial day-care businesses are registered with the city’s Office of Finance, although it’s not clear whether all of those locations would be covered by the city’s new law.

Tuesday’s vote came more than two months after Alberto M. Carvalho, superintendent of the Los Angeles Unified School District, made a surprise in-person appearance before council members to ask for the new restrictions. Parents and school staff have also spoken out in favor of the changes, saying they have observed erratic or even violent behavior on or near school campuses.

Martha Alvarez, who oversees government relations for the school district, told the council that LA Unified had found 120 campuses with encampments over the last year.

“These conditions are a public health hazard,” she said. “They are unsafe and traumatic for students, families and staff as they enter school campuses.”

Buscaino also spoke in favor, saying he has already been working to open more beds for homeless people across the city.

“I’ve supported Bridge Home shelters. I’ve supported tiny homes, Project Roomkey, Project Homekey, permanent supportive housing,” Buscaino said. “But what I don’t support are drug dens near our schools, parks or anywhere children congregate.”

A woman and schoolchildren walk past a homeless encampment near Larchmont Charter School in August 2021.

(Francine Orr/Los Angeles Times)

The new school year starts Aug. 15.

Foes of the proposal have repeatedly argued the council’s restrictions would effectively outlaw poverty, leading to the deaths of homeless Angelenos. Prohibiting encampments around schools, they said, would simply push people and their belongings a block or two away.

“There are a lot of people who are struggling right now, and we should be helping them,” said Andrew Graebner, appearing before the council.

The council’s actions also drew opposition from PATH, or People Assisting the Homeless, which builds low-income housing with supportive services. Tyler Renner, a spokesman for the organization, said the restrictions would waste time and city resources.

“Enforcement of anti-camping ordinances… only displaces people and makes it harder for trained outreach staff to establish trust again,” he said in a statement.

The new restrictions come as city officials are gradually closing one of the signature programs set up to help the homeless during the COVID-19 pandemic: Project Roomkey, which turned multi-story hotels into makeshift shelters.

Those facilities allowed the city to bring far more people indoors than it had before, at a time when the congregate shelter system, where many people sleep in a single room, had to operate well below capacity under social distancing guidelines.

The Mayfair Hotel, which provided 252 rooms under the program, recently ended its participation. The LA Grand Hotel downtown and the Highland Gardens Hotel in Hollywood, which provided a combined 553 rooms, are scheduled to cease operation as Project Roomkey sites at the end of the month, according to Brian Buchner, the city’s homelessness coordinator.

The Airtel Plaza Hotel, which has provided 237 rooms, is set to end its participation in the program on Sept. 30.

Buchner said there are “active discussions” at City Hall and the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority about extending the deadline at one or more of those facilities.

Tuesday’s vote represents a shift in the city’s approach on enforcement of its anti-camping law, reducing the amount of discretion wielded by individual council members and establishing a more sweeping policy. That’s a major contrast from last summer, when backers of the law pitched it as a narrow and targeted measure, with enforcement accompanied by offers of services from outreach workers.

Over the last year, permanent metal signs setting deadlines for homeless people to leave have been posted at more than 200 locations, 33 of them schools or day-care centers. At some locations, tents and makeshift shelters have remained weeks or months past the deadline, as outreach workers struggled to persuade people to move voluntarily.

Although some sites are now clear of tents and encampments, others later had more people living on the sidewalk than they did when outreach workers initially assessed the spots.

City and county officials, along with homeless services providers, previously told The Times that an insufficient number of outreach workers and a lack of interim housing options have hindered the implementation of the law.

Foes of the council’s homelessness strategy have repeatedly called for the restrictions on sidewalk camping to be rescinded. Some of those critics are now leading candidates in the Nov. 8 election.

Accountant Kenneth Mejia, front-runner in the race to replace City Controller Ron Galperin, said the new rules would render about one-fifth of the city’s sidewalks off-limits to homeless people. On social media, he has repeatedly criticized the city’s anti-encampment law, which focuses not just on schools and day-care centers, but also requires that sidewalks offer 36 inches of passage for wheelchair users.

Councilmember Paul Koretz, who trailed Mejia by nearly 20 percentage points last month, voted in favor of the new law.

The new anti-encampment law is also an issue in other contests. Civil rights lawyer Faisal Gill, now running to succeed City Atty. Mike Feuer, has previously promised not to enforce the ordinance, saying it is unconstitutional and will be struck down by the US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Gill’s opponent, attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto, declined to take a position on the measure when contacted by The Times.

“The validity, interpretation and enforceability of the [anti-encampment] ordinance will certainly come before the next LA city attorney,” she said in a statement. “And if I am the city attorney, I would want the opportunity to consult with my clients — LA City Council — before taking a fixed position.”

One citywide contest where there is some agreement on the council’s approach is the race for mayor. US Rep. Karen Bass and real estate developer Rick Caruso, both running for mayor, have come out in favor of the restrictions on encampments near schools and day-care centers.

WASHINGTON — The Senate on Tuesday passed legislation expanding lifesaving health care benefits for Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans exposed to toxic burn pits.

The 86-11 vote came after Republicans agreed to lift their blockade of the popular bill, caving to pressure from more than 60 veterans groups — and comedian Jon Stewart — who had railed against Republicans for days outside the Capitol.

Many of the veterans who had camped on the Senate steps, braving heat, humidity and thunderstorms, watched the vote from the gallery in the Senate chamber. The bill has already cleared the House and now heads to President Joe Biden’s desk for his signature.

“This critical legislation will start helping our veterans and their families that are currently fighting their own health battles due to toxic exposure from their military service on Day One of it being signed into law,” said Jen Burch, 35, a retired Air Force staff sergeant who suffers from numerous ailments she believes was caused by exposure to burn pits and open sewage ponds in Afghanistan.

With the passage of the PACT Act, “veterans across America can breathe a sigh of relief,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, DN.Y., said on the floor before walking outside the Capitol with Veterans Affairs Chairman Jon Tester, D-Mont ., to thank the vets for their advocacy. “The treatment that they have deserved and have needed but have been denied because of the VA, because of all sorts of legal barriers and presumptions, will now be gone.

“Veterans who were exposed to the toxic fumes of burn pits will be treated by the VA like they should have been from the very beginning,” Schumer added.

Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa, had been one of the Republicans holding up the bill as he demanded a vote on his amendment to put spending guardrails in place to ensure some of the massive $280 billion package over 10 years couldn’t be spent on ” completely unrelated programs.” Democrats disputed Toomey’s characterization, saying the money would only be spent on veterans.

“I’m supposed to trust this and future congresses not to go on a spending spree? Seriously? That’s unbelievable,” Toomey said before the vote. “Why did they design this feature so that they could go on a spending spree?”

Toomey had insisted that his amendment be brought to the floor with a 50-vote, simple-majority threshold. In the end, he and other Republicans gave into Schumer’s demands that three GOP amendments would receive votes with a higher 60-vote threshold, essentially ensuring their defeat. All fell well below that bar.

The Senate had already voted 84-14 to pass the burn pits bill in June, but 25 Republican yea votes reversed course when the legislation came up again last week, with many echoing Toomey’s spending concerns and arguing that Democrats did not give them a chance to amend the package. Democrats and veterans argued, however, that many Republicans were voting against the bill in retaliation for the massive deal on climate change, health care and taxes that Democrats had just crafted.

With some veterans literally sleeping on the steps on the Capitol over the weekend, the Republican blockade became increasingly untenable.

“I think they’re fraying in terms of their ability to withstand this,” Stewart, who has also fought for funding for 9/11 first responders and their, told NBC News before Tuesday’s deal was announced.

“I think this is cruel and unusual punishment that’s going on and they’ve got to end this.”

Ali Vitaly and Frank ThorpV contributed.

Two Hellfire missiles ended al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri’s life in a safehouse balcony in a wealthy neighborhood in Kabul, the capital of Afghanistan, at 6:18 am Sunday, a senior administration official said Monday.

The missiles were launched by an unmanned aerial vehicle, or drone, killing him instantly.

The nature of the strike as described by a senior administration official signals that the US may have used the R9X Hellfire variant, also known as the “Ninja” or “Flying Ginsu” missile, nicknamed for knives famously sold on TV in the 1980s. This variant has been used in the recent past to kill other extremist leaders.

The R9X Hellfire has six blades that rotate at high speed and deploy before impact — instead of conventional warhead explosives, according to Janes, a defense intelligence provider. The missile pierces and cuts its target, rather than blowing it up. The design makes it easier to take out an intended target, while lessening the likelihood of causing additional casualties.

The White House has not shared details about the type of Hellfire missiles used. A reporter asked a senior administration official on a call Monday about the nature of the missile, but the official did not answer.

The senior administration official who briefed reporters said the strike only killed al-Zawahiri, avoiding civilian casualties and that the strike did not completely destroy the safehouse where al-Zawahiri was hiding with his family. It is unclear whether the missiles inflicted structural damage beyond the patio. Two intelligence sources familiar with the matter said the CIA carried out the strike.

Hellfire missiles are air-to-surface missiles initially designed for anti-armor strikes, but later versions have been used for precision drone strikes. The arms manufacturer Lockheed Martin developed the missiles with the name “Heliborne, Laser, Fire, and Forget Missile,” which evolved into the Hellfire missile, as it is now known.

The R9X variant was initially deployed in secret in 2017, according to a US Army equipment guide, and was used to kill Abu Khayr al-Masri, a member of al Qaeda’s leadership.

Photos of the aftermath on social media showed the car where al-Masri was purportedly killed as having damage to the passenger compartment of the beige Kia sedan but no damage to the engine block. The roof was blown open on the right side of the vehicle.

The Hellfire variant became public knowledge after it was used in 2019 to take out Jamal Ahmad Mohammad Al Badawi, who was behind the 2000 USS Cole Bombing.

The Wall Street Journal reported in 2019 that a weapon similar to the R9X was considered as an alternative way to kill former al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in 2011, but officials ultimately decided to use special forces fighters.

NORFOLK, Va. (AP) — A former police officer in Virginia should not be criminally charged but should be investigated for potential civil rights violations after he pepper-sprayed, struck and handcuffed a Black US Army lieutenant during a 2020 traffic stop, a special prosecutor has determined.

The prosecutor’s findings are the latest fallout from a confrontation involving two police officers and a uniformed military officer that drew outrage and national attention to the small town of Windsor, about 70 miles (113 kilometers) southeast of Richmond.

The man who was pulled over, Caron Nazario, was never charged. Video of the December 2020 traffic stop surfaced in April 2021 after Nazario sued in federal court, alleging that his constitutional rights were violated. The images sparked outrage and served as a grim reminder to many Black Americans that a military uniform doesn’t necessarily protect against mistreatment by police.

In December, then-Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring’s office sued the town, alleging that it operated in a way that discriminated against Black Americans.

One of the officers, Joe Gutierrez, was fired from the department. He was the target of the special prosecutor’s criminal probe.

“Although I find the video very disturbing and frankly unsettling, Gutierrez’s use of force to remove Nazario did not violate state law as he had given multiple commands for Nazario to exit the vehicle,” special prosecutor Anton Bell said in his report, dated July 29 and posted online by Nazario’s attorneys.

“The problematic issue, however, were Gutierrez’s statements throughout the entire order, which would lead a reasonable person to wonder whether underlying bias was at the root of how and why Nazario was treated in like manner,” Bell wrote.

Bell’s findings were first reported Monday by The Virginian-Pilot newspaper.

The incident began when Nazario was driving home from his duty station, according to his lawsuit. Officer Daniel Crocker radioed that he was attempting to stop a vehicle with no rear license plate and tinted windows.

story continues

Crocker said the driver was “eluding police” and he considered it a “high-risk traffic stop,” according to a report that’s included in the lawsuit. One of Nazario’s attorneys, Jonathan Arthur, later explained that Nazario was trying to stop in a well-lit area “for officer safety and out of respect for the officers.”

The other officer, Gutierrez, was driving by and decided to join the traffic stop, the lawsuit stated. By the time the two officers reached Nazario’s SUV, the license plate was visible in the rear.

When Nazario stopped at a well-lit gas station, the two officers immediately drew their guns and pointed them at Nazario, his lawsuit alleges. The officers then attempted to pull Nazario out of the vehicle while he continued to keep his hands in the air. Gutierrez pepper-sprayed Nazario multiple times as the officers yelled for him to get out.

At one point, Gutierrez told Nazario he was “fixin’ to ride the lightning,” a reference to the electric chair that was also a line from the movie “The Green Mile,” a film about a Black man facing execution, the lawsuit said .

Nazario got out and asked for a supervisor. Gutierrez responded with “knee-strikes” to his legs from him, knocking him to the ground, the lawsuit says. The two officers struck him multiple times, then handcuffed and interrogated him.

The traffic stop was captured on Nazario’s cellphone as well as the officer’s body-worn cameras.

Tom Roberts, another attorney representing Nazario, told The Associated Press on Tuesday that a judge or a jury, not a special prosecutor, should have determined whether Gutierrez violated the law.

“I think that there’s sufficient evidence to show that he was intentional in his actions,” Roberts said. “And I believe that he exceeded any authority to use force, and therefore he committed assault and battery.”

Roberts said that it would have been a misdemeanor offense, for which the statute of limitations is one year, well before the special prosecutor released his findings.

“All too often, when it comes to law enforcement violating the laws, we see our Commonwealth’s Attorneys fail to apply the same zeal at prosecuting law enforcement as they do with other offenders,” Roberts’ firm said in a statement.

John Becker Mumford Jr., an attorney listed for Gutierrez in Nazario’s lawsuit, did not respond to an email seeking comment.

Bell, the special prosecutor, wrote that he asked the local US Attorney’s Office to review the case for possible civil rights violations. Karoline Foote, a spokeswoman for the US Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia, said Tuesday that the office had no comment.

In February, the town of Windsor asked a court to dismiss the state attorney general’s lawsuit, arguing that it only refers to one person — Nazario — “in a cursory and inconclusive manner.”

Jason Miyares, who defeated Herring in November’s election, took over as Virginia’s AG in January. Victoria LaCivita, a spokeswoman for Miyares’ office, said Tuesday that the lawsuit is still pending.