Mayor Karen Bass was absent from Monday evening’s first debate of the Los Angeles mayoral campaign with three challengers criticizing the state of the city and vowing to make changes to improve housing, homelessness and transportation.
Bass had declined the invitation by debate organizers, the Housing Action Coalition and Streets For All — two advocacy organizations focused on housing and transportation policy. The two groups organized the debate, titled “Shaping Los Angeles: A Debate About the Future of LA,” at L.A. Center Studios in downtown Los Angeles.
“While the mayor can’t participate in every debate invitation, she’s eager to discuss her record of changing LA and her vision for the future of Los Angeles,” according to a statement from Bass’ reelection campaign.
Bass’ campaign elaborated that she could not attend the debate due to a scheduling conflict. Bass’ team said she will be participating in multiple debates, including two televised debates.
City Councilwoman Nithya Raman, community organizer Rae Huang and nonprofit founder and tech executive Adam Miller were the only participants.
Reality television personality Spencer Pratt, who is also seeking to deny Bass a second term, did not attend the debate as well. A spokesperson for Pratt’s campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Meanwhile, the mayoral debate Monday night served as an opportunity for Raman, Miller and Huang to distinguish themselves and share their vision for Los Angeles.
“This election comes at a critical moment for L.A.,” said Jesse Zwick, Southern California director of the Housing Action Coalition.
“Too many people are being priced out of housing or living without shelter, while at the same time housing construction lags far behind where it needs to be to reduce costs and provide enough housing for the unhoused. We need to hear directly from the candidates what they plan to do to make L.A. more affordable and reduce homelessness.”
Debate organizers asked questions regarding topics that polls showed were top concerns for voters, including the high cost of housing, homelessness and the need for improved infrastructure and transit systems.
Miller’s opening statement set the tone of the debate, noting “The city is broken. It’s broken physically.”
“It’s become a hard place to live. And I think we’re going to find tonight that we agree that the city is broken,” Miller said.
Miller touted his military experience, and expertise in operating nonprofits.
Raman, who represents the 4th Council District, also listed what she described as her accomplishments in housing and transportation policy.
Huang emphasized the need for new and fresh leadership.
“We need grounded, moral and courageous leadership in this moment of our city and country,” she said. “Leadership that cannot be bought any longer or determined behind closed doors.”
All three candidates criticized Bass for not participating in the debate, and promising not to “hide in my mansion,” as Raman put it.
The candidates all expressed support for building more housing, but had distinct ways to achieve that goal.
Huang described her vision of building more government-owned housing, including multi-family buildings in areas now zoned for single-family homes. Raman shared a similar plan, though building more housing at a more gradual pace.
Miller called for a more holistic approach, but offered few details, and touched upon his experience as an investor in an affordable housing modular manufacturing company.
On Measure ULA, the so-called “mansion tax,” Raman discussed her plans to reform the 2022-voter approved measure, which has generated more than $1 billion for affordable housing production and homeless prevention initiatives. Raman is seeking to carve out or exempt new multifamily construction from the tax for about 15 years, and to allow traditional lenders in funding housing projects.
The measure has been criticized for slowing down and harming affordable housing production. There’s also potential threats to the measure at the state level that aims to eliminate Measure ULA.
Huang doubled down her support on the measure, saying that “We should not be giving tax breaks to developers.”
While not outright saying he would rescind or eliminate the measure, Miller said it has detracted from real estate investment in the city and it needs to change.
As Miller predicted, all three candidates agreed the city is falling apart. Miller and Huang took an opportunity to point out that Raman contributed to that issue as a member of the City Council.
“I think we have made disastrous fiscal decisions here in City Hall that have led us to this moment where it takes a year to fix a streetlight, where it takes months to fix a pothole,” Raman said.
Raman defended herself while also recognizing that past decisions made by City Council and Bass led to the city’s precarious financial status. Raman said she voted against a costly police contract and later a $6 billion-plan to expand the Convention Center after the city closed a nearly $1 billion deficit.
“I spoke up against that as well because all of these fiscal indiscretions are being taken from our city’s essential services,” Raman said.