Angelenos at Van Nuys hearing urge alternatives to mayor’s proposed FY25‑26 cuts and layoffs

Council members held a public comment session in Van Nuys on the mayor’s proposed fiscal year 2025–26 budget, where dozens of residents, nonprofit leaders and city employees urged changes to the plan and warned of direct impacts if proposed cuts go forward.

Speakers focused on the mayor’s proposal to cut about 1,600 city positions and to restructure or eliminate several small, specialized departments and programs. Testimony described the effect of proposed layoffs on services that residents said are essential: senior centers and home‑delivered meals, animal shelter staffing and spay/neuter programs, day labor centers and immigrant legal assistance, city planners and transportation staff who design streets and housing projects, and civilian LAPD positions that handle records and investigations.

The hearing drew repeated pleas to preserve services for older adults. Multiple speakers, including Stephanie Galloway, president and CEO of Valley Intercommunity Council, and representatives of 1 Generation and Bernardi Senior Center, said seniors rely on daily meals, transportation and case management and urged the council not to eliminate the Department of Aging or to fold aging services into a larger department without a dedicated leader. "If there's anything that we need for these baby boomers is more money," Galloway said.

Animal welfare advocates called attention to cuts proposed for Los Angeles Animal Services and to long‑frozen spay/neuter voucher rates. Speakers from Michelson Found Animals, Community Animal Medicine Project (CAMP) and shelter volunteers said the department receives under 1% of the city's budget, cited rising shelter intake and euthanasia figures, and asked the committee to restore at least $5 million that advocates said the mayor’s plan removes from animal services. "Investing in spay/neuter saves lives and taxpayer money," said Jen Naitake of Michelson Found Animals.

Immigrant‑serving organizations and operators of city day labor centers pressed for funding of Represent LA and the city’s day labor programs, which multiple speakers said are currently budgeted at $0 in the mayor’s proposal. Advocates from CARECEN, Hope the Mission and other groups urged the council to fund $4 million for Represent LA and to restore day labor center allocations, arguing the programs provide legal help, job connections and emergency response in crises.

City employees and union representatives described the proposed reductions to planners, analysts, environmental compliance inspectors, mechanics and other civilian staff whose work they said underpins housing production, street safety and public health. City planners working on community plan updates and transit‑adjacent zoning said cuts would halt projects around new light‑rail stations and constrain affordable housing work. Transportation planners warned loss of staff would delay safety projects, and EAA and SEIU representatives said moving sworn officers into civilian roles would increase overtime and liabilities.

Speakers also urged the council to fund a public bank feasibility study that, they said, had been approved previously but left unfunded; advocates repeatedly cited a $460,000 figure that council had earlier allocated for a study and asked the committee to reinstate it to explore alternatives to Wall Street debt servicing. "We want that money put back in the budget to do the job it was supposed to do with the feasibility study for a public bank in the city of LA," said Beverly Roberts of the Home Defenders League.

Several community safety and public‑health alternatives to policing also drew support. Advocates called for continued or expanded funding for the GRID community violence intervention program and for the unarmed crisis response (UMCR) pilot, noting evaluations and departmental briefings that the programs can reduce costs and save lives. LA Forward and community groups asked the committee to preserve $9,376,000 proposed for an UMCR pilot.

Committee Chair (as introduced at the meeting) opened and closed the hearing and reminded attendees that this is a continuous two‑day hearing with a public comment session also scheduled on Monday; commenters were limited to one minute each. The meeting recessed at the end of the afternoon and public comment will resume on the committee’s published schedule.

No formal votes were recorded during the public comment portion reported here; the hearing included only testimony and organizational requests for funding and for changes to the draft budget.