Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Predatory Lending Investments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council asks city agencies to report on investments with Household International amid predatory‑lending concerns
Summary
Following public testimony about high‑cost loans and foreclosures, the council asked the Office of Finance, CRA and Housing Department to report on city investments tied to Household International and recommend next steps; members said public policy should not subsidize low‑wage job creation.
Get email alerts on the Predatory Lending Investments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
After public testimony criticizing high‑cost and variable‑rate lending practices, the City Council on Friday directed city agencies to review investments and recommend next steps regarding Household International (Household Finance).
The motion, led by Councilmember Mike Hernandez, asks the Office of Finance, the Community Redevelopment Agency and the Los Angeles Housing Department, with assistance from the City Attorney, to report on invested funds, stocks, securities and other business obligations involving Household International and to provide recommendations to the council. Hernandez said the goal is to ensure the city’s investments and incentives are not supporting predatory lenders that harm low‑income residents.
Public commenters described specific foreclosure and high‑interest cases. Helen Coleman said her property had been sold under circumstances she called predatory and offered photographs showing deterioration; she said seniors and fixed‑income residents were particularly vulnerable. Richard Marshall called out the use of public pension funds invested in predatory lenders and urged the city to stop such investments.
Councilmembers voiced broad concern about predatory lending and said the council should send a strong public message. Mark Ridley‑Thomas said the report is a necessary first step and expressed hope that the council would later pursue stronger regulatory or programmatic responses. The motion passed 11–0.

