Public commenters urge Los Angeles City Council to oppose proposed Measure ULA amendments

At the Los Angeles City Council meeting on May 22, 2026, several public commenters urged councilmembers to oppose proposed amendments to Measure ULA, saying the changes would divert money from permanent affordable housing and undermine the voter-approved program.

Organizers and residents who identified themselves during the general public comment period said Measure ULA was designed to generate funding for permanent housing and tenant protections and warned that recent amendment proposals — including a reported 15-year extension tied to new commercial construction — would change when and how funds are collected. "Mesure ULA ya está funcionando en sus primeros años. Tiene más de 1,000,000,000 de dólares para poner a las personas en casa," said a commenter who identified herself as a member of a tenant-advocacy coalition. Another speaker representing Community Power Collective, Eva García, said organizers have presented data to the council and asked members not to proceed with amendments that would risk the fund's ability to house people permanently.

Speakers who identified themselves with LA CAN and related tenant groups described the amendments as favoring real-estate contractors and as likely to shift revenue streams away from existing permanent-housing programs. "Necesitamos fondos para prácticas inquilinos," said one resident. "Por favor, rechacen cualquier enmienda y sigan y no sigan nada adelante con ULA," another commenter said, requesting that council members respect the measure voters approved.

Speakers requested clearer fiscal analyses and said the city should protect existing funding commitments, citing the measure's early yield and the city’s obligations to people experiencing homelessness. Several commenters also urged councilmembers to avoid amendments that would change when funds are collected or who pays, arguing such changes could reduce the immediate availability of housing dollars and expose vulnerable residents to higher displacement risk.

The comment period followed the Council's ceremonial recognitions and routine announcements. Councilmembers did not take a recorded vote on ULA amendments at the May 22 meeting; public comment concluded and the clerk moved to the next business item.

What happens next: the council did not adopt any amendment during the May 22 session; comments from the public were entered into the record and callers asked for additional fiscal data and assurances that the voters’ intent would be preserved. Any formal proposal to change Measure ULA would require subsequent council consideration.