After the Ashes: A Beautiful Altadena Podcast

Season 2 / Episode 4: You Can’t Always Get What You Want… But If You Try Real Hard

• Shawna Dawson Beer

Share episode

We open this episode with some unexpected news. After the Ashes was named a Spotify 2025 Most Binged Show, a 2025 Marathon Show (listeners stuck with us 75% longer than the average podcast), and a 2025 Instant Hit, with a debut season more popular than 80% of other new podcasts. 

Whoever you are listening out there — thank you. Truly. We're doing this for you. 

From there, we dig into what may be a pivotal moment in the fight for accountability and recovery in Altadena. And yes, this is also the episode where Steve gets his groove back.

This episode explores:

  • Assemblyman John Harabedian’s audit of the Eaton Fire response — what it is, what it isnt', and why the other "official" investigations have fallen short
  • Whether an audit with subpoena power could finally deliver what fire survivors and advocates have been calling for
  • The importance of hearings and what it would mean if this committee exercises its authority to compel testimony
  • Early discussion of financial tools and recovery mechanisms that may be coming online
  • LA County’s emergency rent relief program for landlords and how (or if) it helps stabilize displaced communities
  • The possibility of a revolving loan fund and other capital-based recovery strategies
  • A brand-new legislative session. Will it bring new solutions?
  • We revisit our conversations around tax reform, including Prop 13, and how structural tax policy could shape recovery, rebuilding, and local government capacity
  • Finally, we explore the bigger-picture questions ahead — Opportunity Zones, recovery incentives, and whether policy will finally meet the scale of the problem

It's worth noting that the day after we recorded this episode, the Trump administration announced it was looking into ways to address this issue, underscoring how suddenly these long-stalled conversations may be re-entering the national policy arena.

The throughline. You don’t always get what you want but sustained pressure and persistence  can move the needle.

Small Business Shout-Out: Bevel Coffee

This episode’s small business shout-out goes to Bevel Coffee, which is making steady progress on its first brick-and-mortar location on Allen, just up from Altadena Beverage. Until then, you can find Bevel on the patio at Prime Pizza
and at pop-ups and events all over town.  They’ve become a familiar and welcome presence in Altadena’s recovery and we’re cheering them on every step of the way. Follow their journey on Instagram @bevecoffee

Shawna:

Welcome back. This is After the Ashes, the beautiful Aldanina podcast on LA Fire Recovery and Public Policy. This is your co-host, Shauna.

Steve:

And I'm Steve. Oh, you know, we forgot to title our last one.

Shawna:

I know. We didn't title this one either.

Steve:

Oh. Season two, episode four.

Shawna:

Yes. It'll have a title before it goes live, but I think that's because we were flying a little by the seat of the pants on what we wanted to talk about. Um, and um, that often informs the title. So don't worry, we'll have a fear not, dear listener. There will be a pithy title that's probably too fucking long because they all are uh in good due time. And by good due time, I mean when these publish tomorrow. So fear not.

Steve:

Tonight.

Shawna:

Uh, are you doing it now?

Steve:

No.

Shawna:

Are you it's wait, Steve is did everybody hear that? Steve is producing now and he's gonna handle it too.

Steve:

I gotta go to Laker game tonight. My wife's never been to a remove. My wife's never been to a Laker game before, so she's going.

Shawna:

Oh my gosh. Um, so here's what we're gonna open with because we were closing the last episode talking about this and having a little chuckle to ourselves um of like, oh my gosh, who listened to this podcast? So this, you know, we supposedly people binge it. Apparently, people binge it. So we are um, you know, it's hard to always pull all of the stats and metrics because this is native on Buzz Sprout where people listen, but it is also pushed out independently through YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, all manner of places, um, all of which have their own kind of um ratings, algorithms, uh stats, etc. So if someone is, you know, listening on Spotify, that doesn't cross over to YouTube stats or to you know spot um Buzzsprouse stats or Apple and so on and so forth. But for Spotify in particular, just one streaming platform, they have you know, you have your Spotify for creators account and they they will run you through your year and stats. So I was sharing this with Steve because I was like, wait, what? So um I it was cracking me, cracking me up that for you know 30 people, we are their like top show. And for thank you, 10, we have 10 super fans. I don't know who you who you are, but to the 10 super fans, we love you. Um we're evidently also called a bingeable show because 55% of our listeners um binge two plus episodes a day. Four out of the six that are top that's not all of our listeners, but our super fans. But so we we were called, so we had we were a 2025 binged show because 55% of the listeners streamed two or more episodes in a single day. We were a 2025 marathon show because fans listened to us for longer than 74% of other shows, and we were a 2025 instant hit show because our debut season was more popular than 80% of other new shows.

Steve:

So the competition is fierce, folks.

Shawna:

The competition is fierce, but for whomever is listening, thank you. Thanks for sticking with us and listening. You want to know who our competition is?

Steve:

You know who the number you know who the number one is? It's our governor's show is a million views and 230,000 subscribers just on YouTube. Yeah, but he trails even Ted Cruz.

Shawna:

Wild, absolutely wild.

Steve:

120 million listens and views.

Shawna:

Insane.

Steve:

So guys, we're coming for you. So there was shit here, it is way better than what you got. There is absolutely I don't need Charlie Kirk to get people to listen to me. Oh shit. Oh, sorry, I did it. I did it. I I said I wasn't gonna do it anymore.

Shawna:

He wasn't gonna do it, and then he did it. Um what was I gonna say? Oh, that there was a great piece, uh media piece that you shared with me this morning. That was what I pulled that from. But it was so awesome. It was like um Newsom is gonna double down and stick with the podcast format that Democrats hate.

Steve:

Well, because he's taken it to Joe Rogan. He's he's the bruh. But he's the bro, but he doesn't even say it. It's not brah.

Shawna:

He's brah.

Steve:

He's gotta be brah. I got 15-year-old boys, I know what brah means. I guess he's got boys too, because allegedly he runs them for sports. I love that. Allegedly. No, that's what the article says, so he does. I mean, welcome to the club. I know I do that a lot. So it's true.

Shawna:

Half of Steve and I's conversations um take place on speakerphone with his boys in the background um addressing me as Miss Dawson, and it's pretty fantastic because he's raising good young men, but that's that's their mother, it has nothing to do with me. Steve gets some credit. So we're gonna open this episode.

Steve:

Sorry, I didn't mean those anyway. Yes.

Shawna:

We're gonna open this one and we're gonna keep it tight, listeners. Let's see if we can do it. We have a hard out. We gotta, we're gonna keep it tight. Yeah, and I'm not gonna write multiple uh, you know, Steve's not gonna binge post after his break. Okay, so here's what we want to talk about. Some other news hitting that um, so your your favorite person. Your boy blue, John Herabedian. Um, we've been talking uh a bit about his audit, right?

Steve:

Yes, yes.

Shawna:

And um this so this is it's really out that you know the audit's happening, um, it's underway. Um, and I think you know, the big question that we continue to ask is, you know, is this gonna be enough, right? Is it gonna go far enough? Is it going to have the subpoena power that, for example, the Al Tedina for accountability coalition that's been pushing so hard for Roger for our attorney general Rob Bonta to open investigation? Um, and you know, our our friend, our pal, our good pal Rob, um in other news is not running for governor. We that came out over the weekend. He'll not run. I'll leave it to all of you to speculate about why not.

Steve:

I I think anybody who's read knows that there were $400,000 of campaign donations that had to, or of legal fees that were spent to investigate concerns that probably made it easier to um not run than run.

Shawna:

Um, so you know, all very lots of interesting developments. Um this is a good thing.

Steve:

All right, so let's go back to Herbedian because I think this is important. I I think or Harabedian.

Shawna:

Um I think have we been saying his name wrong all this time?

Steve:

I think it goes both ways. It's sort of like you know.

Shawna:

You're saying John goes both ways?

Steve:

No.

Shawna:

I'm sorry, it's too easy. It was too easy. I'm sorry, John. That was a Steve dig and definitely not one at you. And if even if you did, it would be nothing wrong with that. But the point was is it Herabedian or Harabedian? Let us find out because we want to be his name correctly.

Steve:

There's an anglified version and you know, the arm of the we should be saying it correctly. Well, I I've heard him say it both ways, so you know.

Shawna:

Okay, the plot thickens.

Steve:

All right, so but let's talk about this. Let's talk about him. Let's talk about this.

Shawna:

Let's talk about this audit, aka investigation. Is it an investigation or is it, you know, can we call this that? I don't know.

Steve:

So uh it depends on what your term investigation means. Again, I'm not trying to parse words as a politician might. I I think what this is, is this is the joint audit committee. So this committee is supposed to go investigate various agencies within the government, both at the state and at the local level. And so it has the ability to go into the county, the city, as well as the state to look at its responses to anything that government is responsible for. It can't go to the federals, which is fine. We don't need the federals involved in this, because as we all know, the state and the city and county have had a lot to a lot of participation in both the uh the immediate and then the follow-on aftermath. Now, this investigation really focuses on the fire itself, what happened in to start it, and the immediate response to it. It's not about the long tail recovery piece. That's it, that would have to be a separate audit that his committee So what is this audit looking at specifically?

Shawna:

Can you watch it?

Steve:

It's looking at the issues that you're talking about. You know, what happened the day of or in advance of it, what things lack of preparation? Lack of preparation planning, where were they different agencies and what were they doing? Um, again, depending on the scale and scope of this, it's up to them to determine it. Then it can look at, you know, the immediate response, what happened that day. So what the response from the fire department was, what the response from the county was, where they what resources were deployed, how they were deployed, what was done right, what was done wrong. Again, we've had many different investigations into this, like the McChrystal report and various subsequent ones.

unknown:

Right.

Speaker:

You know, but FSRI, the UL report.

Steve:

What happened, what happened in the mayor's office, you know, potentially with the communications back and forth while she was out of town, what the responsibility of the deputy.

Shawna:

And that's another important line that this is investigating the full fire response. So this is the same thing. This is to try to get a picture. This is to try to LA City, LA County.

Steve:

This is the post-action report to try to find out what happened. Okay. Now, how deep it goes and where it goes depends on the cooperation of the agencies. So it's an independent auditor that does this investigation, and then that auditor will present those findings to the committee, and the committee can choose to have hearings based upon the findings in those documents. So while the auditor may not necessarily find fault on certain things, the committee might still ask questions to do more detail, depending on where the input comes from the community, et cetera. So to the extent that you guys, Altonia for accountability has been focused on the attorney general, which has subpoena power, the joint audit committee also has subpoena power.

Shawna:

Right. And for anyone listening, the do you want to explain for all of our listeners what the California Joint Audit Committee, that committee is?

Steve:

It's a mouthful, which basically is a committee between it's a joint committee from the House or sorry, from the Assembly and the Senate, which go in and uh basically has the authority to go audit and investigate various government agencies. Very boring, very under the radar until something like this happens. And we just happen to have the chairman of that joint committee who happens to be our assemblyman.

Shawna:

Exactly.

Steve:

So if I was looking for accountability, I would be focusing on where I have that kind of a relationship. And our assemblyman is a smart guy. He gets it.

Shawna:

And he's supportive, and you know, he wants to get it. He wants to understand.

Steve:

Look, this is a major issue that's affected his community. He was a freshman, he was thrown into the the, you know, into the fire, no pun intended. And he was stuck trying to like they were both him and Senator Perez were there, you know, they they what they had what two weeks? Not even. I mean, they got sworn in the beginning of December. And as I said, the story with our assemblyman was he stepped in a pile of shit that night. I mean, and it was just the harbinger for the year. Right. And so, but having having the this type of a resource available to us, depending on what the report comes back with, will be a critical component. Now, I would say that as members of the community, it's going to be important to and I I to work with the press, to work with the community, and continue to press on the idea that you know, these are the questions you want to have the auditors look at. Now, while it's independent, if the auditors don't bring it up, that the uh committee hearings will ask these questions.

Shawna:

So you may not necessarily get it in the initial report, but I think But it's going to raise and clearly illustrate all of the questions that could then be additional pressure could be exerted to get that.

Steve:

I would also say that too, as you continue to establish a record, if the report doesn't include questions that you know community's looking for, excuse me, I think that A, that raises the can the ability to ra to bring another audit, assuming he continues to remain the chairman of that committee. Also, if but if he gets removed, then it makes us wonder why.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Steve:

I think it also presum bring brings a it presents an opportunity to continue to cast whatever they're doing in a light that you know forces the electeds to have to take action. You know, if for whatever reason they neglect certain portions of it and it's on the record that these are things that have happened, which we all know, then I think that that opens up the door. You know, you look at the extent of the reporting that has come out of the LA Times, particularly and the community in the last let's say eight to twelve twelve weeks prior to the anniversary, there's a lot of data that opens up a lot of areas for an audit to go. And it'd be shocking, particularly with the way the LA Times has inventoried all the issues, that the auditors don't just turn to that and go down those roads. Now, the extent to which they're gonna get answers, I think that that leaves a lot of questions.

Shawna:

And I think that is that remains the big question, right? Is that there needs to be accountability, isn't just about saying continuing to say illustrate that yeah, we know all these things failed and all these people and processes and none of it has to be. So that's that's my point. So does this provide the community with what they are looking for, which is meaningful justice and accountability, meaning, you know, will there be an exploration if there was perhaps, you know, anything that's that's uh even deemed criminal activity?

Steve:

I'm not suggesting that there is, but no, but I think I think the answer to your question is does it even pull all of the data?

Shawna:

Does it does it have the ability to subpoena all of the data? Well, and that's the question.

Steve:

And again, you know, I think if they don't address issues that are very obvious to the community, that opens the door to the question of why.

Shawna:

Correct. Because I think that, you know, this needs to very clearly do what the McChrystal report did not, what the ULFSRI report will not, um, what all of these reports cannot. They have not had subpoena power, they have not been able to collect the full scope of data, they have not been truly independent.

Steve:

But they haven't been, they haven't been tasked to do that.

Shawna:

Correct.

Steve:

Which is what needs to happen. That's why we created a joint audit committee for our assembly and our our Senate, like our legislature. And so this is the intent of it. And if we don't do it here, it's never gonna get done. Now, let's also remember, too, we're we're at a point now, at least if I was the elected, that you have reached a juncture where reports have been done up to this point. Reports about the Woolsley fire. These issues that we had fail us are failing us because we're not implementing solutions.

Shawna:

Correct. And this is the other half of it that you know, if you pay attention to what the coalition's been asking for and why what how this is different or why what has happened so far is is not sufficient. It is because it does not go far enough to actually force implementation, to force meaningful change. I mean, this is another one of these things where it's like we're a year in. We know from the what the we have so far that we have multiple systems failures, you know, multiple human error fares, uh failures. But guess what? Still nothing meaningful being changed. It's like, oh, here, let's all go spend one to three million dollars to rebuild our lots and have no guarantee this won't happen again.

Steve:

So look, I you know, this is how government works, you know, and you have to separate the the process from the what you're talking about on the ground is we need we need we need immediate action to solve or resolve the issues that are presenting us with the path forward, right? We need to be able to rebuild, we need to be able to move forward, we need to be able to understand, okay. That differs from what this audit really is going to be doing, which is gonna be much more backward looking, which is gonna be focusing on what happened in those early days after the fires leading up to the fires, why we weren't prepared, what that's gonna look like, and how we can stop that from happening again. I definitely think that there should be an audit of subsequent follow-on audit into the response or the the the the rebuild and the the you know how we've addressed it in the aftermath, but that's probably a year away. When I've seen these reports in the past, depending on what the political motivation is, I've seen reports that look innocuous, that are audits, that all of a sudden become legislation and all of a sudden have become reform. And that becomes the basis. And this is this audit was the excuse to get it to that point, to get the key points to where we want to get it to, and then all of a sudden everything happens. I've also seen it where these are these another effectively blue-ribbon commission that presents their stuff and it goes into the file, it goes on the shelf. There's the audit report from 2025 that was the you know, the the the response or 2026, the response to the fire. We put all this information on there, we have hearings, and then it never gets heard of again. I can see it go both ways, and that's why what you're asking me is where is this going to go? That is going to be a matter of politics. I mean, and I'm just being brutally honest. No, yeah, we know it.

Shawna:

It's a matter of all of this is well, and I think it's a matter of why we haven't had a real investigation up to now is a matter of politics.

Steve:

Well, but we have the tool, that's the key. And so instead of advocating for a tool, it's advocating to use the tool correctly and to get maximum effect of that tool to allow us, to allow the assemblyman to go back to, you know, as the chairman of this committee and to say, my people are demanding this. I need to get answers because this is what my constituents are saying. Because this is where he can get mad. This is where he can go, god damn it. This happened to my people, my friends, my neighbors, my colleagues, my family. And these people are me.

Shawna:

Yeah.

Steve:

And I want it done right. But that's his choice.

Shawna:

So, Steve, as we like to discuss how everyone can be their best advocate, is it time for us all to be writing letters to John's office? I'm sorry, John. Sorry, John.

Steve:

No, I I don't think that's the case. Because again, he can't influence the outcome of the audit.

Shawna:

No, he can't.

Steve:

It is an independent process. What I would be doing instead of, and I've said this before, is I would be working to build a relationship with his office, with his people here locally, and say, we want to ensure that when this report comes in, here's information that we think is important. And I would continue to work with the media the way y'all have, because you guys have been extraordinarily effective and make sure that the media is continuing to amplify the message, to continue to show that there we need to get answers. And this is the path to get there. Because nothing makes electeds move more than the media. And it's not just Assemblyman Hare Bedan on this committee. There are members of the Senate, there are members of the assembly on it. Now, what is the wild card in all of this? And this is the point that we need to make it so that this is continue to be remembered, is if we come after 26, there will be, after the election in November, committee assignments change.

Speaker:

Exactly.

Steve:

Chairmanships change.

Shawna:

Will Speaker Rivas end up being end up changing who is on which committee, and will it no longer be our assemblyman who has who wants to champion some of this versus someone else who does not have that connection or commitment?

Steve:

And how does that fit? Yeah.

Shawna:

So I would say And it I think it's safe to to admit assume that this audit will not be complete by the time that flips.

Steve:

I I think, you know, if if I was in the media, I'd ask him that question.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Steve:

Because that and if it's and if it's buried, why is it buried?

Shawna:

Exactly.

Steve:

So you know I think there's a lot here. Um I think it could be the tool to get you what you want.

Speaker:

It could be.

Steve:

But like everything, you have to pursue multiple paths. Look, come this time next year. Attorney General Bonta may not be attorney general.

Shawna:

Uh yeah. I mean, hey, who knows? You never know what's going to come out between now and then and who ends up elected. I am I have to say, you know, I can't I talk about often now the fact that I think that lots of fire survivors and people in our shoes have to consider running for offices that they never in a million years would have considered because Are you gonna run for attorney general, Shauna? No, I'm not, but I met someone who is. Um, it was like a young, a young kid, um Lalo, Lalo, Lelo, L O.

Steve:

Is he running for attorney general or insurance commissioner?

Shawna:

I think he was actually running for insurance commissioner, um, not for AG, but you know, and will he have a shot? A very, very slim, long one. But the fact that there are young people motivated to be part of the process and to enter that, um, I it was is inspiring. Like we need to see more of that. And I was great to see young people taking that on. I look at also, you know, like someone I've talked about before who I love who's the um LA City controller, um Mejia. Yeah, um, who actually has, you know, is doing a lot and who, by the way, is they're trying to shut him down. They tried to gut his office, and he's literally the only independent auditor at all that exists for the city. County doesn't have one, which we've talked about. I don't know if we've talked about that here. I've talked we've talked about it in our group. But um, you know, this raises a lot of questions. Of again, we asked a lot, where does the money, where is the money? But how about where is the money going? You know, we know it's it's not just about, hey, we don't have the money, but also we have so much money. And other than paying out lawsuits, you know, legal settlements, settlements, where is all this money going, right? So I think with that, do we think that any financial tools and solutions are coming? Does it feel like we have anything on the horizon? I you know we have some things that just dropped. We have the um LA County Emergency Rent Relief Fund. That's you know, a drop in the bucket, but it's something.

Steve:

I I think I think you're gonna see nibbles around the edge. I think you're not gonna see the mass solution just yet. I think we're gonna see people messing around with CRA now. I think there'll be various potential solutions using CRA dollars and banks to catalyze some of this money, or at least try. I think enough time has passed where you know people could say, well, 797's buried. What next? Right. Um I have been told through the grapevine that it's not dead. Like not that maybe the bill is dead, but the concept's not dead.

Shawna:

But the concept's not dead. They just have to figure out how to package it in a plot palatable way.

Steve:

Well, this way it doesn't do that. It's different enough. You gotta put lipstick a pig on the pig enough.

Speaker:

Yep.

Steve:

Which is fine because again, all of this was designed to help the community. So I mean, if you want to take credit for it, just take it. I don't give a shit. If it gives my people and my community the ability to get what they need, it was never about me.

Shawna:

Yeah.

Steve:

And I mean, that I've said that for a moment. Well, if it was about you, your name would have been on it and it wasn't. Well, my name was attached to it. I was not shy. I know, but you know, at the end of the day.

Shawna:

People don't realize that that had anything to do with you. So I I think it's safe to say it was not about you.

Steve:

Well, it's the assemblyman who did it. He had the balls together. Exactly. But what I'm saying is like that model needs to be, you know, he had the courage to take on something brand new, which I give him 110% credit for. Um I I just think that we're gonna see things start to happen because they have to. I just don't know what the answer is. I don't know if it's gonna be, you know, we're gonna see like solutions for low-income folks to try to go back to a model that at the outset I had put out there on my Substack, you know, where like a shared equity type model or like a no interest loan type model, which is effectively a shared equity model.

Speaker:

Right.

Steve:

Where, you know, money comes in and then goes out where people aren't gonna the idea is not to burden borrowers with more debt.

Shawna:

More debt, right? With just layering debt.

Steve:

But it does sound like I think that there, there, there are rumblings starting.

Shawna:

Yep. It sounds like there is a possibility that we're gonna get some financial tools, and maybe we will get some potentially some sort of lending for people to help bridge the gap if they didn't have an SBA loan or if that was not even sufficient.

Steve:

Well, I think that the I think that the state has realized So the interesting calculus right now is going to be do you push forward and bring a solution to the table because you're a year in, or do you wait to see how the election turns out? Because it looks like the Democrats are going to take definitely the House the way things are going with the Republicans and potentially the Senate and use that to just push through. I mean, again, you still have to wait for Trump to authorize the money, but will he care in his last two years? I I I I guess that was the bet that the machine had for the first year was wait long enough, see if a disaster hits. And you know, we were victims of that. So what does that look like now? I I don't know. I'm asking you asked the question and I'm just thinking it through out loud.

Shawna:

Right. I mean, it's there's a lot of interesting questions for this year. So I and that's one of the ones that should be asked. Um, yeah, you know, it's like I keep thinking it's asking too like, will we get our opportunity zones? Like, is that a possibility? That is a possibility. I mean, the hill it is.

Steve:

The folks in DC are very interested in that because it makes sense, it's an easy way to bring in outside capital. Um I think that that's something that the federals can do, that they don't have uh they don't have to depend on the state. And I think it's something that has bipartisan support in both houses. In fact, opportunity zones are considered uh, you know, kind of verboten here in California because everyone thinks it's about giving rich people the opportunity to come in.

Shawna:

But I think if California did it right, well, we've seen it done right, it was done right in old Pasadena.

Steve:

Well, that's that's that's as much redevelopment. And I think you're correct. It was done right in downtown Lawrence. But the proponents of the CRD will say that's nothing different. The CRD is just a a modern version of the art uh the redevelopment agencies. Um but I think what has to happen is, and I think if I was designing this when I was looking at it, was the idea that most of that money from the Opportunity Zone Money can't just be coming in and flooding the market to just acquire real estate, because otherwise it just becomes a giant real estate play. And I think that it has to be something a little bit more innovative from an economic development perspective, to bring in new jobs, to bring in homes, to build homes. I think also the way we have to do it, again, it runs counter. The the government's fine, the federal government and the president are finally realizing that we have to be careful with corporate ownership over homes. And so how that marries in with opportunity zones, I'm not exactly sure. So that's something that's gonna have to be negotiated. But I think that the idea of bringing in investor money, and I think also, frankly, opportunity zones, if you're not a current opportunity zone area, I think you have to make it so that it's more of a tax deferral as opposed to a tax um just like an out and out tax credit. I don't because there has to be a risk reward component, and because areas like Altadena will come back and be valuable as opposed to some of the more you know pressing areas, you don't want to see that money dilute and be taken away from communities that really need the money. Yeah. So I think that you know, there are complications, but these are not hurdles that can't be overcome.

Shawna:

Exactly. I mean, there are always you know uh complications, but I think, you know, as I've I've been saying this for a long time in various circles and contacts, is that you know, if the answer is no, then reframe the question.

Steve:

The answer the answer is yes, it's how.

Shawna:

And I mean we can't always get what we want, but maybe we can get close.

Steve:

We can get close. Exactly. All politics is, you know, if both if one side walks doesn't, if both sides don't walk away unhappy, then you know you haven't done your job. That's I mean, and it's true.

Shawna:

Yeah, it's true. Everyone has to feel like they had to give a little up.

Steve:

And and but I think that there are solutions, and I think that the feds are looking at it. I think, you know, there's the question about, you know, how do we, how do we bring, you know, how can we get, and especially at the state and the federal level, how do we get more inventory of homes on the market? And I think that it was interesting that AEI before Christmas brought out that notion of the capital gains tax, you know, doubling it. And I think that we could start with disaster areas where people are forced to sell and you know, kind of turn some of that liquidity over and give them, you know, where people are holding on because they're like, I don't want to have to pay a massive capital gain on my home because I'm being forced to sell before I can have proper estate.

Shawna:

I mean, it's not on the topics for today, but I mean we we've talked about that.

Steve:

The need to reform a lot of that, the need to revisit Prop 13, the revisit caffeines, it's 20 or and we're dealing with areas like California, Florida, along the coasts, you know, where these disasters are hitting the Carolinas, where it's not just that there has been appreciation of these homes, like tremendous appreciation of these homes. So we have to acknowledge the reality that exists. And, you know, it's not a giveaway to California, it's it's it's a solution to try to solve a bigger problem. And when I think about Prop 13 reform, I think about you know the cap gains at the federal level on housing. And again, I I think about it from the perspective of if we do it there, all we're potentially doing is moving up the timeline of the bulge that's gonna sell anyway. And I think it's really important because I think millennials are being set back 15 years or so in terms of their ability to purchase homes. And I think that that's that we're losing wealth on two ends. Not only are they gonna pay an inflated premium to buy these homes that are already inflating because they're being held off the market, because of forces that have been created due to certain incentives, but we're also losing wealth because they're not building that wealth, and that wealth isn't going where. And so, like, this is a generation that's gonna have to support the next generation and the next generation. And so we're just layering the bubble. We're double screwing ourselves to continue to support the wealthiest generation ever existed, which is the baby boomers. And I always tell my grandmother, who's still alive at 99 years old, she goes, You rotten grandchildren, and I go, Well, it's because of your children, grandma, and that's your fault. You made it too easy for them, and then they made rotten children, and that's why you have rotten grandchildren children. And I, you know, I joke about it, but I also think, like, in a sense, we have to reset the calibration because the baby boomers can't drive all the agenda all the time. Nor should they. And and I think that in California, it's especially acute, but I think nationally you still see this distortion. Some will say, yes, there's still the the the the low-cost mortgages that are also holding people to their homes. I think that's a secondary concern. I think the bigger concern is what about those folks that are baby boomers that are in homes way too big for them, but they don't want to leave because it cost if they leave they'll lose the cap gains plus they'll lose their well, Prop 3 13, they can take that gain over to somewhere else, but I think there's the federal piece to that too. Sorry, you got me. No, don't be sorry.

Shawna:

I mean, I think you know because I think we're a microcosm of all these products here. Exactly. That's we're this is we are just an example of what is playing out on a much larger stage um uh on a number of levels, right? And um anyhow, not just with our property values, with interest rates. Um, anyhow, I'm thinking I'm looking at the clock. I had a whole other path to go down, but we're gonna save it for the next episode next week because now I'm curious. I you'll have to hold your curiosity. Oh, well.

Steve:

Anyway, you got me kind of out of my funk.

Shawna:

Uh good.

Steve:

I think that's what was something productive.

Shawna:

We just shake it, shake Steve out of it. Uh we just shake Steve out of his funk. It's um it's a new session, right? A new legislative session this year. So it's I'm very curious to see what's gonna come of this and what we're gonna get out of it.

Steve:

Yeah, I I agree. I I think and I think it's a critical one because after this session, everything reshuffles.

Shawna:

Yeah.

Steve:

You know, from a leadership perspective, and we may not have the tools that we have today. So correct.

Shawna:

So here we go. We have to wait and see. I'm gonna wrap this up by going back to the um LA County Rent Relief Program because I want to roll through that quickly for people. It's the emergency rent relief program. That is um, so rent relief sounds like it would be tenant-oriented, it's not really. So I'm gonna not bury the lead. That's that's the truth. Um, spoiler, uh, it's not probably not gonna help the people it should directly, like so many things, but hopefully there'll be some some benefit. So the way this is phrased that if you were a landlord or tenant affected by the 2025 Eaton or Palisades fire, um, I crack this up. This makes me laugh every time because it's the line SCE uses every time you call them. The windstorm event. So they're always like, Were you impacted by the windstorm event? I was like, not really, but I was impacted by you not taking care of your equipment and burning my town down, but I digress. But I digress. Um, or any other emergency financial hardship, you may be eligible for assistance. The application is open now. We're in the window. The deadline to submit is Friday, January 23rd, which is right around the corner. So um, this is a DCBA program, the uh County Department of Consumer and Business Affairs. Um, and the program is going to prioritize small landlords with four or fewer rental units to help them mitigate uh what is what is uh described as detrimental emergency financial hardship while also reducing the number of tenants evicted due to unpaid rents. So they are going to cover through a grant up to six months of rent debt. Um, and with limited exceptions, the maximum award is $15,000 per rental unit. So this is money that goes directly to your landlord. Um, but you know, if you are in arrears up to six months of rent, great, that money goes straight to the landlord, but it should benefit you, the tenant, by actually, you know, preventing eviction and getting you out from under that debt. So while the tenant cannot directly apply for the program, they can refer their landlord. So there is that's the most important point I wanted to make here. If you're a renter, um, you're a tenant, you can complete the interest form on this website that is lacountyrentrelief.com and you can actually refer. It's not the la application your landlord has to apply, but you can at least get this um referral in on your landlord's behalf if you think this could benefit you. So um I genuinely hope that brings some sort of uh financial relief for our renters in the community who so desperately need this. And the way this is written, it also applies to people who are displaced from their primary residence and are using a rental right now and perhaps do not have ALE or have run out of ALE.

Steve:

So it gives a little bit of an extension for the correct.

Shawna:

It's a it's it's critical on a lot of levels. This could benefit many people, and so that's why I wanted, even though we don't specifically speak to all of these programs, because I feel like there's so many resources to find that information at this point. This one I felt like is important enough on multiple levels that we I wanted to amplify that and share it. And um, as we wrap up for um for this episode and um think about our small business for today, I'm gonna just refer everybody to go check out Bevel Coffee on Lake. Bevel was a pop-up at Prime Pizza. We've spoken about them in another episode last year. Correct. They are making really great progress on their own brick and mortar that is right there on Allen, just south of Prime Pizza, just north of Altanina Bev. Um, which, and I highly recommend people go over and check it out, follow them on social media, keep abreast of what they're doing in their developments. They're they're also just good people who continue to double down on their investment in the community and deserve everybody's support. So go check out Bevel Coffee, find them on Instagram.

Steve:

Indeed. All right, so that's it. We're gonna let those bingers get out early.

Shawna:

That's right. This is the reward for um the last three hour-long episodes. This one should be a little tighter. Oh, we weren't that bad. We're not that bad. So um again, I'm Shauna Dawson Beer, Beautiful Aldedina. Thank you for listening. You can find us online, you can submit questions, comments, anything you'd like covered um through our email, beautifulaldadina og gmail.com, and also through Substack, and you can find us um everywhere you have social media at Beautiful Aldedina.

Steve:

And you got Steve Sachs, the Alta Policy Wonk, and you got to hear me go wonky today. So I apologize.

Shawna:

He got wonky, but he also got his groove back. This is the I might title this episode when Steve when the the the one-when Steve gets his groove back.

Steve:

Yeah, well, you know, thank you. Thank you for getting me somewhat out of my funk.

Shawna:

That's what we do for each other. He uh he's always trying to get me punchy. I hope to get him a little punchy too.

Steve:

Well, anyway, everybody, thank you so much for listening. And you know, to all those that have been supportive of us for the last year.

Shawna:

Thank you.

Steve:

Well, I've supported our community. Well, since September.

Shawna:

But I mean, we've been doing this since last September. But yeah, um, everyone who's been supporting us in the community for a year, thank you. Yeah, and thanks for sticking it out.

Steve:

Yeah, you know, it's been it's been a ride, but it's been a ride, all right. Thank you.

Shawna:

Thank you. Until next time.

Steve:

Bye now.