Politics
State lawmakers targeted a Santa Barbara development. Then came the fallout
Outraged Santa Barbara residents jumped into action when a developer unveiled plans last year for a towering apartment complex within sight of the historic Old Mission.
They complained to city officials, wrote letters and formed a nonprofit to try and block the project. Still, the developer’s plans went forward.
Then something unusual happened.
Four hundred miles away in Sacramento, state lawmakers quietly tucked language into an obscure budget bill requiring an environmental impact study of the proposed development — which housing advocates allege was an attempt to block the project.
The legislation, Senate Bill 158, signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom, didn’t mention the Santa Barbara project by name. But the provision was so detailed and specific it couldn’t apply to any other development in the state.
The fallout was swift: The developer sued the state and a Santa Barbara lawmaker, the powerful new president of the state Senate, is under scrutiny over her role in the bill.
The current property located at the proposed location for the eight-story apartment tower.
(Kayla Bartkowski / Los Angeles Times)
The saga highlights the governor’s and state Legislature’s growing influence in local housing decisions, and the battle between cities and Sacramento to address California’s critical housing shortage.
In the face of California’s high cost of housing and rent, state leaders are increasingly passing new housing mandates that require cities and counties to accelerate the construction of new housing and ease the barriers impeding developers.
In this case, the law targeting the Santa Barbara development does the opposite by making it harder to build.
‘A horrendous nightmare’
The fight started last year after developers Craig and Stephanie Smith laid out ambitious plans for an eight-story housing project with at least 250 apartments at 505 East Los Olivos St.
The five-acre site is near the Old Mission Santa Barbara, which draws hundreds of thousands of tourists each year.
In Santa Barbara, a slow-growth haven where many apartment buildings are two stories, the Los Olivos project was perceived as a skyscraper. The mayor, Randy Rowse, called the proposal “a horrendous nightmare,” according to local media site Noozhawk.
But the developer had an advantage. California law requires cities and counties to develop plans for growth every eight years to address California’s increasing population. Jurisdictions are required to pinpoint areas where housing or density could be added.
If cities and counties fail to develop plans by each eight-year deadline, a provision kicks in called “builder’s remedy.”
It allows developers to bypass local zoning restrictions and build bigger, denser projects as long as low or moderate-income units are included.
Santa Barbara was still working with the state on its housing plan when the deadline passed in February 2023. The plan was complete by December of that year, but didn’t become official until the state certified it in February 2024.
Opponents of the proposed Santa Barbara development, clockwise from bottom left: Cheri Rae, Brian Miller, Evan Minogue, Tom Meaney, Fred Sweeney and Steve Forsell.
(Kayla Bartkowski / Los Angeles Times)
A month prior, in January, the developers submitted their plans. And since they included 54 low-income units, the city couldn’t outright deny the project.
“The developers were playing chess while the city was playing checkers,” said Evan Minogue, a Santa Barbara resident opposed to the development.
He said older generations in California resisted change, leaving the state to come in with “heavy-handed, one-size-fits-all policies to force cities to do something about housing.”
Santa Barbara, a wealthy city that attracts celebrities, bohemian artist-types and environmental activists, has a long history of fighting to keep its small-town feel.
In 1975, the City Council adopted a plan to limit development, along with water consumption and traffic, and keep a cap on the city’s population at 85,000. In the late ‘90s, actor Michael Douglas — an alum of UC Santa Barbara — donated money to preserve the city’s largest stretch of coastal land.
Hemmed in by the Santa Ynez Mountains, the city is dominated by low-slung buildings and single-family homes. The median home value is $1.8 million, according to Zillow. A city report last year detailed the need for 8,000 more units, primarily for low-income households, over the coming years.
Stephanie and Craig Smith, the developers of the project at 505 East Los Olivos Street.
(Ashley Gutierrez)
Assemblymember Gregg Hart, whose district includes Santa Barbara, supports the language in the budget bill requiring the environmental review. He doesn’t want to see the proposed development tower over the Old Mission and blames the builder’s remedy law for its introduction.
“It’s a brilliant illustration of how broken the ‘builder’s remedy’ system is,” said Hart. “Proposing projects like this undermines support for building density in Santa Barbara.”
Similar pushback has been seen in Santa Monica, Huntington Beach and other small cities as developers scramble to use the builder’s remedy law. A notable example recently played out in La Cañada Flintridge, where developers pushed through a mixed-use project with 80 units on a 1.29-acre lot despite fierce opposition from the city.
Still, the controversial law doesn’t exempt developments from review under the California Environmental Quality Act, known as CEQA, the state’s landmark policy requiring a study of the project’s effects on traffic, air quality and more.
The developers behind the Los Olivos Street project sought to avoid the environmental review, however, because of a new state law that allows many urban infill projects to avoid such requirements. Assembly Bill 130, based on legislation introduced by Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland), was signed into law by Newsom in June.
When the Los Olivos developers asked city officials about using AB 130 for their project, a Santa Barbara community developer director told them in July 2025 that the CEQA review was necessary. AB 130 doesn’t apply if the project is planned near a creek and wetland habitat, or other environmentally sensitive area, the director wrote.
Months later, the state Legislature passed its budget bill requiring the review.
Santa Barbara residents who oppose the project said they didn’t ask for the bill.
But if the review finds that traffic from the development would overwhelm fire evacuation routes, for instance, they may have an easier time fighting the project.
“We don’t want to come off as NIMBYs,” resident Fred Sweeney, who opposes the project, said, referring to the phrase “not in my backyard.” Sweeney, an architect, and others started the nonprofit Smart Action for Growth and Equity to highlight the Los Olivos project and a second one planned by the same developer.
Standing near the project site on a recent day, Sweeney pointed as cars lined up along the main road. It wasn’t yet rush hour, but traffic was already building.
A ‘really strange’ bill
Buried deep in Senate Bill 158, the bill passed by state lawmakers targeting the Los Olivos project, is a mention of the state law around infill urban housing developments. Senate Bill 158 clarified that certain developments should not be exempt from this law.
Developments in “a city with more than 85,000 but fewer than 95,000 people, and within a county of between 440,00 and 455,000 people,” and which are also near a historical landmark, regulatory floodway and watershed, are not exempt, the bill stated.
According to the 2020 census, Santa Barbara has a population of 88,768. Santa Barbara County has a population of 448,229. And the project sits near both a creek and the Santa Barbara Mission.
The controversial development fit the bill.
Monique Limón is president pro tem of the California state Senate.
(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)
A representative for Senate President Pro Tem Monique Limón told CalMatters that the senator was involved in crafting that exemption language.
During a tour of an avocado farm in Ventura last month, Limón declined to comment on her role. She cited the lawsuit and directed questions to Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta’s office.
Limón, who was born and raised in Santa Barbara, confirmed that she did talk to Sweeney — who started the nonprofit to fight the development — about opposition to the development.
The Los Olivos project had “a lot of community involvement and participation,” she said. “In terms of feedback, what I understand, reading the articles, there are over 400 people that have weighed in on it … it’s a very public project.”
Limón also defended her housing record.
“Every piece of legislation I author or review, I do so based on the needs of our state but also with the lens of the community I represent — whether that is housing, education, environmental protections or any other issues that come across my desk,” Limón said.
The developers filed a lawsuit against the city and state in October, claiming that SB 158 targets one specific project: theirs. As such, it would be illegal under federal law, which bans “special legislation” that targets a single person or property.
The home currently located at the proposed development site.
(Kayla Bartkowski / Los Angeles Times)
The suit claims that Limón promoted and ushered the bill through the state Senate, argues that it should be overturned and questions the required environmental review, which would likely add years to its timeline and millions to its budget.
Stephanie Smith, one of the developers, told The Times that the bill was born of the “protests of wealthy homeowners, many of whom cosplay as housing advocates until the proposed housing is in their neighborhood.”
“As a former homeless student who worked full time and lived in my car, I know what it means to struggle to afford housing. Living without security or dignity gave me a foundational belief that housing is a nonnegotiable basic human right,” Smith said.
Public policy advocates and experts expressed concern about state lawmakers using their power to meddle with local housing projects, especially when carving out exemptions from laws they’ve imposed on everyone else in the state.
“It’s hard to ignore when legislation is drafted in a narrowly tailored way — especially when such language appears late in the process with little public input,” said Sean McMorris of good government group California Common Cause. “Bills developed in this manner risk fostering public cynicism about the legislative process and the motivations behind narrowly focused policymaking.”
UC Davis School of Law professor Chris Elmendorf, who specializes in housing policy, called the bill’s specific language “really strange” and questioned whether it would survive a legal challenge.
He expects to see more pleadings for exemptions from state housing laws.
“Local groups that don’t want the project are going to the legislature to get the relief that, in a previous era, they would have gotten from their city council,” Elmendorf said.
UC Santa Barbara student Enri Lala is the founder and president of a student housing group. He said the bill goes against a recent pro-housing movement in the area.
“It’s certainly out of the ordinary,” said Lala. “This is not the kind of move that we want to see repeated in the future.”
Politics
Commentary: Bass clears first hurdle, but if Pratt holds off Raman, the mayoral race could be a holy war
L.A. Mayor Karen Bass made what sounded like a victory speech Tuesday night.
Councilmember Nithya Raman made what sounded almost like a concession speech.
And former reality TV star Spencer Pratt relayed a message from the heavens.
“Well, obviously God wanted five more months of me exposing all the failures of our mayor, so it’s gonna be a fun ride,” Pratt said. “I hope she’s ready.”
Assuming Pratt holds on to one of the two spots in the Nov. 3 general election as the final votes are tallied in the next few days, the smart money will be on Bass, for reasons I’ll get into in a moment.
But the supreme being and patron of all pontiffs has to be considered a wild card. This is the first time, to my knowledge, that an incumbent mayor in the City of Angels would be running against a challenger whose campaign manager is God Almighty.
So here we go. We could be in for one of the more remarkable electoral adventures in city history, with a complete novice and MAGA conservative going up against a liberal career politician in a deep-blue city and state full of people who are tired of hearing excuses from Democrats. (If Raman ends up ousting Pratt, my apologies for jumping to conclusions. But it’s not my fault. The devil made me do it.)
If you intend to follow closely, as of course you should, maybe you can help me count the number of times Pratt plays the faith card. I went to St. Peter Martyr School and attended the church by the same name, and I don’t recall ever hearing a nun or a priest drop God’s name as often as Pratt does.
In fact, I just watched a clip of Pratt talking to Fox News TV host and Donald Trump disciple Kayleigh McEnany, and over the course of 1 minute and 52 seconds, he mentioned God or Jesus 10 times.
“Thankfully, I married an angel who was very connected with Jesus and has brought me to the light,” Pratt said of his wife and former reality TV co-star Heidi Montag. “It’s been very empowering to just pray and just be on his path and just say, ‘God, if you want me to save these animals, save these humans and protect my city, just keep putting me in the place where I can do that.’”
Is he running for mayor or cardinal?
Look, I totally respect your average true believer. But I’m not entirely comfortable with a mayor who might be sitting around City Hall waiting for signs and smoke signals rather than knowing what to do on his own.
God has a lot on his plate. He might be busy multiplying fishes and loaves so people don’t go hungry thanks to the president’s tariffs and warmongering. Is he going to rush to answer a prayer for guidance about underfunded parks or broken sidewalks in Los Angeles?
How did we get here, you ask?
Well, Pratt is an AI creation, in a way. A composite of sorts. You combine the forces of social media, political rebellion, second-rate celebrity obsession and the Peter Principle, and here’s a little Trump puppet walking around L.A. like he’s the chosen one.
Add to that the very real essence of his appeal to some voters:
Los Angeles has problems. Big problems that don’t get fixed quickly enough or at all, and Pratt represents the angry voter who wants to know why City Hall can’t do better and where all the money went. He’s absolutely right when he says we shouldn’t have people living on the streets, using drugs on the streets and dying on the streets.
But if Pratt is in the general election rather than Raman, we’re in for a national media circus rather than a summit on solutions. Raman is well-versed on matters of relevance and could have pushed back against Bass in substantive, detailed ways. On the other hand, as Pratt has fairly argued, Raman headed City Council’s homelessness committee, so isn’t she partly to blame for the failures she tried to pin on Bass?
As for Pratt’s policy chops, he has not responded to my offers of a get-together. Absent that, and given his careful avoidance of local reporters who know their stuff, I read his platform on his campaign website and I can tell you that while he touches on many of the right issues — public safety, fiscal integrity, homelessness — attention to detail and depth of knowledge are not God-given strengths.
Maybe Pratt can actually deliver on his promise of a “treatment-led recovery model that addresses mental illness and addiction as the primary drivers of chronic homelessness.” But that would require an act of God (which I suppose is possible given their relationship), because those matters are primarily under the direction of the county, not the city.
This is the main problem here. Bass was beatable, and could have been pushed by a serious challenger to do better.
In the last election, Rick Caruso gave her a scare. That was partly because he had some depth on the issues, he was a successful businessman and philanthropist, he had served on the police commission and the water and power board, he had built relationships across the city and, along with his family, he had poured time and millions of dollars into underserved communities.
In this election, it looks as though Bass could get lucky and face off against a guy who lost his house in the Palisades fire, saw a few homeless encampments through his car window, and decided he wanted to be mayor. Some might have questioned his hubris, but only before learning that he was on a mission from God.
If you’re keeping count, that’s nine mentions of God so far in this column.
One more for the tie, with an eye toward five more months of campaign fodder.
Thank you, God.
steve.lopez@latimes.com
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., suddenly found himself on the defensive at a budget hearing on Wednesday when, amid levying accusations of the Trump administration’s “corrupt” dealings, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent fired back by bringing Wyden’s son’s investments into the exchange.
“We would like to hear what Adam Wyden and Jeffrey Epstein talked about,” Bessent said, referring to unearthed emails drawing a connection between the senator’s son and the disgraced financier.
“Did your son and Jeffrey Epstein talk about pole dancing as he begged him for money?”
The moment continues the political fallout for the many names associated with Epstein that — despite not amounting to proof of wrongdoing — continue to prompt embarrassment and scandal at even the smallest mention.
TOP FIERY MOMENTS AS DEMOCRATS CLASH WITH TREASURY SECRETARY BESSENT IN CHAOTIC HILL HEARINGS
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, left, pictured along Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore, right. (Aaron Schwartz/Bloomberg via Getty Images; Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
Epstein, a former financier, died while in prison on charges of sex trafficking minors in 2019, leaving behind questions of whether he facilitated illegal sexual encounters for his vast network of rich and powerful figures.
Amid public demands for transparency on the matter, the Department of Justice released troves of documents on Epstein late last year, unveiling a slew of new names with all manner of ties to the infamous figure ranging from purely innocuous to alarming.
Among them, emails surfaced indicating that Adam Wyden, Ron Wyden’s son, went to Epstein, hoping to gain his support for a business venture.
UNEARTHED EMAILS REVEAL DEM SENATOR’S SON WANTED EPSTEIN TO JOIN HIS FUND: ‘ENJOYED OUR CONVERSATION’
Sen. Ron Wyden leaves a Senate Democratic meeting at the U.S. Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 3, 2025, as the federal government shuts down after Congress and the White House failed to reach a funding deal. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
“Jeffrey, I wanted to thank you for taking the time to meet with me. I thoroughly enjoyed our conversation and hope my passion and dedication for my business came through in the meeting. I live and breathe this business and take my returns, integrity and reputation quite seriously,” the younger Wyden said in an email in April 2016.
“I intensely appreciate like-minded individuals and would very much look forward to having you join us at the fund.”
The emails came after Epstein pleaded guilty to soliciting a minor for prostitution in Florida in 2008.
It’s unclear what the business venture discussed by Adam Wyden and Epstein may have been or what, specifically, had been discussed in their conversations.
Even so, Bessent reminded viewers that the younger Wyden had a history of investing in off-color markets at Wednesday’s hearing.
DEMOCRATS ARE HAMMERING REPUBLICANS ON EPSTEIN, BUT ONE SENATOR BRUSHED OFF THE ISSUE YEARS AGO
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent addresses a press conference in Rosenbad after trade talks between the U.S. and China concluded in Stockholm, Sweden, on July 29, 2025. (Magnus Lejhall/TT News Agency/AFP via Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“Your son’s largest investment position was Rick’s Cabaret,” Bessent said, referring to a series of strip clubs.
Wyden, who has widely panned the Trump administration and its many officials for their own connections to Epstein, didn’t respond to Bessent’s jabs.
As election officials continued tallying ballots Wednesday, Republican Steve Hilton and Democrat Xavier Becerra continued to lead in the unsettled race to replace termed-out Gov. Gavin Newsom, with billionaire Democrat Tom Steyer hoping for a surge in late-arriving votes to push him into one of the top-two spots to advance to the November general election.
Hilton, a British immigrant and former Fox News commentator, told reporters outside the state Capitol in Sacramento Wednesday morning that he was “very encouraged” by the latest results, though he stopped short of declaring victory.
“It does look as if change is coming to California, and that is good news for everyone, every small business, every working family, everyone who wants to see our state set back on track,” he said.
Becerra and Steyer did not hold public events as of Wednesday afternoon.
Election data analyst Paul Mitchell said it would be nearly mathematically impossible for Steyer to close the gap.
“As we start to get more data, the runway is going to get shorter and shorter,” he said.
He said Steyer, to finish in the top two in the primary, would have to get about 30% of the remaining uncounted votes while Becerra would need to be limited to 15%. The self-funded billionaire has “a very high hill to overcome, and the challenge gets steeper and steeper as we get more data from the counties,” Mitchell said.
Once mired near the bottom of a crowded pack of Democrats in opinion polls, Becerra, a former Biden administration cabinet member, rocketed ahead of his rival candidates after former Rep. Eric Swalwell dropped out of the race in April amid allegations of sexual assault and misconduct. The scandal triggered an upswing of voter interest in California’s once sluggish governor’s race and in Becerra, who seized the moment.
“Here in Hollywood’s hometown, we love a good underdog story,” Becerra told cheering supporters at his election night party at La Plaza de Cultura y Artes in downtown Los Angeles.
Becerra spoke about his Mexican immigrant parents and becoming the first in his family to attend college. Though a longtime California politician, Becerra said that his campaign for governor was outspent and that he faced calls to drop out of the race.
“The underdog stayed in the fight,” he said. “Like my parents, I never gave up. … Never stopped believing in the beacon-light goodness of California and thankfully, neither did you.”
Steyer, who spent more than $216 million of his wealth on the race, has not conceded defeat.
His campaign manager, Heather Hargreaves, wrote in a letter to supporters Wednesday that “we’re going to give democracy time to work. County election officials are still counting ballots and don’t expect to know how many people voted in total until” Thursday, when officials are required to report the estimated number ballots left to process.
The billionaire former hedge fund owner campaigned against the corporate and special interests that have a powerful presence in Sacramento and often spend heavily in elections, including this year against Steyer.
Billionaires “do everything they can to hoard their wealth and avoid paying taxes, and we see corporations continue to rig the system for themselves — raising your prices to juice their profits. Screw that,” Steyer said at his election watch party at the Regency Ballroom in San Francisco.
Other candidates in the race included Republican Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and Democrats including former Rep. Katie Porter, San José Mayor Matt Mahan, former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and state Supt. of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond.
Villaraigosa, Mahan and Porter conceded the race Tuesday night.
California’s 2026 race for governor started slow but ended with a flourish, including the demise of a scandal-ridden Democratic favorite, the anointing of a Republican by Trump and Becerra’s unexpected rise from the depths of the candidate field.
Unlike gubernatorial elections in the last quarter of a century, this year’s race lacked a clear crowd-pleasing front-runner able to win over voters, such as movie star Arnold Schwarzenegger or Jerry Brown, a sage of the California electorate and scion of a storied political family. But it unfolded at a time when the state’s residents are overwhelmed by high housing costs, steep gas prices and overall unaffordability that threatens the “California dream” that once drew millions of people to the state.
“Normal people are not living and breathing politics on a daily basis,” said Tim Rosales, a strategist who ran Republican John Cox’s unsuccessful 2018 gubernatorial campaign. In today’s information-saturated environment, Rosales said, the race and its roster of “extremely milquetoast candidates” didn’t break through until the Swalwell scandal grabbed voters’ attention.
The 2026 gubernatorial primary has been one of the most unpredictable and expensive in decades and a race that was shaped early on by a number of heavyweight Democrats staying on the sidelines.
Though supporters urged them to run, former Vice President Kamala Harris, Sen. Alex Padilla and Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta passed on the race. It was in a state of limbo for months last year as Harris, one of the state’s most high-profile politicians, weighed whether to jump in.
“I don’t ever recall a playing field that looks like this one. Usually there’s a clear front-runner,” said veteran Democratic strategist Darry Sragow. “It’s easy to say that it reflects a lack of talent [but] that’s absolutely not true. Almost any of the candidates running could make a good governor.”
Still, candidates struggled for months to break through to voters.
In February, polls showed the crowded field of Democrats splitting liberal voters and opening a statistical possibility that the party would be boxed out of November under California’s open, top-two primary, which places all candidates on the same ballot. Only the first- and second-place finishers in the primary advance to the general election, regardless of their party affiliation.
Just when Swalwell appeared on the cusp of becoming the Democratic front-runner the San Francisco Chronicle and CNN published allegations that he sexually assaulted a former staffer and acted inappropriately with other women. Swalwell suspended his campaign.
It was Becerra who benefited the most. In less than two months, he vaulted from polling in the low single digits to the top of the field of candidates, according to surveys conducted by UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies that were co-sponsored by the Los Angeles Times.
“Becerra caught lightning in a bottle,” Rosales said. “It could have easily gone to any of the other candidates,” but many had baggage. Videos of Porter losing her temper hurt her image, the source of Steyer’s wealth and his unbridled campaign spending weighed on voters’ minds, and Villaraigosa and Mahan were “more centrist than what most Democrats wanted, and so Xavier Becerra was really the safe choice,” Rosales said.
Before Democratic voters began to narrow down their choices, Trump endorsed Hilton in early April. It helped the former Fox News host break away from Bianco, his main GOP rival.
In the days before the primary election, the race solidified into a three-way contest involving Becerra, Steyer and Hilton.
Steyer stepped up his fight in the remaining days, seeking to squeeze into one of the top two spots by battering Becerra in ads and at campaign rallies as a politician propped up by corporate special interests.
“We cannot afford to have a governor who’s been bought off by Big Oil. Period,” he said at a Sunday rally in Los Angeles.
Corporations, along with labor unions and interest groups including the California Assn. of Realtors, had spent more than $18.7 million to boost Becerra, according to the election spending tracker California Target Book. Many of the same groups also gave money to a committee intended to attack Steyer.
As the election neared, Becerra sharpened his attacks against Steyer, calling the billionaire a “liar” and accusing him of trying to buy the election.
“We are not going to let a billionaire or Trump’s handpicked candidate take over this state,” he said during a Sunday rally in Long Beach.
If Becerra faces off with Hilton in November he’ll have a distinct advantage. Democratic voters outnumber Republicans nearly 2 to 1 in left-leaning California.
Winning the general election would make the 68-year-old Becerra the first elected Latino governor of California. At roughly 40% of the state’s population, Latinos are California’s largest ethnic group but have not been represented in the governor’s mansion since 1875, when then-Lt. Gov. Romualdo Pacheco was elevated to fill a 10-month vacancy.
Times staff writers Iris Kwok, Susanne Rust, Andrew Khouri and Christopher Goffard contributed to this report.
-
Sports3 minutes agoFan disrupts NBA Finals Game 1 while trying to take selfie with Spurs’ Victor Wembanyama
-
Business15 minutes agoHow Google’s 32-million mosquito project could change California’s battle against dengue
-
Entertainment17 minutes agoAfter ‘Barbie’ success, Mattel looks to He-Man for another box-office lift
-
Lifestyle23 minutes agoWith Highway 1 open, Big Sur braces for its busiest summer in years
-
Politics30 minutes ago
Commentary: Bass clears first hurdle, but if Pratt holds off Raman, the mayoral race could be a holy war
-
Sports38 minutes agoThe Ball brothers’ head coach at Chino Hills, Steve Baik, is the new coach at Calabasas
-
World48 minutes ago
Social media operation linked to Iran manipulated public through fake Irish and Scottish profiles
-
News1 hour agoNational Guard has done little to reduce violent crime in D.C., a new study finds
