Los Angeles Is at a Crossroads. This Election Is Not Routine.
Every few years, Los Angeles holds an election that looks routine on paper, incumbents, challengers, ballot measures, but is actually anything but. The 2026 city council elections are one of those moments. I say that not to generate alarm, but because the facts demand it.
The Los Angeles City Council is the most consequential governing body in most Angelenos’ lives. More than the governor’s office. More than Congress. The 15 members of this council vote on zoning, housing policy, public safety, infrastructure, and spending that directly shape your neighborhood, your commute, your rent, and your safety. And it only takes eight votes to pass anything.
Right now, four sitting council members, Hugo Soto-Martinez, Eunisses Hernandez, Nithya Raman, and Ysabel Jurado, are card-carrying members of the Democratic Socialists of America. The city controller’s office is also held by a DSA member. That’s not a political attack; it’s a matter of public record. And it matters, because the DSA’s stated policy agenda is not a vague set of progressive values. It is specific, ambitious, and in many cases, fundamentally at odds with the kind of city most Angelenos want to live in.
The DSA’s own published priorities include the elimination of private homeownership in favor of what they call “social housing,” the defunding of the LAPD and other law enforcement, allowing non-citizens to vote in local elections, nationalizing industries like finance and utilities, and reversing bans on homeless encampments on public property, including opposing the city’s ability to remove garbage from those encampments on the grounds that it constitutes confiscation of “personal property.” These are not fringe interpretations of their platform. These are their stated goals.
Beyond the four DSA council members, the ideological gravitational pull is strong. Several other members regularly vote with the DSA bloc, not necessarily because they share every conviction, but because there’s a prevailing sense that this is the political direction of the city and that alignment is the path to re-election. That dynamic makes the formal DSA membership count almost beside the point.
Now look at what’s on the ballot in 2026. Eight council seats are up for election: Districts 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, and 15. Of those eight, only two are currently held by DSA members. That means six seats are in play, and the DSA has well-funded, well-organized candidates running in multiple races. They are also fielding a serious candidate for mayor and are competitive for the city attorney position. If they can flip four or more of those open seats while holding their current ones, they reach a governing majority on the council. Pair that with a DSA mayor, and you have unified control of city government.
I want to be clear about what that would mean in practice. It would not mean more progressive governance within a recognizable framework. Based on the DSA’s own agenda, it could mean the effective end of private property rights as they currently exist in this city, a dramatic rollback of law enforcement capacity while crime remains a persistent concern, and policies that would accelerate business and resident flight from Los Angeles at a time when the city is still recovering from economic disruption and the devastating wildfires of early 2025.
The DSA operates from an ideological framework, and that framework is not primarily concerned with whether its policies work. They are explicitly comfortable with disruption, with tearing down existing systems in pursuit of transformation. That’s their philosophy, stated openly. The question for Los Angeles voters is whether that’s the kind of disruption they’re signing up for.
I’m running for city council because I believe Los Angeles deserves serious, pragmatic leadership that prioritizes public safety, housing solutions that actually increase supply, and a business environment that keeps jobs here. I believe in governance that measures itself by outcomes, whether people are safer, whether homelessness is declining, whether the city functions, not by ideological purity.
More than that, I’m running because someone has to be willing to stand up to this agenda directly, without hedging, without worrying about whether it’s politically comfortable to do so. The moderate and pragmatic voices on this council need reinforcement. They need colleagues willing to make the case publicly, clearly, and without apology.
Los Angeles is a great city. It has survived a lot. But its governance is at an inflection point, and the 2026 elections will determine its direction. I’m asking for your vote, and I’m asking you to pay attention to every race on your ballot this year. The future of the city you live in is genuinely on the line.
