LOS ANGELES (CNS) – A motion set to come before the Los Angeles City Council Wednesday that sought $2 million in security grants to provide private security for faith-based organizations will be withdrawn in light of expedited state funding, officials said.
A joint statement from council members Katy Yaroslavsky and Bob Blumenfield, who introduced the motion, and the Jewish Federation Los Angeles noted that Gov. Gavin Newsom has expedited the deployment of more than $76 million in nonprofit security grants.
“Given the state’s accelerated timeline, the motion is no longer necessary and will be respectfully withdrawn,” the joint statement read.
Originally slated for distribution this fall, the state’s Nonprofit Security Grant program is now accepting applications from nonprofit organizations. The application can be found at CALOES.ca.gov, and the deadline to apply is Sept. 23.
“This decisive action, following the recent violence at Adas Torah Synagogue, will greatly improve safety at Jewish Institutions across Los Angeles, ensuring our communities can gather in peace. We are grateful for the governor’s leadership and commitment to protecting our faith communities during these challenging times,” the statement said.
The council members will continue to identify ways in which the city can increase security at houses of worship and strengthen the partnership between law enforcement and religious institutions.
Yaroslavsky and Bob Blumenfield originally introduced a motion seeking to allocate $1 million to fund nonprofit security services to protect Jewish places of worship, community centers and schools. However, that proposal was later expanded to include other faiths with funding increased to $2 million.
The council members proposed that the funding would go toward the city’s Civil and Human Rights Department, which would facilitate a similar program to that of the state’s nonprofit security grants program.
At the time, Yaroslavsky said the proposal received support from Mayor Karen Bass, the City Attorney’s Office and interfaith leaders across the city.
On July 2, the council voted to continue the item for further consideration upon return from summer recess. Councilwoman Monica Rodriguez attempted to send the motion back to the council’s budget and civil rights committees for further deliberation.
Her request was initially approved in a 8-6 vote with council members Yaroslavsky, Blumenfield, Heather Hutt, Tim McOsker, Curren Price and Traci Park voting against it. Moments later, Councilman John Lee, who had voted to support Rodriguez’s request, then voted against it, and with his vote, denied the request.
The council members intended for the $2 million to fill in a “stopgap” and accelerate the state’s effort.
Yaroslavsky and Blumenfield’s original motion aimed to allocate $400,000 to the Jewish Federation Los Angeles for its Community Security Initiative, $350,000 for a contract with Magen Am for community patrols, and $250,000 to the Jewish Community Foundation so it may provide grants to nonprofit organizations to support Jewish community safety efforts in the city, according to Tuesday’s agenda.
The motion came in response to a violent clash between Palestinian and Israeli supporters outside a synagogue in the Pico-Robertson district June 23.
“It was an escalation of tension felt across the country and we need to take it seriously, and act swiftly. The threats are real and the fear of a proxy war for what’s happening in the Middle East spilling onto our streets here in L.A. is real,” Yaroslavsky said on July 2. “I’ve said this many times, but I think it is important to reiterate that everyone has a right to peaceful protest … but that doesn’t mean there’s a right to violence and all of us deserve to feel and to be safe, and to live without fear of hate.”
The grassroots organization Ground Game LA released a letter from its Jewish members “with the full support of our membership” to council members, calling the motion “flagrantly anti-Palestinian” by “holding up Jewish safety as the sole concern raised by these protests.”
It called the proposal “a misallocation of public funds” and demanded it be withdrawn or rejected.
Recent Comments