More than halfway into the Westside Regional Alliance of Councils forum at First Lutheran Church in Venice, the moderator stopped the debate and asked a pointed question.
“But Traci, will you continue saying that Faizah is Mike Bonin’s lawyer?”
The moment crystallized the central tension of the 2026 CD11 race. Incumbent Councilmember Traci Park is still campaigning as though she is running against her predecessor. But Mike Bonin has been out of office for more than three years, and Park is now the incumbent. No matter how many times she lies about her opponent, Park owns the record and represents the status quo.
From her opening statement forward, Park repeatedly urged voters to “walk back in time” to 2020 and 2021, recalling encampments at parks and intersections and presenting her tenure as a corrective. “You guys all remember what our council district looked like,” she said, invoking tents at parks and major corridors.
It is a message that worked in 2021, when pandemic shutdowns and economic collapse drove visible homelessness to crisis levels. But the emergencies facing Westside families in 2026 look different. Federal immigration raids are targeting neighborhoods across Los Angeles, and immigrant families are navigating fear, housing instability and the threat of detention. At a two-hour forum, not a single question addressed ICE, sanctuary policy or immigrant protections.
Housing revealed the sharpest divide. Park pointed to “thousands of units in the pipeline” and argued CD11 is building. But most projects now under construction were approved or funded before she took office, and affordable housing takes years to entitle and finance. Malik argued Park “cannot claim housing under policies that she has actively opposed . . . and housing that has been built under her predecessor.”
Under Park’s tenure, the Bridge Home interim housing site closed. She presided over the illegal mass eviction at Barrington Plaza, displacing hundreds of rent-stabilized tenants. She has also opposed the 120-unit Venice Dell affordable housing project, which has secured approvals but remains stalled.
Malik grounded her case in her work as a public-interest housing attorney. “I’ve spent my career fighting for affordable housing . . . fighting for universal just cause protections,” she said, linking eviction prevention to homelessness prevention and reaffirming her support for Venice Dell . “Our affordability crisis is driving our homelessness crisis.”
Wineberg also backed Venice Dell. “It’s already been approved. We are having a housing crisis. So why are we continuing to fight this?” Park called the project a “boondoggle” and once again promoted an alternative site critics argue is not legally or financially viable. Venice Dell has become a proxy for a larger question: build affordable housing on public land, or delay again.
On SB 79, which would allow denser housing near transit, Park framed herself as defending “local control.” Malik countered that transit-oriented housing is necessary to address affordability. Park similarly criticized Measure HLA safe streets mandates for “eliminating the flexibility to engage directly with communities” – a flexibility that opponents note is often used to delay, block or even reverse life-saving street safety improvements.
Policing revealed another fault line. Park argued LAPD is understaffed and pledged to increase an already outsized police budget to rebuild the ranks. But her strategy goes beyond hiring. She also supports expanding “smart supplements” like Real Time Crime Centers and automated license plate readers, along with high-tech tools like robotic policing devices, effectively growing both the department’s funding and its non-human enforcement infrastructure.
Malik noted that nearly half of the city’s discretionary budget goes to LAPD, crowding out investment in housing, youth programs, infrastructure and mental health care, the very systems that prevent crime. “Forty-six percent of our discretionary budget goes to LAPD. Only 8% of the calls received are for violent crime,” she said, calling for expanded unarmed crisis response.
On homelessness, Park touted her expansion of 41.18 enforcement zones and argued the city must restore “consequences” when people refuse services and supported forced, long-term residential care focused on sobriety. Malik rejected the “service resistant” label, arguing that people often refuse shelter because it does not meet their needs. Enforcement-heavy strategies, she said, move people without reducing homelessness.
The Palisades fire loomed over the debate. Wineberg, who lost his home, pressed Park on fire department funding and preparedness. Park defended her record and endorsed a half-cent sales tax for fire services. Malik and Wineberg opposed regressive sales taxes and called for broader climate resilience planning.
Through it all, Park returned to the same refrain: the district is safer and more orderly than it was in 2021. But that comparison grows thinner with time.
WRAC is generally considered friendly terrain for Park. The alliance is composed of Westside neighborhood councils that tend to be dominated by older, white homeowners and long-time property owners. Their agendas frequently center on public order, encampments, parking, traffic, land use resistance and opposition to density. “Local control” arguments and enforcement-first messaging typically resonate in these rooms. That generational dynamic was visible in the audience, with many older attendees strongly backing Park.
And yet the afternoon did not unfold as a coronation. The crowd was visibly split, and applause lines landed unevenly. Support for Malik was especially pronounced among younger attendees, many of whom framed the race as a choice about the district’s future rather than a referendum on 2021. There were moments of audible frustration directed at the councilmember. At the close of the debate, a chant of “Faizah, Faizah” broke out, and some Park supporters appeared stunned by the intensity of the reaction.
