INGLEWOOD — A few moments before the City Council meeting began Jan. 8, a growing crowd outside of City Hall chanted: “What do we want? Rent control. When do we want it? Now.”
That was the rallying cry as more than 30 people participated in a brief march organized by the Uplift Inglewood Coalition before the City Council meeting.
“I have two beautiful girls that go to school here,” Inglewood resident Derek Steele said. “I want to make sure they have to ability to come back and stay here, too.”
The demonstration was set in motion by a proposed 150 percent rent increase by a property investment company on East 99th Street in Inglewood that went viral on social media in late December, catching the eye of Mayor James T. Butts Jr.
“We’re not going to be pushed into somebody’s idea of what a solution is but what we’re going to do is make sure that people aren’t pushed in mass out of apartment buildings,” said Butts, who advocated on behalf of those specific tenants for a six-month moratorium on any rent increases until July 1.
After that, instead of a 150 percent increase, renters will see a 28 percent increase from $1,150 to $1,475 a month, which Butts said is still way under the market rate of $1,800 in Inglewood.
“Here’s the problem,” Butts said. “When people come and buy property at today’s values, they can’t pay the mortgage or the property taxes and make a profit at what someone who has owned the property 40 years could do.”
The scene was somewhat tense inside the council chambers on the top floor of Inglewood City Hall as residents spoke in support of rent control.
After the room was deemed to be at full capacity, many of the people who attended the meeting to discuss rent control were asked to stand in the hallway by Mayor Butts.
Nearly 20 people ended up speaking and many others stood with them in solidarity.
“Invest in real people,” one man said.
Meanwhile, young people shared that teenagers are afraid they will not be able to afford to live in Inglewood when it’s time for them to live on their own.
“We hope that it is the beginning of a real dialogue with the community,” said Rev. Francisco J. Garcia Jr., who serves as the rector at Holy Faith Episcopal Church in Inglewood. “We believe that 28 percent [rent increase] is still too high. We propose a comprehensive tenant protection solution ordinance.”
“I’m really glad that our home value is almost double in the last eight years but I think that it is more important that we protect the people who have lived here their whole lives than to worry about my home value,” homeowner April Cooper added.
“2019 has been fortunate for us, what happened over the (winter) break is the stories of people’s rent increases came out and went viral. Celebrities were talking about it,” Steele explained before renewing the call for rent stabilization and just cause eviction for the Inglewood community. “We’ve been talking about this for the past couple of years.”
“This isn’t a unique Inglewood issue, it’s an issue in the state of California,” City Councilman Alex Padilla said.
“Whether or not it’s a situation that dictates a long-term solution we don’t know, these are things that we’re constantly talking about, constantly thinking about,” City Councilman Eloy Morales Jr. added. “I want everybody to see this as an example of the attention we actually are placing on it. … I know that this conversation will continue.”
“[Mayor Butts] created a situation that made a deal for that building but what are you going to do for everybody else in this community? We have to have a solution,” Steele said.
Before the end of the meeting, Mayor Butts shared a few specific ideas to protect renters like relocation allowances, total refunds on security deposits and no move-in costs to other properties under the same management as their previous apartment.
“We’re looking at the issue on a global fashion but we’re not using the word ‘rent control,’ we’re not using the word ‘rent stabilization,’ we’re looking more at tenant equity and tenant protection,” Butts said.
From Disparity Study to Solutions: Oakland Coalition and Mayor Barbara Lee Renew Commitment to Reform City Contracting
She committed to ensuring the coalition has direct access to City leadership by designating Assistant Deputy City Administrator Chuck Baker the primary liaison. Working alongside Deputy City Administrator Sofia Navarro, DWES Director Emylene Aspilla, Race and Equity Director Darlene Flynn, and other City departments, the coalition will continue advancing these priorities while maintaining regular communication with City leadership.
Present at the recent meeting on implementing recommendations on Oakland’s Disparity Study on city work contracts were (first row, l. to r.): Chuck Baker, Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee and Darlene Flynn. Second row, l. to r.) Samuel Adams, Erica Astrella, Chadwick Spell, Cathy Adams, Stanley Cooper, Maria Wagner, Len Turner, Derek Barnes, Paul Cobb. Photo courtesy of Oakland Mayor’s Office.
Special to The Post
On June 30, a coalition of minority business leaders, contractors and others met with Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee to discuss the City’s commitment to implement recommendations outlined in Oakland’s Disparity Study and eliminate barriers that have historically prevented Black and minority-owned businesses from fully participating in public contracting opportunities.
Representatives of the Oakland African American Chamber of Commerce (OAACC), National Association of Minority Contractors Northern California (NAMC NorCal), Construction Resource Center (CRC), and the East Bay Rental Housing Association (EBRHA) said the meeting represented an important milestone in a process that has been underway for several months.
On April 21, the Oakland City Council’s Life Enrichment Committee received a progress report from the Department of Workplace and Employment Standards (DWES), where Director Emylene Aspilla presented the coalition’s working document and outlined a collaborative implementation plan between the coalition and the City. That report established 30-, 60-, and 90-day objectives focused on five key priorities:
Reforming Local and Small Local Business Enterprise (L/SLBE) waiver practices
Strengthening prompt payment compliance
Improving procurement forecasting and transparency
Expanding contractor capacity building and business development
Increasing oversight, accountability, and public reporting
A series of working sessions was scheduled between coalition representatives, DWES, and the City Administrator’s Office to begin implementing those priorities but were temporarily delayed by the resignation of former City Administrator Jestin Johnson.
Rather than allowing that momentum to stall, OAACC President and CEO Cathy Adams requested a meeting with Lee to gain clarity on the City’s direction and reaffirm its commitment to implementing the recommendations contained within the Disparity Study.
Coalition leaders described the meeting as productive, candid, collaborative, and encouraging.
During the meeting, Lee spoke not only from her role as mayor but also from her experience as an 8(a) contractor and business owner, sharing that she understands firsthand what it takes to build and grow a successful company, employ a substantial workforce, compete for public work, and navigate the complexities of municipal contracting.
She committed to ensuring the coalition has direct access to City leadership by designating Assistant Deputy City Administrator Chuck Baker the primary liaison. Working alongside Deputy City Administrator Sofia Navarro, DWES Director Emylene Aspilla, Race and Equity Director Darlene Flynn, and other City departments, the coalition will continue advancing these priorities while maintaining regular communication with City leadership.
Mayor Lee also expressed her commitment to personally participate in future working meetings with the coalition.
“This meeting represents a renewed commitment to partnership,” said Adams. “Mayor Lee listened, engaged, and demonstrated that she wants to move beyond conversation and into implementation.”
CRC’s Len Turner said the roadmap is already in place. ““The City already has the evidence. What’s been missing is execution. …Now it’s time to deliver results.”
Mario Wagner, president of NAMC NorCal agreed that the next phase must focus on implementation, funding, and accountability.
“The coalition is ready to get to work. …The next step is ensuring these initiatives receive meaningful funding in the upcoming fiscal budget cycle. Just as important, the City must establish transparent reporting mechanisms that keep the public informed through regular progress reports, measurable benchmarks, and accountability.”
Coalition leaders also acknowledged that while City leadership has indicated it is reviewing Local and Small Local Business Enterprise waiver practices, the community continues to seek a formal response regarding existing long-term waivers, including waivers extending 10 and 25 years. The coalition believes those waivers should be comprehensively reviewed and, where appropriate, rolled back as part of the City’s broader contracting reforms.
The coalition is also calling on the City to include meaningful funding in the upcoming fiscal budget cycle to support implementation of the Disparity Study recommendations and establish better methods and mechanisms to keep the public informed through regular progress reports, measurable benchmarks, and transparent accountability.
The coalition’s immediate next step is to schedule a working meeting with Baker, Aspilla, Lee, and the appropriate City staff to review what has already been accomplished under the implementation framework.
COMMUNITY: What Trump’s Presidency Means for Black Economic Mobility
HOUSTON DEFENDER — Economic mobility for Black communities encompasses more than just income, including factors like homeownership, business creation, education, healthcare access, and voting rights.
By any measure, economic mobility is about more than money.
The ability to buy a home, start a business, attend college, access healthcare, vote, and advocate for one’s interests all shape whether families can build wealth and pass opportunity to future generations.
That reality is why many economists and civil rights scholars argue that the policies emerging from President Donald Trump’s second administration have major implications for Black economic mobility.
Some supporters contend that Trump’s emphasis on deregulation, lower taxes, and merit-based policies could create broader economic growth. Critics argue that cuts to diversity initiatives, civil-rights protections, and social programs disproportionately harm Black communities that already face historic barriers to wealth accumulation.
The truth may ultimately be found somewhere between those competing narratives.
Economic mobility: Income and more
According to Federal Reserve data, the median wealth of Black families remains a fraction of that of white families. Black homeownership rates also continue to trail national averages, while Black entrepreneurs remain more likely to be denied financing and less likely to receive venture capital investment.
“Where you start in America still matters too much,” noted economist William Darity Jr., whose research has focused extensively on racial wealth disparities.
As corporations scaled back Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion initiatives and government agencies faced sweeping cuts, Black women were among the hardest hit. Between spring and late 2025, more than 300,000 Black women either lost jobs, left the workforce, or were pushed out of employment, according to labor data and economic reports tracking the crisis.
Unemployment among Black women climbed from 5.4% to as high as 7.3% by the end of the year — one of the steepest increases of any demographic group. These numbers have an outsized impact on Black communities because nearly 80% of Black mothers in America are primary, sole, or co-breadwinners for their families, according to the Institute for Women’s Policy Research.
And what has gone almost unnoticed is that between November 2025 and February 2026, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that 567,000 Black men lost their jobs across all sectors.
As a result, policy changes affecting employment, housing, education, healthcare, business development, and voting rights can have significant economic consequences.
Texas Southern University (TSU) Professor Michael O. Adams argues that the current U.S. “war economy” isn’t helping matters.
“We need more reinvestment into domestic kinds of issues,” said Adams. “I’m looking at healthcare, education, and economic development… the war economy takes away from those efforts.”
According to Fortune Magazine, the engagement—dubbed Operation Epic Fury—is producing a “war economy” that is costing U.S. taxpayers over $1 billion a day.
Housing: The foundation of wealth
Homeownership remains the primary source of wealth for most American families.
One area of concern among housing advocates is the Trump administration’s opposition to race-conscious housing and reparative programs. The administration recently challenged a housing-reparations initiative in Evanston, Illinois, arguing that race-based housing assistance violates civil-rights laws. Supporters of the program say such initiatives are designed to address generations of housing discrimination.
Critics worry that similar challenges could limit future efforts to narrow the racial homeownership gap.
At the same time, supporters of the administration argue that reducing regulations and increasing housing supply could help all buyers regardless of race.
Whether those broader market benefits outweigh the loss of targeted programs remains a subject of debate among housing economists.
Black businesses face new questions
Black-owned businesses generated record growth following the pandemic, yet many still rely heavily on government contracts, supplier-diversity programs, and technical-assistance initiatives.
One of Trump’s most consequential actions has been a series of executive orders that have ended or restricted Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) requirements in federal agencies and federal contracting. The administration argues these measures restore “merit-based opportunity” and equal treatment under the law.
However, many Black business advocates see potential economic risks.
The administration revoked Executive Order 11246, a civil rights-era policy that required federal contractors to take affirmative action to ensure equal opportunity.
Reuters reported that minority contractors have already expressed concerns that changes to disadvantaged-business programs could reduce opportunities for Black-owned firms competing for infrastructure and government projects. Some contractors reported revenue losses, delays, and layoffs connected to certification changes.
For cities like Houston, where minority-owned firms play a major role in public contracting, the long-term effects could be substantial.
Source: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
And with so many taxpayer dollars still directed towards the war in Iran, Houston’s roughly 200,000 Black businesses are on the front lines when it comes to being negatively impacted. Higher freight and energy costs, for instance, are wreaking havoc on already thin margins.
“I’m not sure people realize the tight margins small businesses operate within,” said Judson Robinson, president and CEO of the Houston Area Urban League. “When the price of oil needlessly skyrockets, the burden on Black people increases exponentially… it erases profit margins and can put you out of business.”
Education and workforce development
Higher education remains one of the strongest predictors of lifetime earnings.
The Trump administration has highlighted additional investments in Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) as evidence of its commitment to expanding opportunity. The White House has promoted increased support for HBCUs and workforce development initiatives as part of its Black History Month agenda.
However, in September of last year, the Department of Education (ED) announced it would pull the plug on approximately $350 million in discretionary funds for institutions that enroll a high percentage of minority students, including HBCUs
Additionally, many education advocates argue that the broader anti-DEI campaign may reduce programs designed to recruit, retain, and support underrepresented students on college campuses.
The administration contends such programs often violate principles of equal treatment. Opponents argue they address documented disparities in access and outcomes.
Healthcare and economic security
Economic mobility is difficult without good health.
Healthcare cuts or reductions in public benefits often affect Black households disproportionately because Black Americans are more likely to rely on Medicaid and other public-health programs.
Policy analysts warn that reductions in healthcare access can produce long-term economic consequences, including higher medical debt, lower workforce participation, and reduced family wealth.
For many families, healthcare costs can be the difference between building savings and falling deeper into financial insecurity.
Voting rights and political power
Economic mobility is also connected to political power.
Voting determines who controls budgets, education funding, housing policy, infrastructure spending, and economic-development initiatives.
Civil-rights advocates have expressed concern that efforts to weaken federal oversight of voting protections could reduce political influence in Black communities. While supporters argue that election-integrity measures strengthen confidence in elections, critics contend that some policies not only create additional barriers to participation but also actively create a reality of voter suppression.
The economic implications are significant because communities with less political representation often have less influence over public investment decisions.
Bottom line
For Black America, economic mobility has never depended solely on individual effort. It has also depended on public policy. Federal and state policies moving forward may determine whether Black families can narrow longstanding wealth gaps—or whether those gaps become even harder to close.
Trump Administration Shelves Harriet Tubman $20 Bill Plan
ATLANTA DAILY WORLD — The Trump administration has halted plans to feature Harriet Tubman on the $20 bill, a proposal that originated under President Barack Obama in 2016. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent confirmed Monday that there are no current plans to move forward with the redesign, which would have made Tubman the first Black American and first woman in over a century to appear on U.S. paper currency.
The Trump administration has shelved the decade-long effort to put Harriet Tubman on the $20 bill— while simultaneously pushing to putTrump’s face on a brand-new $250 bill.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent confirmed Monday (July 6) that the Trump administration is “not at present” planning to move forward with placing Tubman’s likeness on the $20, according to Spectrum News. Bessent did not elaborate.
Tubman would have been the first Black American — and the first woman in more than a century — on the face of U.S. paper currency. The plan originated under President Barack Obama in 2016, when then-Treasury Secretary Jack Lew announced that Tubman would replace Andrew Jackson on the front of the $20 bill, originally set to enter circulation in 2020 to coincide with the 100th anniversary of the 19th Amendment.
Trump blocked the plan during his first term, calling it “pure political correctness” and suggesting Tubman be placed on the $2 bill instead.
When President Biden took office in 2021, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said the administration was “taking steps to resume efforts” and exploring ways to “speed up the process.” Former Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen later estimated the bill would be ready by 2030, citing the need for sophisticated anti-counterfeiting technology.
In May 2025, during a tense exchange with Rep. Joyce Beatty, a Black Democrat from Ohio, Bessent was asked for an update on the Tubman bill’s status. His response: “I can’t, my staff will get back to you.”
The contrast between the administration’s handling of the Tubman redesign and its support for a proposed $250 bill featuring Trump drew immediate criticism.
Pressed on the discrepancy, Bessent told Spectrum News: “The 250 requires an act of Congress, because you can’t have a living person on U.S. currency.”
He added: “For us to change an existing bill, whether it’s $1 through $100, takes many years in advance.” No new person has been added to U.S. paper currency since 1928.
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, a Democrat from New Hampshire who has been introducing legislation to put Tubman on the $20 since 2015, said she was “extremely disappointed” by Bessent’s announcement.
“Commemorating Harriet Tubman would have been the perfect way to honor the women who helped build this country and bravely stood up for freedom and equality throughout our nation’s remarkable 250-year history,” Shaheen said in a statement. “Though Secretary Bessent may be more interested in illegally plastering Donald Trump’s image on a $250 bill, putting a woman on a U.S. bill remains long overdue, and I will keep focusing on finding a path to honor Harriet Tubman’s patriotism and sacrifice.”
Tubman was born into slavery in the early 1820s and went on to conduct 13 missions on the Underground Railroad, helping approximately 70 people escape to freedom. She later served as a Union spy and nurse during the Civil War.
The $20 bill currently features Andrew Jackson, the seventh U.S. president and a slaveholder who signed the Indian Removal Act of 1830, which forcibly displaced tens of thousands of Native Americans.
The Black Information Network is your source for Black News! Get the latest news 24/7 on The Black Information Network. Listen now on the iHeartRadio app or click HEREto tune in live.
Home-based business with potential monthly income of $10K+ per month. A proven training system and website provided to maximize business effectiveness. Perfect job to earn side and primary income. Contact Lynne for more details: Lynne4npusa@gmail.com 800-334-0540