Trump has begun another trade war. Here's a timeline of how we got here
Canada's leader laments lost friendship with US in town that sheltered stranded Americans after 9/11
Chinese EV giant BYD's fourth-quarter profit leaps 73%
You're an American in another land? Prepare to talk about the why and how of Trump 2.0
Chalk talk: Star power, top teams and No. 5 seeds headline the women's March Madness Sweet 16
Purdue returns to Sweet 16 with 76-62 win over McNeese in March Madness
More than $13 million in unspent federal COVID-19 relief funds may soon be used for building upgrades instead of pandemic-related services following a unanimous Los Angeles City Council vote last month. The proposed reallocation has drawn criticism from public health advocates who argue the funds should support ongoing COVID-19 care, particularly for residents suffering from long COVID.
The council approved a proposal from the Community Investment for Families Department to redirect $4.23 million in Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act funds and $8.92 million in Community Development Block Grant funds toward infrastructure improvements. The projects include replacements of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems, roof repairs, and street lighting.
Critics say the plan diverts money from its intended purpose. “I think it’s pretty reckless behavior on the city’s part,” said Michelle Felix, a photographer and advocate who lost her mother to COVID-19. “And it’s really kind of confusing because they’re worried about maintaining the economy, but there won’t be any people around to maintain it if they keep dropping off due to chronic illness and death.”
According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, CARES Act funds must be used “to address unmet needs caused by the coronavirus pandemic.” Some proposed uses, such as $170,000 for “Los Angeles Mission Improvement Skid Row” and $90,000 for “Arleta-Weidner Street Lighting,” have raised questions about whether the projects meet federal eligibility.
A CIFD spokesperson defended the decision in a statement to L.A. Public Press, saying, “Improving a public facility to be prepared to address a future pandemic that would require a facility to have proper air circulation and space to accommodate future pandemic needs is an eligible use.”
However, Paul Hennesey, a COVID-19 safety advocate, expressed concerns about the vagueness of the HVAC improvement plans. “They are telling us to take their word for it,” he said, adding that the city has not committed to specific standards for infectious disease prevention, such as ASHRAE 241.
Most of the reallocated funds are slated for the Department of Economic and Workforce Development’s Microenterprise Recovery Grant project, which supports small businesses affected by the pandemic and a series of fires earlier this year. According to federal data, L.A. received over $694 million in total pandemic relief, but city officials have not specified how much remains unspent.
Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez voted for the reallocation. Her spokesperson, Naomi Roochnik, said the projects benefit communities recovering from the pandemic. “These buildings and projects often house services people rely on, so fixing them up actually is part of our greater recovery,” she said.
Still, long COVID advocates argue that direct support services are urgently needed. Proposals include establishing a permanent city or county office for long COVID, expanding access to in-home care and legal support, and incorporating long COVID into public health reporting.
Currently, L.A. offers no dedicated citywide services for long COVID. A virtual town hall held by L.A. County in April was criticized for lacking actionable support.
Dr. Anish Mahajan, chief deputy director of L.A. County Public Health, acknowledged the need for greater long COVID resources but said he could not comment on funding specifics. “It is an area that needs more attention, research, and planning around care, delivery, and access,” he said during a recent healthcare conference.
Harvard economist David Cutler, contacted by a local data researcher with long COVID, estimated that the condition could cost the city more than $12 billion over five years. That estimate is based on an analysis assuming approximately 268,000 Angelenos are affected by long COVID at any given time.
“Long COVID is a huge burden on the economy, and it is incumbent upon us to recognize that,” Cutler said in an email to L.A. Public Press.
The federal government recently pulled back support for long COVID. In February, the Department of Health and Human Services ended its Federal Advisory Committee on Long COVID and closed its dedicated office in March.
Also Read: https://www.lapost.com/content/judge-extends-ban-on-trump-administration-canceling-covid-school-aid
