LACC Swap Meet takes on City Hall

Los Angeles, CA - April 7, 2026-- The City of Los Angeles will soon bear witness, through the judicial system, what happens when City Hall and its lawmakers not only treat enforcement as optional, but actively target private businesses who are operating lawfully in favor of personal and political agendas of a few, in a systematic manner that prioritizes politics over public safety, violates federal and state laws, and results in gross government overreach to drive out private business.

enough is enough lacc swap takes on city hall

I’m Phillip Dane, operator of the Los Angeles City College Swap Meet. We have filed a lawsuit against the City of Los Angeles because for years, the City failed to enforce its own sidewalk vending rules, including a longstanding rule that sidewalk vendors could not operate within 500 feet of a swap meet, and in addition, the City, its agents, and its employees actively created a hostile environment and nuisance around the LACC Swap Meet with the help of street vendors in a deliberate and concerted effort to drive out the LACC Swap Meet. This nuisance includes blocked sidewalks and bus stops, unavailable parking, and unsafe crowding.

This case is not just about a failure to enforce local rules; it is about retaliation and political targeting. The City has overstepped its authority and engaged in a malicious, targeted, and overt campaign of harassment, which includes attacking me and intentionally undermining my business.

Despite Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martinez stating that “CD13 is committed to finding a solution for the vendors and the swap meet.” and years of requests, the Councilmember has failed to return calls or emails and failed to deliver any practical solutions. Quite the opposite, the Councilmember has chosen to storm the office of a private contracting party and demand that the party end its relationship with the LACC Swap Meet.

Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martinez, who is noted in the lawsuit as being a key figure in the City’s machinations against LACC Swap Meet, has cited his personal history that has become the basis for his actions. However, the Councilmember’s personal history becoming the tool of governance in the City of Los Angeles is not sufficient. The outcome of the Councilmember’s and the City’s actions is that the City and the Councilmember have transgressed beyond their official duties, have selectively ignored the law, and unlawfully interfered with a private contract for the sole purpose of furthering a political agenda. They have done so through the furtherance of actions that are not protected by local, state, or federal law.

The City of Los Angeles has filed a Motion to Dismiss and a Special Motion to Strike Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 425.16, a SLAPP motion, on the basis of statutory immunity and the argument that the City’s actions were protected activity.

The City’s pending motions are a dangerous precedent. The City is claiming that it is statutorily immune from lawsuits for unlawful interference with contractual relations between private parties and that it can deliberately design conditions and an environment for the purpose of taking that business without just compensation.

The City of Los Angeles has a responsibility to prioritize lawful vending practices, protect public safety, and protect the economic welfare of the City’s businesses. The City has utterly failed to do this. Furthermore, the City has taken intentional and unlawful actions to deprive lawful business owners of their business and property.