S1: Coming up on KPBS roundtable this week , President Trump attempts to ban transgender soldiers from serving in the military. We take a closer look at the legal challenges that followed and how the new administration is trying to transform the military.
S2: While the order is not an immediate ban , it is an order for the Pentagon to institute a ban.
S1: And San Diego's city council removed a controversial zoning rule for parts of southeast San Diego. We hear more about it and the grassroots effort to push back. Plus , a look at other stories we've been following on the roundup. That's ahead on KPBS roundtable. Late Monday , President Donald Trump signed an executive order to ban transgender people from serving in the military. The move puts the future of the estimated 15 to 25,000 transgender US service members in doubt. The push against transgender soldiers was but one of Trump's actions , signaling a sharp change in policy and culture for the military. The president has also taken aim at diversity , equity and inclusion programs across the federal government , including in the armed services. Here to talk more about these changes and what they mean is Andrew Dyer. He is KPBS military and Veterans affairs reporter. Andrew , thanks for being here.
S2: Hey , thanks for having me.
S1: Before getting into the specifics on Trump's effort to ban transgender soldiers in the US military , I just wanted to get a temperature check from you.
S2: You know , whenever it comes to the military and military leadership , uh , this is an organization built around saying , yes , we can accomplish this mission and its leadership is not , you know , going to tell you that they can't do something. So as orders come down the pipeline , you know , they are scrambling to comply. That's kind of what the military does , is follow orders. So , uh , whatever the order , whatever they're being told to do , they're going to try to do it regardless of the kind of greater circumstance around it , for sure.
S1:
S2: You know , nothing happens without a written instructions on how to make it happen. Everything is prescribed and regimented. And so a lot of times there is a little bit of confusion from your middle managers. Okay. We know this is coming down the pipe , but how do we do this. What does it mean exactly. And I think those details are the things that are missing. And that's where you have people kind of you know , we would say they're going high and right on things you saw last week , uh , the Air Force boot camp , uh , removed a lesson unit on the Tuskegee Airmen in response to this. It has since been reinstated. But , you know , you have people kind of guessing. What does it mean to eliminate diversity ? Does that mean we don't talk about the first woman to serve anymore in our training units ? Do we not remember the Tuskegee Airmen ? You know , clearly that is , you know , not what they're doing now , but without the guidance and without the the you know , the prescribed instruction. It's it's difficult for leaders to , uh , you know , make sense of the way forward. Yeah.
S1: Yeah. And so getting rid of Dei programs has been a big priority for the Trump administration at large with the federal government , but certainly with the military as well. But how what's the history of Dei in the military ? You talked a little bit about it , but unpack that for me.
S2: Well , you know , the military for , you know , being known as kind of a conservative organization overall. Um , it's always been , uh , very diverse. You know , the the military is always needed warm bodies for its various missions. Once we moved to an all volunteer military after the Vietnam War , you know , increasingly , you see the military recruiting from more economically disadvantaged communities , which , you know , so happened to oftentimes also be communities of color. And , you know , the military is a very diverse place , and it's very become kind of part of the routine in the military. You know , during Black History Month , you know , uh , women's history Month , Asian American Pacific Islander month. There's always , you know , if you're on a ship , they'll have a sheet cake and they'll have , like , a special meal on the mess decks. You get to go down and maybe they'll have crab legs. Maybe they'll have steak. Get a piece of cake. That's kind of what dei looks like on a Navy ship. Um , that's the best way I can describe it is , is these occasional , uh , little cake cutting ceremonies and stuff like that , which sounds kind of trite , but that's what we're talking about when things that aren't going to happen now. So , um , the military integrated before a lot of places in the US were integrated. Uh , women were allowed on warships in the 1990s. And today , you know , I served on a ship that , uh , was built pre integration. And it was very difficult for women. But now ships are designed with women crew members in mind. So there's enough berthing and and bathrooms for , for women. And it's just a normal part of the way the military does business now , and , um , the diversity is baked in. So you may eliminate prescriptive instructions and , you know , uh , observances , but you can't de diversify the military. Right.
S1: Right. And I think a lot of people who take aim at Dei programs will often think of it or characterize it as something like , you know , almost this sort of attachment onto it , this little thing that's added that maybe you can just take away. But what you're describing is diversity , inclusion. These are things that are just part and parcel of the military and part of the community , the culture there. Absolutely.
S2: Absolutely. You know , um , whenever I went dating myself , but I went to boot camp in 2001 , being from like , South Texas , I'm used to a very specific kind of environment and culture and people around me. And , you know , it was eye opening , uh , joining the military. You know , there was a kid in my boot camp division from China , and I did not know that kids from China could join the Navy , but they can. And , um , I knew , you know , kids from Africa , like a lot of immigrants , joined the military. I met people from all over the country and all over the world who were serving in uniform. So it was very eye opening to a kid from one place to go and kind of be thrown into this kind of melting pot as , as cliche as that may be like , I do think for all of its faults , you know , the military is maybe the most diverse workforce in the US.
S1: And so Trump signed an executive order to ban transgender soldiers from serving. But that ban , it's not in place yet. Right.
S2: You know , this is kind of what you kind of hear this language whenever , uh , certain leaders didn't want to allow women into combat. You know , whenever there was a debate over over LGBT , you know , gay and lesbian troops serving openly is that it's going to affect unit cohesion. These are kind of the words they use to justify excluding people. But but this executive order goes further , and it basically denies that being transgender is a legitimate way to live life and that they say that , you know , it's a falsehood and that , um , a person asking other people to honor this falsehood by referring to their preferred pronouns is somehow , uh , not consistent. I'm quoting here not consistent with the humility and selflessness required for a service member. So that language is stark to use for members of your armed forces. You're kind of denying , uh , their ability to serve honorably , Which is , I think , a step beyond just saying that it's detrimental to cohesion , whatever , whatever that means. You're you're saying that somebody like you is completely unfit for service because you know there's something wrong with you.
S1: And as you mentioned the language before , it was a lot more coded in terms of talking about excluding certain populations from serving or serving , perhaps in certain areas of the military. But you're right , the language is getting a lot more unvarnished. Um , much more , uh , um , just explicit. Certainly this executive order has been challenged in court already.
S2: Um , and you'll have to be patient with me. I'll. I'll give you a little bit of history here. Um , the first transgender ban was challenged in court. Also during Trump's first term. It was tied up in court. There was an injunction. Um , then injunction was lifted in 2019 , but the case never was able to go through the court system. So the courts never ruled whether this ban was constitutional or not. Um , when Joe Biden came into office , one of the first things he did was reverse the ban and allowed transgender troops to to serve openly. Um , now , basically , we're seeing a renewal of that legal challenge where that executive order came out Monday night , Tuesday morning , uh , very early Tuesday , um , that there was already , uh , a suit filed in , in district court in Washington , DC , uh , requesting another injunction and again , starting the legal fight , arguing that a ban on transgender troops violates the Fifth Amendment , uh , which is the equal protection under the law for for all Americans. So that's their argument that this is unconstitutional. Traditionally , the courts have granted the military great leeway to determine the makeup of their force. You know they don't. The courts have been hesitant to come in and tell the military how to shape its own force. Um , so , you know , you see these constitutional issues. It's an interesting question whether the courts will step in or not , or they'll fall back on this kind of traditional precedent of letting the military do whatever it wants as far as its personnel decisions. Mm.
S1: Mm.
S2: You know , um , people in the military , you know , I say this a lot. You know , people in the military are just people. You know , they like safety. They like stability. They like knowing , um , where they're going to be next year. They like knowing they have a job. They like knowing they have a place to live. Uh , they like , you know , putting their kids in school and knowing their child will be able to remain in this school for X amount of years. You know , you you do move a lot around , a lot in the military. But , um , you try to find stability wherever you can find it. And so , um , the prospect of , of a band is incredibly disruptive. And it really throws your , your future plans up in the air. Um , I spoke to one service member this week who is a second class petty officer in the Navy , um , serving openly , uh , their gender nonconforming. And , um , they've been selected for an officer program. Uh , they're already have , I believe they said they had two bachelor's degrees , uh , and a master's degree as a petty officer. I've been in the Navy nine years , and , um , they've been selected for a very competitive program to become an officer. You know , one of only a few people selected each year for this program. So we're not talking about , you know , people that are getting in trouble necessarily or people that are scraping by , you know , they're high performers. You know , you don't get selected for an officer program because you're a bad sailor. You know , but now this individual is wondering whether they'll have a job in six months. So the Pentagon has 60 days to change its policy. And the prescription is is there in the language of the executive order , while the order is not an immediate ban , it is an order for the Pentagon to institute a ban.
S1: This feels a bit like some whiplash here , because just before Trump took office , the Pentagon announced its plan to help about 30,000 LGBTQ plus veterans fix so-called bad paper charges. This was an effort to address dishonorable discharges related to the military's don't ask , don't tell policy. But now again , you have these executive orders targeting die programs , Transgender service members. Help me square this.
S2: They like to take orders and execute orders. Um , so during Trump's first term , when you saw the more willingness from his administration to politicize the military , you know , it was a little destabilizing. And a lot of people were just reacting in the moment. And , um , yeah. So with the Pentagon maybe learning some lessons from Trump's first term , they're involved in this lawsuit with these LGBTQ plus veterans. Um , you have people that were we're not. Just don't ask , don't tell. But you know , don't ask , don't tell didn't come into. Policy until 1994. Previous to that , you have people getting kicked out , being almost like witch hunted right there. They would launch an investigation in sick , you know , NCIS to follow you around and see which bars and nightclubs you were going to. So some real kind of cruel treatment of of folks and some harsh language on their discharge papers. And that's what we're talking about doing. Is the military going back and changing that language on their paperwork. Um , and , you know , it's a lot of work for the Pentagon to do that. They're fighting it in court. They didn't want to go and proactively do this. But I mean , I'm not in the room. I , I haven't spoke with their attorneys , but , uh , knowing that the Trump administration is coming in , not knowing what the future of that lawsuit would be , um , they they settled the suit , you know , the first week of this year , uh , and they will be , um , not proactively changing all of the records , but setting up a website and making it much easier for veterans who want those upgrades , those discharge upgrade codes to apply and get it done in a much more streamlined process than what currently exists. So I don't know that , you know , the incoming Trump administration affected that decision , but this is an institution with a long memory. And I think maybe there were some people , you know , making decisions who who knew what was coming.
S1: Andrew Dyer is KPBS military and veterans affairs reporter. Andrew , thanks for joining us.
S2: Hey , thanks so much.
S1: Up next. San Diego's city council has removed a controversial housing development rule for parts of southeast San Diego after residents pushed back. That's coming up on roundtable. Welcome back to KPBS roundtable. I'm Scott Rodd. This week , San Diego's city council repealed a footnote in the city code that allowed for denser housing in southeast San Diego compared to other parts of the city. The neighborhoods that were affected by that footnote , also known as the infamous footnote seven , are formerly redlined communities with majority Black and Latino residents. Following grassroots organizing and outcry from neighbors. The city nixed that rule this week. Katie Hyson is KPBS racial justice and social equity reporter and has been reporting on this evolving story. Katie , welcome back to roundtable.
S3: Thanks for having me.
S1: Footnotes in the city code rarely make news , but footnote seven is an exception.
S3: The city and the area's council members have been really vocal about needing a lot more housing and quickly. And there are a few green spaces in southeast neighborhoods like Encanto and Emerald Hills that are zoned to keep a more rural feel with large lot sizes , and that's part of their community plan. The footnote was some have called it sneaky. At the very least , it was kind of an odd way to rezone those areas without actually going through the standard rezoning process. It applies all the rules of the densest housing zone to what's supposed to be this like rural feeling zone , without formally changing it on the map. So in the plainest terms , on a piece of land that a developer could put one home anywhere else in the city and these neighborhoods , only these black and Latino neighborhoods , they can put four homes on that same piece of land. Um , but I kind of only speculate because the city didn't actually answer clearly who was responsible for the footnote , where it came from and why ? Um , even the former former planning director of the city when it passed said he didn't know. So the mystery thickens. Wow.
S1: Wow. So there is some mystery to the origin , but the response was anything but , you know , subtle. You spoke to residents in communities that were affected by this footnote.
S3: And these neighbors , you know , the area is lower income. And these neighbors pooled their resources and they paid this big appeal fee for this development. And the city's rebuttal letter said , this is fine , actually , because of footnote seven. And they thought , well , what is footnote seven ? And they discovered this tiny sentence of a footnote that singled out their neighborhoods that was buried in this really large land code update years ago that had a ton of changes in it. And this was this little footnote that was allowing all these changes to come to their neighborhood.
S1: All right. It does seem a little sneaky. You mentioned Encanto.
S3: So the planning area is actually called Choice Valley Planning Area , and that's what's affected here. The footnote also applied to I think it was called the Southeast Planning Area. But the the other one mentioned in the footnote doesn't actually have any of the zoning in it. So really we're talking about choice Valley neighborhoods in Kanto , Emerald Hills , that area.
S1: You reported that it took a kind of like grassroots investigative effort to unearth footnote seven , understand it , get people's heads around how it applies to their neighborhoods. Tell me about this.
S3: It was really fascinating to watch. It was kind of like an organizing 101 class to witness. So this group of neighbors really went down a rabbit hole because at first they don't know why this is happening. They think there's a mistake because you look at the zoning map and these developments don't fit the zone on the map. So these are normal people working nine to fives , raising families , doing this , investigating in their own time. This happened over about a year. And they're combing through , you know , hundreds and hundreds of pages of really dense documents and educating themselves on federal and local laws. And like , I have three college degrees and this stuff was really hard for me to understand. Like , I was sitting there rereading lines like it took me a while to wrap my head around it. And all of that led up to the appeal and then the rebuttal letter that brought the footnote to light.
S1: And I'm curious , you know , people throw the the phrase , you know , yimby or Nimby around , you know , yes. In my backyard. No , in my backyard. Would you describe these folks who got involved in this as NIMBYs ? No.
S3: Um , I mean , some would I'm sure I wouldn't , um , because they're very emphatic that it's not an issue of more housing coming. They understand the housing shortage. I think for them , part of it is , um , scale , um , that they want. They want the city to be sharing the burden of bringing in more housing. And they they see it disproportionately landing in their area in different ways. Um , part of it is like an infrastructure issue. Like the the city historically didn't invest in this area in the same way. And so they have concerns about their infrastructures , ability to handle this density. And then also , you know , this community plan they had that this goes around and , and in a way that , you know , wasn't transparent , that they weren't aware of. So no , I wouldn't say Nimby , but I would say , you know , plenty of people have said that.
S1:
S3: Note he lives in Encanto , but there were a number of neighbors involved , um , in the in the hunt , including , uh , Martha Abraham. Um , Andrea. Hotaru. Um , and then you know , this really the community planning group. Um , and then they worked to get the community on board , which was really interesting. You can imagine , like , okay , it takes so much effort to understand this as it is. And not only do they have to understand it , they have to get their neighbors to understand it and get them to care. So it was interesting to watch. Yeah.
S1: Yeah. And I remember from some of your earlier reporting , this uphill battle of like trying to get community members to , to really understand that , like , okay , this seems bureaucratic. We're talking about a footnote , but really it's important , you know , like , trust us , this stuff is really important. And , you know , the community did get on board with this and they started to understand it.
S3: They've been really trying to get more people involved in the community planning group. I was at the meeting where they gave a presentation on the footnote , and they were honestly , they explained it better than I did at the time. As a reporter who's supposed to boil these things down ? Um , they Andrea presented it in a really compelling way. Um , and you could see it click for people as they were watching these slides go by. And they also they also fit it into the larger narrative of this , um , history of discriminatory housing laws , um , and efforts following civil rights , and then the ways local government tried to get around those civil rights gains. And I think that helped it click for people. Um , and then they they started making these , uh , bright yellow shirts that said no on footnote seven. And they started showing up together at public meetings. Um , public comments started growing to at one point it was like a lot. Lately , it's been almost a hundred requests to speak from these neighbors. Um , and they've been really , like , doing their research , coming with receipts , and I'm fascinated. You know , I've only been in San Diego for two years. Uh , but since I've been here , this is new for me to see this level of coordination between neighbors , especially in an area that , you know , they'll say themselves , they often feel targeted because they think that people think they can get away with things. They're because they don't think the neighbors have the time and resources to fight back. That's how they feel. And so , um , if that's the case , you know , they're really proving it wrong.
S1: You know , however you feel about this issue. What is reassuring and kind of uplifting is , you know , there's a lot of conversation about how local politics , local democracy is suffering. There's not as much engagement , not as much a civic engagement. But this is a great example of folks getting together and finding something that they're concerned with and elevating that concern and having it heard. As a side note , I'm just curious. We're talking about having this footnote be , um , sort of discussed and understood by the community and how that may be like an uphill battle for folks who first found it. Well , is it an uphill battle for you to pitch the story to your editor ? Like , like , hey , trust me , this story on a footnote. It'll be really interesting , I promise.
S3: I love that you asked that , because I think that's the exact words that came out of my mouth is like , listen , I have a story. It's about a footnote , but I promise it's like really worthwhile. And I'll figure out a way to make this compelling. And luckily , my editor is really good about seeing the vision , and she trusts me. Um , and I , I would kind of go to different reporters in the newsroom and , and say , like , I try to almost pitch it to them to try different ways of setting up the story to see , you know , you can kind of see when the light goes out of people's eyes versus when they're engaged. So I would try to run it by , you know , my peers and see what could get them interested. Uh , run it by my husband who's not in journalism and , you know , is not somebody who cares deeply about land code , you know , and I would wait when I get his attention on something , that's when I know , like , okay , I've got to weigh in to this story.
S1: Well , it's it's smart a little your own little personal focus group going on. Yeah.
S3: Yeah. One man focus group. Oh.
S1: Oh.
S3: Across the board , they seem to concede two things , uh , that the way in which the footnote was passed was not. They used the phrase not best planning practices and not transparent , um , and that the way it's written to single out some neighborhoods instead of applying across the city is wrong. They did not concede that it violates , uh , federal fair housing laws , and they did not concede to halt or reverse these developments , that the applications are already completed that rely on this footnote. They say that would violate state law. Um , and they didn't concede that housing density itself is the problem. And so I think that leaves this open for them to come back and try to pass something similar to footnote seven , but city wide.
S1: Were there any people at the meeting who were speaking in defense of footnote seven ? No.
S3: And it would be hard to imagine that , honestly , the visuals of it , if you saw all these neighbors there and their bright yellow shirts really impassioned , you know , hour of public comment , um , pointing to the this , you know , history of , um , systemic racism and housing laws. And , um , it was pretty across the board that the the vote was going to be to repeal footnote seven. Um , I think it's just a , you know , careful in how and how they repeal it that they're not saying housing density is the issue.
S1: San Diego and California at large have a housing crisis. Pretty much everyone agrees there needs to be more housing production , but sometimes housing production efforts have unintended consequences , especially on already disadvantaged or vulnerable communities.
S3: Um , unintended consequences , I would say , could be like the environmental effects of that on an area that the city has deemed , um , already overburdened by environmental concerns and health issues. Um , and certainly the community backlash was unintended.
S1: After repealing the footnote at the council meeting , this council session took a bit of an unexpected turn. Council members began criticizing the city's Adu bonus program.
S3: I maybe reporting for NPR has turned me into a big nerd , but I was just shocked.
S1: I can do that. Yeah.
S3: Yeah. Yeah. The city's bonus Adu program was not on the agenda at all. The footnote is a separate issue , related only in that it allows housing density that kind of skirts around zoning. Um , and the state law. State law prohibits bringing up items for discussion or voting that weren't on the public agenda. And Henry Foster , the third. Who brought this motion up , has been very vocally pro housing and pro housing density in his district. And he rolled in into the motion of the footnote , which was pretty , you know , pretty decided. Um , he folded in this second motion for city staff to bring back an action item to remove the bonus Adu program , basically meaning let's get this on the agenda for the council to debate taking away bonus ADUs from San Diego , which the city. It's been a real feather in their cap. It's something they're very proud of. It's won a National pro Housing award. Um , so it was very surprising to me. And some council members brought up similar concerns about this bonus Adu program , um , as Henry Foster did. Um , and some members asked him to split the motion because they were concerned that it you know , because of that state law , I mentioned that it could be it could invalidate both motions. And he refused. And so the bonus Adu motion passed , um , possibly because they weren't going to say no on the footnote. So yeah. Totally unexpected. Um , could not convince my husband that that was exciting , but I sure tried.
S1: Well , it's definitely something that a lot of people in San Diego pay attention to. And again , Adu stands for Accessory Dwelling Unit. It's those sort of small additional housing units that can be built , um , beside , um , single family homes. This program streamlined the building of them and really lifted the limits in certain situations in terms of how many of these could be built. Um , and is a key piece of the city's and certainly Gloria's mayor , Todd Gloria's strategy for increasing housing production. Now on the topic , though , you know , Gloria has touted this program , but now it seems like things are at a crossroads.
S3:
S1: But come.
S3: On , live a little. Um , if I were living , I would say , um , you know , the mayor has already said that he is disappointed in that , and they're exploring options. Um , I would say this is probably , you know , the council can bring this up for debate regardless if the mayor decides that he's not it's not going to come from him then. Uh , the , uh , council member LaCava could say , no , we're going to debate this. Um , and it does sound like there was enough concerns from members across districts that council members wanted to talk about it , whether or not that would go through and actually remove the program. It's hard for me to see at this point. Um , and as far as the footnote , um , it seems like existing projects are moving forward. Um , and I would not be surprised if we saw something similar to the footnote come back , but applied citywide to free up some of these , uh , these open spaces in the city that could have housing.
S1: Well , we appreciate you answering all of our questions and offering a smidge of speculation as well. Katie Hyson is KPBS racial justice and social equity reporter. Katie , thanks for joining us.
S3: Thanks for having me.
S1: When roundtable returns , we hear about some other stories we've been following this week on the roundup. Stay tuned. This is KPBS roundtable. I'm Scott rod. It's time to take a look at some other stories that caught our eye this week. Joining me in studio is KPBS producer Andrew Bracken. Hey , Andrew.
S4: Hey , Scott.
S1: I'm going to let you start it off this week.
S4: I read an article in the Washington Post that actually looked back well over 100 years into the Civil War , and to examples of transgender soldiers that that fought in the Civil War. I think there's some over , you know , some 600 cases of soldiers who were women presenting as men in combat and some of the most famous battles in the Civil War. I think it even refers to one that took command of a company during during the war. And , And , um. The author talks to a couple of authors from a book about it called They Fought Like Demons Women soldiers in the American Civil War. I guess , you know , looks into some of these stories. But what it illuminated for me is that this is not a new phenomenon. We're having this debate about transgender soldiers , but it does connect to the nation's history , too. And I just thought that was an interesting take on it.
S1: It's fascinating. Yeah. And , you know , visibility for transgender people has really increased in recent years. Transgender issues are entering the conversation politically and culturally a lot more. But as this story notes like this , this goes back , you know , years and years and years.
S4: And and in the article , they also kind of mention , um , Civil War re-enactors and , and some of the challenges there of , of women trying to portray these soldiers in these reenactor Re-enactor communities and some of the pushback there. So it even kind of plays out as it connects to our past. But but through today. So I do think it's it's surprising to to a lot of folks.
S1: Yeah , definitely those reenactor communities , they can be sticklers you know that.
S4: Oh they're they're really. Yeah. Like about the food they eat. They can be really intense. Yeah. Yeah.
S1: Yeah. Definitely. Definitely. There are a couple immigration stories that that got my attention this week now. I mean , there were a lot of immigration stories , frankly , this week that got my attention. We can't cover all of them because it's like a fire hose. But I want to touch on a couple of them. One is a more local story. Los Angeles The Los Angeles Unified School District has started handing out these red cards to students , and it essentially allows them to understand their rights and how to defend their rights when they encounter immigration agents. This story was originally published in the Boyle Heights Beat. It was republished by LAist. And these know your rights cards. You know , they printed like 200 of them. And schools are saying , we need more of these. We want to continue handing these out. And this follows the Trump administration announcing that Ice and other immigration agents can conduct raids and operations at sensitive locations that previously were off limits , like schools , like churches. And the fact that these cards are being handed out to students , to me , as a reflection of the moment we're in right now. Yeah.
S4: Yeah. And our colleague , KPBS , Tanya Thorn , did a recent reporting on how a North County , even small businesses are feeling the impacts. And it's sort of like kind of what you're talking about. Seems like this culture of fear is just sort of kind of like flowing around different parts of the community. And people are concerned about spending money or they're concerned about , I think in her reporting , she talks about a nonprofit that doesn't want to do with so many , you know , public outreach and wants to reach clients , you know , more privately in their homes to not attract attention. So it's just this culture of fear can kind of reverberate in different ways. Yeah.
S1: Yeah. And again , we're two weeks into the second term of President Trump , and he's made clear that this issue , immigration is going to remain front and center. And he and the rest of the officials in his administration are going to be moving aggressively. I did also want to talk about the LA fires because they're still burning. There's still a lot of fallout that's happening from these fires. There's a story in The New Yorker where the author of the of the of the piece actually embedded with some firefighters , and it was a revealing look behind the scenes as to what these firefighters have to do day in and day out , especially on these hand crews , which is often when fires have passed , these crews have to go in and work containment lines , make sure that the fires are really out. They won't spark up again. It's hard work. It's grueling work , sometimes thankless work that is done out of the public eye. The story did a really good job of shedding light on just how hard these folks work.
S4: And Scott , I know you have covered wildfires in the past. You've covered the work firefighters do. I'm just curious , you know , what did you take from this piece and what do you think we often get wrong about firefighters and their jobs.
S1: It may not be that we get this thing wrong about it , but I do think that the coverage can sometimes skew public perception. A lot of times , media coverage , you'll see firefighters in pretty heroic circumstances , objectively speaking , where they're facing a fire front there , you know , spraying down fires , facing a wall of flames , trying to protect homes as fires are actively burning through. That certainly should be highlighted. Absolutely. But a lot of times , coverage sort of moves on or folks who are reporting on fires move to other places where the fire is actively burning. And as I said before , these these hand crews , these folks who are working really hard , dirty jobs don't get the kind of recognition that they probably deserve. serve. And I remember being on some fires where I was in areas that were no longer active , but these folks were still working very hard. Their work was still active , and I tried to highlight some of that stuff in my own coverage. Just because , you know , just because the the fire front isn't there doesn't mean that heroic , really important work isn't getting done.
S4: And as you said , the fires are still burning in some of these cases and.
S1: The fires are still burning. Absolutely. I think you want to wrap it up with a sports story. Is that.
S4: Right ? Yeah. Yeah. News affecting the San Diego Wave FC. Their star player , Naomi Girma , is transferring his moving to Chelsea for a record $1.1 million transfer fee. So it's sort of I don't know , some people are kind of calling it the first million dollar player in women's soccer , and I'm kind of looking at it a couple different ways. One is it is a milestone for the NWSL , for women's soccer internationally that , you know , these fees are becoming higher. And she's the first million dollar player On the flip side , it's like the most recent change for the wave FC. They've gone through an ownership change. New coaches. Um , president Jill Ellis left recently. They haven't filled that position. I don't think so. They have a whole new team coming up , so they're kind of starting from scratch. And it's always a red flag when to me , when a team gets rid of their star player. And just to put it in perspective , Naomi Girma is one of the best women's soccer players in the world. She's on the U.S. , an important part of the U.S. women's national team. So , you know , it's sad that San Diego gets to lose her.
S1: Yeah , you know , it's the type of thing we kind of want to cheer her on for such a , you know , being in a position and making that achievement going on to Chelsea. But , you know , you also feel for the hometown team that is losing that star player. To me , something that comes to mind is this is a milestone , certainly , and one that should be applauded. But so often with milestones like this , you also look at the bigger picture. And , you know , transfer fees for , uh , male professional soccer players are way , way higher , especially going into the Premier League , um , in the UK. And so , you know , you look at some of these transfer fees , they're often tens of millions of dollars for men. So while it is an achievement um , it also it shows that there's still this big delta where there is a lack of parity with pay for professional women's soccer players. Yeah.
S4: Yeah. Still still a long way to go. Um , I guess you know , the sort of like , flip side to it is that the health of the league and the sport here is doing well , like the NWSL , the league , the waiver in it's expanding. It announced a new team in Denver coming up next year. So it's at least nice to see this sort of like ecosystem growing. Absolutely.
S1: Absolutely. And you hope that that growth continues. You hope that these , uh , fees and salaries continue to increase for these women's soccer players , for sure , and for greater pay parity. I've been speaking with KPBS producer Andrew Bracken. Andrew , as always , thanks for joining us.
S4: Thank you. Scott.
S1: Thanks for listening to KPBS roundtable. You can listen to the show anytime as a podcast. Roundtable airs on KPBS FM at noon on Fridays and again Sundays at 6 a.m.. If you have any thoughts on today's show , you can email us at roundtable at KPBS. You can also leave us a message at (619) 452-0228. Roundtable's technical producer this week was Brandon Truffaut. This show was produced by Andrew Bracken. Brooke Ruth is Roundtable's senior producer and I'm Scott Rodd. Thanks for listening. Have a great weekend.
