Woke LA mayoral hopeful Nithya Raman mocked over photos touting new crosswalk in ritzy Los Feliz neighborhood
Los Angeles mayoral candidate and city councilmember Nithya Raman faced online mockery after promoting a newly installed crosswalk at Sunset Drive and Bates Street in Los Feliz. Critics focused on the reported months-long process and the still-cracked road surface, while Raman’s office said the work improved pedestrian safety before the school year.
Raman said the Los Feliz Neighborhood Council raised concerns about the junction in late 2025, and her team pressed the Los Angeles Department of Transportation to reassess it after it had been judged a safe and legal crossing. The project was completed by 10 August; former candidate Spencer Pratt joined the criticism online. Incumbent Mayor Karen Bass received similar criticism over a pothole repair video, as Bass and Raman prepare to face each other in November’s mayoral election.
- Raman’s crosswalk announcement prompted widespread online ridicule.
- Her office said the scheme improved school-year pedestrian safety.
- Bass and Raman will contest Los Angeles’s November mayoral election.
New here? Start with this
Los Angeles is preparing for a mayoral election in November, when voters will choose between the current mayor, Karen Bass, and challengers including city councilmember Nithya Raman. Raman represents part of central Los Angeles on the City Council and has built a public profile around housing, transport and neighbourhood services.
Los Feliz is an affluent residential area near Griffith Park, with busy roads and several schools nearby. Decisions about crossings, road repairs and other local improvements are usually handled by city departments, often after requests from residents and local neighbourhood councils.
The debate reflects broader questions in Los Angeles about how quickly the city carries out basic street-safety and maintenance work. Local infrastructure can become a prominent issue in elections because it is visible to residents and can be used to judge how city government is performing.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters can reasonably argue that a clearly marked crossing responds to a local safety concern and gives pedestrians, including schoolchildren, a more visible place to cross. They may also contend that securing a change after an initial official assessment requires persistence across city processes, so completion is worth recognising. This account reflects the reported details in [the Daily Caller’s coverage](https://dailycaller.com/2026/08/27/councilwoman-nithya-raman-dsa-los-angeles-mayor-brags-crosswalk/).
The case against
Critics can reasonably argue that a basic paint-only safety measure should be delivered faster, particularly when the need was identified months earlier. They may also say that celebrating it while the surrounding road remains visibly damaged suggests misplaced priorities and falls short of the standard residents should expect for public infrastructure. This account reflects the reported details in [RedState’s coverage](https://redstate.com/rusty-weiss/2026/08/27/socialist-la-mayor-hopeful-relentlessly-mocked-over-this-safer-streets-photo-n2206155).