The Brief

California wildflower blooms aren’t expected to be as big this year, but there’s an easy action you could take to help other native plants grow around you.

A new study from researchers at UC Riverside found that raking away thatch — a tan layer of dead plant debris produced by invasive plants like grasses — can be an effective way to increase biodiversity of native plants.

Why it matters

Advyth Ramachandran,  now a doctoral biology student at the University of Colorado Boulder, was a co-lead on the study. He grew up in Northern California with an interest in learning about the plants that make up our grasslands.

“ Almost none of these species are actually indigenous to California,” he said. “There’s been this huge replacement. It was a real shock to me.”

Invasive plants are slowly squeezing out native plants, and could be made worse by the climate crisis. Over the next 100 years, it’s estimated that 66% of the state’s native species will shrink in numbers.

But the mechanism of how that happens has not fully been understood.

On grass, thatch typically shows up at the base of grass blades.

(

Courtesy Izhamwong via Wikimedia Commons under CC BY-SA 3.0

)

That’s why Ramachandran and a team of students and professors at the university decided to look into it.

“One of the thoughts is that the reason that these invasive species have been able to outcompete the native species and replace them is because these invasive species produce these layers of dead matter," Ramachandran said.

Invasive grasses, such as the commonly used Bermuda grass, are a large producer of this thatch.

He said the idea is that thatch drowns out native species by smothering them — essentially preventing them from getting light, germinating and growing.

What the research showed

Over three years, the team set up multiple plots on a hill at UC Riverside where thatch was raked away in some, and not in others. Then, they measured what kinds of plants grew afterward.

“ What we found was that indeed the plots in which we removed those dead layers of grass had higher biodiversity,” he said.

A raked plot being surveyed for plant biodiversity in March 2022. In this raked plot, the removal of thatch exposed the soil, which is thought to help native wildflowers to grow.

(

Courtesy Advyth Ramachandran

)

A plot after it was raked to remove thatch in October 2022.

(

Courtesy Advyth Ramachandran

)

The results pointed to a specific type of increase. While the raked plots did have more types of species present (by a small amount), the real benefit came from how many of the native plants there were overall.

“ Not necessarily new species appeared,” Ramachandran said. “[But] there were more of them. They could grow bigger.”

How you can apply it

Lupinus truncatus, a native wildflower, at the project site in March 2023.

(

Courtesy Advyth Ramachandran

)

Ramachandran said the research has big implications for restoration efforts and park management, but that it can apply to residences, too.

The changes you see could vary depending on your land, moisture level and location. But it could be easier than hand-weeding non-native plants and safer than using herbicides.

For example, if you have a landscape with invasive grasses that are producing thatch, particularly if it’s not irrigated, raking the litter away could promote the native species if you have ones already there.

“I’ve done it in my garden,” he said.

So come this spring, get ready to rake a leg in exchange for some beautiful native flora.

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

Across Los Angeles, masked and armed federal immigration agents have raided day laborer centers, detaining workers and, at times, pointing their guns toward staff, according to advocates.  

In one raid last fall, federal agents entered the day laborer center in Cypress Park — which is private property — and threw a site coordinator to the ground, said Maegan Ortiz, executive director of the nonprofit Instituto de Educación Popular del Sur de California, known as IDEPSCA, which operates five of the seven day laborer centers in the city.  

Ortiz said, day laborers have “disappeared” after the raids, leaving it up to the centers to locate the detention facilities where they’re being held.

Now, advocates say the $1 million allocated for the city’s seven day laborer centers is not enough to address the realities that day laborer centers are facing under the current federal administration. The proposal is part of L.A. Mayor Karen Bass’ $14.9 billion budget released last week.

According to IDEPSCA, 136 people have been captured by agents during the 23 immigration raids at the day laborer centers, which are located in Cypress Park, Westlake, the Fashion District, Harbor City, Hollywood, North Hollywood and Van Nuys. 

Advocates instead are asking for a total of $3 million for the seven day laborer centers, arguing that $1 million does not cover the “growing needs of the community.”

“We are seeing increases to the police department budget … Meanwhile, the day laborer centers combined have had more than 100 people kidnapped,” Ortiz told Boyle Heights Beat.

For many families, the centers have also become a lifeline after having their loved ones taken by immigration agents. The centers have provided more than $400,000 in assistance for rent, food and legal fees, according to IDEPSCA.

Ortiz also said that day laborers have been crucial in recovery efforts from the January 2025 LA wildfires.

“A lot of the workers cleaning those homes, repairing those homes, rebuilding [are] our day laborers and household workers who use our centers,” Ortiz said. “Our centers have become climate disaster hubs that help workers who are left out of the safety net system.”

“This is more than just about an immigration issue. This is an economic issue. This is a climate issue. This is a health and safety issue,” Ortiz added. “The role that day labor centers play in the economy of Los Angeles cannot be understated and should not be understated.”

Ortiz said additional funding is needed for basic security upgrades, including cameras and reinforced doors. The goal, Ortiz said, is to “make it harder for Border Patrol to go in and violate the Constitution.” 

Across Los Angeles, masked and armed federal immigration agents have raided day laborer centers, detaining workers and, at times, pointing their guns toward staff, according to advocates.

(

Luis Cano

/

Boyle Heights Beat

)

At a budget and finance committee hearing on Friday, Ortiz and other advocates urged the city to increase the funding. Members of IDEPSCA and the Central American Resource Center (CARECEN), which operates the day laborer center in Westlake, also testified. 

A series of budget hearings is scheduled through mid-May. The budget needs to be approved by the City Council and signed by the mayor by July 1, the beginning of the fiscal year.

“Attacks have intensified and the needs have grown significantly,” Jorge Nicolas with CARECEN told the budget and finance committee. “Day laborers are at the center … facing direct impacts of these attacks. Our response cannot remain the same while the crisis grows.”

“Maintaining decorum budget is not enough,” he added.

Joshua Erazo, an organizer at the CARECEN Day Labor Center, said he has witnessed four different raids at the Westlake center.

“I’ve been witness to the fear instilled in our community. Despite these attempts, the immigrant community continues to rise above,” Erazo said. 

“Regardless of these attacks, all the day laborer centers remain open so the community could have a space for healing,” he added. “We are grateful to be in the proposed budget … The amount is just not enough.”

Boyle Heights Beat has reached out to the mayor’s office for comment. This story will be updated if one is received. 

California is preparing to share with an outside organization detailed information about driver's license holders, including immigrants who do not have legal authorization to live in the U.S.

That breaks a promise the state made a decade ago when it began issuing licenses to unauthorized immigrants, advocates say, and it means more than 1 million people may face higher risk of deportation.

But if state officials don’t turn over the data, the Department of Homeland Security may refuse to accept California licenses and IDs at airports, the advocates believe, following a briefing with the California Department of Motor Vehicles and the office of Gov. Gavin Newsom earlier this month. State authorities confirmed they plan to share the data to comply with the Real ID Act of 2005, which set requirements for accepting state identification in federal facilities like airports.

Representatives from four advocacy groups who participated in the briefing told CalMatters the shared information will show whether a person has a Social Security number, meaning it could be used to identify people in the country without authorization.

The state plans to provide the information to the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, a nonprofit organization whose governing board is made up of DMV officials from across the country.

The information given to the association will go into the group’s State-to-State Verification system and its platform, known as SPEXS, which allows DMVs and contractors that work with them to verify if someone has more than one license issued in their name. Sharing that data allows agencies that issue driver's licenses to verify that a person doesn’t have duplicate licenses in multiple states.

In the future, an ID database like the one the association maintains could be used to support mobile licenses people can use on their iPhones or online age verification for access to mature content or chatbots.

But advocates fear that federal immigration officials will try to gain bulk access to the data and use the fact that a person doesn’t have a Social Security number as a signal that they’re deportable.

The state received assurances from the association that safeguards will be added to prevent bulk searches for unauthorized immigrant license holders in the database and to prevent access by the Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, according to people who joined the briefing with the DMV and governor’s office. But they remain skeptical.

“Once this data is uploaded to AAMVA, it's out of California's control, no matter what California wants, no matter what protests we may make,” said Ed Hasbrouck with San Francisco civil liberties group The Identity Project, who was on the briefing call.

To carry out the plan to share data with the association the California Legislature will need to approve $55 million to cover the DMV’s costs. It may also need to amend existing law, which states that a Social Security number obtained by the DMV cannot be shared for any other purpose than to address unpaid taxes, parking tickets, or child support.

A spokesperson for the governor’s office declined to confirm details of the call or respond to specific concerns from advocates.

“California continues to lead in supporting immigrant families and protecting personal data from federal overreach,” the spokesperson, Diana Crofts-Pelayo, wrote in an email. “The state has taken the same approach to protect Californians' data during the Real ID implementation, while maintaining Real ID compliance for the benefit of all Californians.”

Ian Grossman, the chief executive of the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, told CalMatters that participation in the verification system is voluntary and that only authorized state employees or contractors have access to the system, that bulk searches of the system are not currently allowed, and all searches must contain specific information about an individual like their name and date of birth.

Social security number ‘99999’

For more than a decade, California and 18 other states invited undocumented people to obtain driver's licenses in order to support public safety and the economy. Economists say that such laws improve economic activity, drive billions of dollars in taxes into state coffers, and benefit public safety because people who lack federal authorization to be in the country can feel more comfortable reporting criminal activity.

More than 1 million people have obtained driver's licenses in California under Assembly Bill 60, a law passed in 2013. The law prohibs the state from using information obtained in the licensure process to consider an individual’s citizenship.

But the multistate verification system can reveal whether a person is an undocumented immigrant. According to an association manual obtained by CalMatters, the database will include the last five digits of a person’s Social Security number, and if that person has no Social Security number, the association allows states to use the placeholder “99999.”

Advocates fear that federal immigration officials could gain access to information in the database, including on undocumented Californians, by asking local officials to make requests on their behalf.

That sort of end run would not be without precedent.

CalMatters reported on instances last year and this year where local law enforcement agencies broke state law and shared information gathered by automated license plate readers with ICE or Border Patrol agents.

The DMV and the governor’s office say the association will notify California of requests from any entity other than a participating state, including attempts to subpoena the database for information about California license holders, providing them with the opportunity to challenge subpoenas or intervene in other requests. But if a subpoena is accompanied by a gag order the association could not deliver any such notification. An agreement between the association and the California DMV obtained by CalMatters states that the association will inform California “if legally permitted” if it receives a subpoena “to release, disclose, discuss, or obtain access to S2S information.”

Hasbrouck believes the DMV and governor’s office “must have known” the reassurances they got from the association were “hollow given the possibility of gag orders.”

He also said that, as a private entity, the association has less protection from court orders or subpoenas than a government agency. Its data sharing is also more easily hidden, since the association is not subject to Freedom of Information Act requests or open meeting laws.

Advocates see ‘a direct betrayal’

Advocates who spoke with CalMatters said sharing the driver's license information with the association sells out immigrant license holders. The law that created the program prohibits the state from using information the program gathers to determine citizenship.

“It's unclear how extreme the danger people are being put into by this decision but there ’s no doubt we told people with AB 60 licenses this would never happen, but it’s happening, and that’s a direct betrayal,” said Tracy Rosenberg, head of advocacy at Oakland Privacy, who was on the call.

Linda Nguy, an associate director at the Western Center on Law and Poverty, compared the disclosure to a move last summer by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy to share data about millions of non-citizens with federal immigration agencies. That was a violation of federal law, department officials concluded, according to a memo obtained by  the Associated Press.

Pedro Rios, director of the U.S.-Mexico Border Program at the American Friends Service Committee, was not on the call, but echoed Rosenberg and Nguy, calling the data sharing plan “a betrayal of California’s commitment to protect and defend all its residents, especially those who have an AB 60 driver's license.”

Becca Cramer-Mowder, who was on the call representing the Electronic Frontier Foundation, questioned why the governor’s office and DMV are in a rush to comply with the Real ID Act two decades after it passed at a time of increased pressure from the Trump administration.

“It just seems like we’re missing the bigger picture of this moment in time,” she said

The plan to share license information with the database depends on the state budget process because the DMV is requesting $55 million to move the data over to the association’s systems.

At a state Senate budget hearing last month to approve the funding, lawmakers questioned why the state should follow a timeline set by a private organization and share part of Californians’ Social Security numbers. They also asked the DMV to explore the reasoning behind a lawsuit filed by Oklahoma lawmakers in January to block data sharing with the association, in which they argued that sharing personal data collected for driver’s licenses violates state law there.

DMV director Steve Gordon told them that California unsuccessfully tried to convince the motor vehicle association to consider a unique identifier other than a social security number and “anybody who has a social security number that's sharing information of course would have a concern” but told lawmakers “we need to go. We need to go now.”

DMV spokesperson Jaime Garza said that Californians can submit a request to surrender or cancel a driver's license but that driving without a license is illegal.

Nick Miller, a spokesperson for Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, told CalMatters lawmakers continue to work on the policy issue.

“Protecting immigrant communities from the Trump administration's relentless attacks — and ensuring Californians are empowered and defended — continues to be a top priority for the Speaker,” he said in an email.

Rosenberg with Oakland Privacy suggested that the state might be better off opting out of the Real ID system than sharing information about its license holders, noting that more than 60 percent of Californians already have passports.

“I just wonder what would happen if the state asked Californians to get a passport in order to fly for a couple of years in order to protect 1 million Californians with AB 60 licenses. Maybe we should give people that opportunity.”

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

On most weekday afternoons at the Expo Park/USC Metro station outside the University of Southern California, the platform feels like an extension of campus life. People are usually bunched up in pairs or groups. Many wear USC crewneck sweatshirts and talk about campus life as they straddle the edges between downtown Los Angeles and the classroom. What they aren’t talking about are their cars or debating the pros and cons of taking an Uber versus a Waymo. 

“Ubering is expensive every time I’m going somewhere, it’s at least gonna be $30,” Jaiden Torres told The LA Local. Torres is a third-year student at Hofstra University doing a semester in Los Angeles. 

He said a car is the last thing on his mind as he navigates the city. “That’s money that I could be spending on other things. So I try to opt out to take the train.”

For many young Angelenos, the Los Angeles Metro isn’t a last resort. It’s how they move through the city. They’re embracing transit even as the system evolves and works to rebuild ridership and public trust.

More than 500,000 students, including community college students, across L.A. County now ride Metro through its GoPass program, with nearly 60 million student boardings since 2021. Metro says its overall ridership has also continued to recover since the pandemic, reaching more than 82% of pre-pandemic levels in January 2025 and extending a run of more than two years of growth.

In a statement, Metro attributed that increase in ridership to improvements in service, safety and a return of public confidence in the system. 

For Josh Figueroa, a first-year urban planning major at the USC, transit is both a classroom topic and a daily necessity. Originally from Riverside, he moved to L.A. this year without a car and now relies on Metro to get around.

“In terms of getting where I need to go, the Metro is very reliable,” he told The LA Local. “And, because I’m a student, it’s free.”

And it’s not just USC students. Since 2016, Metro has offered a U-Pass partnership that allows students to get unlimited or discounted rides with their TAP cards. The program went from one major university in 2017 to nearly two dozen schools in 2025. 

Jacob Wasserman is a research program manager at UCLA’s Institute of Transportation Studies. He told The LA Local that by offering passes, schools are helping create a culture of students using the Metro.  

“At UCLA, every undergrad and grad student gets a pass. It makes the transit agency money because [schools] buy it for everybody, and the people who do use it get a ton of value. It’s effectively free,” he said. 

For students juggling tuition, rent and groceries, the savings matter.

“I’m definitely more inclined to take the Metro than an Uber because of finances,” Figueroa said. “It’s way cheaper to take the Metro.”

Figueroa also feels more a part of L.A. when riding. “I feel more in connection with a community or in connection with a city when I’m taking the resources and the transportation that they provide,” he said. 

But there are drawbacks. 

On most weekday afternoons at the Expo Park/USC Metro station outside the University of Southern California, the platform feels like an extension of campus life. People are usually bunched up in pairs or groups. Many wear USC crewneck sweatshirts and talk about campus life as they straddle the edges between downtown Los Angeles and the classroom. What they aren’t talking about are their cars or debating the pros and cons of taking an Uber versus a Waymo.

Trains vs cars

L.A.’s landscape is built around cars and freeways, with many Metro stops located in inconvenient places. “It’s hard to fit a transit system into land use that’s built around the car, because you may have to walk that last mile, and if there isn’t just much around, it can be unsafe,” Wasserman said. 

Figueroa has personally experienced this. “A lot of places I want to go, like a food spot somewhere, I’d need to drive because the Metro stops are in inconvenient places. If I get off at a Metro stop, I might have to walk 30 minutes to an hour,” he said. 

But that may change. New Metro expansions are working to connect the city more efficiently.

Metro’s “28 by 28” initiative aims to complete 28 major public rail transportation projects before the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games, including rail extensions, new light-rail segments and rapid bus transit lines. 

Nine projects have been completed so far, including the A Line (formerly the Gold Line) Foothill Extension to Pomona. “[The A Line] is great for connecting college students out there,” Wasserman said. 

He added that these projects are meant to serve everyday riders. “The difference that we’re seeing for the 28 Olympics is that a lot of these projects, even the bus projects, are designed to be Olympic supporting, but also legacy projects beyond that,” Wasserman said. 

Wasserman hopes Metro’s expansion will help keep Angelenos connected across the city and is optimistic about its future.

“We’re really ambitiously expanding our rail system,” he said. “If it can work in L.A., it can work anywhere in the U.S.”

But another major issue affecting ridership is around safety. 

Commuter safety concerns

Figueroa noted that Metro stations with the fewest riders feel less safe.

“In urban places that don’t have a lot of people, there’s this idea of having less eyes on the street. When you have less eyes and less people watching, people tend to feel unsafe because they feel alone. It’s very prevalent on the Metro,” Figueroa said.

Torres noted the difference between the buses and trains in L.A. 

“I feel a lot safer on the train than on the bus. On trains, if it feels unsafe, I can move to the next car. But on the bus you’re kind of stuck,” he said. 

Transit agencies are paying attention to these concerns. Wasserman conducted a research project into the L.A. Metro Transit Ambassador Pilot Program, which provides a visible, customer-focused presence at stations and on vehicles. 

“I think the ambassador program is working well. They’re just like extra eyes, so you’re not in an empty station,” Wasserman said. “They are also doing more serious stuff. They carry Narcan and address overdoses.” 

Figueroa has noticed the changes. “I definitely feel safer. I don’t feel like I’m in danger or threatened,” he said. 

The UCLA report concluded that Metro was “wise to consider, pilot, and now make permanent” the ambassador program. 

The continuous improvements are also shaping how young people view the city itself. “I feel like [by taking the train] I’m getting to observe the working class or day-to-day people of L.A.,” Torres said.

Most Orange County residents favor offering undocumented residents a pathway to legal status rather than blanket deportation, according to a new poll from the University of California, Irvine School of Social Ecology. But that’s not true for a majority of Republicans (54%), who favor deportation, the poll found.

Jon Gould, dean of the School of Social Ecology, said the poll demonstrates the stark difference in public opinion on immigration between Republicans on one side, and Democrats and independents on the other.

“ Majorities are very much in favor of immigration, paths to legal citizenship, and are hesitant to use the enforcement power too strongly," Gould said of the poll results. “It’s surprising in a purple county that we’re seeing both a strong majority one way, and a cleavage where one of the political parties [Republican] is off by itself compared to independents and Democrats.”

Orange County is considered “purple” because the county’s 2 million voters are nearly evenly split, with one-third each registered as Republican or Democrat, and another third registered as No Party Preference or with a smaller political party.

There was agreement across political parties on some issues, Gould said. The majority of respondents agreed that violent criminals should automatically be deported, and that immigrants who are U.S. veterans should never be deported.

UC Irvine School of Social Ecology polled 1,200 Orange County adults on immigration issues in March 2026.

(

Courtesy UC Irvine School of Social Ecology

/

LAist

)

Gould also said the poll of some 1,200 adults demonstrates the nuanced opinions that most residents have on the subject of immigration. For example, a majority of all respondents (61%) support limiting immigration from countries the government deems dangerous or unstable.

Results of the UC Irvine poll on immigration show agreement across party lines on some nuanced questions.

(

Courtesy: UC Irvine School of Social Ecology

/

LAist

)

Some other key takeaways:

• While 62% of respondents said they disapproved of President Donald Trump’s handling of immigration issues, a smaller margin, 55%, disapproved of his handling of the U.S.-Mexico border.
• A majority said immigration fills essential low-wage jobs (76%) and enhances civic life (67%). A plurality also said immigration strains public services (48%).
• Only small percentages of all respondents said they supported automatic deportation for immigrants convicted of non-violent crimes (23%), unemployed immigrants (16%), recent arrivals (11%), and non-English speakers (10%). 
• On the question of ICE, 73% of Republicans said they supported the agency’s actions, whereas 67% of Democrats and 40% of independents said the agency should be abolished.

Implications for the upcoming elections and immigration reform

Trump’s aggressive immigration enforcement has taken a heavy toll in Orange County. Some families have lost breadwinners to deportation, while others have sought to limit their exposure by quitting jobs and staying indoors. Spending in the county decreased by about one-quarter of a percent immediately after enforcement ramped up last year, according to a separate UC Irvine study. That led to a $4.5 million decline in sales tax over an eight-week period, the study found.

Students protest ICE on Jan. 27, 2026 in front of Anaheim City Hall.

(

Jill Replogle

/

LAist

)

A growing number of cities, plus the county itself, have set aside funds to support immigrant residents with basic needs and legal services.

This support reflects what Gould called a “sea change” in public opinion since 1994, when two-thirds of Orange County voters cast ballots in favor of excluding undocumented immigrants from public education and other public services. That ballot initiative, Proposition 187, was ultimately found to be unconstitutional and never went into effect.

Gould said the majority of respondents’ positive views on immigration in the recent poll shows how much the county has changed. It’s also a reflection of the vast demographic shifts that have occurred in the county in recent decades as a result of immigration and refugee arrivals from countries like Vietnam.

Nearly 40% of residents polled said both of their parents were born in another country; 82% of Asians polled said both parents were born in another country.

Slightly more than one-third of respondents said they personally knew someone who is undocumented.

Gould thinks the results of the polling bode well for the prospects for immigration reform — despite decades of failure in Washington to strike a deal between Republicans and Democrats. The shift in public opinion might not lead to change in policy yet, Gould said, “but politicians generally follow where the wind’s blowing.”

 “At a time where we're being led to believe that immigration pits people against one another, it's intractable, these battles will go on forever," he said. "I actually think what we're seeing in the data here is that there is a supermajority support for a number of policies on immigration. There is actually potentially a solution here.”