The Brief

When California State University paid OpenAI $17 million last year to give campuses unlimited access to a high-powered educational version of ChatGPT, the goal was to help students learn to use artificial intelligence for their education and future careers. However, the announcement came as a surprise to faculty and students, who were left on their own to figure out how to use AI ethically.

Afraid students would use ChatGPT Edu to cheat, many professors turned to in-class tests using bluebooks and scantrons, or employed faulty AI detectors like TurnItIn to catch AI-generated work. Meanwhile, other faculty have embraced ChatGPT and made it part of their curriculum. This all has left students confused over the use of AI in their courses.

A recent Cal State survey of over 94,000 students and university employees found 52% of faculty reported AI having a negative effect on their teaching and 67% of students felt their professors don’t teach them how to use AI effectively.

Now, as Cal State approaches the end of its 18-month contract with OpenAI this July, the university system has not announced whether it will renew the deal. Some faculty at San Francisco State University have begun a petition calling on Cal State Chancellor Mildred Garcia to end the partnership.

The Cal State Chancellor’s office points out that the AI survey found 64% of students, faculty and staff said AI has affected their learning experience at their university positively, and 63% said they’ve seen more opportunities on their campus to learn about AI.

“Our systemwide AI survey results reflect what we are seeing across our universities — widespread engagement with AI tools and technologies,” wrote Cal State spokesperson Amy Bentley-Smith in an email.

The university system left it up to campuses to dictate the proper uses of the chatbot while offering tools and training on a website called AI Commons. But students and faculty say those resources have not been enough. As of April, only 0.7% of students and 16% of faculty have completed the voluntary training, based on data provided by Bentley-Smith.

Assemblymember Mike Fong introduced Assembly Bill 2392 in February, which would require Cal State and California Community Colleges, as well as request University of California schools, to provide training on any AI product deployed on campuses.

Last fall, Fong and the Assembly Standing Committee on Higher Education questioned Cal State officials about planning around the AI initiative.

“During the joint hearing on higher education and privacy, discussions revealed that California State University campuses have adopted AI tools without consistent guidance or training, raising concerns around data privacy, academic integrity, and equitable use,” said Fong in an email to CalMatters.

While a few students and faculty testified at the hearing, others have continued to echo those issues.

“I’m not sure [Cal State] realized how much new work it would require, how much revision to the old way of doing things it would require,” said Ryan Jenkins, the chair of the AI Task Force for Cal Poly San Luis Obispo’s faculty union chapter.

Students want to be a part of AI decisions

Cal State Northridge communications major Katie Karroum was shocked when she saw the announcement about ChatGPT Edu last year. As the vice president of systemwide affairs for the Cal State Student Association, she would have expected the chancellor’s office to meet with the student organization that represents over 470,000 students throughout the state.

“We were not consulted when the contract was signed, and we weren’t even given a heads up,” Karroum said.

Cal State chose OpenAI as the least-costly option, according to assistant vice chancellor of academic technology services Leslie Kennedy. The contract aimed to give everyone free access to ChatGPT Edu across all 22 campuses. Previously, campuses and individuals were paying for their own upgraded ChatGPT accounts that allow users to generate content like images and research reports without the limitations of the free version.

The contract with OpenAI was signed in January 2025, revealed later that month at a Board of Trustees meeting, and formally announced through a systemwide press release in February 2025, which is how Karroum found out.

In a meeting of the Cal State Student Association last October, student representatives from each campus told Karroum that they saw a lack of justice for students accused of using generative AI to cheat, and that they were concerned about the data collected from the chatbot being shared.

ChatGPT Edu at Cal State is defaulted to not use data for training models, but users can opt to allow their data to be shared, according to testing by CalMatters.

Students have also complained about the absence of a consistent AI policy in their classes, according to an open letter published by Karroum. At most campuses, professors get to decide their classroom policies, including about AI.

Yagmur Wernimont, a sophomore at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, said that although AI is used for automation and robotics in her intended agriculture field, she still does not use the technology herself because she thinks “it’s making us dumber” and doesn’t promote learning. She also watched herself fall behind while a classmate used ChatGPT to get a 100% on an assignment.

While her professor verbally told the class at the beginning of the quarter not to use AI, the rule was not on the syllabus, nor was a clear consequence for using AI. Wernimont said this may have given students a loophole for using it.

At Cal State Bakersfield, Emily Callahan, dean of students for academic integrity, said there has been a steady uptick of students reported for improper use of AI. She said students are using the chatbot to gain an unfair advantage over others.

Wernimont has also witnessed a divide between professors over AI. While one of her professors required the use of Google NotebookLM, an AI-powered note-taking app, an English teacher told Wernimont’s class that she was sad students would be using AI for writing, but shared a presentation on ways to cite the tool anyway.

“They’re all having different ways and ideas how to do it,” she said. “And it’s kind of conflicting as a student.”

Kennedy said the university system hasn’t excluded anybody from the discussion around AI. The Chancellor’s Office started a generative AI committee in 2024 that includes students and faculty.

“It was the committee’s recommendations that served as the basis for the CSU to identify, evaluate, and negotiate with multiple companies who at the time offered plans designed specifically to help bring AI tools to higher education institutions,” said Cal State’s chief information officer Ed Clark in an email. “Their assessment and feedback have been and continue to be essential to how the CSU implements its AI strategy that is both cost-effective and secure.”

A new board formed after the implementation of ChatGPT Edu focuses on California’s workforce by including representatives from technology companies. Cal State Student Association President Tara Al-Rehani said that while she is part of that board, it makes no final policy or guidance decisions on AI use.

Karroum said although students need to learn how to use AI, she doesn’t like feeling part of an experiment.

“I think that we’re being treated as, like, test rats right now because there’s no policy and there’s no guidance,” Karroum said.

Faculty introduce new classroom policies on AI 

Faculty leaders said they also were caught off guard with the ChatGPT deal. According to the Cal State survey, 59% of faculty regularly use AI in teaching and research, and 68% said they include an explicit statement on AI use.

According to a repository of more than 200 AI syllabus policies housed on Cal Poly San Luis Obispo’s website, one criminal justice professor from Cal State Fullerton describes in the syllabus when, why and how students should use AI. The professor also includes an example of a good AI disclosure statement from a student who outlined their use of ChatGPT for an assignment.

The AI Commons website states that faculty ultimately decide how they want to implement generative AI into their curriculum,taking into consideration whether it might improve teaching and learning in their classroom like any new technology.

Jenkins, who teaches philosophy at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, gives exams in class using blue books and scantrons to avoid any potential for students to cheat with AI. When ChatGPT was first released in 2022, Jenkins tested the chatbot by giving it a reading quiz. It gave all the right answers, alarming Jenkins that his students might use the technology while taking tests online. Today, Jenkins tells his students to treat AI like any other source when using its outputs for an assignment, but still proctors exams in-class.

“The bread and butter of philosophy is reflecting on your own ideas and trying to sort out what you believe and why,” Jenkins said. “If you have a tool that does that for you, then you’re being denied an opportunity to practice that skill.”

Jenkins said he does not have an AI statement in his syllabus because neither the department nor Cal Poly has provided one to use. On its website, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo links to the AI Commons as well as an AI statement builder from Pepperdine University for faculty to use. But the university does not require any specific statement from professors.

At Cal State Fullerton, Shelli Wynants helps faculty decide how to use AI in their classrooms through her role in the university’s faculty development center. She also teaches students in her child and adolescent studies courses to critically review AI output, and make sure they are remaining “the thinker and the decision maker” in the process.

Wynant said she refers to AI as an “assistant” or “teammate,” but emphasizes it should never replace human judgment. She has found that many of her students who plan careers in teaching want to learn how to use AI responsibly for the sake of their future students. “These students need to get up to speed because they’re going to be the ones teaching students digital literacy,” she said.

In August 2025, the Assembly Standing Committee on Higher Education questioned Cal State officials about planning around the AI initiative. Representatives of the Academic Senate, Cal State Student Association, California Faculty Association and Cal State Employees Union spoke to the Assembly committee about their discontent over the contract with OpenAI.

“We understand all these criticisms and concerns, and they’re valid,” said Cal State’s chief information officer Ed Clark at the meeting. “The best way to deal with those concerns is to have our universities participate in helping to shape the future of these technologies. We can’t just sit back and let it go by.”

Students still need support, even with AI chatbots   

Staff at university tutoring centers are struggling to advise students who say faculty are blaming them for cheating by using the very AI tools the university system wants them to learn to use. According to the Cal State AI survey, 78% of students, faculty and staff said the ethical use of AI is a major concern.

Seher Vora, the coordinator for San Jose State University’s writing center, created an AI Writer Toolbox after conversations with tutors about students who were being penalized by professors for using AI. The toolbox helps students work with AI responsibly, including how to properly cite AI use and not using the chatbot for generating work that is not their own.

The toolbox also includes a disclosure tool that allows students to fill out a form outlining their use of AI for an assignment. The form generates a certificate for students to submit with their work.

The writing center at San Jose State advises students to check with their professors if they are unsure what uses of AI they accept. Vora hopes her work with the toolbox will encourage education around AI, for both students and faculty.

“We have to stay on top of it,” she said. “It’s changing every day.”

Angel Corzo is a contributor with the College Journalism Network, a collaboration between CalMatters and student journalists from across California. CalMatters higher education coverage is supported by a grant from the College Futures Foundation.

James L. Jones Jr., 69, a self-described “community pastor” and a tireless advocate for Black communities in Los Angeles, was an enthusiastic supporter of Karen Bass’ mayoral bid in 2022, when she made history as the first woman, and first Black woman, to be elected L.A. mayor.

As Bass seeks reelection, Jones is supporting her again. Despite the political turmoil and criticism she has faced during her first term, Jones, known as Reverend JJ, believes she has a plan for Black progress that may not be evident, but is long range and strategic.

“I believe that in my heart of hearts, Karen’s not one of those people who follows polls,” said Jones. “In the end she’ll do what’s right for the people.”

When Angelenos elected Bass four years ago, she seemed like the right person to bridge the ideals of the post-George Floyd era and whatever moment was coming next. She was a seasoned politician — a former state legislator, congresswoman and native Angeleno with a history of grassroots organizing and coalition building in a city that was leaning more progressive.

But in 2022, there was trouble on the horizon. The nation’s Floyd-inspired reexamination of racial equity was losing ground to a growing MAGA backlash that had helped kill a major federal bill to reform policing, among other initiatives. Big blue cities like Los Angeles that had seen big protests for racial justice were being cast as chaotic and ungovernable.

Four years later, the ideals that propelled Bass’ election have taken a beating. Trump’s return to the White House has elevated long-simmering anti-“wokeness” and white resentment into federal policy. And the administration has focused special ire on California and Los Angeles, where Bass is in charge of the nation’s largest city currently led by a Black mayor.

Bass is taking a beating too. As she seeks reelection in the June 2 primary, the mayor is weathering criticism from many sides that she’s done too little about everything, from the homelessness and housing crisis that she made a signature issue to her response to the epic January 2025 wildfire that destroyed thousands of homes in Pacific Palisades, one of the city’s wealthiest neighborhoods.

Despite facing more voter uncertainty this time around, Bass is leading in the polls, with 30% support among likely voters, according to the latest survey by Emerson College Polling/Inside California Politics. While Bass’ support has jumped 10 points since March, she would have to get more than 50% of the vote to avoid a runoff with the other top vote-getter in November.

Her most formidable challengers in the crowded primary are Councilwoman Nithya Raman, a Democratic socialist to Bass’ left who is campaigning on housing affordability and a host of other progressive causes, and Spencer Pratt, a former reality show star with no political experience who skews conservative and touts cleaning up crime and homelessness. A former Bass ally, Raman pledges to do better than the mayor on reducing homelessness and increasing new housing production; Pratt decries corrupt leadership and talks chiefly about making L.A. great again, a la MAGA. Pratt and Raman are polling at 22% and 19%, respectively.

Missing from all the criticism of how Bass has fallen short is how or whether her election has benefited L.A.’s Black community. It’s a population that is rapidly continuing to dwindle — to roughly 8% today from a peak of 18% in 1970 — besieged by gentrification, stratospheric housing costs, underemployment and shrinking political representation, all of it aggravated by the racial hostility emanating from Washington. That norm-shattering phenomenon has tended to eclipse discussion of racial crises happening locally, with good reason. But politics are still local, and many Angelenos who supported Bass in 2022 hoped that electing the second Black mayor in the city’s history would help move the needle on longstanding Black problems dating back to 1992 that have reached yet another inflection point.

But public assessments of Bass by Black leaders the last four years, including this election cycle, have been muted to nonexistent. The exception is Black Lives Matter Grassroots L.A., which has routinely taken her to task for increasing police funding instead of allocating more resources to social and other services — a core part of the post-George Floyd reforms. Observers say the reticence among Black leaders is partly due to the fact that Bass has been so inundated with crises, some not of her making — especially the Palisades fire. The view that Bass committed a fatal mistake by being on a diplomatic trip to Ghana when the fires broke out has more or less defined her politically since.

That’s unfair, said Michael Guynn, a veteran social worker and community activist who lives near Florence and Normandie avenues, a famous site of the 1992 racial unrest.

“I don’t give a damn if she was out of the country — she got back when she could,” Guynn said. “They blamed her for what the fire department was responsible for.”

Then there’s the racism that dogs Black elected officials, women in particular. Pratt, who lost his home in the Palisades fire last year, has invoked Donald Trump-like rhetoric to belittle L.A.’s first Black woman mayor. That includes an official campaign poster that depicts Bass stuffed in a trash can and says “throw out Karen Basura,” the Spanish word for trash, echoing Trump’s disparaging of Somali immigrants — a demographic that includes Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar — as “garbage.”

But the takedown isn’t only coming from the MAGA right, said Genethia Hudley-Hayes, former president of L.A.’s civilian Fire Commission and a Bass appointee who stepped down in March.

“There’s always the bigotry of, ‘We rallied around this Black woman and she hasn’t performed,’” said Hudley-Hayes. “She’s not a superwoman. That’s part of the ‘I’m mad’ vote in L.A.”

Another hurdle for Bass, Guynn said, is the unrealistic expectation that she would dramatically reduce or even eliminate homelessness.

“She couldn’t get a fair break because of that,” he said, adding that “everybody hates homelessness and wants it to go away, but nobody wants to do the work.”

Homelessness certainly qualifies as a Black concern: 32% of unhoused people in the city are African American, according to the city’s latest count. Bass’ signature program Inside Safe, which seeks to get people off the street and into temporary housing, has made inroads. But the mayor’s efforts have been hampered by what City Hall observers say is a larger problem of messaging, management and oversight. The scandal involving a subcontractor accused of defrauding the city’s homeless services authority of $23 million is a painful reminder of that.

Hudley-Hayes says that it points to the need for the mayor of L.A. to be a skilled executive, a skill that Bass doesn’t have, at least not yet.

“You need collaboration, which is different from coalition building, different from the activism of Community Coalition,” she said, referring to the grassroots South L.A. organization co-founded by Bass.

Deep understanding of the roles of not just the 41 city departments but of bigger entities like the county is essential not just for running the city but for effecting racial justice as well.

“Homelessness is important, but you have to ask, what are the structures that create homelessness? It’s not just a city problem but a regional problem,” said Hudley-Hayes. “Inside Safe is a program, not a strategy.”

But being a better executive wouldn’t automatically guarantee improvements for Black people. Tom Bradley, who was mayor from 1973 to 1993, is venerated both as a coalition builder and astute manager who improved many parts of the city. But he didn’t do enough for L.A.’s Black populace. While the Black middle class flourished during the Bradley years, in part because Black municipal employment flourished, the larger working class and poor in South L.A. did not.

Hudley-Hayes argues the mayor’s lack of accountability to L.A.’s Black population as a whole is longstanding, and not unique to elected officials like Bradley or Bass. Local branches of civil rights groups like the NAACP and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference — which Hudley-Hayes once led — also play a part in accountability, though they have declined notably over the years. But Hudley-Hayes notes that accountability works two ways.

“Black people have individual agency, but we have to exercise it together,” she said. “We have to pool our experience. It means nothing if we don’t demand what we want.”

Even — especially — in these trying times, and in a city with as much possibility as L.A., problems notwithstanding — those demands should still matter.

Copyright Capital & Main 2026

Stay up to date with our Up First newsletter sent every weekday morning.

Walmart will likely put its tariff refunds toward lowering store prices, executives said on Thursday, as they described shoppers who are increasingly anxious about the rising cost of fuel.

In recent weeks, visitors to Walmart's gas stations have begun to fill up with fewer than ten gallons for the first time since 2022, Chief Financial Officer John David Rainey told investors on an earnings call.

"That's an indication of stress," he said.

"We see with our customers that the high-income customer is spending with confidence," Rainey added later, "while the lower-income consumer is more budget-conscious and perhaps navigating financial distress."

The U.S. government last week began refunding tariffs payments to importers that paid higher customs fees imposed by President Trump last year before the Supreme Court struck down most of them. Walmart is now the largest retailer to suggest that it will put those refunds toward potential price cuts.

"We think that the single best return that we can have on a dollar of capital right now is to investment in the customer, invest in price," Rainey said, noting that Walmart's stores and gas stations have been drawing more shoppers looking for deals. U.S. sales grew 4.1% from February through April.

Shoppers' slightly bigger tax refunds this year seem to be offsetting some of the budget pain so far. That's according to rival retailers Home Depot, Target and Lowe's, which also held earnings calls this week. Sales at all three companies grew in the latest quarter.

The latest federal data shows spending at retail stores and online grew 5.2% in April compared to a year earlier, surpassing inflation. That means people may have spent more because of higher prices, but also because they bought more things. At gas stations, spending surged a whopping 21%, driven by higher gas prices.

Walmart executives warned that persistently high gas costs would eventually drive up the prices shoppers see at stores.

The U.S. war with Iran has snarled tanker passage through the Strait of Hormuz, a vital corridor for shipments of both fuel and fertilizer needed to grow food. U.S. inflation already jumped to its highest level in three years in April, with energy prices being a big driver. The average U.S. price of regular gas on Thursday was $4.56 per gallon, according to AAA. That's up $1.38 from a year ago.

So far, major retailers have been absorbing their growing transportation and shipping costs. Walmart on Thursday reported a notable hit to its income from higher fuel expenses. Home Depot executives told investors on Tuesday that the company might use its own tariff refunds to offset its mounting fuel costs.
Copyright 2026 NPR

With less than a month before the 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup kicks off, soccer fans are scrambling to grab the last remaining tickets.

At the time of publication, there are still some tickets available for the six World Cup games hosted at Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara.

But while the Bay Area hasn’t yet experienced the kind of ticket frenzy seen in other World Cup host cities, prices are still out of reach for many fans — raising concerns about how fans looking for a bargain could fall prey to scams falsely promising far cheaper tickets.

And most recently, the World Cup’s own governing body, FIFA, has drawn scrutiny from California state officials over changes to its ticketing system — following reports from ticketholders who say they have been assigned seats in a different category than advertised when they bought their tickets through FIFA’s own online portal.

“We have laws in California against misleading or deceptive business practices,” said state Attorney General Rob Bonta, who sent a letter to FIFA last week requesting a list of ticket buyers who were assigned seats in a lower category than what they purchased. “We want to learn more from FIFA in order to assess whether what was done was lawful or not.”

Bonta also expressed concern that sky-high prices could deter people from buying a ticket through FIFA’s official website or other verified vendors. Passionate soccer fans, he said, “may go into a site that isn’t as reliable and maybe they get taken advantage of.”

An Adidas FIFA World Cup soccer ball is seen on a FIFA x NFL chair in the Media Center on Feb. 4, 2026 at the Moscone Center in San Francisco.

(

Matthew Huang

/

Getty Images

)

So how can you spot a scam when buying a World Cup ticket, or just make sure you get what you pay for?

Keep reading to learn what officials recommend about buying World Cup tickets online and what to do if you already bought a ticket on the official FIFA site but feel that the seat you were assigned does not match what you originally paid for.

And rest assured: there are still plenty of ways to watch the World Cup in the Bay Area for free — or for a fraction of the cost of a Levi’s Stadium ticket, real or fake.

Remember, if something’s too good to be true …

First off: If you’re feeling confused over what a World Cup ticket actually costs, that’s understandable, Santa Clara County Assistant District Attorney James Gibbons-Shapiro said.

For this World Cup, FIFA adopted a pricing system known as “dynamic pricing,” where the cost of a seat changes based on current demand for that specific game.

The 2026 FIFA World Cup winner’s trophy is seen on stage at the Global Citizen NOW event in New York City on May 14, 2026.

(

Charly Triballeau

/

Getty Images

)

Scammers often promise you “a better deal” if you make the payment using instant payment sites like Zelle, Venmo and Cash App. But fraudsters aren’t trying to save you money with this suggestion: They’re trying to make it easier for themselves to keep your money.

Talking to strangers on a resale or payments site that’s not verified puts you at greater risk of getting ripped off, Gibbons-Shapiro said. “The criminal is simply looking for someone desperate enough to go to the World Cup that they’re willing to send a lot of money right away to a total stranger,” he said.

In other words, he said: “It’s not that the country that you are supporting is going to lose — it’s going to be you that loses.”

How do I know if the World Cup tickets I’m being offered are real?

Scammers have become incredibly good at printing fake tickets that look highly realistic, Gibbons-Shapiro said. So much so, he said, that when sports fans ask him for advice on how to spot a fake ticket, he tells them that he doesn’t have any tips that reliably work — that’s how identical the scam tickets can physically appear.

The real pro tip here, Gibbons-Shapiro said, is “don’t go to the stadium to try to buy a ticket there.”

“Because the great likelihood is that you’re buying a fake ticket,” he said. “You’re not gonna be able to get in, and you’re going to lose all your money.”

Scalpers are actually not permitted on stadium grounds — and reselling tickets near the stadium is a misdemeanor crime in California.

That’s why it’s important to buy your ticket on a third-party ticket resale site that will deliver the ticket directly to you.

Footballs and jerseys are displayed during the opening day of the official 2026 FIFA World Cup merchandising store in Miami Beach, Florida, on May 18, 2026

(

Chandan Khanna

/

Getty Images

)

Platforms like WhatsApp or Facebook Marketplace usually will not verify if what’s being offered is what’s actually sold.

And even if you’re using reliable third-party sites like SeatGeek or TicketMaster, check the reseller’s refund policy to see whether they offer a guarantee regarding the authenticity and timely arrival of the tickets.

I just got scammed buying a fake World Cup ticket. What can I do?

First of all, make sure to document all your communication with the person who promised to sell you a ticket — and take screenshots of those messages in case they attempt to delete anything from their end of the conversation.

If you were scammed online or over the phone:

You can then report the situation to your local police department, as the city where you live is defined as where the crime took place.

If you bought the fake ticket in person from a scalper: 

Contact the police department of the city where the transaction took place. “If that happened right outside the stadium, that would be Santa Clara Police Department,” Gibbons-Shapiro said.

You can also file a complaint with the California Attorney General’s office or the Better Business Bureau.

Gibbons-Shapiro said his office is ready to prosecute anyone who tricks others into buying fake World Cup tickets, adding that he would consider that to be a felony.

“We have robust teams for consumer protection and theft enforcement,” he said. “We’re going to prosecute the scammers.”

I bought a ticket on the FIFA website, and I think I got seated in a different place than what I paid for.

If you bought your ticket from the online FIFA purchasing portal during the initial sales phase last October, Attorney General Bonta recommends that you keep a record of everything from that purchase. This could include, he said, “images of the map they were shown and the original receipt for the ticket that they purchased and what it says, and the existing ticket that they have.”

You can also contact Bonta’s office to share your experience.

Bonta told KQED his office is still investigating what happened during this initial ticketing phase and hopes that FIFA provides the information he has requested by the May 29 deadline. “And if they don’t, we can ratchet up the level of severity here,” he said.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta speaks at a news conference in front of the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco on Thursday, Nov. 7, 2024. (

(

Terry Chea

/

Associated Press

)

“It’s not something that we want to do, but we always have an ability to send civil investigative demands or subpoenas,” Bonta said.

FIFA did not respond to a request for comment from KQED. However, the organization has told other media outlets that the initial maps consumers saw last year were meant to “provide guidance rather than the exact seat layout,” and seating arrangements could be subject to change — as happened when the organization introduced new seating categories in later phases of ticket sales.

But that could potentially be in violation of California law, Bonta said.

“The law in California is that businesses and organizations cannot justify misleading practices by pointing to the fine print or other terms that an everyday reasonable consumer would not have seen or understood,” he said. “If you’re told something, then you’re entitled to rely on the representation and to trust what you were told.”

The attorney general’s office could seek some civil penalty if its investigation concludes that the rights of California consumers were indeed violated, Bonta said. “Then we could help those individuals get the ticket that they actually purchased, not the one that they received after they were misled.”

But the investigation is still ongoing, he said.

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

At the five-point intersection connecting Boyle Heights and East LA, one Memorial Day tradition has brought the communities together for 80 years.

The Memorial Day tribute at the Mexican American All Wars Memorial returns Monday, giving veterans and their families a space to honor service members of Mexican descent who died in war.

The event kicks off with a 24-hour vigil starting at 10 a.m. Sunday, when veterans will stand guard through the night ahead of Monday’s annual event.

“Memorial Day in Boyle Heights and East LA is way different than any other memorial or ceremony because there were a lot of men and women who went to World War II and Vietnam from this area,” said Joe Diaz, a co-organizer for the event.

Elected officials, including LA County Supervisor Hilda Solis, Senator Maria Elena Durazo and Council District 14 Councilmember Ysabel Jurado, are set to give remarks. LA Mayor Karen Bass is also expected to attend. 

LAPD officer and military veteran Kioni Smith is set to be the keynote speaker. A flyover from the Los Angeles Police Department Air Support Division and a colorguard performance are also scheduled. 

Cinco Puntos was the starting location of the first Chicano Moratorium, a march in protest of the Vietnam War on December 20, 1969, according to the Los Angeles Conservancy. The war memorial pays tribute to the strong presence of the veteran community on the Eastside, the L.A. Conservancy adds. 

Event Details:

The 80th Memorial Day ceremony at the Mexican-American All Wars Memorial in Boyle Heights.

Location: 3300 E. Cesar E. Chavez Avenue

Time: 10 to 11 a.m.