The Brief

In California, about 87,000 undocumented students are pursuing higher ed. Increasingly, they do not qualify for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), which provides protection from deportation and a work permit.

President-elect Donald Trump has pledged to “carry out the largest deportation operation in [U.S.] history.”

After the presidential election earlier this week, the leaders of California's public colleges and universities issued a joint statement of support for those students. California Community Colleges Chancellor Sonya Christian, CSU Chancellor Mildred García, and UC President Michael Drake said their institutions will “continue to support and protect all members of our communities.”

LAist reached out to California’s public higher ed institutions for specifics on how they will protect undocumented students.

Who are California’s undocumented students?

California’s 87,000 undocumented students make up less than one percent of those enrolled in the state’s public higher ed institutions, according to the Presidents' Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, a group representing college and university leaders.

Undocumented students are a heterogeneous group, representing a range of races and countries of origin. The vast majority are undergraduates, but some are pursuing graduate and professional degrees. They are not eligible to work campus jobs, which means paying for college can be a struggle.

(

Presidents' Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration

)

California Community Colleges

Melissa Villarin, a spokesperson for California’s Community Colleges, referred LAist to its website, which states: “Our colleges will not release personally identifiable student information related to immigration status unless required by judicial order.”

Many campuses, Villarin added, have created Dream Resource Centers and host “know your rights” clinics.

California State University

Amy Bentley-Smith, a spokesperson for CSU, said information about students’ migratory status is confidential. She also pointed to a resource page for students in the university system, along with an FAQ sheet that says campus police “will not contact, detain, question or arrest an individual solely on the basis of suspected undocumented immigration status” or undertake joint efforts with federal immigration enforcement authorities.

University of California

UC has not responded to requests for comment. However, UCLA’s Center for Immigration Law and Policy also issued a statement this week: "In addition to state and federal laws that protect students’ privacy, UC policy provides that the University 'will not release immigration status or related information in confidential student records ... without a judicial warrant, a subpoena, a court order, or as otherwise required by law.'”

The center also said that UC “has a strict policy that generally prevents campus police from undertaking joint efforts with federal immigration enforcement or detaining people at the federal government’s request."

On Tuesday, the Central American Resource Center of Los Angeles (CARECEN) — an immigrants’ rights nonprofit with legal offices in L.A., San Bernardino, and the San Fernando Valley — will host an online discussion for community college and CSU students, faculty, and staff. The conversation will include a debrief on the presidential election and what it can mean for immigrant communities.

Monterey Park voters will decide in June whether to ban data centers citywide, setting up a potential legal battle with the developer behind a proposed project.

The City Council on Wednesday unanimously approved placing a measure on the June ballot that would ask voters to amend the city’s General Plan to prohibit the facilities.

The council, also by unanimous vote, directed officials to begin drafting a city ordinance banning data centers ahead of the June election that could potentially take effect before then. It also extended a 45-day moratorium on data center development to January 2027.

City Attorney Karl Berger said the multi-prong approach would give Monterey Park the strongest legal footing.

“I like the belt, suspenders and girdle approach to most things just to make sure that everything's buckled down,” Berger said.

The council votes come after months of mounting resident outrage over a proposal to build a 250,000-square-foot data center in a business park — a project they fear would bring high energy use, noise and limited economic benefit.

Many said they did not learn about the project until the end of last year through word-of-mouth and social media, and faulted city leaders for failing to properly inform them.

Developer HMC StratCap has threatened litigation over the council’s moves toward banning data centers.

On Wednesday, before the council voted, Bryan Marsh, an HMC StratCap executive, gave public comment to boos from the audience, saying the company purchased the land in December 2004 after the “city provided assurances about the viability of data center development.”

He urged the city to work with the company on finding “alternative land uses” for the property.

“Forcing a ballot proposition with a special election in June 2026 severely degrades our ability to work together,” Marsh said.

The council appeared unmoved. Berger, the city attorney, said the developer currently does not appear to have a legally vested project.

There is an application on file, he said, but no public hearing has been scheduled. Berger added he had been authorized by the council to initiate litigation against HMC StratCap if the company were to file suit.

Opponents of the data center rejoiced over Wednesday’s votes and expressed relief that they had mobilized against the project before HMC StratCap’s application had advanced any further.

“The City Council has listened and is listening,” said Hrag Balian, a resident who helped found the group No Data Center in Monterey Park! “ I feel very optimistic that data centers are going to be banned from Monterey Park in the foreseeable near future.”

A group in South Pasadena gathered Wednesday to urge their city council to end its contracts with Flock Safety, the controversial surveillance company that operates AI-powered automated license plate readers in thousands of communities across the U.S., including many in California.

The small town has 27 Flock cameras that monitor the cars that come and go in the community of around 25,000 people — one of the highest densities in the region, according to the mayor. That information is temporarily stored in a database that's shared with law enforcement agencies across the state.

The South Pasadena City Council is now taking a deeper look at its contracts with Flock, after reports that some local law enforcement agencies in Southern California illegally shared license plate reader data with federal immigration agents. Those included the Riverside County Sheriff’s Office, which South Pasadena shares its data with.

"I’m deeply concerned for the safety of our community. Flock has proven to be careless with our data," Olivia Ramirez, a South Pasadena resident, told the city council in public comment Wednesday. “Continuing to work with Flock will erode public trust and, as a consequence, will harm public safety.”

The speakers are part of a growing movement, as residents across California push local law enforcement and city governments to reconsider their ties with the Flock over concerns about surveillance and how their data could be used in the federal government's mass deportation campaign.

How other communities are responding

Santa Cruz killed its contract with Flock in January following reports that the city's data was accessed by agencies outside of California and shared with ICE. Last month, Mountain View Police Department shut off its Flock cameras after an audit found that federal agencies had accessed its data in 2024. Other local governments in the Bay Area have followed suit.

The Oxnard Police Department also suspended its use of Flock license plate readers last week, after an audit revealed that data from the city's cameras was made available to federal law enforcement agencies between February and March of 2025 through a "nationwide query" setting, against the city's wishes and state law. A California law prohibits sharing license plate reader data with agencies outside of the state.

Flock acknowledged the incident in a blog post this week, saying that out-of-state law enforcement agencies' access to some of its camera networks was "inadvertent" and it was not possible in some cases to determine the cause.

The post also said that Flock had strengthened its protections, including by excluding federal agencies from national and statewide lookup networks, and implementing guardrails that keep California agencies from accepting or initiating data sharing with federal agencies or out of state entities.

"Flock sincerely regrets the confusion and mistrust this has created within several communities," the blog post reads. "Flock takes full accountability for this situation, and has made changes and improvements to significantly enhance agency ability to effortlessly comply with applicable laws, regulations, and community norms that govern information sharing."

That wasn't good enough for Sam Gurley, who rallied with his neighbors in South Pasadena on Wednesday night.

“It isn't until they get caught that they say, 'Hey, I know that this is a law in California. We got caught, let's fix it,'" said Gurley, who said he became alarmed when he learned that Flock cameras were deployed. " Now that I have a better understanding of how the system, the city use and share this data with each other, I'm more terrified than I've ever been."

How Flock works

Flock has contracts with more than 5,000 law enforcement agencies around the nation that use its cameras and license plate readers. The cameras are sometimes attached to street poles — including one on Fair Oaks Avenue in South Pasadena near the entrance to the 110 Freeway, where cars streamed by the nondescript camera under a small solar panel on Wednesday evening.

There are 27 Flock cameras installed around the city of South Pasadena.

(

Libby Rainey

/

LAist

)

Flock cameras "continuously scan and record images" of vehicles' license plates numbers, color, and make, according to a report put together by city staff in South Pasadena. The cameras record the date, time and GPS location every time a car passes by. According to Flock's website, the cameras also pick up other identifying features of cars, like stickers and roof racks.

The technology automatically cross references license plate numbers with law enforcement databases and alerts the police department if it detects a vehicle connected with a criminal investigation, according to the report.

Flock's database also allows law enforcement agencies to search the location of vehicles outside of their own city. Flock stores the data for 30 days and then automatically deletes it, although cities can adjust the length of time they retain the data. Flock emphasized to NPR that cities control how the data they collect is shared.

Law enforcement agencies have hailed the technology for helping them locate suspects and stolen vehicles. At a February city council meeting, South Pasadena Sergeant Andy DuBois called the Flock cameras a "force multiplier" for officers trying to solve crimes.

" It allows agencies to share relevant information in a secure and regulated way. By participating in this network, we benefit from broader technological coverage without needing to add additional staffing," DuBois said.

Nick Hidalgo, senior staff attorney with ACLU of Northern California who has done work on automated license plate readers for years, called the technology a "dragnet.”

"What they are collecting is a person's location — because any license plate information can be connected very easily to a driver," he said. "You can capture a ton of information about where a person lives, works, etc. We're talking about truly sensitive information here."

A deeper look at the law

In California, state law SB 34 prohibits agencies from sharing information gathered by automated license plate readers with out-of-state and federal agencies. Police departments also must keep a record of their queries of the system. Another state law, SB 54, limits California law enforcement agencies from assisting with immigration enforcement.

In 2023, the state's attorney general Rob Bonta issued two bulletins to state and local law enforcement on complying with those laws when using automated license plate reader data.

"The majority of California law enforcement agencies collect and use images captured by ALPR cameras, but few have appropriate usage and privacy policies in place," a press release from Bonta's office said at the time.

Last year, Bonta sued the city of El Cajon in San Diego County, saying it had shared data from its system of Flock automated license plate reader cameras with more than 100 out-of-state law enforcement agencies. The mayor of that city responded with defiance, saying it shares data with other states because "crime doesn't stop at the border."

Flock Safety says that it does not work with ICE or any agency within the Department of Homeland Security. It also emphasizes that it is local agencies that own the data that their cameras collect, not Flock.

South Pasadena faces a deadline

The city of South Pasadena pays around $83,000 annually for two contracts with Flock – one which sunsets this month, on March 19. The council has until March 18 to decide whether or not to auto-renew the contract for two more years.

If the city decides to terminate the contract, it will have to repay a federal grant of around $45,000 it used to install 14 cameras. The city could also decide to end its second contract with Flock before its March, 2027 end date. That would cost the city a $6,500 termination fee, but it would receive a refund for the unused days of service, according to a city report.

South Pasadena Mayor Sheila Rossi told LAist that she's concerned about Flock's system and reports about data being shared out of the state of California. She also told the city council in February that South Pasadena had a far higher density of cameras than many surrounding communities, saying it reached "the category of surveillance."

South Pasadena says it's implementing changes to its camera policies, including requiring monthly audits of how the system is queried and requiring agents that search the data include a case number.

Councilmembers in February also raised the idea of reducing their system's data retention to less than 30 days. The state of New Hampshire requires law enforcement agencies to delete automated license plate reader data after three minutes if it does not yield a hit with criminal investigations.

Rossi said the council will look into options including contracting with other automated license plate readers and canceling one of the city contracts with Flock.

" Cities have a responsibility to make sure the safeguards around these tools keep pace," she said.

Susan Seager, a First Amendment lawyer and South Pasadena resident, said she wants the cameras gone, period.

" I don't trust Flock and I don't trust our federal government, and I want to be able to trust our local police department," she said. "I don't think our little small city should be part of that surveillance state."

Los Angeles' regional homeless services agency revealed last month that it’s behind on paying tens of millions of public dollars to homeless services providers currently operating shelters and other services for unhoused Angelenos.

Leaders at the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, or LAHSA, said the agency currently owes more than $50 million to service providers for services they’ve already provided. Several LAHSA contractors told LAist they’re taking on debt to maintain operations while awaiting payments.

Now, the city of L.A. and L.A County are investigating the causes of LAHSA’s cashflow problems and pushing to get those contractors paid.

The agency’s finance team blames the payment delays on a variety of factors, including LAHSA’s own outdated policies, disorganized workflows and low morale among staff.

They also point to local bureaucracies, especially within city government, which LAHSA said has failed to pass along tens of millions in public funds meant for providers.

Starting Thursday, the county’s auditor-controller is launching a review of LAHSA’s financial operations. The audit is expected to conclude this month, officials said. County supervisors also approved a motion this week asking staff to come up with a plan to speed up late payments to county-funded providers.

Officials from the city of L.A. said the Los Angeles Housing Department, City Administrative Officer's Office and LAHSA are working together to expedite the contracting and payments processes on the city side.

This budget year, which ends June 30, LAHSA is responsible for doling out nearly $700 million in city, county and state and federal dollars to the local organizations it contracts with to provide homeless services.

LAHSA’s latest payments crisis comes as L.A.’s lead homelessness agency has been under heightened scrutiny for more than a year, after an L.A. County audit and federal court-ordered review found widespread financial mismanagement.

County officials cited LAHSA’s oversight problems when they voted last April to shift more than $300 million in funds away from the agency next budget year and oversee the funds itself within a new homelessness department.

“LAHSA does not have the staffing or expertise to pay its bills,” Supervisor Lindsey Horvath said in a statement. “These failures have destabilized providers and eroded public trust — and they must end.”

Now, the L.A. City Council is weighing moving the city’s roughly $300 million away from the troubled agency soon, too.

Some officials are calling for serious reforms at LAHSA's finance department. L.A. City Councilmember Monica Rodriguez told LAist the delayed payments aren’t an isolated incident, but a symptom of the agency’s broken governance structure.

“When the City routes hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars through a joint authority without directly negotiating and contracting with providers, accountability becomes blurred and finger-pointing replaces responsibility,” Rodriguez said in a statement.

LAHSA’s finances

Providers raised the same concerns about late LAHSA payments nearly two years ago, and officials promised to make changes.

L.A. County began issuing quarterly advance payments to LAHSA to pay homeless service providers ahead of time, officials said, instead of weeks or months later. The city started doing the same thing for many of its LAHSA contracts.

Janine Trejo, LAHSA’s chief financial officer, was instrumental in developing the new advanced payment model, according to the agency.

But that fix, which was meant to speed up payments, is now a bottleneck. The advance-payments system has become administratively burdensome for overworked and undertrained staff, LAHSA officials said. And the agency failed to release many of those advances to providers on time this year.

“Having an advanced model is great for the providers, but it’s extremely difficult for LAHSA,” said Gita O’Neill, the agency's interim CEO, in a public meeting last week.

In December, LAHSA put a new plan in place for contracts, which O’Neill said “will prevent the avalanche of invoices” next budget year. She said LAHSA is working to identify consultants to help the agency modernize how it issues and recoups advances, submits cash requests to funders and disperses checks.

“We're actually gonna go through it with an outside firm and make sure it works,” O’Neill said last week at a LAHSA Commission meeting. “Not just fixing the tools, but actually checking the process to see if we can make it better, since it's my understanding that this happens year after year at LAHSA and it can't continue. We aren't just gonna put a band-aid on it.”

O’Neill acknowledged the agency is in deep crisis.

“LAHSA has been structured for decades as the entity that takes the blame,” O’Neill said. “Political incentive has always been to point at LAHSA rather than to address structural issues.”

Janine Trejo, LAHSA's Chief Financial Officer, speaks at a LAHSA Commission meeting on April 25, 2025.

(

Samanta Helou Hernandez

/

LAist

)

The blame game

Last month, LAHSA finance deputy Janine Lim told the commission overseeing the agency that delayed payments were partly caused by the city of L.A. not passing along funds.

LAHSA Commission member Amy Perkins, also a policy deputy for county Supervisor Lindsey Horvath, pressed Lim on why the agency had not raised an alarm.

“Providers are submitting invoices for work they've completed for the city of Los Angeles and you don't have that money, and you are not calling out that as a 911?” Perkins said. “That feels like a 911 to me.”

Lim said she had informed providers consistently that LAHSA was waiting on payments from the city — more than $40 million as of last week.

Contracts for the Inside Safe program, which moves people from encampments into shelter, had the longest delays, Lim said. That program is funded quarterly, making payments more complicated.

“ Government funding, I think as we know, is some of the toughest dollars to manage,” Lim said.

Several homeless services providers told LAist that the wait is typically longer for city-funded contracts, because there are more departments and offices involved.

“What may take the County a few days or a week to approve, can take considerably longer at the City level,” said Kelvin Driscoll, CEO of HOPICS, in a written comment. “The City has a much more complex process that can, and has, caused delays for months in both finalizing contracts as well as funding.”

City pushes back

City officials acknowledged the need to streamline their processes, but said LAHSA was slow to finalize contracts for the current budget year.

The city of L.A. executed its eight contracts with LAHSA in September, a few months after the budget year had already started. It then took LAHSA until this February to finalize 160 subcontracts with the providers, city officials said.

“While there is certainly room to move faster on the city side, most of the delay this year in contracting was at LAHSA,” L.A. City Councilmember Nithya Raman told LAist.

Matt Szabo, L.A.’s city administrative officer, said the city has already given LAHSA more money than it has asked for when it comes to advances.

“The City has disbursed more than $138 million to LAHSA in advance-payments this year, far in excess of what we have been billed for to date,” Szabo told LAist in a statement.

Raman, who chairs the council’s homelessness committee, said the overdue payments are unacceptable.

“I do not think the city should sign any new contract with LAHSA for next fiscal year until LAHSA has an outside, qualified accounting firm in place to process its payments and cashflow,” Raman said.

Meanwhile, L.A. Mayor Karen Bass blamed the City Council for contributing to the delays.

During this year’s budget process, the council voted to move half of all funding for shelter beds into the city’s unappropriated balance, to allow for more spending flexibility and oversight. That decision has caused severe payment delays this budget year, the mayor’s office said.

“Mayor Bass is exploring all available options to improve this system, including reevaluating the cost-reimbursement model, advocating for a multi-year budget, and working with the city council to keep all homelessness funding outside of the unappropriated balance,” a Bass spokesperson told LAist.

The Housing Department administers LAHSA’s city-funded homelessness contracts. The department did not immediately respond to questions about the delayed payments.

Large trash piles and sprawling homeless encampment in downtown Los Angeles Sept. 25, 2025.

(

Allen J. Schaben

/

Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

)

What’s next? 

The evaluation by the Auditor-Controller’s Office will focus on the agency’s delayed processing of invoices and its failure to draw down available funds in time to pay scheduled advance payments to some county-funded providers last month.

Acting County CEO Joe Nicchitta sent a letter notifying LAHSA of the review last week.

“ Why this happened, I think, remains unclear,” Nicchitta told county supervisors this week. “We all agreed that a review of LAHSA’s policies, procedures, and financial records relating to the advances was warranted and necessary to make sure that we understood what was happening.”

County officials are expected to return to the Board of Supervisors with a financial analysis and corrective action plan next month.

In July, L.A. County will start managing its homelessness funds directly, through the Department of Homeless Services and Housing, instead of relying on LAHSA.

LAHSA is still expected to manage $340 million in homelessness dollars for the city of L.A. next budget year. But the future of that arrangement is uncertain, as city officials consider withdrawing from the troubled agency.

After an L.A. City Council committee discussed options at a meeting Wednesday, Bass released a statement urging the council not to withdraw funding from LAHSA without a plan in place.

“We need to continue putting people and services first,” Bass said.

Incumbent Mayor Rex Richardson has raised more than $336,000 in contributions for his reelection bid, while his four declared challengers have not yet reported raising any money, according to campaign finance filings.

This comes as the field for the mayoral race, the marquee local race, is nearly finalized ahead of the filing deadline on Friday, March 6.

Richardson, looking to secure his second term, will so far face four contenders: former Marine and National Guardsman Joshua Rodriguez; Lee Goldin, a nonprofit worker; Rogelio Martinez, who gained notice for calling upon gangs to “take back” the city from ICE; and childcare specialist Terri Rivers.

None has held elected office in Long Beach before. The city has not voted in a mayor who hasn’t first sat on the City Council since Beverly O’Neill’s inaugural victory in 1994.

Outside of Richardson, only Rivers has filed to form a campaign fundraising committee, which is required if they plan to receive over $2,000 in contributions. None of the challengers has reported making any expenditures. Richardson has so far spent $138,000, mostly on campaign consultants.

Any candidate that earns more than 50% of the vote in the June 2 primary election will win outright; if no candidate gets a majority vote, the top two vote-getters will advance to the general election on Nov. 3.

Experts say such a large gap in fundraising is a strong indication of how the election will likely turn out.

Winning against a local incumbent like Richardson is “extremely difficult,” barring a major scandal or instance of corruption, said Matt Lesenyie, a political science professor at Cal State Long Beach.

“The strength of the incumbent can scare off quality candidates,” he said. “And then, should somebody take them on, they’ve got this machine with inertia that is going to push back against them mightily.”

Behind Richardson is a donor coalition of labor and business groups, politicians like Assemblyman Josh Lowenthal and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, two sitting Long Beach council members in their own re-election races and L.A. County Sheriff Robert Luna, formerly Long Beach’s police chief.

Beyond that, analysts who spoke with the Long Beach Post say Richardson holds the advantage in experience, name recognition and backings than his less well-heeled competitors.

The power of the mayor includes running council meetings, advocating on a regional, state and federal level, providing budget recommendations, among other duties. The measure of a good candidate, in many ways, is their ability to drive momentum around a plan.

Winning the seat, Lesenyie said, requires strong name recognition, a sizable war chest, and tight-knit backing from business associations, unions and other civic leaders. Winning candidates also need a track record that shows wherever they previously served, success was left in their wake.