The Brief

For all the math taught at college, the California State University system is stumped over an arithmetics problem it has less than five months to solve: How to keep operating when the governor has proposed cutting $375 million from its budget.

Without the money, the nation’s largest public four-year university system — enrolling more than 460,000 students — is likely due for a lot of subtraction: fewer professors teaching students due to layoffs and employment contracts that aren’t renewed, gutted academic programs and cancellation of majors that students are already enrolled in.

It’s already happening at some campuses, including San Francisco State and more recently Sonoma State, whose interim president intends to take the rare step of laying off tenured faculty, ending majors and totally shuttering the university’s NCAA Division II intercollegiate athletics.

“One of the things that people notice when they come to campus is that the lawns don’t seem to be mowed like they used to be, that there is a lot of trash and garbage around,” said Emily F. Cutrer, Sonoma State’s interim president, at a Cal State trustees hearing late last month.

And that’s all before the planned spending cuts Gov. Gavin Newsom outlined in his proposed 2025-26 budget in January. The final budget is due by late June. It also comes at a time in which the system overall grapples with the reality that it hasn’t been able to afford itself since 2021, due to a mix of rising labor and insurance costs and greater student needs, plus a drop in enrollment after the COVID-19 pandemic.

If the reductions were to hold, what’s happening at Sonoma State “is the first of what we will see at every Cal State University campus,” said Sen. John Laird, a Democrat from Santa Cruz, who chairs the subcommittee on education finance. He made those comments during a Senate budget committee hearing in late January that began reviewing the governor’s budget proposal, which includes the $375 million cut.

In an interview last week, Laird said the cut is “untenable.” On paper, it amounts to a nearly 8% cut to Cal State’s support from the state budget, but with the system’s growing labor expenses and inflation, he views that as closer to a 10% to 12% cut. He said his top priority this year is ensuring those cuts never strike Cal State or the University of California, which faces identical planned reductions.

Less money would also undermine the Legislature’s and governor’s ongoing efforts to enroll more new California residents. It would “prohibit new enrollment… and that’s just not acceptable,” Laird told Calmatters.

Newsom’s proposed cuts reflect a larger budget problem for the state. Last year lawmakers and the governor closed a $47 billion projected deficit in part by cutting most state agency budgets by 7.95%. Lawmakers were able to persuade Newsom to delay those cuts to UC and Cal State by a year to give the systems more time to prepare. Newsom’s proposed budget for next year basically maintains the university cuts he and lawmakers agreed to last June. The system has been in a state of panic over these planned reductions since last summer.

As for finding money in budget negotiations this year to stave off the cuts partially or fully, the odds seem stacked against Cal State. Last month Newsom’s Department of Finance issued a letter saying that the recent Southern California fires and projected deficits of several billion dollars after 2025-26 “underscores the need for continued vigilance to strengthen budget resiliency and fiscal stability to protect and preserve essential programs.”

Julia Lopez, a Cal State trustee, attempted to translate that jargon in lay terms: “Don’t expect things to be much better in May. In fact, you may even plan for further cuts in May, and certainly don’t start anything new,” she said at January’s trustees meeting.

The governor seeks only about $570 million in new spending, underscoring just how fragile that balanced budget calculus is. The costs of natural disasters, including the Los Angeles area fires, and a dropoff in federal support for the state could wreck California’s budget plans.

Laird’s counterpart in the Assembly, Chula Vista Democrat David Alvarez, said in an interview that some cuts may be necessary but the hit both systems would be taking under this plan is unfair. “I’m just being realistic about our budget situation.”

He noted that the cuts to Cal State and the UC would represent 40% of all the reductions to the state budget in Newsom’s January budget. That’s because the two campuses receive a combined $10 billion in direct state funding, so an 8% cut bites off a much larger amount than it does for agencies with smaller operating budgets. Alvarez called the planned reductions to UC and Cal State “disproportionate.”

The issue is now a major concern for the leaders of the Legislature’s powerful budget committees. On Monday the chairperson of the Joint Legislative Budget Committee sent a letter to the director of the finance department echoing Alvarez’s points. “A cut this significant will undoubtedly result in cuts to direct services for students and possible layoffs or furloughs,” wrote Sen. Scott Wiener, a Democrat from San Francisco.

The 2025-26 budget can only be finalized through negotiations between legislative leaders and Newsom. Laird said he “will work over the next five months to try to make sure that the Senate leadership agrees with me.”

Right now, 42 out of the 119 state lawmakers in office represent a district with at least one Cal State campus. Laird’s district includes two.

The 23 campuses together generate $7 of economic activity for every dollar the state spends on Cal State, a system report calculated in 2021. The ripple effect includes campus and student spending on goods, wages, housing and construction.

Cal State’s budget crisis

Seventeen campuses have cut a combined 1,200 workers between fall 2023 and fall 2024 while six campuses added almost 400 employees. San Francisco State posted the highest losses, with 180 employees. That amounts to 7% of workers, said campus president Lynn Mahoney, at the trustees meeting last month.

Three other campuses — Dominguez Hills, East Bay and Los Angeles — each reduced their workforces by more than 100 employees, according to data the system’s chancellor’s office shared with CalMatters.

Some of those losses were due to layoffs. In other cases faculty or staff left on their own and the campuses chose to leave those vacancies unfilled.

And that doesn’t include the job losses announced this year. Cal State Dominguez Hills sent layoff notices to 30 non-faculty staff last month, the school’s spokesperson said.

Despite $164 million in extra revenue this year from recently approved higher tuition, the system’s finance team projects a deficit of $375 million due to ever-growing costs for student financial aid as well as campus insurance, utilities, employee health care and the loss in state support. It’s an amount equal to the annual operating budget of Fresno State, which enrolls about 24,000 students. The system has also been relying partly on one-time reserves to plug budget shortfalls the past two years.

“There will be zero new funding for compensation increases” if the state cuts go through next year, said Ryan Storm, an assistant vice chancellor at Cal State overseeing the system’s budget planning, at the trustees meeting last month. “There will be no new funding for mental health services for our students or our facility improvements,” he added later in his remarks. About three-quarters of the system’s operating budget is spent on salary and benefits.

And that budget shortfall is on top of another fiscal blow to the system: the delay of about $250 million in promised funding from Newsom as part of his annual “compact” with Cal State to grow state support in exchange for higher student enrollment and improved graduation rates.

All told, Cal State is looking at around $620 million in less funding than it would get for 2025-26 were the state to live up to its end of the compact deal and avoid the budget cut. The system’s operating budget is about $8.6 billion — a mix of state support and tuition revenue.

Cal State leaders are adamant about lobbying lawmakers to prevent the cuts, from alumni groups to presidents appealing to their state representatives, said Greg Saks, who heads external relations and communications for the system, at the January trustees meeting.

Sonoma State spotlight

Sonoma State had more than 9,000 students in 2018. Now it’s down to 5,800. Since 2020, the school has shed $26 million in expenses to fill the budget hole left by losing nearly 40% of its students in the last six years.

Those cuts meant far fewer lecturers. It also means the loss of 70 staff plus eight tenured or tenure-track professors — largely through attrition or unfilled vacancies. Gone also are 26 management positions. Now the school faces an additional $24 million deficit in 2025-26. And like several other campuses with declining enrollments, Sonoma State will be rerouting a few million dollars to the campuses that are growing.

“That demonstrates the right type of leadership,” said Alvarez when asked about Sonoma State’s plans to shrink its payroll. “When you don’t have resources, you have to make those tough decisions.”

That dire budget picture prompted Cutrer, Sonoma State’s interim president, to propose cancelling 23 degree programs by the end of this school year, including philosophy, economics, modern languages, physics, theater, dance, geology, women and gender studies. Those majors enroll 302 students. And while 114 will graduate this spring, 56 will need to find a new major and 132 will need a “teach-out” plan to finish their majors, which may include online classes and counting other courses as satisfying their programs.

While Alvarez acknowledges the necessity of “tough decisions,” he is less thrilled about telling some students already enrolled in cancelled majors that they have to find new ones. “I don’t think that’s the right approach.”

Cutrer’s team also plans to lay off 46 full-time faculty, ending the NCAA sports programs that affect 11 teams and 36 coaches, and not renewing contracts for 60 lecturers. The expected moves have been met with outcry from the campus community and deep concern from local politicians.

“These actions will have far-reaching consequences not only for the university and its students, but also for the broader Sonoma County community, our local economy and the ability of businesses and public institutions — including county government — to recruit and retain a skilled workforce,” said a letter from the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors to Cal State’s leadership last month.

Spotlight on San Francisco State

San Francisco State declared a financial emergency in December after its enrollment sank from almost 29,000 students to less than 23,000 since 2019.

“So when my freshman class declined by 20% I needed 20% fewer sections of college writing, so a number of lecturer faculty didn’t get any courses,” said Mahoney, in an interview last month.

Lecturers, who are faculty and typically sign contracts per semester or year based on course availability, have fewer job guarantees than tenured professors.

By leaving vacancies open and cutting academic programs, the campus saved $26 million this year. But that doesn’t close the budget gap because the university has $8 million more in wage increases for its employees this year. And the proposed 8% statewide cut would mean an additional $20 million shortfall next year for San Francisco State.

“The greatest cost is to our lecturer faculty, many of whom are proud products of the CSU who have worked for San Francisco State for many decades,” Mahoney said in late January to the trustees.

She then read a note from an unnamed student who wrote “cutting jobs may provide a temporary financial fix, but it risks undermining the very foundation of the university’s mission to provide high quality.”

Systemwide, campuses have cancelled nearly 4,000 course sections between 2021 and 2024, even as enrollments have been climbing again after a brief dropoff. “This results in increased class sizes, which can impact student success, especially in student populations that need additional support,” Storm said.

Mahoney told CalMatters that “this is as dire as anything I heard during the Great Recession.”

The number of immigrants who have died while in Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody has reached an all-time high this fiscal year.

Twenty-nine people have died in ICE custody since October, the start of the federal government's fiscal year, already surpassing 2004's toll of 28, the previous record, according to government data.

The most recent death was of 27-year-old Aled Damien Carbonell-Betancourt, a Cuban man held in ICE custody in Miami. According to an initial report released by ICE on the evening of April 16, Carbonell-Betancourt was found unresponsive in his cell on the morning of April 12. The report lists the cause of death as a "presumed suicide," but the official cause remains under investigation.

The report said Carbonell-Betancourt entered the United States in 2024 without valid documents and later released into the U.S. via a program known as parole, which allows noncitizens to enter the country without a formal visa, often for humanitarian reasons.

He was arrested for resisting an officer with violence in 2025, and then transferred into ICE custody earlier this year, according to the ICE release.

The rise in deaths comes as detention numbers have skyrocketed during the Trump administration. Detentions are up more than 70% under President Donald Trump compared to the first year of the Biden administration. The Trump administration has carried out an unprecedented crackdown on immigration. Immigration officers have arrested and detained criminals in the country illegally, as well as many people without a criminal record and some migrants who are in the country with temporary protections from deportation.

There are about 60,000 people currently in immigration detention.

In a statement to NPR, DHS denied there's been a spike in deaths and attributed the increase to the large number of people in detention. DHS said as of April 16, "death rates in custody under the Trump administration are 0.009% of the detained population."

The agency added that ICE provides migrants with access to medical care.

"For many illegal aliens this is the best healthcare they have received their entire lives," the statement said. The statement went on to encourage detainees to self-deport. "Being in detention is a choice. We encourage all illegal aliens to take control of their departure with the CBP Home App," the statement said.

During a congressional hearing also on Thursday, acting ICE Director Todd Lyons said there are a high number of deaths this fiscal year "because we do have the highest amount in detention that ICE has ever had since its inception in 2003." Lyons added that the agency spent "almost half a billion dollars last fiscal year … to ensure that people have proper care."

He reiterated details noted by other DHS officials: that detainees get a complete physical within 14 days and are seen by a medical professional within 24 hours of being admitted.

"No death is what we want. We don't want anyone to die in custody," Lyons, who handed in his resignation hours after testifying, said. "I hope that's a policy of anyone that has to be tasked with detaining someone."

When asked how many people were still working in the Office of Detention Oversight, he was not able to provide a number.

Lyons was also asked about the delay in public reporting and tracking detainee deaths. On April 13, Georgia Democratic Sens. Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock sent a letter to Lyons and DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin raising concern over the rising number of detainee deaths and noted that of the 49 deaths in custody at the time since January 2025, "ICE has issued an interim death notice within 48 hours in only 15 cases" and argued that reports contained less details.

"We are reporting. We are working on that timeline," Lyons said during the House hearing, agreeing that the detainee death reports were considered essential work even during the agency's funding lapse.

Facilities in Texas and California are the deadliest

Adelanto ICE Processing Center in Adelanto, Calif., and Camp East Montana in El Paso, Texas have each reported the deaths of three detainees, the most out of ICE's sprawling detention operation. 

According to ICE's initial reports, the deaths of the six immigrant detainees were attributed to a number of causes, including suicide, alcohol withdrawal, liver failure and kidney failure. Other detainees displayed symptoms like shortness of breath.

One of the deaths at Camp East Montana was ruled a homicide by the El Paso County Medical Examiner's Office.

Initially, DHS said that Geraldo Lunas Campos had died in Camp East Montana after experiencing "medical distress." It also claimed Lunas Campos had become "disruptive while in line for medication" and was placed in segregation. But later, the El Paso Medical Examiner's Office ruled his death a homicide due to "asphyxia due to neck and torso compression." The FBI is now investigating the death.Chris Benoit, an attorney representing the family, told NPR Lunas Campos came to the U.S. in the mid-1990s as part of a wave of Cubans immigrants during the balsero crisis after the fall of the Soviet Union.

"For all sense and purposes he is an American," Benoit said. "He's lived here for decades and raised his family here and his kids love him and miss him."

According to DHS, Lunas Campos had been convicted of multiple crimes, including petty larceny, unlawful possession of a weapon during a robbery and sexual contact with a child under 11.

In a court petition seeking eyewitness testimony, Lunas Campos' three children said they planned to file a wrongful death lawsuit.

Rahul Mukherjee contributed to this report.
Copyright 2026 NPR

Combatting bacterial and viral infections is getting tougher because of their growing resistance to drugs. Antibiotic drugs can no longer be counted on to conquer nasty bacteria. Antivirals don't always overpower the viruses. This is a huge problem but it is one that widely acknowledged and researched.

There's an additional medical challenge though, that matters a lot. Namely, drug-resistant fungi.

Yep, fungi.

It's a topic that doesn't get discussed much — and that worries Paul Verweij, professor of clinical mycology at Radboud University Medical Center in Nijmegen, the Netherlands. He says there's a "silence surge" in drug-resistant fungi and that it's mostly happening under-the-radar.

This is a particular challenge in lower-income countries.

"Look at, for instance, Candida auris [a type of yeast that can cause severe infections and is often drug-resistant] -- you need very, very strict infection control measures in hospitals, you need good diagnostics, good infection control, you have to follow-up with patients and that's just not available in these lower- middle-income countries," he says. "People will die, and you won't know they have a fungal infection. You wouldn't know if it was resistant."

Verweij teamed up with 50 scientists around the world – from Brazil to Nigeria to China — to call for action against drug‑resistant fungi in Nature Medicine this week.

NPR spoke with Verweij, who's been working on this issue for more than 20 years. His interview has been edited for length and clarity.

What's the link between agriculture and drug-resistant fungi?

Fungicides are used to protect plants against fungal disease. Everything — watermelons, maize, wheat, flowers — use lots of fungicides. If we didn't use the fungicides, you'd probably have a yield loss maybe of 30% or 40%.

The problem is that the fungicides are quite similar to the drugs we give to patients. So the fungus becomes resistant to the fungicide and, at the same time, our medical azoles [a class of antifungal drugs] do not work as well anymore.

The fungi which cause disease in humans are not causing disease in plants. So this is an unintended effect.

How does the resistance get from farms to hospitals? 

So the molds – the hairy fungi – have spores which are released into the air. These spores travel long distances. It's not really well-understood but the idea is that they go right up to these jet streams, very high into the atmosphere and then can travel for continents. We inhale the spores all the time.

How serious are fungal infections?

With fungi you have two types of infections. First, we have very severe infections, and they usually occur in [hospitalized] patients who have some kind of defect in their immunity. So, yeast found in the bloodstream or mold in the lungs. Second, we have infections of the skin, the hair and the nails, which are irritating but are not life threatening.

In the past 10 to 20 years, we see more and more resistance in fungi in both those categories.

There are very few studies looking at the clinical impact. We did a study in the Netherlands, and we found that if you compare an infection [where azole antifungal drugs work] and where it's resistant. There's about a 20% difference in mortality — you're 20% more likely to die. So that's a significant impact. And there's the new skin disease [Trichophyton indotineae] where you don't have mortality but we've had patients who have been on treatment for four years and are still suffering from the infection.

Why is it hard to create new antifungals?

The main challenge is that fungi, if you look at the cell structure — how they are built up — it's very similar to the human cell. This is different from bacteria, because bacteria are much simpler. And viruses are even more simple because they don't even have a cell.

For fungi, because they're similar to human cells, it's quite difficult to find a drug which kills the fungus but does not harm the human cell. So in the past 75 years, we have developed only five classes of antifungals. The azoles are, by far, the most important.

The problem is that if you can't use one of these classes then maybe you'll have one alternative left. It's already causing problems. For instance, if the fungus is in the brain, you have a very few drugs which actually get into the brain.

What can be done?

At a mycology meeting we found a global community who wanted to collaborate [on this issue].

For example, you really want to know what people are using [on crops] and see if you can reduce that or if there's any unnecessary use. Another important factor is: If you introduce new fungicides, they [should] undergo an assessment to see their impact on human fungal pathogens. It's important to establish if there's a risk for cross resistance.

Are you optimistic? 

I've worked in this field for a long time, and I think that it is changing.

WHO published a fungal pathogen list in 2022 for the first time — that had a major impact. A decade ago, when the World Health Organization came out with its global action plan against antimicrobial resistance, fungi were only mentioned twice. Now, after 10 years, it is being revised. And as a mycology community, we feel it is really important now that fungi are addressed.

The problem is, in fungi, we need to do the basic stuff: Develop the tools. Do the surveillance. Set up the [laboratory] networks. And it's sometimes difficult to get these basic things funded.

But overall, I think it's really changing. People are realizing this is not a local problem — it's really global.

On Wednesday, a federal jury found that Live Nation engaged in anticompetitive practices that stifle competition and harm the live music industry. The verdict marked a major victory for more than two dozen states in the antitrust trial against the live entertainment company, and has the potential to transform the concert ecosystem in the U.S.

Live Nation owns, operates or works with hundreds of venues across the country. It also manages artists, promotes concerts, books tours and owns Ticketmaster, which is one of the largest ticketing companies in the world. Throughout the trial, an attorney representing 33 states and the District of Columbia argued that Live Nation wielded too much power over the industry at the expense of fans, venues and artists. Live Nation repeatedly denied those accusations, but the jury ultimately sided with the states, declaring that the company had an unfair dominance in the industry.

Afterward, Live Nation issued a statement saying the verdict "is not the last word on this matter" and pointed to several pending motions that the court still has to rule on. The company said it plans to appeal any "unfavorable rulings."

Several artists and organizers NPR spoke with say they don't expect to see any immediate changes in the live music industry — but they see this is a first step in the right direction.

Having this scale of a win is a huge development for artists.Downtown Boys member and UMAW co-founder Joey La Neve DeFrancesco
Joey La Neve DeFrancesco is a guitarist and vocalist in the Providence, R.I. punk band Downtown Boys. In 2020, as the COVID-19 pandemic wreaked havoc on the music industry, DeFrancesco founded the United Musicians and Allied Workers (UMAW), a grassroots union advocating for the wellbeing of artists. Since then, the group has organized campaigns focused on increasing streaming royalties, merchandising payouts and SXSW payment rates for musicians. DeFrancesco says UMAW heavily supported the antitrust lawsuit against Live Nation and was closely monitoring the trial.

"We were all ecstatic. It's been decades that artists have been fighting this company," DeFrancesco says, citing Pearl Jam's boycott of Ticketmaster in the early 1990s. "It remains to be seen what the judge is going to do with this verdict — if we're going to truly break apart this Live Nation-Ticketmaster monopoly. But having this scale of a win is a huge development for artists."

More than just ticket prices 

The Live Nation verdict comes at a time when many working musicians say they're struggling to make ends meet. As the value of recorded music has decreased with streaming, there's an increased emphasis on touring and merch sales to make up the difference. But artists NPR spoke with say the rising costs of transportation, lodging, food and other factors required to put on shows are creating an untenable situation.

Conor Murphy is a St. Louis, Mo. based musician who spent more than a decade as the lead vocalist of the emo band Foxing and now continues to perform as Smidley. In the fall, Foxing announced it would be going on an indefinite hiatus. Murphy says there's a multitude of reasons for the break, but one of the leading factors is how financially unsustainable it's become to be a full-time musician. He says it's especially frustrating, then, to see fans spending more than ever on concert tickets. (As part of the Live Nation verdict, the jury found that Ticketmaster had overcharged fans in some states by $1.72 per ticket).

"My bands in particular, from my experience, we're not seeing the benefits of ticket prices being more expensive," he says. "We're not taking home more money at the end of tours."

Murphy's not alone Damon Krukowski is a writer, UMAW organizer and one-half of the indie-folk duo Damon & Naomi. He says he and his wife Naomi Yang recently sold out three performances in London, and still ended up in the negative.

"Three nights at our favorite club, sold out, and we lost money because expenses are so high right now," he says. "It's not the club's fault. We love that club and they're transparent about money and everything. It's not the fans' fault. But it's like, if you're charging normal money at a decent, normal club, it's not adding up right now."

Krukowski says he thinks the problem is a wider consolidation of power across the industry — that includes Live Nation, but also extends to streaming giants and recorded music companies. He says the industry looks completely different today than it did when he started playing music in Boston in the 1980s.

"We used to have such a wide variety of partners to work with as independent artists. We had venues that were independently owned. We had record stores that were independently owned," he says. "We had a network on the radio that was community and college radio stations, and we had a way of touring that didn't depend on these huge companies that are backed by enormous capital."

Impact on local scenes

All of the artists NPR spoke with say they hope the Live Nation verdict leads to lower ticket fees for fans as well as more robust competition and investment in small, local music scenes across the country. A study conducted by the National Independent Venue Association (NIVA) found that 64% of independent venues, promoters and festivals were not profitable in 2024.

It's a win for the fans and the artists that have suffered under Live Nation for way too long.Stephen Parker, executive director of the National Independent Venue Association (NIVA)
Stephen Parker, executive director of NIVA, tells NPR that the verdict is incredibly meaningful at a time when so many venues are struggling.

"It's not just a win for the states. It's a win for the small businesses and nonprofits that I represent," he says. "It's a win for the fans and the artists that have suffered under Live Nation for way too long."

In past statements to NPR, Live Nation has said that it promotes thousands of shows in independent venues across the country.

In Boston, Krukowski says the local landscape has shifted dramatically in recent years. Two major venues with over 3,500 capacity have been built in the city since the pandemic; one is operated by Live Nation and the other is owned by a partner of AEG Presents, which is Live Nation's biggest competitor. But small clubs and independent venues with much lower capacities have shuttered across the city.

"That means that my friends who play adventurous, independent music or improvised music have nowhere to play in Boston. So they don't," he says. "They go on tour and they don't play here."

Krukowski's not the only one who's noticed a shift. Online, some music fans on Reddit have posted about certain bands skipping Boston on tour, and touring in smaller markets instead. Krukowski says one such place booking notable lineups is Portland, Maine.

There, the Maine Music Alliance — a coalition of artists, venues, music industry workers and community members — has been leading a fight against Live Nation's proposal to build a 3,300-seat concert hall in the city. So far, the group has succeeded in getting a temporary moratorium on large venues in Portland, which was recently extended until September.

Scott Mohler is executive director and co-founder of the Maine Music Alliance. He says the verdict comes at a crucial moment for the group's ongoing battle against Live Nation.

"This is incredible legitimacy added to what I think a lot of people have thought are just a bunch of hippies and hipsters shouting about the corporation for the past year," he says. "I do think that it's going to certainly create more engagement and the council will be hearing from voices that they hadn't heard from before."

In the meantime, individual artists are doing what they can. Pop-rock singer Caroline Rose says they've been avoiding working with Live Nation as much as possible in recent years. They say the verdict is "a pretty amazing milestone" for now, but they're curious about what will actually happen next.

"We'll see how it pans out. I have a general distrust that things ever turn out in artists' favor," Rose says, laughing. "We've just been burned so many times."

In 2025, Rose released their album year of the slug exclusively on Bandcamp and in physical format. Since then, they've been focused on smaller solo tours in independent venues across the country. They say playing intimate rooms creates an incredibly rewarding, almost spiritual connection with the audience — and they say it's been refreshing to focus on those interpersonal connections rather than constantly trying to size up to the next biggest possible venue.

"By far, the most positive and nourishing experience has been working with the venue staff and the promoters that work at these independent clubs," Rose says. "It's a totally different type of show and a totally different type of experience, as opposed to when you get into the bigger rooms and you have better sound systems and maybe there's not a bathroom with no seats on the toilets anymore. But I do think it's important to pay homage to those venues and actively support them and treat them with respect."

This post first appeared on The LA Local.

A coalition of community activists and supporters held a vigil Thursday evening near the Home Depot on Century Boulevard to acknowledge those who were detained by masked agents earlier this year.

The vigil was organized by ING Fellowship, a grassroots organization founded in 2018 to address issues affecting Inglewood residents, where about 25 people gathered in the parking lot with flowers, candles and signs that read, “Boycott Home Depot” and “Inglewood Unidos.” Each person briefly talked about why they came to the vigil. 

“As a customer of Home Depot, I am outraged. We have normalized racial profiling on this parking lot,” Mars Marvilla said during the vigil. She told The LA Local that she now helps patrol the area near Home Depot when she’s driving for a rideshare company. 

The event was part of the group’s week of action to demand stronger protections for immigrant families and more accountability from city leaders in the wake of ongoing federal immigration enforcement. 

As part of their ongoing efforts in the city, activists are asking city officials to adopt the “Inglewood For All Act,” creating sanctuary city-style protections because “we felt like our local governments weren’t doing enough, so we started gathering to provide and fill those gaps,” said Yaritza Gonzalez, ING Fellowship co-founder. 

The protections include ordinances that would prohibit city resources from being used in immigration enforcement, limiting any collaboration with immigration authorities and Inglewood Police Department and restricting access for immigration authorities to non-public areas of city property.

“With this policy, we’re hoping that the city would be more welcoming to not just residents, but to all the people who will be coming to Inglewood for major events like the World Cup, the Super Bowl and the Olympics,” Gonzalez told The LA Local. 

A coalition of community activists and supporters held a vigil Thursday evening near the Home Depot on Century Boulevard to acknowledge those who were detained by masked agents earlier this year.

(

LaMonica Peters

/

The LA Local

)

The coalition is also encouraging residents to participate in know-your-rights workshops, rapid-response networks and demonstrations intended to show solidarity with those impacted. 

The “Inglewood For All” campaign comes months after incidents like the Jan. 13 operation where  masked federal agents detained workers outside a Superior Grocers construction site. The coalition of activists, including the Hill Network, said they have since tracked dozens of detentions in and around Inglewood, including near day labor hubs and retail centers.  

“On January 13, 2026, our cousin was taken under false [pretenses] from Inglewood,” said Maritza Medina, an Inglewood resident. “Since then, I’ve committed myself to be more involved in our city and be as supportive as I can.” 

The LA Local reached out to Inglewood Mayor James Butts for a response to ING Fellowship’s week of action but received no response.  

The Inglewood For All Act also signals a growing grassroots movement, where community patrols, advocacy groups and informal networks have taken on the role of documenting enforcement activity and supporting affected families — even without formal backing from the city.

“This is just the start of this,” Gonzalez said during the vigil. “It’s an election year, and we’re hoping there is change.” 

A protest at Inglewood City Hall took also place Friday after months of trying to meet with city officials, ING Fellowship said.