Sponsored message
Logged in as
Audience-funded nonprofit news
radio tower icon laist logo
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
Subscribe
  • Listen Now Playing Listen

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • They say new tech is making job worse
    A woman wearing glasses and in a red shirt working on her computer at a desk at home.
    Kaiser Permanente advice nurse Raquel Alvarez Sanchez works from her home office in Santa Rosa on April 6, 2026.

    Topline:

    Kaiser Permanente nurses who answer advice and triage calls say their duty of care for patients is being increasingly threatened by workplace surveillance. Artificial intelligence systems have also been used to rate their empathy and tone of voice.

    What Kaiser says: Kaiser defended its use of AI, saying it deploys the technology with patient safety in mind and does not use “average handle time” to assess performance.

    Why it matters: Kaiser Permanente is the largest private employer in California, meaning the company’s use of artificial intelligence could set important precedents for managing workers with AI.

    Why now: California lawmakers are considering several bills regulating AI in the workplace, including one that would protect from retaliation doctors and nurses who override automated care recommendations.

    Kaiser Permanente nurses who answer advice and triage calls say their duty of care for patients is being increasingly threatened by workplace surveillance.

    Seven current and former nurses told CalMatters that those who spend more than 15 minutes on a call with a patient routinely face criticism from Kaiser management or get called into performance evaluation meetings. Call time, they said, factors into monthly performance scores they receive.

    In addition to tracking call length, they said Kaiser uses software that tries to predict on a daily basis whether they’re being unproductive or failing to answer calls quickly. Artificial intelligence systems have also been used to rate their empathy and tone of voice.

    Their comments come as the California Nurses Association begins negotiating a new contract with Kaiser this month with AI a likely issue. Kaiser nurses went on strike against AI for one day in March and picketed against AI last fall. The CNA is bargaining for 25,000 nurses, including 1,000 in call centers.

    At the same time, California lawmakers are considering several bills regulating AI in the workplace, including one that would protect from retaliation doctors and nurses who override automated care recommendations.

    Kaiser defended its use of AI, saying it deploys the technology with patient safety in mind and does not use “average handle time” to assess performance.

    Kaiser Permanente is the largest private employer in California, providing healthcare services to more than 9 million people in the state and to 3 million other Americans. That means the company’s use of artificial intelligence could set important precedents for managing workers with AI. It could also have a big impact on patient care, providing an early example of how the healthcare sector balances cost-cutting automation with human presence or touch.

    Raquel Alvarez Sanchez, a Kaiser Permanente advice nurse in Vallejo since 2010, said she was on a call with a patient who was suicidal last year that took more than an hour because she had to wait for police to arrive before hanging up. She tried to make the man feel cared for, even though she was cognizant that staying on the call that long would throw off her average call time for weeks and could lead to questions from management. Sanchez, a union steward, said she’s accompanied colleagues to performance evaluation meetings, where they were found to have done everything right on a call — except staying on the line for more than 15 minutes. She said she hasn’t seen nurses get fired for doing that, but she fears that continued pressure can lead nurses to quit or retire early.

    “I think at some point all of the nurses have been talked to about their average handle time,” she said. “The only thing I can think of is they’re doing it for profit.”

    Another nurse who spoke with CalMatters on condition of anonymity due to fear of retribution described how that surveillance affected a call with a patient last year. Initially she thought her patient, an elderly woman who just received a terminal cancer diagnosis, was suicidal, but quickly came to understand that she was in shock and really needed somebody to talk to.

    The nurse wanted to take time to show compassion or comfort to the woman, who acts as a caretaker for her daughter, but she stopped herself out of fear it would hurt her monthly performance score and lead to a reprimand from her manager. She became a nurse to provide people with compassionate care, but “I had to ask myself: Am I going to get disciplined for going off script or saying more than what is necessary?”

    Kaiser Permanente says its performance evaluations help improve patient outcomes. A company spokesperson said, “Kaiser Permanente does not use Average Handle Time to assess agent performance or enforce call time metrics. Any tools used in contact center settings support our quality assurance efforts and have human review and oversight.” In a statement provided to CalMatters, spokesperson Vincent Staupe added that Kaiser uses AI responsibly, with human oversight, and by “prioritizing patient safety, privacy, and equity,” but he said, “As a large organization, we do not share specific information about internal technology systems for security and operational reasons.”

    Is technology putting patients at risk?

    It’s not clear how patient care is affected by algorithmic management, nor is the impact of limiting the length of triage and advice calls on patients. Kaiser call center nurses can’t say for certain whether the pressures they face results in adverse outcomes for patients because their contact with patients ends after they hang up the phone. A 2024 public records request by CalMatters to the California Department of Managed Health Care found no complaints by patients against Kaiser related to call times. But nurses insist the risk to patient safety and quality of care is real.

    Consumer Watchdog patient advocate Michele Ramos said many Kaiser patients begin their care on the advice line. They later complain to her, mostly about things that happen in Kaiser facilities, but “I can see now where a lot of the problems” start, given the call constraints nurses are under.

    Ramos said the time pressures may fit a broader pattern at Kaiser of putting costs over quality. The health giant was hit with a record fine, $50 million, as part of a settlement over findings from the California Department of Managed Health Care that it delayed behavioral health appointments beyond statutory limits and too often moved patients into group rather than individual therapy. Kaiser also settled with the U.S. Department of Labor after investigations into its substance use and mental health services. Kaiser faced criticism in 2002 for paying bonuses to call center workers who aren’t nurses for keeping calls short, though call center nurses who spoke with CalMatters said they encountered no such practices today.

    “Kaiser’s been known through the years to manage dollars over managing care, and I think this would be a contributor to that, which is only going to fail patients,” Ramos added.

    Nurses said they are pressured to stay under 15 minutes even for the sorts of calls that often take more time, like diagnosing a patient with multiple symptoms, chronic illnesses, new parents in need of advice and assurance, people who desire extended health education, or people who are overwhelmed after receiving life-altering news who could use some compassion. Nurses say calls that involve interpreters often take 30 minutes or more. About four in 10 Californians speak a language other than English and half of them do not speak English well, according to a state environmental health agency.

    “The amount of time that Kaiser is giving us to complete a call is sometimes not safe,” said one nurse, who asked to remain anonymous due to fear of retaliation.

    “People can get hurt,” said Charlotte Capulong, who has worked in nurse call centers for 22 years and helped organize Kaiser nurses against the AI tone-of-voice tool. Capulong said nurses felt harassed by managers in meetings she attended as a union rep, even if they successfully carried out all other duties of their jobs except completing calls within 15 minutes.

    “You aren’t calling Comcast. We’re dealing with life here,” she said.

    Nurses are instructed to stick to a script on phone calls and give no more than two to three pieces of advice, Capulong and other nurses said, which means they may sometimes need to decide whether to withhold advice or face a performance evaluation hearing.

    The nurses say artificial intelligence could make the surveillance nurses encounter on the job worse.

    In summer 2024, Kaiser began testing an AI tool that attempts to assess empathy and tone in the voices of nurses and patients, according to nurses who spoke with CalMatters. In response, nurses circulated and signed a petition in favor of the right to patient privacy, more transparency, and the right to exercise their professional judgement and encouraged management to involve nurse’s input and feedback. The signature campaign used the same tag line that nurses used at protests outside San Francisco hospitals earlier that year: “Trust nurses, not AI. The AI tests ended in November 2024, but union representatives were told that managers may bring the program back in the future.

    Nurses reported feeling harassed by existing surveillance, “and that was intensified when they said we’re going to use AI to evaluate our calls and grade us,” said Sanchez.

    Another nurse speaking on condition of anonymity said “AI did not understand our job and would grade us wrong all the time.”

    A Kaiser spokesperson declined to respond to questions about the AI tool or answer questions about the use of AI and other automated systems in the company’s call centers and healthcare facilities, including for evaluating nurse performance or whether patients were informed about the use of AI to evaluate their empathy and tone.

    Nurses also said they get little time between calls even if that call involves speaking with a patient who is suicidal, experiencing a mental health episode, or near death. In years past, nurses got around 10 minutes to finish writing notes in a patient’s chart or collect themselves after a particularly tough call. Today they say they typically get 30 seconds or less when lines are busy, although more at slow times, like late at night, or if they get a manager’s permission after a particularly challenging call. The overall pace they say, can lead to mistakes like missing important cues into a patient’s wellbeing.

    CNA reps declined to talk about specific provisions they intend to seek related to AI ahead of their talks with Kaiser this summer.

    How surveillance and AI shape nursing

    Critics say excessive workplace monitoring can lead to lower morale as employees feel less trusted and autonomous, relegated to being no more than algorithm monitors. UC Berkeley Labor Center Technology and Work Program director Annette Bernhardt has warned that algorithmic management can turn people into fleshy robots, echoing complaints from an Amazon factory worker who CalMatters interviewed last year. A 2023 academic survey of call centers in four developed countries found that using AI for management or monitoring left workers with less time between calls and more likely to feel emotionally drained by their work. Nearly half of respondents said that AI tools made their jobs more stressful. A prior study by the same researchers, Virginia Dolleghast of Cornell University and Sean O’Brady of McMaster University found that performance monitoring leads to higher rates of emotional exhaustion.

    Dolleghast, who has studied the impact of surveillance technology on call center workers for more than a decade, said what Kaiser call center nurses are experiencing is part of a broader trend: Across different industries, persistent surveillance is increasing stress levels for workers who are resolving complex, emotionally-charged issues.

    “Stress and burnout can lead to more mistakes across a range of areas, and in the healthcare setting that is much higher risk because you’re dealing with people’s lives and their health,” she said.

    The converse can be true: Workers who are given more discretion to decide the pace and timing of their work experience higher levels of job satisfaction and less absenteeism.

    Nurses nationwide are more frequently encountering artificial intelligence and similar software systems in the workplace. Half of more than 2,000 nurses who responded to a 2024 survey by the National Nurses United union said their employer uses algorithmic systems to analyze health records. Such systems can do things like determine how fragile a patient is or predict how many hours of care they will need. Two-thirds of the surveyed nurses said their own assessments had at some point disagreed with a computer-generated prediction. Six out of 10 respondents said they don’t trust their employer to prioritize patient safety when using AI.

    Pa Vue has worked as a nurse in call centers for the better part of the past decade. She said she and other Kaiser nurses routinely have conversations with managers about call efficiency and receive evaluation scores once a month. She recalls having a score reduced for repeating advice to a patient that she worried had unusual symptoms and possible heart issues.

    As a union representative in some performance meetings, Vue has seen managers raise efficiency questions about calls they deem too long. She’s also seen nurses receive lower performance scores if they go against software recommendations based on their professional opinion or make an appointment for a patient without consulting a doctor.

    She believes that efficiency aims accelerated by technology can hinder a nurse’s ability to focus and reduce the quality of care that patients pay for.

    “I’m not against the use of AI as long as it’s beneficial to the patient but in this particular use [empathy and tone monitoring] it’s to increase productivity and improve efficiency and cut costs. Kaiser is forgetting we aren’t just a call center for customer support, we’re nurses, and we’re there to take care of patients,” she said.

    As AI improves and businesses push workers to use it, unions are, in turn, increasingly demanding that employers address issues raised by AI when bargaining for new contracts. Surveillance technology has become a common way for managers to collect data about workers in a number of industries, used for everything from improving safety to hunting for ways to increase profit gains or train AI to do a job.

    At Kaiser, AI is a key issue not only among nurses but also for mental health workers, 2,400 of whom are in contract negotiations in Northern California with Kaiser Permanente. Kaiser therapists have said they are concerned about use of therapy session transcripts to train AI models and about the health-care giant using AI to take their jobs. National Union of Healthcare Workers spokesperson Matt Artz told CalMatters contract negotiations are ongoing.

    How Kaiser uses AI

    Kaiser Permanente is exploring or using AI in many parts of the healthcare experience far beyond nurse call centers. Kaiser uses AI to identify patients in hospitals at risk of adverse events by evaluating data on their electronic health records. An AI system called Preventus is used to determine when to discharge patients. Doctors and therapists use Abridge to record interactions and translate speech to text during in-person visits with patients instead of taking notes. Remote monitoring with AI for patients that need extra care has been tested at Kaiser Permanente facilities in the Bay Area, according to nurses who encountered the technology in the course of doing their jobs.

    National Nurses United and CNA President Cathy Kennedy sees the use of AI to detect nurse empathy as part of a long series of steps by Kaiser to limit their autonomy and make them more efficient. She believes AI threatens to automate and fragment the work that nurses do, and companies developing and deploying AI systems should establish that those systems are effective and equitable before deploying them.

    Notification of new tech deployments is part of the nurse union’s contract with Kaiser but sometimes nurses don’t receive notification, CNA says. So union leaders are attempting to track the number of AI models in use at Kaiser Permanente, advising its members to inform them when they encounter new tech. This paves the way for CNA to push back as it did with the empathy and tone AI last summer or as it did when it stopped a pilot program that would have replaced nurses that sit at the bedside of confused patients with cameras.

    Debru Carthan, a Kaiser radiologist, is on the front line of worker-management fights over AI at the company. A member of Service Employees International Union, she is also part of the Coalition of Kaiser Permanente Unions, where she sits on a committee to discuss use of AI and emerging technology at Kaiser. The coalition also has a “see something, say something,” campaign for frontline workers to report when they notice AI deployments; the coalition says that too often management quietly implements AI into workflows without notice or worker input. She worries that the AI tone detector used on advice nurses could discriminate against nurses from different cultures and has come to believe that the use of AI in healthcare generally has more to do with money and corporate greed than patient care.

    California lawmakers have responded to worker AI concerns both inside and outside the healthcare sector. They tried and failed last year to address how AI impacts workers like call center nurses. Assembly Bill 1018 and Senate Bill 7, two bills endorsed by the CNA, would have required employers to inform workers before using automated systems on the job to do things like promote or discipline workers or evaluate job performance, but Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed SB 7, and, facing strong opposition from companies including Kaiser Permanente, AB 1018 failed to pass for the third consecutive year.

    Earlier this year, lawmakers reintroduced a new version of Senate Bill 7, now called Senate Bill 947. Another bill would prohibit employers using AI to predict the emotional state of their employees. Yet another bill would protect doctors and nurses from retaliation if they override recommendations generated by an automated system and require healthcare providers to supply employees with an inventory of automated systems once a year. Kaiser declined to share a comprehensive list of AI systems in use when asked by CalMatters.

    Altogether CNA and the affiliated California Labor Federation support roughly half a dozen bills to regulate use of AI in the workplace. Calling AI a central issue in the next presidential election, members of the California Labor Federation and labor leaders from Democratic primary states held a press conference in Sacramento earlier this year to say that if Newsom wants to become president then he needs to pass laws protecting workers from AI. “It’s an ongoing fight, and it’s a fight well worth having,” Kennedy said. “Whenever there are other unions in discussion about artificial intelligence we are in solidarity with them.”

    The nurse that withheld compassion to a terminal cancer patient she thought was suicidal said she believes monitoring and scoring systems turn nurses into automatons that check boxes.

    “I used to use humor as a way to help patients heal, and I don’t feel comfortable doing that here because I know the calls are being recorded. You can always tell when a patient appreciates the humor or your personal compassion, but I don’t feel like call centers have tolerance for that because that’s not part of the script,” she said. “That really takes away from the whole point of being a nurse and what patients come to know from nurses.”

    This story was reported with contributions from Lam Thuy Vo and Ana Ibarra.

  • Malibu and Pasadena agree to lift SB 9 bans
    A wide look at two workers bent over on top of a wooden house frame using tools to work on it. One is wearing bright orange, while the other is in bright yellow.
    Construction workers build a home to replace one destroyed by the Eaton Fire on March 19, 2026, in Altadena.

    Topline:

    Duplex projects will be allowed to move forward once again in two Southern California cities affected by last year’s fires. It comes after advocates for denser housing challenged the legality of the local restrictions on state law.

    What is SB 9? The state housing law SB 9 allows single-family homeowners to subdivide their lots and build duplexes. They can create up to four units in some cases.

    How this started: After the Palisades and Eaton fires, local jurisdictions were allowed to suspend SB 9 projects in certain areas. Advocates for increased housing development sued them and the state, alleging the bans were not legal.

    About the result: Pasadena and Malibu are now backing out of the lawsuit, agreeing to settle with the plaintiffs. The two cities have until the end of September to repeal their SB 9 bans. L.A. County, the city of L.A. and the state are still fighting the lawsuit. However, a proposed state housing bill could impact what happens next in Altadena.

    Read on…. to learn more about what the settlement means.

    Duplex projects will be allowed to move forward once again in two Southern California cities affected by last year’s fires. The change of course is the result of a court showdown between advocates for denser housing and local elected officials who wanted to ban more units from cropping up in burn zones.

    The cities of Malibu and Pasadena have agreed to settle with the plaintiffs who brought forward a lawsuit that challenges local jurisdictions’ suspension of Senate Bill 9 in high fire risk zones, according to documents obtained by LAist.

    Sonja Trauss, executive director of YIMBY Law, a plaintiff in the lawsuit, said the result will help residents get more out of their properties.

    “I want them to know that they can build,” Trauss said.

    How we got here

    SB 9 allows single-family homeowners across the state to build duplexes and split their lots. It became state law in 2021. SB 9 applicants can use the law to create up to four units where a single-family home once stood, in some cases. The law takes away the ability of local governments to block these projects.

    However, after the 2025 fires, some homeowners affected by the fires erupted with anger over the prospect of their burned-down neighborhoods being rebuilt with denser housing. They argued more homes — and the additional residents that come with them — would clog evacuations and hurt neighborhood character.

    In July 2025, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed an order giving local leaders the power to block the law in very high fire hazard areas within the Palisades and Eaton fire burn zones.

    Elected officials in L.A. city, the county of L.A., Pasadena and Malibu followed suit and adopted policies to stop processing SB 9 applications in those areas.

    Advocates for increased housing development, including YIMBY Law, sued the governments, alleging they didn’t have the authority to suspend laws passed by the legislature.

    Trauss told LAist housing advocates believe the order is being misused for political purposes.

    “ It chips away at the policy,” she said. “Especially in the Palisades, everybody could watch the political back-and-forth that caused that to happen.”

    The backlash on social media to SB 9 projects in the Palisades was led by former reality TV star Spencer Pratt, who lost his home in the fire and later mounted an unsuccessful campaign for L.A. mayor.

    What the settlement means

    According to the settlement documents, Malibu and Pasadena have agreed to repeal the local ordinances that blocked SB 9 projects by the end of September. The settlements still require City Council action to undo those bans.

    The cities are also supposed to process any pending SB 9 applications that were submitted, paused or rejected.

    Another plaintiff in the lawsuit — Andrew Slocum, CEO of Green Development Company — said he thinks Newsom never should have signed the executive order in the first place.

    Slocum said he hopes to see recovering homeowners have more options when rebuilding their properties. Last year, he told LAist he was working with homeowners on SB 9 projects.

    The settlement “allows for the people to hopefully be able to come back and resubmit that application,” Slocum said, “because most people who are doing SB 9 are the homeowners themselves.”

    The Pasadena City Council took the first step toward repeal on July 20, according to city spokesperson Lisa Derderian. She said they’ll start processing SB 9 applications once the vote is finalized.

    “The City reached a conditional settlement with YIMBY in recognition of the uncertainty inherent in litigation and the significant passage of time since the Eaton Fire in January 2025,” she said in a statement.

    LAist contacted officials in the city of Malibu for comment but has not heard back.

    What’s next

    The county and city of L.A. are still fighting the lawsuit. They control land use in Altadena and the Pacific Palisades, home to the lion’s share of properties affected by the Eaton and Palisades fires.

    State officials also continue to defend the restrictions. Newsom’s office stands behind the executive order and plans to defend it in court, according to a state official.

    Trauss said the parties met for  a trial setting conference a few days ago.

    “ I want the folks in the county and in the city of L.A. who could build … to have hope,” she said.

    The lawsuit is playing out while state legislators are moving forward with a new bill, SB 1090, which would expand the ban on SB 9 to all of Altadena.

  • Sponsored message
  • Historic theater set to reopen

    Topline:

    The Cinerama Dome – one of the most famous movie theaters in the world – has been closed since the COVID pandemic. But it's now got a new lease on life, thanks to SONY Pictures and Alamo Drafthouse Cinema.

    The backstory: The Cinerama Dome was built in 1963 by William Forman – the founder of Pacific Theaters, who had popularized drive-in cinemas. Forman commissioned a French architect who had studied under R. Buckminster Fuller, a designer of other geodesic structures. The theater was originally made to showcase Cinerama, a format developed in the 1950s that was part of the widescreen craze designed to lure viewers away from television and back to cinemas. Parent company Pacific Theatres and Aclight Cinemas filed for bankruptcy in 2021.

    New life for the Dome: The studio announced it will lease, restore and reopen the famous theater in 2028; Alamo Drafthouse plans to program and operate it and 14 other screens at the adjoining multiplex. Sony has promised to preserve the Cinerama Dome's history while ensuring its future.

    One Hollywood icon is prepping for a comeback. The Cinerama Dome – one of the most famous movie theaters in the world – has been closed since the COVID pandemic. But it's now got a new lease on life, thanks to SONY Pictures and Alamo Drafthouse Cinema.

    The studio announced it will lease, restore and reopen the famous theater in 2028; Alamo Drafthouse plans to program and operate it and 14 other screens at the adjoining multiplex.

    "Hot damn! We're bringing the Dome back, baby," SONY Pictures Entertainment Motion Picture Group CEO Tom Rothman said in a statement. "We believe in moviegoing down to our soul, and no venue on Earth stands more for that than the one-of-a-kind Dome."

    "There's a lot of passion behind this theater," says Michael O'Leary, who heads Cinema United, the global association of movie theater owners. He says while the Cinerama Dome's closing was a symbol of the pandemic, its recovery is proof the pandemic is behind us and movie theater-going is back.

    "It's really exciting," agrees Escott Norton, former executive director and current board member of the Los Angeles Historic Theatre Foundation. "There's been a lot of people waiting with baited breath to see when the dome is going to reopen. People think of this as the ultimate Hollywood experience."

    As an LA native and former film production designer, Norton has great memories of going to the Cinerama Dome. He says it was always an immersive experience to watch movies inside the geodesic-shaped auditorium designed to show wide screen movies.

    "When I saw Close Encounters on this giant screen curved around me, it knocked my socks off," he says, adding he was also blown away watching Apocalypse Now at the Dome. "The movie opens up with this wide screen of just a quiet jungle, birds tweeting and then it explodes. Being surrounded by that on the curved screen, it still gives me tingles thinking about it."

    Closeup of a sign, hanging on a building, that reads, "cinerama."
    The Cinerama Dome in October 2021.
    (
    Mario Tama
    /
    Getty Images
    )

    The Cinerama Dome was built in 1963 by William Forman – the founder of Pacific Theaters, who had popularized drive-in cinemas. Forman commissioned a French architect who had studied under R. Buckminster Fuller, a designer of other geodesic structures. The theater was originally made to showcase Cinerama, a format developed in the 1950s that was part of the widescreen craze designed to lure viewers away from television and back to cinemas.

    Forman was able to get the theater constructed in 16 weeks … just in time for the world premiere of a madcap comedy called, It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World. The movie ran four hours long, with an intermission. Filmmakers had originally planned to use the Cinerama format, but abandoned it, shooting in Ultra Panavision 70 millimeter instead.

    Still, it featured a who's who of comedy at the time – including Sid Caesar, Edie Adams, Milton Berle, and Buddy Hackett. Buster Keaton even makes a ten second cameo. "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World played at the Cinerama Dome, the brand new theater, for two years without stopping," recalled Karen Sharpe, the widow of the movie's director, Stanley Kramer. The former TV actress and producer spoke at a rally to preserve the Cinerama Dome last year, and talked about the star-studded premiere.

    "It was a real happening," she remembered. "Bobby Kennedy came, Adlai Stevenson came and President and Mrs. Kennedy accepted the invitation to attend the opening. A few days before, they called to say 'So sorry, we have to [decline] the invitation because President and Mrs. Kennedy have to go to Dallas.' And we know what happened in Dallas."

    Over the decades, the theater became a mecca for cinephiles. The dome was sometimes costumed like the movies it screened. Once, a replica Godzilla appeared to burst through the egg-like roof. Another time it was painted green with ears to resemble Shrek's head. Figures depicting the Pink Panther, Spider Man and the Minions have perched or crawled atop the Dome.

    And fans were treated to countless premieres and special events, like when filmmaker Quentin Tarantino personally welcomed audiences to his 2019 feature Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. For the film, he included exterior shots of the Dome.

    Two years later, after the Cinerama Dome's operators went bankrupt during the pandemic, Tarantino talked about how it was one of his favorite LA landmarks.

    "I don't know if I could 100% afford it, but I would love to own the Cinerama Dome," he said on The Jess Cagle Show on SiriusXM. "That would be fantastic."

    Tarantino already owns two other historic LA cinemas. But other preservationists and activists have been working to revive the dormant theater. Many of them credit the efforts of Benjamin Steinberg, a 27-year-old filmmaker and actor who appeared on Brooklyn Nine-Nine.

    "The Cinerama Dome is the most famous movie theater in the world," Steinberg said, standing outside the boarded-up theater. "It seemed like it was going to be a demolition by neglect. So I was, like, something has to be done."

    Steinberg created a campaign to save the Cinerama Dome. He organized a few street rallies, and wrote an online petition that amassed more than 30,000 signatures.

    Images of two men and the words "reopen the dome" are projected onto a white domed building.
    Ben Steinberg projected images onto the dome as part of a campaign to save the theater.
    (
    Ben Steinberg
    )

    Then in March, Steinberg went even further to get the attention of the Forman family, which still owns the property: he projected images of the owners' faces onto the outside of the Dome, asking them to reopen the theater.

    "We actually projected it for two hours and then they called the police on us," Steinberg explains. "We didn't get arrested; The police just said that the ownership considered it an escalation and harassment. I never wanted to anger the owner, so we stopped immediately."

    Steinberg's stunt created a lot of buzz, and may have moved the needle, says theater preservationist Norton. His group had been consulting with architects on restoration plans in hopes that someone would save the day.

    "We were all working behind the scenes. But Ben Steinberg really got on board on social media to save the dome," says Norton. "I'm very happy he did. You know, you sort of have to rattle the chains sometimes."

    Meanwhile, Sony has promised to preserve the Cinerama Dome's history while ensuring its future.
    Copyright 2026 NPR

  • Why LA’s federal homelessness money is in limbo
    A man sleeps on a bus bench during daylight, using a backpack as a pillow.
    An unhoused man sleeps on a bus bench in the heart of Skid Row in downtown Los Angeles.

    Topline:

    A pair of federal court battles unfolding in the coming weeks could reshape the future of homelessness funding across the Los Angeles region.

    What’s at stake: Two separate lawsuits challenging recent actions by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) will help determine whether L.A.’s embattled lead homelessness agency can compete for up to $241 million in federal grants this year and how that money can be spent.

    What’s on the docket: One lawsuit challenges HUD’s suspension of the L.A. Homeless Services Authority from federal grant activity pending a federal investigation into alleged financial mismanagement. The other seeks to overturn HUD’s new grant regulations capping permanent housing at no more than 60% of local spending plans.

    Read on… to learn how L.A. homelessness officials and service providers are preparing to deal with the outcomes of these cases.

    A pair of federal court battles unfolding in the coming weeks could reshape the future of homelessness funding across the Los Angeles region.

    Two separate lawsuits challenging recent actions by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) will help determine whether L.A.’s embattled lead homelessness agency can compete for up to $241 million in federal grants this year and how that money can be spent.

    Both legal challenges reflect a broader fight over the Trump administration's efforts to remake federal homelessness policy and crack down on perceived misspending by local governments overseeing federal assistance programs.

    Will lead L.A. agency stay suspended?

    The lawsuits center on HUD’s national Continuum of Care grant competition, the largest source of federal homelessness dollars flowing to L.A. each year.

    Since the 1990s, HUD has required metropolitan areas like L.A. County to submit one single application for the region’s entire chunk of annual funding. The L.A. Homeless Services Authority, known as LAHSA, has been responsible for submitting that application on behalf of the region.

    That changed in June, when HUD suspended LAHSA from federal grant activity pending a federal investigation into alleged financial mismanagement. The federal agency said LAHSA’s suspension meant it was not allowed to apply for this year’s grants, even though the agency has been working on an application.

    LAHSA sued to overturn the suspension and is moving forward with its application while awaiting guidance from the court. U.S. District Judge David O. Carter has scheduled a hearing for Aug. 6 on LAHSA’s motion for a preliminary injunction.

    HUD has since formally invited homeless service providers to apply directly for the federal homelessness money, bypassing LAHSA entirely.

    Meanwhile, the L.A. County Development Authority has offered to apply for the region instead of LAHSA, if necessary.

    HUD’s application deadline is Aug. 26. That’s when LAHSA, or an alternative applicant, would submit its final application to the federal government.

    Shift away from permanent housing

    The second lawsuit between HUD and local officials focuses on how federal homelessness dollars can be spent.

    The L.A. Continuum of Care historically spends about 90% of its more than $200 million federal funding allocation on permanent housing interventions — including subsidies to help cover people’s rent, according to LAHSA.

    That approach is part of a philosophy and strategy known as “housing first,” which prioritizes providing unhoused people with a stable place to live as the first step towards recovery from life on the streets. Additional issues, like unemployment, addiction, mental illness or other health problems, are typically addressed only after first moving someone indoors.

    But that approach is now under fire from the Trump Administration, which has made multiple attempts to remake the federal Continuum of Care program to fund fewer permanent housing beds and focus more on drug treatment, recovery and enforcement.

    As the Trump administration geared up to pivot away from the “housing first” model, HUD initially proposed rules limiting permanent housing to 30% of local spending. Last year, the city of L.A. and other municipalities joined litigation challenging the HUD guidance.

    This June, Judge Mary McElroy struck down the proposed HUD rules, but denied cities’ request for a permanent injunction.

    HUD had already issued new grant regulations, this time capping permanent housing at no more than 60% of local spending plans, forcing the states to start over with a new legal complaint assigned to the same federal judge.

    A heavyset man in a dark suit shakes hands with a dark-skinned man wearing a pink polo, in front of the White House rotunda.
    U.S. President Donald Trump greets United States Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Scott Turner during the congressional picnic on the South Lawn of the White House on May 19, 2026 in Washington, DC.
    (
    Heather Diehl
    /
    Getty Images
    )

    States push back

    Last month, nearly two dozen states, including California, sued HUD over those regulations, asking McElroy to again throw out HUD’s new funding rules.

    The proposed rules put more than 5,000 Angelenos at risk for homelessness, according to projections by the National Alliance to End Homelessness, a nonprofit research and advocacy group.

    The states hope for a ruling by Aug. 10, so that regions like L.A. have time to align their applications. The lawsuit argues the restrictions conflict with federal law and undermine the federal government's long-standing “housing first” strategy.

    The Trump administration says the new rules are intended to move federal policy toward approaches emphasizing mental health treatment, addiction recovery and personal accountability.

    If HUD prevails, local officials warn the consequences could ripple across L.A. County, affecting one of the region’s largest sources of funding for permanent supportive housing and other homelessness programs.

    The federal funding at stake has been roughly a quarter of LAHSA’s annual budget in recent years and is among the largest single sources of money for the region’s homelessness programs, which are also funded by the state, county and city.

    The story behind the Trump admin’s LAHSA fight

    HUD imposed the suspension earlier this year amid mounting scrutiny of LAHSA's financial oversight and operations. Auditors and local officials have raised longstanding concerns about the agency’s internal controls, contract monitoring and oversight of homelessness funds.

    LAHSA argues HUD's suspension is unlawful and could jeopardize the region's ability to secure funding.

    On July 2, Carter directed HUD and LAHSA to propose an order to temporarily keep the current funding process in place while the case moves forward. The two sides couldn't agree on the terms.

    LAHSA sent an email to service providers last week urging them to continue with the current process.

    “Please do not let this notice disrupt your current application preparation,” the letter said. “We strongly urge all service providers to stay the course.”

    Other regional homelessness officials clarified they’re moving forward with the consolidated application and working to protect existing program funding.

    Sarah Mahin, director of L.A. County’s new Department of Homelessness and Housing, said the county expects to receive more direction from the court before or at the August 6 hearing. Until then, Mahin said, “The existing competition process and LAHSA’s role as collaborative applicant should remain undisturbed while the court considers the preliminary injunction motion.”

    A man walks at night in a blue outfit surrounded by other people, along a road with buildings in the background, as someone points in the direction the man is looking.
    U.S. District Judge David O. Carter walks on a tour of the VA's West LA facilities on Wednesday, Aug. 21, 2024 in West Los Angeles, CA.
    (
    Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images
    /
    Los Angeles Times
    )

    How the feds are planning for court decisions

    In a July 21 court filing, HUD said it intends to delay any final action against the L.A. Continuum of Care until Aug. 10, or whenever the court rules on LAHSA’s request for a preliminary injunction.

    HUD also said that if the suspension holds and LAHSA and the court determine local applicants must apply directly, the federal agency will give providers an additional 30 days to submit their applications.

    Carter is also overseeing a major L.A. legal settlement stemming from a lawsuit by the L.A. Alliance for Human Rights over the city and county’s response to the homelessness crisis. Carter ordered all of the parties in the Alliance settlement to also appear at the Aug. 6 hearing in the case between LAHSA and HUD.

    How service providers are preparing

    Homeless service providers, caught in the middle of HUD’s legal battles with LAHSA and with states, say they want to make sure services aren’t disrupted.

    LAHSA’s own deadline for local homeless service providers to submit their individual applications as part of the collaborative application process was last week. More than 100 local nonprofit service providers have already submitted theirs.

    Several organizations told LAist they’re prepared to submit applications directly to HUD, including Hope the Mission, a large homeless services provider operating primarily in the San Fernando Valley.

    “While larger organizations have the administrative capacity to pivot quickly, we are concerned about smaller, specialized community providers who may struggle to navigate a direct HUD submission without localized technical assistance,” said Ivet Samvelyan, a vice president at Hope the Mission.

    Service providers told LAist they’re watching the two court cases closely, and awaiting clearer guidance from local officials about what to do next.

    “Our concern is less about the application process itself and more about the policy direction it represents, which is an attempt to take funding away from evidence-based practices such as permanent supportive housing and instead fund programs that require sobriety and compliance,” said Tian Martinez, a spokesperson at Union Station Homeless Services.

  • Voters will decide whether to ban data centers
    In the foreground of a crowded meeting room is a sign that reads "No Data Center" held up by a woman who's face is obscured by the sign.
    Hundreds packed into Monterey Park City Hall to call for a moratorium on data centers.

    Topline:

    The Alhambra City Council voted unanimously Monday to put a measure on the November ballot that will ask local voters to ban data centers citywide.

    Why it matters: Alhambra could become the second city in California to pass a ban on data centers through a public vote. Monterey Park became the first city to pass such a ban in June.

    The details: The new ballot measure proposes expanding an existing prohibition on data centers in Alhambra's office and industrial zones. It would effectively ban data centers in all of the city.

    The backstory: Local citizens and groups like No Data Centers San Gabriel Valley and No Data Center in Monterey Park have been organizing to oppose the construction of data centers and other infrastructure that supports them, such as battery energy storage systems.

    Read on... for more on Alhambra's new ballot measure.

    The Alhambra City Council voted unanimously Monday to put a measure on the November ballot that will ask local voters to ban data centers citywide.

    Why it matters

    If the measure passes, Alhambra could become the second city in California to pass a ban on data centers through a public vote.

    In June, Monterey Park became the first city to pass such a ban.

    The details

    Council members previously voted to establish an official definition of what qualifies as a data center. At an earlier meeting last month, they also added data centers to a list of prohibited facilities in office and industrial zones.

    The new ballot measure proposes expanding the prohibition. It would effectively ban data centers in all of the city.

    Residents weigh in

    Andrew Yip, an Alhambra resident and an organizer with the group SGV Progressive Action, spoke about the importance of ballot language during Monday’s council meeting.

    Yip said the name of Monterey Park's June ballot measure — Measure NDC, which stood for "No Data Center" — left some data center opponents unsure about whether to vote yes or no.

    “It was very confusing,” Yip said. “I encourage the city to consider a different acronym if possible, maybe BAN, so people know to vote yes on a ban.”

    The backstory

    Local citizens and groups like No Data Centers San Gabriel Valley and No Data Center in Monterey Park have been organizing to oppose the construction of data centers and other infrastructure that supports them, such as battery energy storage systems.

    Plans for a proposed data center in Monterey Park were pulled in March, and the Covina Planning Commission voted down a proposed storage system in June following public input.

    What’s next

    Alhambra voters will decide the fate of data centers in the city in the general election on Nov. 3. The ban needs a simple majority of support from local voters in order to pass.

    How to keep tabs on the Alhambra City Council

    The Alhambra City Council tends to meet a few times per month, generally on Mondays. Meetings typically start at 6 p.m.

    Here’s how you can follow along: