The Brief

The Long Beach City Council passed a series of reforms on Tuesday that will prohibit federal agents on non-public city grounds, create a certificate program for businesses offering safe spaces to undocumented residents, and establish penalties for city workers or contractors who do not comply with its sanctuary policies.

Long Beach has never formally declared itself a “sanctuary city” — a term that has no defined legal meaning — but, since 2018, it has continued to expand its rules around non-cooperation with civil immigration enforcement, a common theme in sanctuary policies.

Tuesday’s vote was the second expansion this year of its ordinance, titled the Long Beach Values Act, and comes as high-profile immigration sweeps have continued across the Los Angeles region, where officials with the Department of Homeland Security say they have arrested more than 4,000 people since beginning their mass deportation operation on June 6.

Long Beach’s policy already banned most cooperation and data sharing between city departments and federal immigration enforcement, including a prohibition on honoring most detainer requests from Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which will often ask local jurisdictions to hold inmates for extra time so agents can retrieve them for deportation. Now that non-coordination will be even more visible.

‘No Entry’ signs will soon be posted on doors and entryways in city buildings or properties that aren’t open to the public — a move meant to stop federal agents from entering without a judicial warrant. In the event authorities show up, employees will also be trained to ask for court papers.

City staff will be required to learn the new policies through pre-recorded modules online, as well as during upcoming town halls later this month. Those who don’t follow the rules could be subject to “warnings, suspensions, demotions or dismissals.”

“If there is a policy where somebody willingly, maliciously disobeys it, people get fired in the city for that,” City Manager Tom Modica said. “That’s not acceptable, doesn’t matter what the policy is.”

Residents will be allowed to report violations in an online portal, maintained by the city’s Human Resources Department.

Changes also extend to vendors, including those contracted with the city or hoping to bid on a project.

The city already prohibits employees and third-party workers from sharing data with federal authorities, but the prohibition hasn’t always been followed: The city police department mistakenly shared license plate data with ICE in 2020.

This change goes much further, allowing Long Beach to end contracts with vendors that don’t follow the Values Act, without any legal repercussions. It can also be grounds to disqualify applicants from bidding on a project.

Any data shared with a vendor must be either returned or destroyed — it’s at the city’s discretion — within 10 days.

However, City Attorney Dawn McIntosh clarified that the city cannot dictate terms in all cases, including on some major contracts, such as with cybersecurity firms, multi-national corporations like Microsoft or with specialized goods or services. Going forward, her office will also work to obtain public records on federal enforcement and pursue “legal remedies for damages to city property, programs or revenues.”

Lastly, the new policy establishes a “Safe Place” certificate for businesses that complete “Know Your Rights” training with locally accredited nonprofits.

The changes represent “a massive undertaking” for city employees, said Modica, at a scope workers have “never really experienced before.”

“It’s not something that we have had to deal with in the past,” Modica said. “The potential for masked agents with weapons to show up at your workplace asking to detain people.”

Proponents of the changes say the policies will further engender trust with people in migrant communities, allowing them to feel comfortable cooperating with local authorities, and extend beyond a performance to score political points.

Audience members at a Long Beach City Council meeting hold up signs in favor of a stronger sanctuary city policy on Jan. 7, 2025

(

Thomas R. Cordova

)

But supporters of immigrants’ rights present Tuesday night had mixed feelings about the latest amendment.

Several took note that this version dropped two requests made by civil rights groups in a Dec. 9 letter, including the removal of exceptions that allow some cooperation with immigration agents when the deportee has a serious or violent criminal history as well as the ability for individuals or groups to sue the city in the event it does not uphold the sanctuary ordinance.

Maribel Cruz, associate director of local immigrant rights group ÓRALE, asked the city to remove the loophole and to restore a private right to legal action. “The Long Beach Values Act is a powerful policy that can truly provide concrete protections but the policy as it stands is not enough,” Cruz said.

In an Aug. 8 memo by the city manager’s office, Modica explained that state law would require the city to defend employees sued for potentially violating the Values Act, a costly path that could “cripple city processes.” It would also create a “disparity” in how the city already handles allegations of employee misconduct and may conflict with employee or union agreements.

Nick Masero, a deputy city attorney, said removal of the exception for assisting ICE with deportees convicted of certain felonies could leave Long Beach open to “legal challenges and judicial scrutiny, which it might not survive.”

Establishing a private right of action, he added, would waive several legal immunities enjoyed by the city and result in “new, expensive and meritless litigation.”

With the backdrop of criticisms by local civil rights groups that the policy package continues to allow some loopholes and lacks public accountability tools, Mayor Rex Richardson reminded the room that the city never asked to be put into this situation.

Looking back at a turbulent few months, he recounted “increased enforcement activities,” “masked individuals” and “unmarked vehicles” that have sown “fear and terror” into residents. He stressed that existing city policy must keep pace with the ever-advancing tactics used by federal immigration authorities.

As part of a $3.7 billion spending plan unveiled last month, Richardson suggested the city reserve $5 million for assistance and legal defense for those facing the specter of deportation or federal cuts that could put more people on the streets.

He also recommends establishing a new legal reserve for the city attorney’s office to defend against legal challenges the Trump Administration may bring against Long Beach directly.

“We need to continue to place a focus on why we’re in this situation is because of the federal government,” Richardson said. “… This is a situation that was brought upon us, not something that we welcome.”

The West Hollywood City Council will consider a motion Monday evening that thwarts long-planned and nearly shovel-ready protected bike lanes along Fountain Avenue out of concerns that the cyclist improvements will eliminate too much street parking.

The motion was introduced by West Hollywood City Councilmember Lauren Meister. If passed, it would direct staff to evaluate an alternative design for Fountain Avenue, one that maintains the road’s existing parking capacity, reduces the road to one travel lane in each direction and adds a center turn lane — but doesn’t include protected bike lanes.

“Continued investment in bicycle infrastructure elsewhere would remain a separate consideration,” according to a copy of the motion. 

Meister did not respond to LAist’s requests for comment about her motion.

The project 

Introducing protected bike lanes to Fountain Avenue was approved by City Council in 2025 as part of the first phase of the Fountain Avenue Streetscape Project.

The approved designs include reducing the road to one travel lane in each direction, installing pedestrian improvements and creating a bike lane separated from vehicular traffic by concrete curbs.

The goal of the road redesign is to increase safety. Between 2013 and 2024, there were 35 collisions resulting in severe injuries and five fatal collisions, according to the city. Last year, Blake Ackerman, a 27-year-old attorney, died while biking on Fountain Avenue in a hit-and-run collision. 

But to make room for the reimagined Fountain Avenue, city staff said they would need to remove 60% of the road’s street parking. To mitigate that loss, city staff has suggested allowing residents with parking permits to use nearby parking lots.

Although it was ultimately approved, the issue caused disagreement among the five members of the City Council. Two voted against it — Meister and West Hollywood Mayor John Heilman.

The election

The future of Fountain Avenue has been a political issue at play in recent city elections, and this year is no different.

Meister and Heilman are termed out, and there are three seats on West Hollywood City Council up for grabs. 14 candidates are vying for a spot, and their views on the bike lane debate are front and center.

Incumbent Chelsea Byers, who is an advocate for the protected bike lanes, is running to retain her seat.

Several candidates have spoken out against Fountain Avenue’s planned bike lanes, including Kyle Brazeal.

Brazeal has earned the endorsements of Meister and Heilman. He told LAist he isn’t against bike lanes and believes there are other West Hollywood streets that are better candidates for cycling infrastructure.

The timeline

West Hollywood officials said construction for the first phase, including the protected bike lanes, is scheduled to begin before the end of 2026. That schedule would change if the City Council decides to pursue an alternative design.

Officials said in a report that changing the project’s scope could “jeopardize” the nearly $5 million in state grant funding it’s planned to use for construction.

City staff said in the report that if the motion is approved, it would seek clarity on how any design changes would impact grant funding and if the city would need to find alternative funding sources.

Topline:

Joseph Hawkins, former director of ONE Archives at the USC Libraries, the largest LGBTQ+ repository, joined AirTalk, LAist’s daily news program, to talk about the legacy and current state of these spaces.

Economic woes: As the story goes with a lot of local businesses right now, gay and lesbian bars are suffering the same economic challenges due to rising costs and a decline in alcohol consumption.

“Masses of people who can go to a bar and sustain it over a long period of time has become more and more difficult,” Hawkins said. "Some bars don't have the clientele that they used to because of the internet."

Tony in Anaheim called into AirTalk and shared a funny story about showing up embarrassingly early (8 p.m.) for a night out at the Abbey in West Hollywood, but ultimately remembered it as a safe place to make friends after moving to Los Angeles.

Jeff in Palm Springs called in to say bars in his city seem to be thriving thanks to an older population and tourists.

Hawkins said there may be a silver lining in the shift we're seeing.

"Maybe we're not losing gay bars; what we're doing is opening up other spaces where gay people can be included," he said.

Listen to the full conversation above for more history and insight.

Hackers stole personal and demographic information about millions of California public school students in a data breach revealed Friday by the California Department of Education.

Hackers allegedly accessed the information through the company ETS, which conducts standardized testing, including the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress tests that start in third grade. Between May 22 and Sept. 18, 2026, an “unauthorized party” copied student information files, according to the CDE website.

However, ETS’ investigation did not find that the information has been made public.

What information was taken?

The breach exposed the information of 5.7 million students currently enrolled in transitional kindergarten through high school and those enrolled since 2023. Students who have left California since 2006 without notifying the state that they transferred to another school are also affected. That information could include:

• Student names, birthdays, addresses and schools
• Statewide student ID numbers (SSID)
• Demographic information, including race or ethnicity, gender, country of origin and English learner status
• A student’s disability and related academic support 
• Whether a student is low-income or unhoused 
• Statewide testing results

The breach is not reported to include:

• Parent or guardian information 
• Social Security or driver’s license numbers
• Financial information

ETS is working with cybersecurity experts and law enforcement and is monitoring whether the students’ information appears publicly.

The California Department of Education is also collaborating with state cybersecurity experts and reviewing whether ETS complied with data security and requirements included in its contract with the state. The state has also set up a website with more information.

How to get help

ETS is emailing and sending letters to affected students and families to notify them of the breach and offer two years of free identity protection services. Separate services are available for minors and adults — both have a March 19, 2027 deadline to apply.

It’s important to know that not getting notified does not necessarily mean a student’s data is safe. Families can call a dedicated helpline, 833-931-8488, from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Friday.