The Brief

Billions of dollars are pouring into data centers to power streaming services, cloud storage and the biggest energy monster of all, artificial intelligence.

Dozens of data centers already dot the region, from El Segundo to downtown L.A. But in Monterey Park, residents concerned about the environmental and health impacts of data centers are drawing a line.

A developer has proposed building a nearly 250,000-square-foot data center in a local business park. Last Wednesday night, hundreds of people packed City Hall to say they didn’t want it — or for that matter, any such facility.

“No data centers in Monterey Park!” the crowd chanted.

Residents’ immediate goal was to ensure the City Council approved a 45-day moratorium on data center development, an item added to the agenda after weeks of mounting public pressure.

What they got, in a meeting that stretched past midnight, was the council’s commitment to draft an outright ban during the 45-day period for a later vote. “That is more than I ever could have hoped for from this meeting,” resident Steven J. Kung said. “I am shocked and a little bit overjoyed.”

Residents organize

Hours earlier at a rally he helped lead outside City Hall, Kung had been far more cautious.

He expressed little faith in city officials, especially after learning that the project had been moving through the city’s planning process for about two years without his knowledge.

Kung said he only found out about the proposal from the Australian-based developer when his husband showed him a social media post by SGV Progressive Action last month — despite their living about 1,300 feet from the proposed site.

“I was incensed that no one had told me, especially since I lived so close,” he said.

Steven J. Kung is part of the activist and resident-led No Data Center Monterey Park.

(

Josie Huang

/

LAist

)

Kung joined a grassroots group of residents and activists called No Data Center Monterey Park, which has organized teach-ins, canvassing drives and yard sign campaigns in the weeks leading up to the vote.

Developer's promises

The developer, HMC StratCap, has said its proposed data center on 1977 Saturn Street would generate more than $5 million a year in tax revenue and more than 200 jobs during construction. It’s also promised to build a public park.

But residents said that’s not worth the tradeoff of the massive energy demand of data centers, pollution from diesel backup generators and noise from cooling equipment.

The developer counters that the generators will be strictly regulated, a “closed-loop cooling technology” will use water efficiently and noise will be “similar to a typical commercial area,” according to a handout shared with residents at Wednesday’s meeting.

Monterey Park City Hall was packed to capacity as people waited to testify in opposition to a proposed data center.

(

Josie Huang

/

LAist

)

The developer has also agreed to an environmental impact report.

Kung and others say an EIR is the least the developer should do. They say they’re also troubled by the decision to locate a data center in a city of roughly 60,000 people, more than half of them immigrants.

“They see a small city full of Asians and Latinos, and they don’t think we’ll fight back,” Kung said. “But they’re wrong.”

“People, not machines”

So many people showed up that the lobby was converted into overflow space.

Among them was Alex Leon, a mathematician who attended with his wife, a phlebotomist, and their two young daughters.

“This has kind of been our dream, living in Monterey Park,” Leon said. “I just don’t want it to turn into an industrial farm for big data.”

Alex Leon came to speak out against the proposed data center with his wife Janette and their two daughters.

(

Josie Huang

/

LAist

)

Like dozens of others, Leon wasn’t there just to watch, but wanted council members to listen. When his turn came to give comment, he met the eyes of the council members.

“Monterey Park should be built for people, not machines,” he said. “For families, not server racks. For community life, not industrial infrastructure. This is our home, and it’s worth defending.”

“Open and honest conversations”

A handful of speakers supported the project, including a representative for the developer. Laziza Lambert pivoted at the podium to face the crowd.

“We just really want to be good, long-term partners with the community and hope to have open and honest conversations,” she said, as some in the audience started to jeer.

Residents voiced concerns that once one data center is approved, the floodgates would open, noting that the developer owns another parcel on the same street.

But much of the anger that night was aimed at city leaders. Speaker after speaker said they had been kept in the dark.

Tran and

(

Josie Huang

/

LAist

)

Katherine Torres, a real estate agent and president of the Monterey Park Women’s Club, said the organization is apolitical, but she would be sure to tell the members.

“I swear, I’m going to spread the word about the data center because they need to know,” she said as the room erupted in applause.

She looked at the council members with whom she was on a first-name basis.

“I have dinner with you guys,” she said. “I go to your events. Why didn’t I know?”

A surprise shift

By the fifth hour, nearly 80 residents had spoken. Then it was the council’s turn to give comments before their vote on the 45-day moratorium.

Two members said they supported going beyond a temporary pause and considering a permanent ban. Jose Sanchez’s opposition to data centers was already known to those closely following the issue. But Elizabeth Yang’s was not.

Yang told the room that her mother and stepfather live within a mile of the proposed site.

The council meeting was preceded by a rally against data centers.

(

Josie Huang

/

LAist

)

“I’m not going to vote for something that’s going to hurt my own family,” she said.

She added she was disappointed the developer had not done more with outreach and information.

“Because of all of you feeding us good information, I’m siding with no data center,” Yang said.

The remaining residents started clapping and rose to their feet.

What’s ahead

The council unanimously approved the 45-day moratorium during which city staff will draft an ordinance that could ban data centers permanently — a proposal that will return to the council for a vote.

Outside council chambers, Steven J. Kung praised his fellow residents for speaking out and pushing the council to think bigger.

“I’m so proud of Monterey Park and our residents,” he said. “The more I’m here, the more I fall in love with the people.”

He’d celebrate that night. But then it’d be back to work, making sure the ban stands and Monterey Park keeps data centers out for good.

The developer would not be sitting back either. Lambert, the representative for the developer, said they were moving forward with plans to host a town hall with residents in the next couple of weeks.

Southern California summers aren’t exactly known for mugginess.

But uncharacteristic humidity has been clinging to the region for almost a month, and it looks like there’s little relief coming our way.

It’s not enough moisture to create much, if any, rain, but it is abnormal for this time of year

The dew point in Southern California is normally around 60 degrees at this time of year, forecasters say. But in downtown Los Angeles yesterday, the dew point hit almost 70 degrees.

Scientists say humidity generally becomes uncomfortable in the summer when the dew point is higher than 65.

“We do get these prolonged periods of heat, but what is unusual is the humidity,” said National Weather Service meteorologist Bryan Lewis.

So, what’s causing this mugginess?

A confluence of atmospheric forces, some hundreds or even thousands of miles away, is collecting and trapping moisture in Southern California.

“It's basically the combination of the warm ocean temperatures, as well as we've just been in the right pattern for some tropical moisture" to be sent our way, Lewis said.

Storms in the Pacific

Storms are to blame, at least in part, for the uncharacteristic humidity in the region this summer.

Two in particular have contributed to moisture levels in Southern California as they traveled across the Pacific Ocean in recent weeks.

Tropical Storm Fausto formed off of Central America earlier this month before moving off into the open ocean and moving toward Hawaii. It briefly was elevated to a Category 2 hurricane over the weekend before weakening again into a tropical storm.

Fausto is expected to continue weakening as it passes to the north of the Hawaiian Islands over the next few days.

The other, stronger storm, Hurricane Genevieve, also formed off the coast of Central America and has been moving relatively parallel to the Mexican coast, several hundred miles offshore.

Genevieve was elevated to a Category 5 hurricane on Monday.

The storms aren’t solely responsible for sending moisture hundreds of miles across the ocean.

Other weather patterns closer to home, including the system of high pressure air currently settled over the Western U.S. and the North American monsoon, siphon the tropical moisture from the storms into our region.

Thankfully, forecasters say, Hurricane Genevieve is not expected to create as much moisture as Fausto and other recent tropical storms.

Warming oceans

Forecasters also say warming ocean temperatures are adding to the humidity.

When the ocean is warmer than usual, the wind blowing inland off the water is also warmer. The warm seawater also evaporates faster, releasing more moisture into the air above it. That moisture is then carried inland by the wind.

Ocean warming is not new in Southern California, but it’s getting worse.

The region has been hit with a series of marine heatwaves over the last decade. They generally recede during the winter, but the current one has lasted for over a year. Scientists say these ocean heatwaves are likely being worsened by human-caused climate change.

But there is some short-term hope on the horizon for humidity-haters.

One, Hurricane Genevieve is not expected to pull as much moisture into our region as other recent weather patterns. And two, forecasters expect drier air to flow in from the northwest, cutting down the humidity a bit, especially inland.

That may not reach people who live along the coast, however, where the higher ocean temperatures will help keep the coastal humidity elevated, especially at night.

Los Angeles-area eviction lawyer Dennis Block has agreed to one year of probation after the California State Bar Court found he violated a court order and engaged in other misconduct.

The decision came through a stipulation — similar to a settlement agreement with the court — in which Block admitted to charging clients improper fees, representing a landlord and their tenant at the same time, signing off on an error-filled court document a junior attorney in his firm generated using ChatGPT and failing to pay court-ordered sanctions for nearly three years.

LAist first reported on these disciplinary charges in January.

Block, who runs a firm that claims to have evicted hundreds of thousands of tenants, is expected to be placed on probation for one year. He will also be required to take classes on ethics and proper handling of client funds if the State Bar Court’s recommendation is approved by the California Supreme Court.

The State Bar Court recommended Block be suspended from practicing law for one year, but allowed the suspension be stayed as long as he complies with ethics rules and his probation conditions.

David Bramante is one of the clients who reported Block to the bar. He said he paid Block $17,000 up front to work on a court motion that needed to be taken care of quickly.

“The Ellis Act work I paid for never got done,” Bramante told LAist. “And when I terminated him, his office wouldn't give me a real accounting of where the money went.”

Bramante said it was only after many months and the State Bar’s investigation that Block’s firm refunded him the money.

Three legal ethics experts told LAist the disciplinary actions the bar recommended against Block are in line with similar cases they have seen in the past.

“This is a pretty serious sanction,” Scott Cummings, a UCLA law professor who teaches legal ethics, told LAist.

Cummings said suspension and disbarment are the two highest forms of discipline given by the bar.

Even though the suspension is being stayed in this case — because Block cooperated with State Bar investigators and has had a long career without disciplinary issues — Cummings said it seems like the bar is sending a message to Block and other attorneys that they need to treat their clients’ interests and money with the highest level of care.

Still, others think the court didn’t go far enough.

Richard Zitrin, an emeritus lecturer with UC Law San Francisco, called it a “slap on the wrist" considering the level of wrongdoing in the case.

“The failure to suspend Mr. Block is letting him get away with clearly unethical conduct that harms his clients,” Zitrin told LAist.

Other clients who were not involved with the bar’s investigation also claimed they had negative experiences with Block’s firm.

Xavier Jones said he hired Block’s firm for a few months in 2025. He told LAist there were no issues at first. Then, he said he saw Block’s attorneys start coming to court unprepared for his case. He said he also felt Block was overbilling him for the firm’s services.

Block would hang up on him when he asked legal questions or about how much he was being billed, Jones said. He said there were two times the firm’s lawyers came to court without having a copy of the tenants’ lease, which he says he sent them.

“I'm paying for this, for them to show up, for them to do their back-end work,” Jones said. “It's just unprofessional, it's embarrassing, and it's costing me a lot of money.”

Jones said he stopped working with Block in November. He said he had lost about $70,000 in unpaid rent, legal fees and other costs he believes could have been avoided with proper legal assistance.

LAist reached out to Block and his attorneys this week for comment, but did not receive a response. Last month, Erin Joyce — Block’s defense attorney — told LAist that the State Bar Court’s investigation into her client was “thorough” and found “no conduct by the firm involved moral turpitude,” which had been alleged in the original charges.

A year ago at this time, the streets of Los Angeles and other American cities were the sites of highly visible, large-scale immigration raids. While those scenes have died down, immigration enforcement remains more quietly active.

Federal data show Immigration and Customs Enforcement detained more people in June, at 43,000, than in any month since January 2025. Locally, Los Angeles Police Department officials say June had the highest tally of potential unlawful conduct by federal immigration officers. The 12 incidents investigated mark the most since the department began reporting the data in March.

German Hurtado, LAPD immigration affairs liaison, said in an interview that he noticed the uptick of reported immigration enforcement incidents, but could not say what caused the increase.

In February, Mayor Karen Bass issued a directive requiring the reporting. Police commissioners approved the most recent report at their meeting Tuesday.

Hurtado said the increase seen in June might be reflective of the department’s efforts to capture more of the potential issues.

“We’re finding better ways to improve how to capture these incidents,” Hurtado said. “It could be a combination of everything, but I did see that it was a large increase.”

He said those efforts include changes in how they label calls related to federal immigration enforcement actions and adjustments to the way department computers store the information.

What’s in June’s report

Here’s how that process worked, according to the department’s report:

The LAPD first identified 45 potential federal immigration enforcement actions by searching internal reporting systems for immigration related search terms. The immigration affairs liaison determined 33 of those incidents were unrelated to immigration enforcement.

At the commission's meeting on Tuesday, Lisa Ridoutt, assistant inspector general, explained these incidents included:

• 26 notices from federal agents conducting surveillance in the area
• 2 reports of protests
• 2 medical related incidents
• 1 report of DHS agents executing a search warrant unrelated to immigration
• 1 federal task force meeting
• 1 call reporting someone believed they were pushed from behind by a federal agent. LAPD reviewed security footage and determined no crime had occurred.

The department then looked deeper into 12 enforcement incidents that qualify for reporting under Bass’ executive directive, which asks the LAPD to report when officers document or receive reports of suspected unlawful conduct by immigration officers. Two of those incidents involved an LAPD response in the field, according to the report. The department also says neither resulted in officers being on the scene for an active enforcement action.

The report states the LAPD does not know the overall number of immigration enforcement actions that happened in June.

The 12 reported incidents are a significant increase from previous months. The department reported just four incidents in May, four in April and none in March.

Hurtado said the number of incidents has increased every month since March, potentially because the department is getting better at documenting them.

“It takes a while to teach 8,700 people exactly what to do, so as we are rolling out different training, the officers are now being more observant of it, documenting it more," Hurtado said.

The increase, he added, could also stem from federal authorities communicating with LAPD more. He said federal immigration authorities have not asked LAPD for support during enforcement actions.

The backstory

For decades, the LAPD has refrained from directly enforcing immigration laws. That’s because policing experts say doing so could deter witnesses or victims from cooperating with law enforcement.

State and local laws have codified that policy in recent years and further prohibited California law enforcement from assisting in federal immigration enforcement.

The mayor issued two executive orders last year with instructions for how city departments interact with federal immigration officers.

Executive directive 17 mandates the monthly immigration reports from the LAPD and instructs officers to activate their body-worn cameras whenever they respond to potential immigration-related incidents.

Ridoutt, of the Office of Inspector General, said that while officers did activate body-worn and in-car video systems, the OIG found some recordings were not properly titled or tagged and that some videos or photos from community members were not uploaded to the department’s evidence database as required by department policy.

The Inspector General’s Office reviews the LAPD’s reports to ensure compliance with the directive. Ridoutt said the office will be releasing a more comprehensive report in October or November.

Calls for increased transparency

At previous meetings, commissioners have asked for more details about what calls for service or incident reports entail.

Hurtado said the executive directive just requires the department to release aggregate numbers.

Shiu-Ming Cheer, deputy director of immigrant and racial justice at the California Immigrant Policy Center, said the directive calls for greater transparency than what the LAPD’s monthly reports currently provide.

The June report, for example, notes that LAPD twice dispatched officers in response to a report of ICE activity, but provides no description of the department’s role once officers arrived. Cheer said the public should know whether officers were responding for crowd control, interacting with federal agents or serving some other purpose.

Cheer said the LAPD’s monthly reports should explain what happened during the incidents the department counts.

Sophia Wrench, an attorney with Public Counsel, agrees.

“A central purpose of Executive Directive 17 was to provide increased transparency and build public trust, but LAPD’s reporting month after month falls short,” she said in a statement. “The lack of information in its monthly reports only creates more confusion in the community, building greater fear and mistrust of the police.”