The Brief

This story was originally reported by Shefali Luthra and Mel Leonor Barclay of The 19th. Meet Shefali and Mel and read more of their reporting on gender, politics and policy.

Cary López Alvarado, of Hawthorne, California, was nine months pregnant when she was arrested by immigration officials alongside her husband, an immigrant from Guatemala. Alvarado was held overnight but was never sent to a detention facility: After taking her into custody, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) learned she was a U.S. citizen.

Immediately after her release, she began to experience sharp pains in her stomach, according to a claim she filed against the federal government. She gave birth a few days later.

Angie Rodriguez, an immigrant from Colombia, was taken into ICE custody following a routine check-in with immigration officials in July, and soon after found out she was pregnant. At the Mesa Verde ICE Processing Center where she was held, Rodriguez could hardly bring herself to eat the small meals that the detention facility served because of how they looked and smelled, and her only other option was buying processed food like instant noodles and chips.

Rodriguez went on to miscarry while in custody, according to a lawsuit she filed against the federal government.

Antonia Aguilar Maldonano, a mother of two from El Salvador, was arrested by ICE on her way to work and detained at the Kandiyohi County Jail in Minnesota for almost a month. Her youngest child is 22 months old and still nursing; he has acid reflux and an allergy to other forms of milk. The jail was not equipped to house someone who was nursing, said Gloria Contreras Edin, her lawyer: It did not have a breast pump when Aguilar Maldonado arrived, forcing her to use her hands to massage milk out until the facility was able to buy a pump.

Antonia Aguilar Maldonano, a mother of two from El Salvador, was arrested by ICE on her way to work and detained at the Kandiyohi County Jail in Minnesota for almost a month.

(

Courtesy Antonia Aguilar Maldonano

)

Lawyers successfully argued for her release on bond — $10,000, paid for by members of her church — while the government makes the case that she be deported.

A Biden-era policy restricts ICE from arresting or detaining immigrants who are pregnant, postpartum or nursing, except in extreme circumstances. While President Donald Trump has not formally rescinded the policy, it’s clear from lawsuits, news reports and advocates for immigrants who are detained that it’s not being followed.

Quantifying the exact number of pregnant, postpartum or nursing immigrants in custody has become impossible: This March, Congress let lapse a requirement that the administration report twice a year on how many of these immigrants are being held in immigration facilities. Since the fall of 2019, Congress had required the Department of Homeland Security to publicly report the count every six months and include “detailed justification” for every single detained immigrant who was pregnant, postpartum or nursing.

ICE did not respond to The 19th’s request for this data.

While the agency said in a statement in August that pregnant immigrants are receiving sufficient care in custody, medical professionals say the conditions in these facilities can heighten the risk for complications. Limited food can impact nutrition at a vulnerable time; access to medical appointments is spotty and often not aligned with standards of care; and pregnant, postpartum and nursing detainees also face the stress of arrest and separation from their families.

The impact of arrests and detention

In 2021, following public outcry against the first Trump administration’s immigration policies, the Biden administration directed ICE not to detain pregnant, postpartum or nursing people except in “exceptional circumstances" — they are a national security threat or pose immediate harm to themselves or other people. Those who are detained are supposed to be held in facilities suited to appropriate health care. ICE-employed medical professionals are supposed to provide weekly updates on those detainees to relevant agency directors. The ICE Health Service Corps is also supposed to keep consistent records of all pregnant, postpartum and nursing detainees, providing monthly updates to the organization’s leadership.

Since returning to the White House, Trump has not formally rescinded that policy, but administration officials argued in court that he had done so implicitly through a sweeping anti-immigration executive order that supercharged immigration enforcement. A federal judge refuted that argument, but on its website, ICE says the policy is “not reflective of current practice.”

“We're seeing more pregnant women detained again after not seeing much of that, at least not in ICE detention,” said Amanda Heffernan, a longtime nurse-midwife and professor of midwifery at Seattle University.

Rebecca Cassler, an attorney at the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said her organization’s pro bono program has seen an increase in cases of detained pregnant, postpartum and nursing people. She says no one outside ICE really knows how many, but it’s enough to make her “very concerned.”

Though the federal government has not made public how many pregnant people have been detained, Democratic lawmakers have published multiple investigations documenting known cases.

One report, published this summer by the office of Sen. Jon Ossoff of Georgia, identified 14 credible cases of pregnant women being mistreated in detention facilities. The report included a description of pregnant women sleeping on cell floors, one detainee being told to “just drink water” when needing medical support, and another miscarrying alone after days of bleeding.

ICE has disputed the report. "Pregnant women receive regular prenatal visits, mental health services, nutritional support, and accommodations aligned with community standards of care. Detention of pregnant women is rare and has elevated oversight and review. No pregnant woman has been forced to sleep on the floor," ICE said in a statement on its website.

A September 18 letter signed by 29 Democratic senators and addressed to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem directed federal officials to clarify just how many pregnant, postpartum and breastfeeding people are being detained, how many have been deported and what health care is being made available to them. DHS has not acknowledged receipt, said a spokesperson for Sen. Patty Murray, a Democrat from Washington who organized the letter.

“We do not know how many pregnant women are in ICE custody, whether U.S. citizen babies have been born in ICE custody, and what provisions have been made for mothers’ and children’s health, safety, and wellbeing,” the senators wrote.

The Women’s Refugee Commission, an advocacy group, is seeking records from Homeland Security pertaining to pregnant, postpartum or nursing individuals who have been detained. It recently launched its own independent tracker, encouraging health providers, lawyers and family members to submit information about pregnant people who have been detained. The commission said it’s too early to provide an accurate count from its tracker.

Zain Lakhani, a lawyer and director of migrant rights and justice for the commission, said credible reports of pregnant people being detained suggest a frequency higher than ICE’s policy would suggest.

“It would be shocking that we would be able to have this level of detained pregnant people under the guidance,” she said. “We are seeing just this shocking number of detained postpartum and pregnant women.”

Dozens of people participate in an anti-ICE rally outside of the Brooklyn Metropolitan Detention Center on Sept. 2, 2025, in New York City.

(

Spencer Platt

/

Getty Images

)

Workers helping integrate deported immigrants in Honduras told researchers from the Women’s Refugee Commission that nursing women who were deported had not received enough food and water to continue lactating.

“They arrive with hardly any milk — or milk that looks like water — and this affects the babies’ weight,” one worker said, according to a report published by the organization.

The impact of arrests and detention

By the time Aguilar Maldonado left the jail, her breast milk had started to dry up, Contreras Edin said. She is particularly worried about the impact of detention on her children, who were not with her and now follow her wherever she goes, including to the bathroom. Her boyfriend has been deported; she is asking a judge to let her leave voluntarily — a process that has fewer legal penalties than being deported — so she and her children can follow him.

“Her children were traumatized and her youngest was especially traumatized,” Contreras Edin said. “That bond was broken during detention and that left a permanent impression on her children.”

There is no way to ethically research how detention specifically may affect pregnancy outcomes, including whether it could increase the possibility of miscarriage, said Dr. Carolyn Sufrin, an associate professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Johns Hopkins University who studies the reproductive health of incarcerated women. But evidence does show that physical and psychological strain — the kind people can suffer while detained — threatens the health of a pregnancy and can mean greater risk of preterm birth.

“I’m very concerned because of the conditions we’ve already heard about that could be increasing the risks of adverse outcomes,” Sufrin said. “I’m very concerned about the outcomes for these moms as well as for the outcomes for their babies.”

ICE did not respond to a request for comment on the conditions or available accommodations for pregnant, postpartum or nursing immigrants.

Alvarado, who is seeking $1 million following her arrest, citing “the unconstitutional conduct, unlawful arrest, and the tortious conduct of Border Patrol and ICE agents,” said her daughter is healthy and growing. But she’s still dealing with the aftermath of her detention.

Footage of the arrest shows federal agents holding her hands behind her — despite guidance advising that officers generally not use physical restraints on pregnant people and that, if they do, they should keep a pregnant person’s hands in front.

Her husband has now been deported, and Alvarado has no income. She’s watching her savings dwindle and relying on her family to help care for her little girl. She said she was unsure if she’d have to pick up multiple jobs to make ends meet — and if so, who would be able to care for her infant. She remembers the terror she felt while in government custody.

“Every time I see a news or video, it does rewind in my head,” she said. “It does get me very emotional, seeing stuff like that.”

Victoria Petty, an attorney with the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area who is representing Rodriguez — the woman who suffered a miscarriage in detention — said that she first connected with her client’s husband in late August, about a month after his wife’s detention.

He had left Petty a voicemail and text explaining that his wife was pregnant in a detention center and that he was really worried about her. Days later, he called again. “He’s crying on the other line, and he's like, ‘She had a miscarriage. I don't know what to do. She's in the hospital. Help,’” Petty recalled.

Rodriguez described in court records being “unignorably hungry” inside the Bakersfield, California, detention facility and lacking prenatal health care and education for weeks after her pregnancy was confirmed. Eventually, she began to see brown discharge and was taken to an off-site hospital where, days later, health care providers confirmed she had miscarried.

Petty moved quickly to file a lawsuit claiming unconstitutional detention. Court documents show that upon release from the hospital, Rodriguez was placed in medical isolation at the ICE detention center.

“It was very scary. She was in pain. So after this really traumatic experience, and her going to the hospital and confirming that they did not see the fetus on the ultrasound — after all of that, they brought her back to the detention center and put her in medical isolation,” Petty said, adding that her client was distraught.

Petty said it’s hard to determine whether detention conditions caused or contributed to Rodriguez’ miscarriage, a very wanted first pregnancy. But, she said, it’s important to consider the stress of being suddenly detained in a van — her client is from Colombia; kidnappings and murders have left lasting scars on the Latin American nation — along with the strain and lack of food options in detention.

“These are the conditions that she was in when she was pregnant. And we cannot rule out that having been under that level of stress and fear and having that little care contributed to her pregnancy loss,” Petty said.

Heffernan, who has worked with several immigrants who were detained while pregnant, said she has seen pregnant immigrants get a few small accommodations: being placed in a lower bunk instead of the top bunk for sleep or getting extra milk with their meals and sometimes an extra sandwich or snack before bedtime.

Medical care, she said, can be “very haphazard and spotty,” with prenatal appointments often not happening on schedule.

“You do see people getting a prenatal visit here and there, but not in a timely fashion, and not according to the standard of care for people that are outside,” Heffernan said. “For instance, in a couple of people that I've been in contact with recently, one had been in detention for several months and had had no prenatal care at all. Another had had one visit.”

Pregnant immigrants are also more vulnerable to more severe cases of COVID-19, flu and other illnesses, which spread quickly in crowded places like detention centers.

There is an extensive list of best practices for detained pregnant and postpartum people, Sufrin said, including but not limited to regular access to comprehensive physical and mental health care, nutrition, the ability to exercise and adequate housing.

But from a medical standpoint, she said, “The best practices would be not to detain them.”

Two of L.A.’s top elected officials are publicly clashing over one of the public’s top issues — the future of homeless services spending — as city council members weigh pulling $300 million a year out of the troubled L.A. Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA).

It started just after Wednesday’s meeting of the city council’s housing and homelessness committee, where members discussed the possibility of directing the city’s homelessness spending to the county’s new department. Mayor Karen Bass issued a statement urging the council not to redirect the funds too quickly without a plan.

“The county’s decision to establish its own department and withdraw from LAHSA has created a funding and operational gap, which the city must immediately address in order to ensure life-saving services for unhoused Angelenos are not disrupted,” Bass said.

County supervisors decided last April to withdraw their funding — over $300 million a year — from LAHSA and shift it to a new county department starting this July.

“The last thing we need is a new department and more bureaucracy,” the mayor said, adding the county had been “prioritizing bureaucracy rather than services.”

County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath responded shortly after with a statement of her own, saying the mayor “is living in the LAHSA twilight zone.”

“When the mayor created a new program — spending hundreds of millions of your dollars without prior City Council approval — she called it ‘strategic,’” said Horvath, referring to Bass’ Inside Safe program.

“Now, when the County withdraws hundreds of millions of your dollars from an agency that failed multiple audits, she calls it ‘more bureaucracy.’”

Audits released in late 2024 and last spring found LAHSA failed to properly track the hundreds of millions of dollars the city and county entrusted to it per year.

“Angelenos know the truth: The current system doesn’t work,” Horvath’s statement said. A spokesperson for Bass didn’t respond to a request for comment on Horvath’s criticism.

‘Wasted precious time’

Wednesday’s discussion by the homelessness committee came a year after city and county officials received staff reports about potential alternatives to LAHSA.

County supervisors made their decision last April. The city council is about a year behind in starting its discussion of the options.

City Councilmember Monica Rodriguez, who introduced the motion two years ago requesting the city report up for discussion Wednesday, said at the meeting the council had “wasted precious time.”

 ”This is a leadership failure,” Rodriguez said. “If you care about the people that are being lost in the street, then you should care to work with urgency and decisive action.”

She has criticized the committee’s chair, Nithya Raman, for waiting more than 300 days after the report was finished before bringing it forward for discussion.

Raman did not respond to the criticism during the meeting or in response to a request for comment from LAist.

At Wednesday’s meeting, council members were told in their official staff briefing that the city lacks officials dedicated to homelessness policy and that it would likely take a year and a half to bring oversight of the spending in house to direct city control.

Homelessness Bureau not ready

Bass’ statement pointed to a forthcoming Homelessness Bureau, a team in city government she said will focus on oversight and accountability over homelessness spending.

Raman said the bureau is not yet ready to monitor homelessness spending or advise the council.

“We have not hired a single person for the bureau yet,” said Raman, who championed the bureau a year ago. City council approved the bureau’s funding nine months ago, for the fiscal year starting last July.

Rodriguez criticized the council’s decision last spring to pursue the bureau instead of discussing options to shift funding from LAHSA. The bureau, she added, still does not have “ an overarching goal, which addresses the concerns around governance” of homelessness dollars.

Raman recently announced she’s running for mayor against Bass, something Horvath openly considered but opted not to do. She is instead running for re-election as supervisor.

The committee plans to hold one more discussion in the coming weeks, before deciding next steps. Any changes to funding would have to go to a vote of the full city council.

The historic Original Pantry Cafe in downtown Los Angeles is reopening under a new partnership with nonprofit Hope the Mission.

The more than 100-year-old diner on Figueroa Street is expected to open in May or June in collaboration with the North Hills-based organization that provides meals, shelter and services to people experiencing homelessness.

When The Pantry first announced its closure last March, thousands of Angelenos from its loyal multi-generational customer base flocked to the restaurant for one last meal.

But now, the greasy spoon will start serving customers again under a new model. All profits will go toward supporting the unhoused community, according to Ken Craft, founder and CEO.

“This creates an opportunity for people to know 'I'm going to go enjoy an incredible meal at an iconic location in Los Angeles, and it's going to be doing good for the city of Los Angeles,'” Craft told LAist.

What’s new

Hope the Mission isn’t a total stranger to food service.

The organization provides nearly 9,000 meals each day and operates 33 shelters and interim housing sites in the region, including five shelters within a few miles of The Pantry.

One of its mottos is that everybody and everything gets a second chance — the historic diner included.

“It is very symbolic of the work that we do where oftentimes lives get beat down, they get worn out and they feel like their usefulness is done,” Craft said. “And so I look at The Pantry and I say, ‘No, your best years are yet to come.’"

The tagline of The Pantry when it reopens under the new partnership will be “a second serving”, as a nod to that second chance.

But the nostalgic draw of the diner is not lost on Craft.

The Original Pantry Cafe in 1979.

(

William Reagh

/

Los Angeles Photographers Photo Collection

)

The Original Pantry Cafe, on the northwest corner of Figueroa and 9th streets, in 1978.

(

Security Pacific National Bank Photo Collection

/

Courtesy L.A. Public Library

)

He said Hope the Mission is going to honor the history and legacy of the space (logo and several layers of flooring included) while giving it a new lease on life.

The organization’s chefs have been working on an updated menu. Craft said it’ll include some of the classic food customers came to love, including pancakes and hash browns, along with a new dessert line and some healthier options.

The overall goal is to replicate the feeling people had when they ate at The Pantry decades ago, with the same style and much of the same staff, while the diner evolves into the next philanthropic chapter. Craft said he wants to make sure The Original Pantry Cafe gets back on the map.

“Not only will you get an amazing meal and a wonderful experience, you're going to be actually investing back into the community,” he said.

The counter was full on The Pantry's last day open in March 2025.

(

Dañiel Martinez

/

LAist

)

The scene on the last day of The Pantry's operation in March 2025.

(

Dañiel Martinez

/

LAist

)

Officials are working to reopen The Pantry between May 1 and June 1, Craft said. All the business’ profits will go toward supporting people experiencing homelessness through Hope the Mission’s shelters, services and meal programs.

What’s old

Kurt Petersen, the co-president of UNITE HERE Local 11, the union representing the restaurant’s workers, told LAist they’ve come to an agreement with Hope the Mission so that all the staff who lost their jobs when The Pantry closed will be able to return to their previous positions.

Petersen said the union also reached an agreement that will provide free family health insurance, legal services and training funds for those workers.

“The folks who've been there 10, 20, 30, 40 years — they're really listening to them about what this needs to be in order to be a beloved institution going forward for Angelenos, “ he said.

“At the same time, they have some thoughts about how it should be run and hopefully the marriage of those two concepts will bring The Pantry forward so that it'll be open another 100 years,” Petersen continued.

José Moran, who worked at The Pantry for more than 45 years, told LAist he’s excited to start serving Angelenos again.

José Moran said he's "very happy" to be going back to work at The Pantry.

(

Courtesy UNITE HERE Local 11

)

“I feel great, I feel very happy,” Moran said. “I never thought I was going to work again there.”

Moran described the restaurant staff as a “family” — both figuratively and literally. His brother, Jesus, also worked at The Pantry a little longer than José.

Moran said he’s been missing his brother since they stopped seeing each other every day when the diner closed. But now, they’re both looking forward to coming back to the greasy spoon.

José and Jesus Moran were both servers at The Pantry for more than 45 years. José Moran said they're both looking forward to returning for the reopening.

(

Courtesy UNITE HERE Local 11

)

How we got here

The diner shut its doors last year after more than a century of serving breakfast staples.

The owner at the time, the Richard J. Riordan Administrative Trust, told LAist’s media partner CBS LA that the restaurant was never profitable and that selling the property would help keep the foundation’s charitable mission. The trust took over ownership after former L.A. Mayor Richard Riordan, who bought the restaurant in 1981, died a few years ago.

But UNITE HERE Local 11 said the trust abruptly closed the diner after staff insisted that any new owners must protect their jobs and honor the union.

Kurt Petersen, the co-president of UNITE HERE Local 11, said the staff who lost their jobs when The Pantry closed will be able to return to their previous positions.

(

Courtesy UNITE HERE Local 11

)

“I saw some of the guys crying, and because, you know, we all got families and we have to support them,” Moran said. “I know how they were feeling, because I was feeling too the same. At the beginning, that was very sad.”

Last September, the union announced a “landmark agreement” with the new owner, Leo Pustilnikov, who’s also a real estate developer.

Petersen said because the staff fought for their jobs with the support of residents and city officials, they are now going back to work with an operator and owner who share the mission that The Pantry needs to be one of the great restaurants in Los Angeles.

“So this is all good news,” Petersen said. “and God knows we need good news right now.”

Pustilnikov told the Los Angeles Times last fall that he planned to reopen The Pantry on New Year’s Eve, pending the necessary permits and licenses. Petersen said there were some delays when a car crashed into the building shorty after.

The restaurant’s website still reads “temporarily closed” as of Thursday.

Pustilnikov didn’t immediately respond to LAist’s request for comment.

How to get involved

Hope the Mission is also launching a fundraising campaign with opportunities for the community to support The Pantry’s reopening.

There are various donation levels, with people giving $100,000 or more getting the chance to name a drink or item from the menu. Craft said they’ve already had a few takers.

Gifts of $50,000 or more will get to sponsor a booth at the diner, with the donor's name or business displayed on the table.

People who donate $5,000 or more will have their name permanently displayed on a sign inside The Pantry.

“We're looking to the business community and people that love L.A. to partner with us in helping to make sure that it's a successful launch,” Craft said.

You can learn more here.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

On Wednesday, before the council voted, Bryan Marsh, an HMC StratCap executive, gave public comment to boos from the audience, saying the company purchased the land in December 2024 after the “city provided assurances about the viability of data center development.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

How other communities are responding

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

How Flock works

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

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

(

Libby Rainey

/

LAist

)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A deeper look at the law

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

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

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

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

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

South Pasadena faces a deadline

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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