Lift International Church, the Altadena congregation that lost its building in the Eaton Fire, plans to gather funders, gap-assistance grants and legal help in Pasadena on Sunday for households whose rebuilds have not started.

Organizers said four funding entities are expected on site to work with at least 200 underinsured homeowners, and that more than 160 families supported by the church during the past 19 months have been invited. Recent assessments put the number of parcels without rebuilding applications on file at approximately 2,222, organizers said.

The initiative, called Come Back Home, is built to clear financial, administrative and technical obstacles to rebuilding, organizers said. Partners will also launch a centralized platform connecting survivors with state and municipal resources and grants.

The event offers disaster recovery funding allocated for more than 100 residences, gap assistance grants, legal filing deadline advisories and consultations, pro bono referrals through the Altadena CDC’s ALLY platform, and recovery updates from the Altadena Coalition of Neighborhood Associations, organizers said. Partners include Samaritan’s Purse, Hope Crisis Response Network, Mennonite Disaster Service, HPP Cares and San Gabriel Valley Habitat for Humanity.

A separate press conference will address coalition recovery and advocacy. Joy Chen, executive director of Every Fire Survivor’s Network, is scheduled to highlight legislative achievements protecting wildfire survivors, including utility accountability, organizers said. Coalition representatives will state a neutral position on Senate Bill 492, which died without a vote on the session’s final day.

Pastor Anthony McFarland, who lost his Altadena Drive home in the fire, will co-host.

If you go: the Come Back Home press conference and community gathering takes place Sunday, September 13, from 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. at Westminster Presbyterian Church, 1757 N. Lake Ave., Pasadena. Complimentary refreshments will be served. For more, call LIFT International at (626) 797-6056 or visit liftaltadena.org.

In a functioning school district, administration brings the board clear recommendations — supported by data, cost analysis and alternatives. The board questions them, weighs them and decides.

That is how governance is supposed to work.

Thursday night showed what happens when it doesn’t.

For roughly two hours, the Pasadena Unified Board of Education debated and line-edited a draft definition of “district transformation” — striking language, moving provisions and arguing over what belonged in the document.

No vote was taken. No date was set for one.

Yet Superintendent Elizabeth Blanco told the board the process is already “outlined in a resolution that the majority of the board passed” and can proceed alongside district goals through 2030.

If so, the obvious question is: Why did the board spend two hours defining it?

The problem was not simply that trustees disagreed. The problem was that they were left to work out basic questions of scope, process and direction in public, in real time.

The board was left to build the framework

Facilitator Natalia Guerra told a student board member she was not aware of a deadline for completing the definition. No one on the dais could provide one.

That matters.

Administration should bring the board a framework clear enough to evaluate. The board can then approve it, amend it or reject it. It should not have to construct the framework itself, line by line, during a public meeting.

Thursday’s discussion made that painfully clear.

The proposed five-to-10-year horizon disappeared. A reference to Assembly Bill 1912 — the law behind the equity metrics the board adopted for consolidation decisions — was removed while consolidation remained in the document in several places.

A trustee’s addition concerning consolidation was not read back during the final review, leaving its status unclear.

And after two hours, the board still had no final definition and no date for a vote.

That is more than a disagreement over wording. It is evidence of a process that was not sufficiently developed before it reached the dais.

Chaos is a leadership problem

When there is no clear framework, trustees can begin arguing not only about decisions, but about one another.

Thursday provided a glimpse of that dynamic when Trustee Jennifer Hall Lee said she would “not be pushed anymore by four people on this board.”

That moment matters—not because one trustee is the problem, but because it shows how quickly the discussion can shift from What should the district do? to Who is pushing whom?

That is when governance can turn into politics.

One trustee becomes associated with a proposal. Another becomes associated with opposing it. The public picks sides. Emails become evidence of intent rather than context. Personalities begin to overshadow the questions taxpayers actually need answered:

Who developed the recommendation? What data supports it? What alternatives were considered? What will it cost? What problem does it solve? And who is responsible for the recommendation?

Those questions should come before politics.

Instead, the public is left watching trustees debate while the underlying substance remains unsettled.

It is easy to look at that and conclude that the board is dysfunctional.

Maybe that is the wrong conclusion.

Maybe what Thursday demonstrated is what happens when leadership does not give an elected board enough direction to govern effectively.

The board’s job is to hold administration accountable — not to build the administration’s work product from scratch in real time.

And that distinction matters.

PUSD is facing consequential decisions about enrollment, finances and potentially school consolidation. Those decisions require more than carefully crafted language. They require evidence, analysis, alternatives and a clear recommendation.

Taxpayers should not have to watch the board spend two hours figuring out what the process is before the real work can even begin.

Public discussion and amendment are part of the board’s job. Transparency matters. But transparency should not mean watching elected officials spend two hours redlining and wordsmithing the basic definition of a process that could ultimately determine which schools remain open.

When the stakes are this high, the public deserves a different kind of transparency: clear recommendations, the data behind them, the costs, the alternatives considered, and an explanation of what problem each proposed action is meant to solve.

The board should be debating those choices — not trying to figure out what the process is supposed to mean.

So the question coming out of Thursday night is not simply whether the board is dysfunctional.

It is this:

What exactly was leadership asking the board to accomplish — and why wasn’t that framework ready before the meeting began?

Because what looked like two hours of transparency may have been something else entirely: a board left to improvise because leadership hadn’t given it something ready to decide.

Gil Barel in her son’s room in Pasadena on Aug. 2, 2026. Barel and her family are still waiting for their home, a duplex they had rented for eight years before the January 2025 Eaton Fire, to be cleaned up and free of toxic materials before they move back in. Photo by Ariana Drehsler for CalMatters

Two smoke-damage bills awaiting the governor’s signature address a longstanding issue brought to the fore by the Los Angeles County fires: When is it safe for wildfire survivors to move back into their homes?

After the deadly January 2025 fires, which destroyed more than 16,000 structures, the state Insurance Department estimates that more than 13,000 out of 40,000 claims involved smoke damage.

The fires burned for nearly a month. Debris and emissions contained a mixture of trees, brush and manufactured materials made up of  plastics, metals and more — raising concerns about toxic contents left in homes that are still standing but may be dangerous to live in.

Many survivors with homes that did not burn down have yet to return to them 21 months later. Their homes reeked of smoke and they found ash, soot and char inside. They await test results for things such as lead and asbestos. They wait for homes to be repaired, cleaned up and cleared of toxic materials after months of back-and-forth with their insurance companies. Along the way, fire survivors, experts and insurers have all pointed to the lack of standards around smoke damage.

Assembly Bill 1642 will set “a first-in-the-nation standard for testing and remediation,” said Assemblymember John Harabedian, a Pasadena Democrat, about the bill he authored. Remediation is the removal of contaminants or hazards, and fixing possible ill effects.

The bill passed in conjunction with Assembly Bill 1795, authored by Assemblymember Mike Gipson, a Gardena Democrat. Gipson’s legislation will incorporate the new standards and require insurance companies to abide by them. The governor has until the end of the month to sign both bills; one cannot become law without the other.

“We were hearing from survivors that they weren’t getting a fair shake from their insurance companies,” Harabedian told CalMatters. “Kudos to survivor groups that worked with us on this. We hope others don’t have to go through what they went through.”

The bills are just two of several pieces of legislation to come out of the Eaton and Palisades fires meant to set clearer standards, hold insurers accountable and improve the recovery process after a wildfire.

Smoke damage figures prominently in lawsuits and legal actions against two big insurers in California: State Farm, which insures about 20% of the state’s property insurance market, and the last-resort FAIR Plan. The insurance department has accused both of delaying and denying smoke-damage claims.

Los Angeles County sued State Farm last week, alleging unfair business practices in its handling of claims from the 2025 fires. The lawsuit cited the findings of the insurance department’s investigation, including that the company denied or discouraged requests for environmental testing and refused to reimburse policyholders for testing they paid for themselves. Also among the allegations was that for standing homes, the company sent preferred restoration companies that typically “offered an inadequate and unsafe cleaning method.”

State Farm “strongly disagrees” with the county lawsuit’s characterization of the company’s claims response, said spokesperson Sevag Sarkissian.

Standing but not move-in ready

Kareem Ali’s Altadena home is one of the few left standing on his cul-de-sac, but he and his wife haven’t been able to move back in.

Instead, they have been living in a donated RV on their property since August.

State Farm paid for them to live in other places from January 2025 until April of this year, when the insurer refused to reimburse them for rent at an $8,000-a-month one-bedroom that it had recommended to Ali. Ali quit paying rent then,  and the rent for May, June and July is unpaid.

As for their smoke-damaged home, State Farm denied their request for environmental testing, so they paid $3,000 out of pocket for it. The insurer declined to reimburse them, and has since delayed and denied claims for cleanup. Some of the delays are because the insurer has assigned at least six or seven adjusters to their case, Ali said.

“Every time we got some sort of momentum on our claim, they’d randomly switch,” he said.

So Ali said they spent the money that the company has given them so far for their personal belongings coverage. They hired contractors to clean, remove insulation and replace the carpet. When they told State Farm more repairs are needed but they ran out of money, the insurer denied their claim, he said.

Meanwhile, they’ve continued to pay State Farm their monthly premiums. Ali said he asked their adjuster: “What are we paying for if we’re not going to get coverage?”

Elisa Jacobs Nixon is in the same boat. She and her family haven’t been able to move back into their Altadena home, either, primarily because of months of back-and-forth with State Farm about smoke-damage testing and cleanup.

The insurer initially ignored results of the May 2025 environmental testing she paid $6,000 for herself. So her public adjuster — a private insurance professional who handles claims on behalf of policyholders — advised her to get a contractor’s bid for the work that needed to be done because of the findings. That worked. Within days, State Farm sent its own industrial hygienist, Nixon said.

Both the initial report and the one State Farm ordered had similar findings, including about high levels of contaminants. The most recent test also found asbestos.

Now, even though Nixon and her family remain displaced, things finally seem to be moving forward, she said.

“This has completely hijacked my life, my kids’ lives, it’s just taken over everything,” Nixon said. “That’s why these parameters (in the bills) are so important. My hope is this will spread across the U.S. and help disaster survivors everywhere.”

What smoke-damage bills will do

Under Harabedian’s bill, the Department of Toxic Substances Control would have to create standards for lead and asbestos testing, repair and removal by the end of 2028. By the end of 2029, it would have to establish similar standards for other contaminants, including heavy metals, cyanide and lithium.

Gipson’s bill creates a legal presumption that if ash, soot, char or other combustion byproducts are in a standing home after a wildfire, then smoke damage in the property is the result of wildfire for insurance purposes. Also included in the bill: Insurers must inspect properties within 30 days of claims; would be responsible for the cost of testing needed to restore properties to their pre-loss conditions; and cannot stop paying additional living expenses until properties are restored.

The insurance industry remains “technically opposed to the bills,” said Karen Collins, a vice president at the American Property Casualty Insurance Association and a member of the smoke claims and remediation task force the state’s insurance department formed after the Los Angeles-area fires.

Although Collins said the bills create a framework, she said specific regulations and standards that result should “remain grounded in science.”

That’s why adjuster Brian Haden is skeptical about the bills, which he says lack specifics. He thinks both sides — fire survivors and insurance companies — will use “whatever’s approved as a weapon.”

“Will the (insurance department) enforce this?” Haden said, adding that he foresees litigation will still be the way disputes will get resolved.

Jane Lawton Potelle, founder and executive director of  Eaton Fire Residents United, whose data helped inform Harabedian’s bill, acknowledged that the bills won’t necessarily solve all enforcement issues.

She also said that although the bills’ standards won’t take effect in time to help her and her fellow survivors directly, she thinks the fact that standards are coming could still affect lawsuits or possible settlements right now.

“Insurers are relying on people not to know information,” she said. “I want people to know how to protect themselves and stop being afraid. Living in a contaminated home can make you sick. And it can devalue your property.”

Other notable bills

State lawmakers also passed legislation that takes aim at insurer behavior. They involve some of the other problems fire survivors mentioned, including long payment delays and insurers’ practice of throwing multiple adjusters at one claim:

Senate Bill 876 requires an insurer to assign a primary point of contact for a customer within 30 days of a claim being filed and send a written report to that customer whenever it assigns a third adjuster within six months. It also includes rules requiring insurers to disclose more information:  They must submit detailed disaster response plans to the insurance department by April 1, 2028. Those plans would need to be updated every two years or upon the insurance commissioner’s request.

Senate Bill 877 says all preliminary and final calculations related to the amount of loss, covered damage and cost of repairs must be included in claims-related documents insurers provide to their customers within 15 days of a request.

Senate Bill 878  requires insurers to pay the customer the cash value of a property within 30 calendar days of it being deemed a total loss. Subsequently, after receiving proof and documentation, if a policy requires it, insurers must pay the rest of the replacement cost within 30 days. Insurers will owe accrued interest on those amounts if they don’t make payments within 30 days.

CalMatters.org is a nonprofit, nonpartisan media venture explaining California policies and politics.

A trial-setting conference in Tina Fredericks’ case against Los Angeles County election officials is set for 9:30 a.m. in downtown Los Angeles, six days after she struck the 124 recall signers from the filing

The lawsuit Pasadena Unified School District Board President Tina Fredericks filed to block the recall petition against her goes before a Los Angeles Superior Court judge this morning for a hearing to set a trial date.

The Trial Setting Conference is scheduled for 9:30 a.m. Tuesday before Judge Tiana J. Murillo in Department 834 at the Stanley Mosk Courthouse in Los Angeles.

A trial-setting conference is a scheduling matter rather than a trial. The judge typically determines whether a case is ready to be placed on the trial calendar and works out the structure of any future trial — whether it will be tried to a jury or to the judge, and which claims will be tried. Witnesses are rarely called, and no evidence or testimony on the merits is normally given.

The conference follows Fredericks’ Sept. 2 Amended Verified Petition, which struck “DOES 1 TO 124, inclusive” from the case caption and from the petition’s opening paragraph. The figure matched the number of District 6 residents who signed the notice of intention to circulate the recall petition, according to the original filing, thus leading recall proponents to conclude Fdericks intended to include each of them in her suit. Fredericks said a misunderstanding of the filing requirements landed them in the case.

“I had no intention of suing them,” she told Pasadena Now. “From the beginning my goal was just to clear up the falsehoods about me, and that’s it.”

They were removed from the case filing last week.

Fredericks filed her original verified petition July 2, naming the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk, and designated it a priority matter under Elections Code section 13314(a)(3). It sought a temporary restraining order and preliminary and permanent injunctions barring the county from authorizing circulation of the recall petition until a court could decide whether it should be invalidated. Fredericks, who represents Trustee Area 6, is lrgally representing herself in court proceedings.

The recall petition’s stated grounds allege Fredericks violated the Ralph M. Brown Act through private meetings and serial communications on school consolidation, advanced her own “Consolidation 2027″ plan while portraying the process as independent, and worked with a consultant before it received a taxpayer-funded contract worth more than $233,000. She denies each assertion, saying no more than two or three of the seven board members took part in any communication and that “Consolidation 2027″ was a compilation of personal notes never circulated.

The Registrar-Recorder approved recall petitions against Fredericks and Trustee Scott Harden for signature gathering Aug. 13. Proponents have until Dec. 11 to gather signatures from 20% of eligible voters in each trustee area.

[photo credit: Office of Supervisor Kathryn Barger]

Early-bird registration for the second Altadena Forever Run closes at 11:59 p.m. Monday, after which the 10K entry fee rises from $59.30 to $64.60 and registration for the 5K closes and reopens at a new price tier.

The benefit race is hosted by the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department’s Altadena Station in collaboration with the Sheriff’s Support Group of Altadena and the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Athletic Association, and it returns to Mariposa Junction in Altadena on Sunday, Jan. 10, 2027, three days after the second anniversary of the Eaton Fire. Its first run delivered $148,485.84 to the Altadena Eaton Fire Relief Fund and the Sheriff’s Support Group of Altadena.

The 10K starts at 8 a.m., the 5K at 8:15 a.m. and the 1K Family Run at 10 a.m., all from Mariposa Junction at 849 E. Mariposa St., on Mariposa Street between El Molino and Lake avenues. Runners are asked to be at the start line by 7:30 a.m.

The 10K covers 6.2 miles, following the 5K route before turning west past neighborhoods still rebuilding and passing Charles White Park on the way back to Mariposa Street. The 5K covers 3.1 miles through the lower foothill neighborhoods east of Lake Avenue, and the 1K covers 0.62 mile, starting at El Molino Avenue and looping west past the Altadena Library.

New for 2027, Altadena fire survivors can register for the 1K free of charge, and the registration platform lists a separate Fire Survivors 1K at no cost. Children ages 1 to 10 also enter the 1K Family Fun Walk/Run free. Fire survivors who register for the 1K receive a T-shirt but not the other registration items.

Entry otherwise includes a race bib, a T-shirt, a medal and post-race refreshments. The race is chip-timed with a two-hour course limit, and organizers list two water stations on the 10K and one on the 5K.

The event runs rain or shine. Free parking is available at the Grocery Outlet lot at 2270 Lake Ave. and the former Rite Aid lot at 735 E. Altadena Drive. Packet pickup is set for the Grocery Outlet lot, with days and hours listed as to be determined. Pets and bicycles are not permitted; strollers are allowed but must start at the back of the pack.

Participants who want to raise money beyond their entry fee can join or create a group or team at the bottom of the registration page.

The inaugural run was held Jan. 4, 2026, in heavy rain and under a flood advisory. News coverage at the time put the field at about 3,000 runners and walkers, while the Los Angeles Times reported nearly 2,000 participants and organizers said more than 3,200 people registered. Of the money raised, the Altadena Eaton Fire Relief Fund received 67% of net proceeds in a check for $102,047.32, with the remaining third going to the Sheriff’s Support Group of Altadena; a further $17,010.52 in checkout donations and $29,428 in other direct donations brought the total to $148,485.84, presented to the Altadena Town Council on Feb. 17.

In May, the Sheriff’s Department announced $212,000 in relief grants for Eaton Fire survivors, $148,000 of it raised through the run, and used the announcement to open the 2027 race.

Southern California Gas Co. returns as exclusive title sponsor, the organizers said in a July 21 press release. “SoCalGas believed in this event from the very beginning, and their decision to return as our Title Sponsor sends a powerful message that Altadena’s recovery remains important,” Victoria Knapp, the run’s producer, said in the release. Altadena Sheriff’s Station Capt. Ethan Marquez, who co-chairs the run and was promoted to lead the station in August 2025, said in the same release that the event “is becoming an annual tradition that celebrates resilience, strengthens community, and reminds everyone that Altadena continues to move forward together.”

Registration remains open after Monday at the higher tier. Sign-ups for the 1K and the Fire Survivors 1K run until 9:59 a.m. on race day.

Metrolink will operate on a weekend schedule Monday for Labor Day and offer passengers a $10 day pass for unlimited travel throughout its Southern California rail system.

Metrolink’s $10 SoCal Day Pass provides unlimited rides throughout the system on the day of purchase and is available through the Metrolink mobile app and station ticket machines, officials said.

The agency’s Rail2Rail program, which allows Metrolink Monthly Pass holders to ride eligible Amtrak Pacific Surfliner trains at no additional cost, was suspended Friday and will remain suspended through Tuesday because of the holiday. The program will resume Wednesday.

Amtrak Pacific Surfliner codeshare trains that accept Metrolink tickets and passes between Los Angeles and Ventura could have limited availability if holiday ridership exceeds capacity, according to Metrolink.

Meanwhile, Pasadena Transit will suspend service on all but one of its bus routes Monday, Sept. 7, 2026, in observance of Labor Day, according to the transit system’s published holiday-schedule notice, according to the city.

Route 33 will be the only Pasadena Transit route in operation, running on its Sunday schedule instead of its regular weekday schedule, the notice states.

All other Pasadena Transit routes, as well as Pasadena Dial-A-Ride, will not operate at all on the holiday, according to the schedule notice published on individual Pasadena Transit route schedule sheets.

Weekend Metro service will operate on the Antelope Valley, Orange County, 91/Perris Valley, San Bernardino, Inland Empire-Orange County and Ventura County lines, along with Arrow service between San Bernardino and Redlands, according to the agency.

The Riverside Line will not operate Monday.

Tina Fredericks says she never intended to sue the 124 residents named as “Doe” parties; it was a paperwork snafu; a trial-setting conference is scheduled Tuesday in Los Angeles

Pasadena Unified School District Board President Tina Fredericks has removed the proponents of a recall effort against her from the lawsuit she filed to block the recall petition, saying they were never meant to be targets of the case.

Fredericks said an unclear understanding of filing requirements resulted in listing “DOES 1 to 124, inclusive” as respondents and defendants in her original July filing.

“I had no intention of suing them,” she said. “From the beginning my goal was just to clear up the falsehoods about me, and that’s it.”

She told Pasadena Now she wants to make clear that people involved in the recall are not targeted by her lawsuit and are no longer described in it.

Fredericks filed an Amended Verified Petition on Sept. 2 in Los Angeles Superior Court.

A hearing to set a trial date is scheduled for 9:30 a.m. Tuesday, Sept. 8, at the Stanley Mosk Courthouse in downtown Los Angeles. The Trial Setting Conference will be heard by Judge Tiana J. Murillo in Department 834.

A trial-setting conference is a scheduling matter rather than a trial. In such conferences, the judge typically determines whether a case is ready to be placed on the trial calendar and works out the practical structure of any future trial — whether the case will be tried to a jury or to the judge, which claims and defenses will be tried, whether discovery is complete, the anticipated length of trial, and witness and counsel availability.

Witnesses are rarely called, and no evidence or testimony on the merits is normally given.

Fredericks filed her original verified petition July 2, naming the Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk and 124 unidentified “Doe” parties. That figure corresponded to the number of District 6 residents who signed the notice of intention to circulate the recall petition, according to the original filing.

The action is brought under California Elections Code sections 13314 and 18600 and Code of Civil Procedure sections 1085 and 525, et seq.

Fredericks designated the action a priority matter under Elections Code section 13314(a)(3), a designation state law gives precedence over other civil cases.

The original filing sought a temporary restraining order, a preliminary injunction and a permanent injunction barring the county from authorizing circulation of the recall petition until a court could decide whether it should be invalidated.

Fredericks, who represents Trustee Area 6, is listed on the amended petition without an attorney and is representing herself.

The inclusion of the Doe parties drew public criticism through the summer.

Sierra Madre Mayor Kris Lowe, who has demanded Fredericks’ resignation, said in August that she believed she was among the unnamed parties and called the lawsuit an action against the same families the board is meant to serve.

The recall petition’s stated grounds, which Fredericks reproduces and disputes in her filing, allege that she violated California’s Ralph M. Brown Act by coordinating school consolidation plans through private meetings and serial communications, drafted and advanced her own “Consolidation 2027″ plan while portraying the process as independent, and worked with a consultant before it received a taxpayer-funded contract worth more than $233,000.

Fredericks denies each assertion.

She contends no Brown Act violation occurred because the communications involved no more than two or three of the seven board members, short of the majority required for an unlawful serial meeting. She has said “Consolidation 2027″ was a compilation of her personal notes that was never circulated to other board members, staff or the public, and was discovered only through an automated search the district conducted in response to a Public Records Act request.

The district’s outside counsel, Scott D. Danforth of Atkinson, Andelson, Loya, Ruud & Romo, wrote in a June 12 letter responding to a Brown Act “cure and correct” demand that there “does not appear to be coordination among more than three Board Members,” while acknowledging “the effect these communications have had on the public’s trust.”

The Board of Education approved the consulting agreement with Total School Solutions on Jan. 22 in a 5-2 vote and voted 7-0 to terminate the contract without cause June 11. The board rescinded Resolution No. 2852, which established optimal school size ranges, on June 25.

“The recall effort against board members does nothing to address the very real challenges that declining enrollment poses to our district and its impact on fully funding classrooms, support staff, and improving student outcomes. Let’s restore decorum in our board room to focus on these issues that unite all of us,” Fredericks said.

The Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk approved recall petitions against Fredericks and Trustee Scott Harden for signature gathering on Aug. 13. Proponents have until Dec. 11 to gather signatures from 20% of eligible voters in each trustee area.

Michelle Berenfeld discusses and signs Lessons from a Lost Republic at Vroman’s at 7 p.m. Thursday.

Michelle Berenfeld is the John A. McCarthy Professor of Classics at Pitzer College. Her new book describes nearly five centuries of representative government undone by wealth and power concentrated among elites, political violence, expansionist wars and a Senate that normalized emergency measures. She is at Vroman’s Bookstore, 695 E. Colorado Blvd., at 7 p.m. Thursday.

Lessons from a Lost Republic: What Ancient Rome Can Teach Us about This American Moment came out August 11 and sells for $26 in hardcover at the store.

Berenfeld teaches in the Classics field group at Pitzer, an interdisciplinary and intercollegiate program whose courses are taught by faculty at Pitzer, Scripps, Pomona and Claremont McKenna.

The bookstore lists the evening as an adult event and a book signing. Vroman’s asks that attendees buy the book from the store, which it says makes events like this possible.

Vroman’s is open Sunday from 10 a.m. to 7 p.m., Monday through Thursday from 10 a.m. to 9 p.m., and Friday and Saturday from 10 a.m. to 10 p.m. The store closes at 9 p.m. on Thursday. Arrive early.

For more information, call (626) 449-5320.

Michelle Berenfeld discusses and signs Lessons from a Lost Republic: What Ancient Rome Can Teach Us about This American Moment will run on Thursday, September 10 at 7 p.m. Vroman’s Bookstore, 695 E. Colorado Blvd., Pasadena. For more information, call (626) 449-5320 or visit https://vromansbookstore.com/event/2026-09-10/michelle-berenfeld.

A registered nurse from Huntington Health takes walk-ins from 10 a.m. to noon in Meeting Room 2, and no appointment is necessary.

A registered nurse from Huntington Health, an affiliate of Cedars-Sinai, will be in Meeting Room 2 at the Bob Lucas Memorial Library and Literacy Center on Tuesday morning offering free health counseling and screenings. The session runs from 10 a.m. to noon at 2659 Lincoln Ave. in Altadena. No appointment is necessary.

The screening covers hypertension, or high blood pressure, and includes a diabetes risk assessment and screening for high blood sugar.

One piece of preparation has to happen before anyone leaves the house: the diabetes screening requires a minimum two-hour fast. Plan the morning around it.

Health promotion literature and resources are available at the session.

The Altadena Library District’s Main Library is closed for renovation, and the district’s branches are keeping extended hours during the closure. Bob Lucas is one of those branches.

The session is free, takes no appointment, and is open to adults 19 or older. Bring any questions about the fasting requirement to the phone first.

The branch itself is open from 10 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday through Thursday, 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. Friday and Saturday, and 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. Sunday, so the screening window sits early in a long Tuesday. The library’s phone number is (626) 798-8338.

Huntington Health Screening at Bob Lucas will run on Tuesday, September 8 at 10 a.m. to noon. Bob Lucas Memorial Library and Literacy Center, 2659 Lincoln Ave., Altadena. For more information, call (626) 798-8338 or visit https://altadenalibrary.libnet.info/event/16470440. Admission is free.

A Flock Safety camera in use. [Shutterstock]

Rules under which Pasadena’s 61-camera Flock network operates, unchanged

A bill to tighten how California police collect and share automated license plate reader (ALPR) data died in the Assembly without a floor vote last week, leaving Pasadena’s 61-camera Flock network operations unchanged under existing law.

Senate Bill 1013 by Sen. Sabrina Cervantes, D-Riverside, passed the Senate in May but was stopped by Assembly Majority Leader Cecilia Aguiar-Curry on the final day of the session before it could reach the floor, CalMatters reported — the fifth straight year the Legislature has failed to regulate the technology.

In Pasadena, where a City Council committee is divided over whether to keep the cameras at all, the outcome leaves the question to the city.

The bill would have limited police use of plate-reader data to locating criminal suspects or missing people, required privacy and cybersecurity training, restricted sharing with national databases by default and required the attorney general’s office to audit plate-reader activity at random.

A similar Cervantes bill passed in 2025 but was vetoed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, in part over a requirement that police delete data after 60 days.

“It’s unfortunate that Senate Bill 1013 did not get the chance to be voted on before the deadline passed, but I look forward to continuing to fight for the privacy rights of Californians next year,” Cervantes said in a statement. More than 230 California police and sheriff’s departments use the readers, according to Cervantes.

Nearly 40 law enforcement agencies and police unions opposed the bill.

“We were concerned that this bill was going to limit the utility of ALPR data to solve crimes, find missing persons, exonerate innocent individuals, and so the fact that it did not pass, we’re glad for that,”  Cory Salzillo, legislative director of the California State Sheriffs’ Association, told the news organization.

Pasadena’s program dates to a contract the council approved July 17, 2023, with Flock Group Inc. for cameras at 17 intersections. The Police Department now operates 61 fixed cameras and has asked for 11 more, according to a July 2026 review by Independent Police Auditor Teresa Magula.

That review found no evidence camera locations were chosen on the basis of race or ethnicity, and concluded the program complies with state law and department policy with no evidence of use for immigration enforcement.

The committee that will decide the contract’s future is split. Minutes of its May 20, 2026, meeting record Vice Mayor Jess Rivas, the Public Safety Committee’s chair, favoring termination without a replacement vendor, and Councilmember Steve Madison supporting continued use with adjustments within the municipal code. Councilmember Tyron Hampton favored a new vendor whose system would hold data for the city’s use only absent a warrant. Councilmember Justin Jones raised concerns about data sharing with Immigration and Customs Enforcement and about camera concentration in District 3, according to the minutes.

The committee’s Aug. 19 hearing on the cameras was canceled for lack of a quorum, under a notice the city posted Aug. 12. An April 15 meeting was canceled as well. Its next regular meeting falls on Sept. 16.

Several dozen residents rallied on the west steps of City Hall on Aug. 19 under the banner “DeFlock Pasadena,” organized by a group called Pasadena Privacy, asking the council to disable and remove the cameras, cancel the contract, decline any replacement vendor and redirect the money to community programs. Organizers say the contract comes up in September.

“It’s unnecessary and it’s creepy as hell,” Rivas told the crowd.