LAPD

The Los Angeles City Council on Wednesday voted in favor of new restrictions on so-called “pretextual” traffic stops, signaling a growing impatience with the Police Commission’s failure to rein in a controversial LAPD tactic that critics say enables racial discrimination.

The vote requests that the department’s all-civilian watchdog adopt new guidelines similar to San Francisco, which bars police officers from pulling people over for broken taillights and other minor equipment violations unless there is a safety threat.

“Board of Police Commissioners: Get this done; we’re watching, no excuses,” said Councilmember Imelda Padilla, who shared stories of her late father being stopped by police with no explanation. “This is what this generation wants.”

If the new policy were adopted, LAPD officers would be prohibited from stopping motorists, bicyclists or pedestrians for minor violations “except in cases where the violation poses a significant and imminent safety risk.”

The unanimous vote followed sometimes emotional testimony at a City Council meeting from Angelenos about how their lives had been shaken by discriminatory traffic stops and searches.

Several speakers pointed to a growing body of research showing that minor stops disproportionately affect Black and brown motorists and do little to combat violent crime while eroding public trust. In recent years, there have been several high-profile traffic stops that resulted in officers or drivers being killed.

The current LAPD policy, in place since 2022, requires officers to record themselves on their body-worn cameras stating the reasons for suspecting a more serious crime had occurred when making a stop for a minor infraction.

The measure passed Wednesday stops short of a categorical ban that some have sought, but was still met with cautious optimism by traffic safety reformers.

“It helps place the city of Los Angeles on a path of ending racial profiling by LAPD,” said Chauncee Smith, of Catalyst California, a group that advocates for racial justice.

Smith’s group recently released a report that said such stops have continued to disproportionately affect Black and Latino drivers.

Smith said the new policy advanced by the City Council represents “a more formal, explicit prohibition,” adding that he hopes the Police Commission will ultimately give officers even less discretion in deciding when to make stops.

In a brief statement after the vote, Mayor Karen Bass thanked Harris-Dawson for his “leadership and dedication in moving this updated policy forward.”

“I will work closely with the Police Commission and Chief [Jim] McDonnell to implement it and to provide officers with appropriate training,” Bass said.

Any changes to the policy will probably draw strong challenges from within the LAPD and the Los Angeles Police Protective League, the powerful union that represents the city’s rank-and-file officers.

McDonnell has publicly defended the stops as an essential law enforcement tool in the department’s fight against guns, gangs and drugs. He and some transportation safety advocates have argued that persistent traffic deaths — road fatalities have in recent years outpaced the number of homicides — indicate the city needs to crack down harder on reckless driving.

The proposed change comes against the backdrop of a broader effort by city leaders to wrest greater oversight of the LAPD from the Police Commission. A spokesperson for the civilian body said it would evaluate how to proceed.

“The Board intends to place this item on a forthcoming agenda to enable a full and transparent discussion of the Department’s pretextual stop policy, which will include the recommendations from the City Council,” the statement said.

McDonnell did not respond to a request for comment.

The vote was the latest move in a broader push to remove police officers from traffic enforcement. Some advocates have argued that more punitive approaches that prioritize arrests and traffic citations do little to keep city streets safe; instead, they argue the city should invest in unarmed civilian workers and speed bumps, roundabouts and other street modifications that could help curb unsafe driving.

Adrienna Wong, a senior attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, said Wednesday’s vote showed city leaders taking action on an issue that was personal to them.

“I think what you saw today in council was the council members have lived experiences and are hearing from their constituents and are voting to represent their constituents in a way that the Police Commission has not,” she said.

A request from Los Angeles police officials to boost staffing and purchase new vehicles in time for the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games has been met with deep skepticism by City Council members who worry about committing funding amid uncertainty around the plan to secure the venues.

During an hours-long budget hearing Tuesday, LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell repeated a warning he has issued in recent months, suggesting that public safety will suffer if the city doesn’t hire more officers to replace the hundreds expected to leave the department in the next two years.

Despite recent recruitment gains, McDonnell said the council needs to fund the new hires now, so the department can staff up in time for the Olympics. Under the current security plan, the LAPD would supply about 2,400 officers, or just under a third of the total officers needed to police the Games.

The LAPD is requesting 520 new police recruits for the next fiscal year, which would grow the 8,600-member department by about 10 officers, with projected attrition at 510 officers.

The department is also requesting nearly $100 million from the city to purchase more than 500 new vehicles, as well as equipment such as an upgraded radio network, new computers and more than 1,600 body cameras, for the Games. LAPD officials said that after the Games, the vehicles would be used to upgrade the department’s aging fleet.

LAPD Cmdr. Mario Mota told council members at the Tuesday hearing that hundreds of the new vehicles would police the eight Olympic venues within city boundaries. The additional patrol cars and other specialized vehicles would also allow police to continue normal operations elsewhere over the 66 days between the July 14 start of the Olympic Games and the end of the Paralympic Games, he said.

LAPD officials said there was a misconception that federal authorities will take the lead on all security operations at Olympic venues. In fact, the federal priority will be safeguarding international delegations and protecting high-security areas, while the LAPD and other state and local agencies will be responsible for securing areas where most Olympic-related events are being held. The LAPD will still respond to 911 calls within city limits.

The U.S. Secret Service has not yet released details on how many federal agents will flood secure zones around venues, which include Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum, Exposition Park and Crypto.com Arena.

Some L.A. officials have expressed growing fears that taxpayers and the city treasury could be hit with a round of crippling costs if the city doesn’t ink a rigorous deal with LA28, the nonprofit that is organizing the Games, to ensure a “zero-cost” event.

The federal government has set aside $1 billion for Olympics security spending, including for local and state law enforcement, but has given few details about when and how it will distribute those funds, amid concerns that President Trump and a Republican-controlled Congress might not follow through with its funding pledge. The exact costs to L.A. and other local governments remain unknown, as officials wait to hear from federal security agencies about what services will be needed.

Police officials previously told the department’s civilian watchdog that the city has to allocate the money to the LAPD before the federal government can say how much it will reimburse.

That uncertainty didn’t sit well with some council members.

“What is LAPD’s role inside the perimeters of the venues?” Councilmember Katy Yaroslavsky, who heads the budget committee, asked at one point during the meeting. “The fact we haven’t nailed this down and it feels like we’re having two conversations — it’s confusing and frustrating.”

Some council members questioned whether the new vehicles in the budget proposal were necessary — and fiscally responsible.

When asked why the department can’t lease squad cars or repurpose existing vehicles, an LAPD official admitted that those options hadn’t been explored — which drew an exasperated response from Councilmember Tim McOsker.

Some of the concerns raised by the City Council echoed activists and other observers, who point to the LAPD’s increased militarization after the 1984 Summer Olympics — when it acquired new equipment that some say was disproportionately used against communities of color in the years that followed.

Security preparations for the Olympics have been ongoing for years. The LAPD has sent delegations to Italy and France to observe security measures in those host nations. But in other ways, progress has been slow. Several months ago, McDonnell quietly replaced the department’s Olympics czar, Cmdr. Hamed Mohammadi, with Deputy Chief Billy Brockway.

“We’re going in the wrong direction as far as personnel,” McDonnell said. In all, police officials estimated that 30,000 law enforcement employees from various state and local agencies will be involved in the security operations.

Mayor Karen Bass, who is running for reelection, once hoped to bring the LAPD back to 9,500 officers — its size when she took office. But amid a continuing budget crunch, she recently said she is more focused on keeping the department from getting smaller.

Overtime for Los Angeles police officers, and any other major expenses, would be acutely felt by a city government that recently closed a nearly $1-billion budget deficit, in part by slowing police hiring. The police union may try to negotiate for bonus, hazard and standby pay for officers who work the Games when their contract expires next June.

The last U.S. host city, Salt Lake City, had a much smaller police department but benefited from an infusion of federal funding and mutual aid agreements with neighboring agencies. Under California law, LAPD officials said, law enforcement agencies can enter mutual aid agreements only after a state of emergency has been declared, such as after a natural disaster.

Several council members asked whether the department has considered lobbying for changing the state law; LAPD officials admitted that they haven’t.

Some on the council also questioned whether the department should be doing more to reassign sworn officers working administrative jobs that could be handled by civilian employees.

Times staff writer James Rainey contributed to this report.

In the aftermath of a recent data breach that saw hackers make off with a vast trove of confidential police records, Los Angeles leaders have sought an explanation from the city’s top lawyer, whose office was targeted.

What they have gotten so far, according to Councilmember Ysabel Jurado, are answers that only leave more questions.

In an interview, Jurado said she had expected City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto to appear before the Government Operations committee this week, but instead had received an internal report offering a “high level view” of the breach that left many key details unaddressed.

“When did the city attorney’s office become aware, what actions were taken, and why were city officials not notified promptly?” Jurado said. “Right now, we’re still left to question and trying to assemble the information.”

The Times reported the existence of the hack last week, prompting further scrutiny by public officials — some of whom, like Jurado, said they hadn’t previously been informed. Since then, The Times has reviewed an inventory of 337,000 files that were compromised.

The documents amount to millions of pages, and appear to mostly come from civil lawsuits against the city that have been resolved in court. They range in nature from trip-and-fall cases to police excessive force.

During a brief discussion at the council committee Tuesday morning, Jurado said she had received information that an internal link used by the city attorney’s office to access the files had been clicked at least 5,000 times on the first day of the breach, which is thought to have occurred sometime in March.

The files were not secured by a password, according to sources who spoke previously with The Times and requested anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the ongoing investigation. A senior police official last week assured the department’s civilian bosses, the Police Commission, that none of the department’s own systems had been compromised.

Jurado said she wanted answers for why and how the city had managed to leave exposed sensitive records, such as medical reports, autopsy photos and witness names.

“It’s just horrific to think that that was out there,” Jurado said.

The city attorney’s office responded to questions from The Times by referring to a public report issued April 17, which said a preliminary investigation indicated that “the incident was contained to that third-party environment, and that no other City applications, systems, or department records were accessed or affected.”

The report noted that the hackers teased “small samples” of the data on its dark web site over a week starting March 20, before publishing the whole thing on March 27. The data were taken down after about eight hours, and then reappeared again twice in early April, the report said.

In a separate letter to the police union, the office said it would begin notifying people whose information was compromised “without unreasonable delay.”

The inventory reviewed by The Times shows personnel files for LAPD officers who were accused of using excessive force against a Black military veteran during a traffic stop in 2021. Another file included the identities of witnesses who saw a man die after LAPD officers knelt on him during an arrest, the records reviewed by The Times showed.

Thousands of hours of uncut body camera footage were released. There were also medical records from thousands of cases in which police and other city employees were accused of misconduct. At least 1,060 of the files are labeled as confidential, the inventory says.

The city attorney’s office has said that it alerted senior LAPD officials and the city’s IT department as soon as they discovered the leak, and has in the weeks since been in regular contact with other city departments to assess the scope of the leak. The FBI has begun investigating the matter.

The situation has already cost Feldstein Soto, who is up for reelection, the endorsement of the powerful union for the LAPD’s rank-and-file officers, which withdrew its support after accusing the city attorney of failing to disclose the full extent of the breach.

The leak follows Feldstein Soto’s efforts to weaken the state’s public records law after the release of many police officer photos and other materials, which she demanded be returned.

Several attorneys whose cases were included in the list of compromised files told The Times they have not yet heard from city officials. Some said they could foresee the records leaked being used as justification to reopen old cases — or initiate new ones.

“I’m curious to know what exactly it is that the city attorney’s office had that they may not have disclosed to us in discovery,” Arnoldo Casillas, an attorney for the family of Eric Rivera, a 20-year-old man whose family sued after he was killed by police in Wilmington in 2017 and whose files are among those included in the leak, according to the inventory reviewed by The Times.

The case was later dismissed, but the family has filed an appeal.

Other attorneys whose lawsuits against the city and LAPD were listed among the hacked materials said they wanted to know exactly what was included in the files.

Robert Glassman, who successfully sued for $18 million last year on behalf of two elderly brothers who were badly injured when a speeding LAPD squad car broadsided their vehicle, said he also hadn’t heard from the city attorney’s office.

“You’d think that they would notify [the affected parties] and tell them that they’re working to get their information back,” he said.

Experts said similar cyberattacks on government offices across the country have shown it can take months or years for the dust to fully settle and the full scope of the damage to emerge.

James E. Lee, president of the Identity Theft Resource Center, a nonprofit organization that provides advice and assistance related to identity theft, said last year alone the center documented an all-time high of 3,322 hacks.

That’s almost certainly an undercount, given the number of cases that go undetected or unreported, Lee said. Of the recorded incidents, roughly 165 targeted government agencies — up from 47 in 2020, he said.

In the past, according to Lee, many attacks of government entities were carried out by state-sponsored actors, but the emergence of AI-powered hacking tools have allowed everyday people to carry off such incursions.

“They want data that they can repurpose: anything that’s going to have financial information, anything that’s going to have driver’s license information is going to be very valuable to them,” he said.

Matthew McNicholas, a lawyer who has represented many officers in their lawsuits against the city, said he has fielded numerous calls from clients worried their personnel and medical records were exposed.

The leaked records, the inventory shows, include a case in which McNicholas sued the city on behalf of a victim who said they’d been sexually molested as a minor by an employee at a city-run recreational center.

McNicholas said he is worried that the leak will expose the private information of police whistleblowers who came forward to reveal discrimination and other misconduct.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.