california

The parents of Doug Martin filed a wrongful death lawsuit alleging that police officers used excessive force in trying to subdue the former NFL running back while he was “experiencing a mental health crisis” last October.

The lawsuit, filed Tuesday in the Northern District of California, also claims that paramedics contributed to Martin’s death by failing to “provide timely medical care.” The city of Oakland, several police officers and emergency medical service provider Falck USA/Northern California were named as defendants.

Martin died Oct. 18 in a hospital following his arrest by officers responding to reports of a break-in at a residence. He was 36. His death remains under investigation by Oakland police.

According to the Alameda County coroner’s office, Martin’s autopsy reports still are being finalized. Martin family attorney John Burris told the Athletic that an independent pathologist told the family that Martin potentially died from restraint asphyxia.

“Plaintiffs allege, on information and belief, that Decedent Martin died from restraint asphyxia caused by Oakland police officers and the FALCK NORCAL paramedics’ failure to provide timely medical care,” the lawsuit states.

The Oakland Police Department and Falck Norcal did not immediately respond to messages from The Times.

According to the complaint, Martin was “experiencing a mental health crisis” when his mother called for paramedics. He then fled and hid in a neighbor’s basement, where officers found him.

“After a brief struggle, defendant police officers physically restrained him,” the complaint states. “During the restraint, decedent Martin was placed face down while one or more officers pressed on his back. After a period of time, defendant Officers turned him onto his side.

“When they did so decedent Martin was unresponsive seemingly unconscious; However, the defendant officers initially believed he was sleeping or pretending to be sleep. When decedent Martin remained unresponsive, an officer requested medical assistance.

“Plaintiffs are informed and believe that decedent Martin did not receive immediate medical attention. Falck paramedics arrived over 15 minutes after the call for service and, and when they arrived, did not promptly provide medical care.”

A Stockton native, Martin was a first-round pick by Tampa Bay in the 2012 draft. He played six seasons for the Buccaneers, making the Pro Bowl in 2012 and 2015, before spending his final season with the Oakland Raiders in 2018. In his career, Martin rushed for 5,356 yards and 30 touchdowns.

California Forever, the tech billionaire-backed group that hopes to build a city from scratch on farmland in the outer San Francisco Bay Area, is lobbying state leaders to fast-track a massive shipbuilding deal that would kick-start its development after years of local opposition.

The billionaires behind the project are seeking a deal to expedite environmental reviews of the development and, if necessary, bypass county restrictions on building by being absorbed into Suisun City boundaries. They’ve hired former Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg and former Senate Majority Leader Bob Hertzberg — Democratic architects of landmark environmental laws — to make their case, and are using the prospect of luring a major shipbuilder to California to accelerate the dealmaking.

California Forever has pursued its project for nearly a decade, though the vision has shifted: At first pitched as a walkable city with cottages, bike lanes and even a water park, the plan then added a major shipbuilding operation and, last summer, a significant manufacturing hub.
California Forever’s proponents, led by the state’s powerful building trades union along with Realtors, peace officers and pro-housing groups, argue the latest proposal would boost the state’s economy and bring an estimated half a million jobs to California. And now, a prospective tenant has emerged: Defense company Saronic Technologies Inc., which builds autonomous vessels for use in national security, is deciding between California and Texas for its next factory. The state must fast-track the development or lose the deal, supporters argue.

The developers are seeking the state’s permission to use an 18-year-old environmental impact report for the shipyard development, limit any legal challenges to the project to 270 days, and allow Suisun City to annex their land if needed, according to Steinberg and Hertzberg.

“In short, if legislation is not approved, California will lose billions of dollars in investments and tens of thousands of jobs this summer to Texas and other states,” proponents wrote in a joint letter to Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislative leaders this week.

But some locals and lawmakers are skeptical, arguing that details about the project remain scarce. The proposed development would convert vast farmlands into factories and risk harming the surrounding ecosystem, they said, which deserves rigorous environmental review under the landmark California Environmental Quality Act that proponents are seeking to expedite.

State Sen. Christopher Cabaldon (D-West Sacramento) is shown during a Senate floor session at the state Capitol in Sacramento on Feb. 20, 2025.

(Fred Greaves / CalMatters)

“For a project this scale in this location, it is what the [law] was designed for,” said Sen. Christopher Cabaldon (D-West Sacramento), who represents the area. “A central question for the people of Solano County is: Is this going to be for the community or is this a conversion project that leaves them behind?”

Opponents also slammed California Forever for pursuing relief behind closed doors with state leaders and circumventing local opposition. Since 2018, the group has secretly bought up agricultural land, shelled out hundreds of millions of dollars to court local residents and spent at least $330,000 lobbying the governor and legislative leaders for favorable legislation.

“I think they know that the only way this actually happens is under cover of darkness, by trying to essentially get the governor to work this plan for them,” said Jordan Grimes, legislative director at Greenbelt Alliance, which has advocated for streamlined environmental reviews for housing projects.

Secretive beginnings foment distrust

For residents of Solano County, an agricultural community on the outskirts of the Bay Area that includes coastal areas next to a deep-water shipping lane, the suspicion around California Forever has been hard to shake.

The group’s subsidiary, Flannery Associates, started buying up farmland in 2018, eventually acquiring 62,000 acres while routinely refusing to answer questions about its backers. Some farmers later alleged the company used strong-arm tactics to get them to sell.

In 2023, Flannery’s backers were unmasked as a group of wealthy venture capitalists, including the founders of LinkedIn and Netscape, all led by former Goldman Sachs trader and real estate developer Jan Sramek. Marc Andreessen, co-founder of venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, holds investments in both California Forever and Saronic, the defense company eyeing California. Andreessen’s firm did not immediately return a CalMatters inquiry for comment.

Despite rocky beginnings, California Forever needed the majority of Solano County voters on its side due to a 1984 “orderly growth” law that requires voters to approve development on unincorporated land.

In 2024, the company debuted the East Solano Plan to rezone 17,500 acres of agricultural land for a dense, 400,000-person city. The proposal was set to go before voters that year, but its backers pulled it following powerful grassroots opposition, poor polling and a county assessment that found holes in the plan. Sramek acknowledged the group likely moved too fast and said the initiative would go back before voters in 2026.

Instead, the group has pivoted. The East Solano Plan has become the Suisun Expansion Plan and the Solano Shipyard. In January 2025, Suisun City’s city council directed its manager to explore expanding the city’s limits through annexation, which is now underway, although it could take years.

State Route 113 runs through land where California Forever plans to put its new city in Solano County.

(Loren Elliott / CalMatters)

“The annexation and the shipbuilding have been a clear way to work around the need for voter support in Solano County,” said Nate Huntington, a member of the grassroots group Solano Together, which formed in response to the secretive land purchases. Huntington pointed out that California Forever hasn’t even submitted a proposal for a shipbuilding facility to the county.

“All of this has been happening in backrooms of Sacramento, and it’s not been publicly available.”

Seeking state environmental relief

California Forever is now selling the development to the state as a major incentive to lure manufacturers and shipbuilders to California — and the subsequent need for housing to accommodate the promised jobs.

The company wants the governor and state lawmakers to cut red tape for the development and require enough housing for the new jobs. Steinberg and Hertzberg told CalMatters they are contemplating legislation to that end, but only after California Forever signs a lease with a manufacturer or shipbuilder.

Their plan would allow the governor to designate construction on company land as “environmental leadership development projects,” which would effectively require any litigation to be resolved within 270 days. Steinberg authored the state law streamlining that process in 2013.

State law requires government agencies to prepare a report for any project that might have a significant impact on the environment. Instead of assessing the impact of the proposed shipyard, Steinberg and Hertzberg’s proposal would use a 2008 report, which designated the area where the shipyard would go as “water-dependent industrial usage.” Most of California Forever’s 7,500-acre planned footprint does not have that designation.

Steinberg told CalMatters the report is sufficient since the site has changed little.

“The state and county need the ability to say yes now to these numerous opportunities,” he said in a text. A new report, he said, “would require years of additional delay and lost opportunities.”

But the report is outdated, Cabaldon argues.

“This is completely different,” he said. “Just the notion that you would just say, ‘We are not going to do any assessments at all and we’ll just rely on this old one’ — that is not consistent with what the public interest is.”

Steinberg and Hertzberg also want the state to require enough housing in the area, but to allow surrounding cities and Solano County to permit local housing developers to build first.

But if local governments aren’t willing to or cannot build enough housing within the timeline the manufacturer or the shipbuilder wants, Steinberg and Hertzberg’s proposal would allow Suisun City to annex adjacent California Forever-owned county land into its city boundaries — a controversial idea that has drawn fierce local opposition. The move would be a “last resort,” Steinberg and Hertzberg stressed repeatedly.

The annexation would effectively bypass the county’s orderly growth initiative, which requires voters to have a say in development.

“The shipbuilders and manufacturers need certainty on a much faster timeline,” Steinberg said.

Cabaldon said the pitch to build new housing to accommodate theoretical jobs is “fantastical,” noting that Saronic, the proposed shipbuilder, is a leader in automation.

“There’s no indication that this is going to generate on an ongoing basis that many jobs, and certainly not more jobs than we have housing for even today without building a single additional unit,” he said.

Historic union agreement prompts support

In January, California Forever announced it had signed a 40-year deal with the Napa/Solano Building Trades Council and Northern California Carpenters Union to use union labor to build its development. The agreement was an important political alliance for Chief Executive Sramek, bringing more influential advocates to the table.

According to Digital Democracy, both the Building Trades Council and the Carpenters Union have given roughly $10 million in direct donations to legislative candidates since 2000.

Those advocates made themselves heard over the last few weeks, following a Texas county court approving significant tax incentives to lure Saronic to Brownsville. In a statement, Saronic said its nationwide search is still “active and ongoing.”

The California Alliance for Jobs, an alliance of influential construction companies and workers, drafted two letters in quick succession calling for legislative leaders to streamline the California Forever expansion and shipyard.

“We champed at the bit to go all in to get this project moving, and to get legislation through Sacramento this session,” said Joshua Arce, executive director of the alliance.

Suisun City Councilmember Princess Washington, who has consistently been the sole vote on the council against the annexation plan, said she feels organized labor is being used as “political pressure” to win approval.

“Processes are slow, but they’re done that way through government to ensure that it’s being done correctly, that all parties of interest are being treated fairly, and there’s checks and balances,” Washington said.

“It’s unheard of for a project to be done as quickly as they want it to be done.”

In a statement, California Forever spokesperson Jim Wunderman said any shipyard project will comply with all California environmental and land-use laws. He said county supervisors already approved using the 2008 impact report, and that legislation would allow the group to “meet prospective employers’ timelines.”

He said by pursuing expansion within Suisun City, California Forever is following the community’s preferences by channeling new growth into existing cities.

An ongoing presence in the Capitol

Since 2024, California Forever has spent at least $330,000 lobbying the Legislature and governor’s office on bills and other actions, according to campaign finance records.

Steinberg and Hertzberg told CalMatters they were hired in April as “special counsel,” not lobbyists, meaning they are spending less than a third of their time talking with public officials.

Grimes, who said he respects Steinberg for leading landmark environmental land-use reforms in the Legislature, said he’s disappointed in his advocacy for California Forever, “a project that is antithetical to all of this.”

Sheep graze on land where California Forever plans to build its new city in Solano County.

(Loren Elliott / CalMatters)

California Forever reported spending $90,000 lobbying the governor’s office and the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development, called GO-Biz, last year on “federal shipbuilding activities and California business attraction and retention activities.”

“GO-Biz has discussed relevant state incentive programs with Saronic and explained how they operate,” said GO-Biz spokesperson Willie Rudman. He said the agency does not offer incentive packages to specific companies.

Last fall though, GO-Biz helped organize a bid for Saronic to settle in Solano County. County staff reported during a board meeting that GO-Biz supported a legislative effort to override the county’s “orderly growth” law.

County supervisors rushed through a proposal to change the boundaries of the Solano Shipyard to comply, but with just days remaining before the end of the legislative session, Assemblymember Lori D. Wilson, a Democrat from Suisun City, said there wasn’t time to introduce legislation.

Since then, Wilson said, the proposal has been on the table, but “nothing’s been requested” of her office by California Forever.

The company also urged lawmakers to act fast or risk losing the shipbuilder to Texas last year — a negotiating tactic common in economic development, Cabaldon said.

But Cabaldon argued that Saronic will decide where to place its shipyard based on “defense needs of the United States of America” instead of state incentives.

“We have to negotiate with our eyes open,” he said.

Wolffe and Yu write for CalMatters.

Twenty-four days after the polls closed on election day, Los Angeles County officials have certified the results from the 2,227,461 ballots cast. Despite questions raised about the pace of the vote count, a Times analysis found ballots this June were tallied faster than in previous cycles.

California is known to have a slow vote count, partially because of the state’s grace period for mail-in ballots. This year, counties were required to report most of the ballots by June 15, with some exceptions, including for mail-in ballots received within seven days of election day and ballots requiring additional verification such as signature curing. The process has spurred baseless claims of fraud from President Trump and others, leading the U.S. Supreme Court to take up a case on whether mail-in ballots must be received by election day to count.

The state has reported 9.4 million processed ballots. Officials estimate about 5 ballots remain to be counted and 17,650 are waiting to cure a missing or mismatched signature.

Compared with the last time both governor and Los Angeles mayor were on the ballot, county election officials counted more ballots, and tallied them faster than in 2022, The Times found.

In Los Angeles County, turnout jumped from 28% of eligible voters in the 2022 primary to 38% this June, according to the county registrar. Meanwhile, the share of vote-by-mail ballots dropped about 3 percentage points to 82%, indicating a rise in in-person voting.

Statewide, early results show 41% of registered voters turned up for the June election, up from 33% in 2022, according to the secretary of state. County elections officials must report their final results by July 3, giving state officials a week to certify all election results.

The Los Angeles Times reports election results from the county clerk as well as from the Associated Press. The AP provides ballot counts, a calculation of the expected vote and race calls for statewide and national races.

The expected vote percentage, or EEVP, is an estimate of the total number of votes that will eventually be certified. That number can be adjusted based on new information over time.

“Before counting begins in California, our estimates are primarily informed by turnout in past similar elections plus pre-election data on ballot returns, with projections based on what percentage of ballots had already been received at the same point in past elections,” AP director of election analytics Emily Swanson said in an email.

In the gubernatorial and mayoral races, more than half of the votes were counted by the end of election day, EEVP data show.

Swanson’s team also observed a faster vote count this year than in the 2022 and 2024 primaries.

In January 2024, L.A. County consolidated its election operations into a new ballot processing center in the City of Industry. Dean Logan, head of the L.A. County registrar-recorder/county clerk’s office, told The Times earlier this month that the facility, which is open to observers, is designed for transparency, security and efficiency.

“It doesn’t take long to count. The counting process is very fast,” Logan said ahead of election day. “What extends the time period is those options that are provided under California law for voters — to allow everyone the opportunity to vote up until election day, and then allowing us the time to process those with the same level of security and integrity that we did the ballots that were received two weeks before the election.”

Despite the faster count, the Associated Press took longer to call winners, suggesting these races were more competitive. The AP makes such declarations by determining whether there is an opportunity for a trailing candidate to catch up to the race leader. It has been calling races for nearly 180 years.

Both the gubernatorial and Los Angeles mayoral race saw a 30% increase in votes from 2022. The governor’s race received more than 9.2 million votes compared with 7 million in 2022. The Los Angeles mayor’s race received more than 850,000 votes, an increase from nearly 650,000 in 2022.

The vote counting process for California, Washington, Oregon, Nevada and Alaska may change for the November midterm election, depending on which way the U.S. Supreme Court rules.

Data and graphics assistant editor Sean Greene contributed to this report.

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom reached an agreement Friday with legislative leaders on a $351.7-billion state budget in his final year as governor, a spending plan that uses a tax windfall to avoid major cuts and lessen California’s chronic deficit in the years ahead.

The deal provides nearly $2 billion in state revenue next year through tax hikes on corporations, new levies on software sales and a revamped tax on managed healthcare organizations. Lawmakers and the governor continue major investments in education, healthcare and agreed to increase spending on subsidized childcare and affordable housing.

“We want to leave the next governor not only a balanced budget, but a budget that is substantially structurally sound, and we’re going to accomplish that,” Newsom said in an interview Friday. “We were very cautious in terms of new spending,”

The agreement ends weeks of lobbying by outside interests and negotiations among lawmakers and the governor at the state Capitol about how to handle a surge of income tax collected on stock market gains related to artificial intelligence.

Early forecasts last June projected a $12.6-billion deficit in 2026-27, according to the California Department of Finance. Updated predictions now suggest the state will end the year with a surplus of $4.5 billion.

Democrats, following Newsom’s lead, are tucking away $6.4 billion for future years, which allows the governor to knock down a deficit previously projected through 2027-28 and assuage criticism about his spending habits.

But economists say the fix and revenue increase is likely only temporary.

Spending in California has generally exceeded revenue growth during Newsom’s tenure in the governor’s office, creating a chronic shortfall. Despite the extra funding, the budget continues a trend of relying on reserves, shifting funds, borrowing and suspending debt payments to balance state spending.

The Legislative Analyst’s Office, the nonpartisan fiscal advisor for lawmakers, has warned of a roughly $10-billion gap between the amount of money the state brings in and spends, which could grow dramatically worse if the stock market turns downward. The LAO has said the existence of any operating deficit during a revenue boom is a red flag and that the state is “ill-prepared” for even a modest decline.

Christopher Thornberg, an economist and founder of the consulting firm Beacon Economics, said it’s business as usual in Sacramento.

“They love increasing spending. But it seems politically impossible to go the other way,” Thornberg said. “We’ve seen this play out over and over again.”

Lawmakers and the governor offered a different take and asserted that their decision to put the $6.4 billion into a short-term reserve, called the Projected Surplus Temporary Holding Account, and ask voters to allow them to store more money in the rainy day fund are examples of prudent budgeting.

“You see us save more and you see try to address the immediate needs of our community, but also the structural budget that potentially awaits us,” said Senate President Pro Tem Monique Limón (D-Goleta) in an interview. “We are forecasting a moment where we will need to address these issues and we want to start now to think about the future as well.”

Under a progressive tax structure, the state budget is dependent on income taxes paid by the ultra-rich on earnings largely from capital gains. The set up leaves California vulnerable to the unpredictable nature of the stock market, dramatic swings in revenue and, in recent years, reliant on poor projections.

Negotiations at the state Capitol included an agreement on a constitutional amendment that seeks to offset the revenue highs and lows.

If approved by voters on the statewide ballot in November, the amendment would raise a cap on mandatory deposits into the rainy day fund from 10% to 20% of general fund revenue. The measure would also allow lawmakers to exempt money they put into the rainy day fund and the temporary holding account from state spending limits.

Under an existing state appropriations restraint, also known as the Gann Limit, lawmakers cannot spend more than an amount determined by a formula that takes annual tax proceeds, changes to the population and cost of living into consideration. Tax revenue above the limit must be divided between schools and refunds to taxpayers.

With few exceptions, the limit applies to most appropriations of tax revenue, including when lawmakers put money away in the rainy day fund and other reserves.

Newsom said the change will leave the state in a much better position to weather the volatility. Though calls for tax reform remain in California, the governor said being able to place more money into the reserves could ultimately solve the state’s budget challenges.

“The one thing missing is the one thing that I think we finally landed, which is the change in the reserves,” Newsom said. “It changes the political dynamic, where now you’re not exchanging general fund priorities.”

Republicans criticized the proposed constitutional amendment, which passed in a budget trailer bill this week, for failing to require that excess revenue pays down the state’s $22 billion in unemployment insurance debt.

State Sen. Tony Strickland (R-Huntington Beach) called it a missed opportunity.

“It does not require debt payment to go to the UI debt,” Strickland said. “It facilitates more spending, exempting reserve deposits from the state spending limit.”

As part of the negotiations, lawmakers agreed to delay some healthcare cuts that would have required monthly premiums for immigrants and eliminated dental care. The deal adopts a Medi-Cal asset test of $21,000 on July 1, 2027, instead of a $2,000.

The budget agreement includes a provision requiring California’s next governor to develop options to reduce taxpayer subsidies for corporations whose employees receive state-sponsored healthcare through Medi-Cal instead of the company’s health plan. The plan is aimed at raising revenue to offset federal cuts that are expected to leave millions of Californians without access to healthcare.

The California Department of Finance said state reserves are expected to total $28.8 billion under the 2026-27 budget.

For decades, Californians have generally said immigrants, who make up more than a quarter of the state’s population and a third of its labor force, are beneficial to the state and its economy. But budget instability and concerns about rising costs are spilling into a debate over the controversial and expensive policy of allowing low-income immigrants without legal status to receive state-funded health coverage.

Now, Democrat Xavier Becerra and Republican Steve Hilton present a stark choice to voters in the race to be the next governor at a moment when public support for the state’s generous safety net is starting to fray.

Both frame the choice as an economic one.

Becerra, former secretary of Health and Human Services under President Biden, has said it would be “foolish” to exclude the poorest immigrants from routine care and push them into expensive emergency rooms on the taxpayer’s dime. Hilton, a conservative commentator backed by President Trump, has promised to eliminate their coverage and has echoed national Republicans who have skewered California’s expansions to bolster their claims of fraud and abuse in the Medicaid program.

With voters nationwide worried about inflation and the rising cost of living, some Californians might feel less inclined to provide full healthcare coverage to those lacking legal status. What the state does next could have profound implications for its healthcare system and sprawling economy.

Over the past decade, California lawmakers used state dollars to expand Medi-Cal, offering all low-income residents comprehensive coverage regardless of immigration status. But enrollment surpassed initial projections, as did the cost. Medi-Cal coverage of immigrants without legal status costs the state roughly $10 billion a year, according to California’s nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office, more than double the initial estimates.

California lawmakers and Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, who championed the program, have approved major rollbacks of benefits for those residents. They said the state can’t afford ballooning healthcare costs amid massive federal cuts from the GOP tax-and-spending law known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act; the California Health and Human Services Agency projected up to 3.4 million Medi-Cal enrollees could lose coverage and the state could lose more than $30 billion a year in federal funding under the law, causing major disruptions in the safety net health program.Medi-Cal’s budget for fiscal year 2026-27 is $217 billion, and the program serves more than 14 million Californians.

Meanwhile, many legal U.S. residents and citizens have seen their health premium payments skyrocket this year after Congress let enhanced federal Affordable Care Act subsidies expire at the end of December.

As the state grappled with a deficit last year, a majority of likely voters in California said — for the first time in nearly a decade — they opposed providing health insurance to immigrants without legal status, according to a poll by the Public Policy Institute of California.

“The state faces major challenges, and healthcare is one of the major expenditures,” said Mark Baldassare, the institute’s survey director. “People have become more selective about how they want to see those limited healthcare dollars spent.”

Hilton, running on a platform of affordability and lowering taxes, has seized on the sentiment, casting health coverage for immigrants without legal status as deeply unfair and a direct threat to the state’s ability to help citizens.

“Stop taking money from California taxpayers who can barely afford their healthcare to give free healthcare to citizens of other countries who shouldn’t even be here,” Hilton said in a Facebook video the morning of the June 2 primary.

In campaign stump speeches, Hilton promised to use the savings to lower healthcare costs for other Californians without detailing how. Hilton did not respond to requests from KFF Health News for comment.

“Their messaging is very, very simple: It’s an us vs. them,” said Roger Salazar, a Democratic political consultant who represents a coalition of healthcare advocates who argue providing coverage to people who can’t afford it strengthens the workforce and, as a result, the economy. “It’s just a question of convincing the average voter that it’s much better economically.”

A son of immigrants, Becerra for decades pushed to extend safety net benefits in Congress and has made a similar pitch in his campaign for governor. He did not respond to requests for comment.

“Immigrants, whether documented or not, work hard. They pay taxes, and sometimes they get injured on the job or their children get sick,” Becerra said during a debate last month. “It would be foolish to tell a family that they don’t have access to the pediatrician or the family doc.”

Becerra, who could become California’s first elected Latino governor, objected last year when Newsom and legislative leaders decided to freeze Medi-Cal enrollment for adults without legal status, cut benefits, and impose monthly premiums.

“Stop treating coverage as a budget variable that expands in good years and contracts when revenue dips,” Becerra wrote last month in response to an Orange County Register candidate questionnaire. He has vowed to pursue new, steady revenue to fund basic services, such as by upping taxes on corporations and the wealthiest Californians.

In 2023, California was home to about 2.3 million people without legal status, representing roughly 8% of the state’s labor force, according to the Pew Research Center. And 1 in 5 California children live in a family that includes at least one member without legal status, according to the California Department of Education. Healthcare economists say giving people access to preventive healthcare saves taxpayers money in the long run by keeping the workforce healthy and relieving pressure on an overburdened system.

That, Baldassare said, wasn’t a hard argument to make during the COVID-19 pandemic, when immigrants were celebrated as essential workers and the link between individual well-being and public health was more obvious.

But Medi-Cal costs to cover roughly 1.4 million immigrants have ballooned, according to the latest estimates from the Department of Health Care Services. Because only some lawfully present immigrants are eligible for federal Medicaid benefits, states like California that cover other populations must do so exclusively with state funding.

California’s budget experts have warned that maintaining full Medi-Cal coverage for immigrants without seeking additional revenue would destabilize the state’s long-term fiscal outlook.

In a legislative hearing last year, Republican Assemblymember Carl DeMaio questioned whether California taxpayers would prioritize the expansions, saying he doubted “illegal immigrant healthcare in the general fund would be at the top of their list.”

After lawmakers approved the spending reductions, support for immigrant health coverage dropped, Baldassare said. Now lawmakers and Newsom are negotiating further cuts.

David Hayes-Bautista, who has spent his career studying the economic contributions of Latinos and immigrants, said Californians without legal status have higher labor force participation and tend to work in industries and occupations that don’t offer employer-based health insurance. As a result, many resort to Medi-Cal, saddling the state with the healthcare costs instead of employers.

“California, as a state, has the world’s fourth-largest GDP, which is true thanks to Latinos,” Hayes-Bautista, director of the Center for the Study of Latino Health and Culture at UCLA, said. Without contributions from Latinos, many without legal status, it drops to eighth place, about the size of Italy’s economy, he added.

Immigrant advocates hope to have a more vocal champion in Becerra, the favorite to become governor in a state where Democrats outnumber Republicans nearly 2 to 1.

“He will fight, he will push back, he will do all that he can,” said state Sen. María Elena Durazo, a former labor leader who has championed the immigrant healthcare expansions. “That’s the most we could expect.”

Mai-Duc writes for KFF Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism.

WASHINGTON  — Licensed gun owners have a right to carry a concealed firearm into stores and other private places unless the owner objects, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

The 6-3 decision extends gun rights and strikes down laws in Hawaii, California, New York, New Jersey and Maryland.

Those measures would prohibit carrying guns onto private property that is open to the public unless the owner has expressly authorized them.

“This regime hobbles what the 2nd Amendment protects: the right of Americans to carry arms for self-defense as they go about their daily lives. We hold that the law is unconstitutional,” Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. said for the court.

The new laws, if upheld, would “impose severe restrictions on the daily activities of residents who have satisfied the state’s rigorous requirements for the issuance of a carry permit. When these permit holders leave home in the morning, … they may also be barred from entering many places that people routinely visit in the course of their daily routines, such as gas stations, convenience stores, restaurants, coffee shops, drug stores, grocery stores, ‘big box’ stores, home improvement stores, barber shops or hair salons, dry cleaners, and laundromats.”

The three liberals dissented, saying the law would protect property owners who don’t want guns in their stores.

“There is no constitutional right to enter private property without the owner’s permission, let alone with a firearm,” said Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.

Trump administration lawyers had joined a coalition of Hawaii gun owners in urging the court to strike down these blue state laws in the case of Wolford vs. Lopez.

They said the laws, if enforced, would mean “a person carrying a handgun for self-defense commits a crime by entering a mall, a gas station, a convenience store, a supermarket, a restaurant or a coffee shop.”

This litigation is part of much broader debate over where guns may be permitted or prohibited.

Four years ago, the justices ruled that law-abiding persons had a right to obtain a permit to carry a concealed gun when they left home. They also agreed there are “sensitive places” where guns may be prohibited, such as schools, courts and other government buildings.

In response, lawmakers in California and Hawaii adopted their own lists of “sensitive places.” They imposed restrictions on concealed weapons at parks, beaches, playgrounds, places of worship and public transit as well as bars and restaurants that serve alcohol.

Gun owners sued but the 9th Circuit Court refused to block most of those restrictions in a single 83-page opinion covering Hawaii and California. Both states would prohibit carrying guns onto private property open to the public without the owner’s consent.

The 9th Circuit upheld that measure in principle but said California went too far by requiring the owner to post a prominent sign expressly authorizing guns.

“While today’s ruling in Wolford is disappointing, owners still have every right to decide whether firearms are allowed in their stores and businesses,” said Janet Carter, managing director of Second Amendment Litigation at Everytown Law. “The Supreme Court may have changed the default rule, but it cannot take away a private property owner’s authority over their own land.”

The Firearms Policy Coalition said the court had properly protected gun rights and barred states from carving out their “own regional version of the 2nd Amendment.”

“The historical record does not support forcing peaceable people to obtain advance permission before carrying for self-defense in places held open to them,” the group said.

Last week, the court upheld gun rights in a Texas case and said the government may not make it a crime for an “unlawful user” of a drug such as marijuana to own a gun.

WASHINGTON — California’s two Democratic senators on Thursday criticized the Trump administration after it requested $87.6 billion from Congress to address some of the nation’s most “urgent needs” but omitted funding for victims of last year’s Los Angeles wildfires.

“Donald Trump’s desire to punish Los Angeles and the state of California for not voting for him, means once again that thousands of Angelinos are left watching this administration fight for anything but them, their businesses, and their communities,” Sens. Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff said in a joint statement.

“These fires did not discriminate based on party or political preference. Neither should this administration,” they added.

The omission is the latest strain in a yearlong standoff between California leaders and the Trump administration over federal disaster aid, and it comes after Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and Los Angeles County Supervisor Kathryn Barger met with President Trump at the Oval Office in April to request the funding.

At the meeting, Trump signaled his commitment to working with local officials to help with disaster recovery efforts. The officials asked for $16 billion that would be split between the city and county. The money would consist primarily of disbursements from the Federal Emergency Management Agency flagged for communities hit by the fires, part of a $33.9-billion wildfire relief funding request made by Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Two months later, those talks have yet to yield results sought by local leaders.

The budget request, submitted by the Office of Management and Budget on Wednesday, mostly seeks funding for the Pentagon to address costs related to the Iran war. It also includes $11.1 billion in economic assistance for American farmers, $1.4 billion to address the Ebola virus outbreak in Central Africa, $500 million to support “ongoing efforts to complete restorations and construction projects” across the nation’s capital and $1 billion to boost the pensions of workers at General Motors that were cut as a result of the automaker’s bankruptcy.

“I urge the Congress to take action on these important and urgent requests as soon as possible,” White House budget director Russell Vought wrote in a letter addressed to House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.).

Vought said the administration was open to discussing “additional relief for other urgent matters.” The White House did not immediately respond when asked why the budget request did not mention the Eaton and Palisades disaster relief funds.

State leaders, including Newsom, have repeatedly accused the Trump administration of stonewalling billions in wildfire aid. The governor visited Washington in December to meet with lawmakers, including three who serve on the Senate and House appropriations committees, to push for the funding.

The governor also attempted to meet with FEMA about the matter, but said his request was denied. Newsom, a political foe of Trump’s, would not say whether he had attempted to meet with Trump to talk about the recovery efforts.

I was explaining the location of my broken-down car in Angeles National Forest to the tow truck dispatcher when I suddenly found myself shouting.

“Bear!” I yelled.

A black bear ambled across the road and into Red Box Picnic Area. I hollered at the bear, as did another person in the lot.

The bear ignored us both, focused on where it would find its dinner that night: a bear-proof trash can.

In this edition of The Wild, our weekly outdoors newsletter, I will share the three bear encounters I had last week with black bears in Angeles National Forest. They were my first, second and third times to experience bruins in the San Gabriels. The third time, when a bear slapped my backpacking tent, was the most memorable moment. We’ll get to that later.

For anyone feeling rusty on the best course of action when you see a black bear in our local mountains, here’s a quick refresher on the tips I got previously from a conservation biologist.

• 🙅🏃Don’t run. You will look like prey.
• 🗣️ Let bears know you’re there. Say something loudly and calmly — don’t shriek! — like “Hey, bear!” in a deep voice.
• 💪 Make yourself big. Put your hands up and out — don’t shake them around — and try to get the bear’s attention without indicating that you’re scared or that you’re a threat to that bear.
• 👀👀👀 Keep your eye on the bear. But don’t look it in the eye. That can be perceived as threatening or like you’re trying to be dominant.
• 🤔 Observe its behavior and react accordingly. To learn more about this portion of my tips, check out No. 4 on my list.
• 🏔️ Carry bear spray. Bear spray is legal to carry in Angeles National Forest and generally on national forest land unless otherwise posted. It is prohibited in Yosemite National Park and other California national parks.

A black bear wanders along Canyon Road in March 2020 in Arcadia.

(Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)

Anyone who hikes in Angeles National Forest is likely familiar with Red Box Picnic Area. It’s where adventurers park to hike up to Strawberry Peak or other nearby trails, like the Gabrielino Trail, which I wrote about last week. That’s how I found myself briefly stranded in the forest.

I had spent the day hiking past gorgeous wildflowers and splashing around in the Arroyo Seco. I got back to my car around 7:30 p.m., discovered my car’s battery was dead and, after realizing I had cellphone reception, called for help.

As I waited, I chatted with a good Samaritan, an outdoors woman reading a book in her car who decided she’d wait with me until a service technician arrived.

The bear arrived in the lot around 8:30 p.m. As the sun dipped lower into the horizon, we watched the hungry fluffball knock over the brown metal trash can that was specifically designed to keep its species out.

A bear with its head inside a bear-proof trash can.

(Jaclyn Cosgrove / Los Angeles Times)

After knocking the trash can down, the bear easily shoved its arms inside. Over the next several minutes, it repeatedly shook the can toward its (adorable) face. It was kind of like watching a human shake a potato chip bag toward their mouth to get the very last bits of delicious fried starch.

My new friend and I agreed, in all our travels throughout California, we hadn’t seen anything like this. I contacted the California Department of Fish and Wildlife to ask them: How normal is it for a bear to deftly navigate the mechanisms of a trash can built to resist it?

“It’s pretty uncommon that the bears actually break in,” agency spokesman Cort Klopping said. “When I was talking to our biologist about it yesterday and a couple people in the office, the reactions were all kind of like, ‘Wow.’ Either somebody didn’t secure that thing or that bear was an absolute hulk of a bear to get into a bear-proof or bear-resistant trash can. … I was joking with the biologist that I think I’ve actually had trouble opening those.

“You were witness to what I would refer to as a pretty rare sight,” Klopping added.

I’d known there was a bear in the area when I started my hike earlier that day. At Switzer Picnic Area, I read signs posted around the picnic tables warning visitors, “Active Bear Area: Do not feed bears or leave food unattended.” The flier featured an image of a bear standing on a picnic table, eating through some family’s meal.

A sign posted at the Switzer Picnic Area in Angeles National Forest.

(Jaclyn Cosgrove / Los Angeles Times)

Angeles National Forest spokesperson Keila Vizcarra said in an email that since last August, forest officials have received at least four reports from the public and staff about two bears active in the Switzer area.

Earlier this month, recreation staff spotted two bears at the Switzer Picnic Area eating food left unattended at a picnic table. They notified state wildlife officials.

“The animals may be the same bears seen last year, but it is difficult to confirm because tag numbers are not always visible or provided; in this case, one of the bears did not appear to be tagged,” Vizcarra said.

Forest staff use various hazing methods to discourage bears and other wildlife from eating human food, like making loud noises, securing or repairing trash cans and educating visitors about how to keep their food safe from animals, she said.

“A major contributing factor continues to be unsecured or unattended food, which attracts bears from long distances,” Vizcarra said.

The bear at Red Box finished its trash-inspired tasting menu and then walked past our cars. We both honked, but it was so unfazed, I wondered aloud whether it was deaf. (It wasn’t.)

It then headed south from the parking lot, and we didn’t see it again. I had already planned to write this week’s newsletter about that experience.

Then I went backpacking as a little treat to myself.

On Friday afternoon, my dog, Maggie May, and I headed out from near Pasadena down the Gabrielino Trail with a plan to camp overnight at the Gould Mesa Trail Camp. Despite loving the outdoors, I’d never been backpacking, but after my parents bought me a tent and sleep pad for my birthday in late May, I was itching to go. Gould Mesa is close to a city. It’s next to the Arroyo Seco with water to filter and reachable by a short two-mile mostly flat hike. It felt like the perfect first trip.

About a mile in, a mountain biker warned us of a “big bear, really big bear” at the campground before he sped off. A female hiker told me the bear was average, probably 5 feet on its haunches. Others hadn’t seen it.

I was talking to another mountain biker, who was telling me the bear had been active in the area for about a month, when a man came racing down the trail, shouting about how the bear was aggressive and dangerous. The man said he’d lunged at the bear, trying to protect his food, and proceeded to make several choices that would likely be found on a “What not to do when you encounter a bear” list. Maggie and I continued onward.

We arrived at the campground around 4:30 p.m. and didn’t see anything. I asked a mother and son set up at the site next to mine about the bear, and they pointed to a large coast live oak where a small, young bear laid over a thick branch, its small feet dangling down, right above the trail. One reason hikers hadn’t seen the bear was that they’d walked right under it.

A young bear lies on the branch of a large coast live oak above the Gabrielino Trail near Pasadena.

(Jaclyn Cosgrove / Los Angeles Times)

The bear had entered the campground from near the river, and without the mother-son duo realizing that the bear was approaching them, it grabbed their food right off their picnic table. The mom told me that she considered trying to pull the food back, but the bear made noises suggesting that it preferred she didn’t. It then left the campground, and presumably after eating the meal that her son told me had “a lot of protein” in it, the bear climbed into the tree and took a nap.

I’d camped in areas with bears before, including in Kings Canyon National Park where bears came into the campground every night. This bear wasn’t being aggressive. Instead, it seemed young and like it was testing out how easy it was to get food from these weird animals — we humans — in its backyard.

I decided to stay, especially after the bear left around 7:30 p.m., and none of us saw it again. The campground was full, and two of us, myself included, had bear spray.

Maggie and I got into the tent around 9 p.m. and soon fell asleep to the sweet serenade of frogs and toads singing their nightly songs.

Then, at 2:39 a.m., I woke up to the sound of something slapping the corner of my tent next to my head.

“What the f—?” I screamed.

I lay there, heart racing, listening.

I had put my tent’s rain fly on, so I couldn’t see outside, but I could hear the bear as it left. A large whoosh-whoosh sound headed away from my tent.

For the next 20 minutes, I listened intently to every single sound the forest made. Then, after checking that my bear spray and satellite communicator were close by, I fell back asleep. In the morning, I found a small cut in my rain fly that the bear’s paw had left. My dad later suggested that I date the hole with a marker.

A small cut left after a bear swiped the rain fly of Wild writer Jaclyn Cosgrove’s backpacking tent.

(Jaclyn Cosgrove / Los Angeles Times)

Maggie and I left around 10:30 a.m. to beat the day’s heat. Once at my car and with strong cellphone reception, I must admit that I opened ChatGPT. I don’t have a bear biologist on speed dial — yet! — and I wanted to talk to someone about why the bear hit my tent.

I explained that there wasn’t any food or toiletries in my tent. I had packed everything inside a bear canister that I then placed inside the bear vault in the campground. The chatbot and I soon agreed: This bear was likely making its rounds for a late-night snack, hoping someone had dropped a marshmallow or hot dog, when it encountered my tent. Maybe my tent was in its way. Maybe it looked weird.

Later, I called Klopping with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife again.

When we’d spoke earlier in the week about the trash-can bear, I’d asked him whether that bruin was at risk of euthanasia.

I told him that Goldie, a mama bear euthanized by the state earlier this year after swiping at and injuring two people, was top of mind for me, along with Victor, a beloved bear in Mammoth who was euthanized in 2024.

Goldie was the first California black bear to be euthanized in 2026, Times staff writer Clara Harter reported. “There were two bears euthanized in 2025, three bears in 2024 and five  bears in 2023, according to Fish and Wildlife,” Harter wrote.

Klopping said the trash-can bear was just out for an easy meal and would be classified as a “no harm, no foul bear,” defined by the agency as “a bear that has strayed into an area where an incident could occur, has not engaged in nuisance activity or caused property damage, and may require assistance to return to nearby suitable habitat.”

He said it was unlikely, based on what I reported, that the bear would be moved since it was already in a forest far from any neighborhood. Instead, the only action would probably be that someone secure the bear-proof trash can so it actually functions properly. (Sorry, bear.)

“As much as I don’t want to say it, this bear is doing bear things,” Klopping said. “This is a natural thing for a bear to do. It’s searching out calories to sustain itself — they’re there, readily available. This bear knows how to get to them.”

When I called Klopping back to talk about the bear (or bears) at the campground, I was more worried. I reported the incident through the agency’s website because I know its biologists use the data for several reasons, including discerning when to implement bear-resistant measures in an area or relocate a bear. But again, I worried about what would happen to the bear or bears.

A black bear peeks its head around the vault toilets in the Red Box Picnic Area in Angeles National Forest.

(Jaclyn Cosgrove / Los Angeles Times)

Klopping had told me it was rare for the agency to euthanize a bear: California Department of Fish and Wildlife received 2,735 calls and reports regarding black bears in 2025, including some duplicates where multiple people were reporting the same incident, compared with the two bear euthanizations that same year.

During our second call, he told me that a biologist would review the report I made and might call me to get additional information, but again, this wasn’t “aggressive” behavior, he said.

When bear yearlings separate from their mothers at around 18 months old — which often happens in June — Klopping said the agency will get reports of these adolescent bears wandering closer to populated areas.

“You would use the term ‘testing boundaries’ — that may have been exactly what happened here,” he said. “Odds are pretty good you probably scared it just as much as it scared you.”

I hope the bears I encountered soon return to foraging for forest delicacies that don’t come in fast-food wrappers.

As interesting as last week was, I really hope the only bears I see the rest of the summer are at the pride festivals I attend. They’re absolutely welcome to go camping with me!

3 things to do

Cyclists ride down an open street at a previous CicLAvia event.

(CicLAvia Los Angeles)

1. Frolic through the streets in South L.A.
CicLAvia will host a free car-free open streets event from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Sunday through the Leimert and Exposition Park neighborhoods. The 3.6-mile pop-up park includes a short segment of Crenshaw Boulevard and mostly stretches along Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard from Crenshaw to Figueroa Street. Visitors are welcome to walk, skate, bike, play and explore along the route. For more details, visit ciclavia.org.

2. Celebrate Pride along the river in Long Beach
Friends of the L.A. River will co-host an LGBTQ Pride nature walk from 10 a.m. to noon Saturday through the Dominguez Gap Wetlands with the California Native Plant Society South Coast Chapter. Plant enthusiast Tory Jaimez will guide the walk, teaching participants about local ecology. Register at support.folar.org.

3. Listen to the birds in Huntington Beach
We Explore Earth, a local outdoors community group, will co-host with Save Orange Hills and Friends of Shipley Nature Center a peaceful bird walk from 8:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. Saturday at Shipley Nature Center in Huntington Beach. Guides will help participants learn about local bird species and ecosystems. Register at eventbrite.com.

The must-read

Perched atop a tall pine tree, resident bald eagles Jackie, left, and Shadow protect their latest offspring in their 5-foot-wide nest. The nest is viewable via a live feed from the nest cam.

(Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times)

Friends of Big Bear Valley, the nonprofit behind a popular eagle nest camera, is rushing to raise $10 million by July 31 to buy land that could become a lakeside gated community, leading to the destruction of crucial habitat that celebrity birds Jackie and Shadow use for foraging, along with other wildlife who call it home. Times staff writer Lila Seidman wrote that if the nonprofit can raise the money, then the San Bernardino Mountains Land Trust would conserve the roughly 63 acres and might transfer it to the U.S. Forest Service (a common practice of land conservancies). That’s if they meet the July deadline. “Failure is not an option,” said Jenny Voisard, media and website manager for Friends of Big Bear Valley. “We’re not going to let them build on it.”

Happy adventuring,

P.S.

After Goldie the bear was euthanized, lawmakers listened to the public’s demand for a more transparent process of when the California Department of Fish and Wildlife plans to kill a bear that the agency has deemed a threat to public safety. That includes Senate Bill 1135 by state Sen. Catherine Blakespear (D-Encinitas) that would “create the Wildlife Coexistence Program, which would provide public education, offer technical assistance and maintain a statewide incident reporting system. It would help communities deploy nonlethal devices to deter predators, like barriers or noise and light machines,” former Times staff writer Katie King wrote. The bill is set to have a hearing before the state Assembly’s Committee on Water, Parks and Wildlife on Tuesday at the state Capitol. Although the deadline to submit a letter to the committee has passed, residents can still attend the hearing, where they’re allowed to give their name, organization (if with one) and their position on the bill. You can still also contact your Assembly member or the committee.

For more insider tips on Southern California’s beaches, trails and parks, check out past editions of The Wild. And to view this newsletter in your browser, click here.

Reporting from Sacramento — Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom on Thursday announced he will place his ownership interest in the collection of wineries, hotels, restaurants and other investments that made him a millionaire into a blind trust, a step he said “goes beyond anything required by law.”

Since his election in November, Newsom has been weighing how to handle his array of assets in the hospitality business, collectively known as the PlumpJack Group, a multimillion-dollar business enterprise that grew from a wine shop he opened in San Francisco in 1992. Those holdings have the potential to create ethical conflicts between Newsom’s job as California’s chief executive and his business interests.

“Governor-elect Gavin Newsom is announcing today that he will be the first governor in the history of California to release his tax returns every year, just as he has done as a candidate,” Newsom’s spokesman Nathan Click said in a statement. “Newsom will also disclose his personal and business holdings each year on his statement of economic interest and separate himself from the PlumpJack Group wine and hospitality businesses that he has built.’’

Bob Stern, coauthor of California’s 1974 Political Reform Act that dictates the state’s conflict-of-interest laws, praised Newsom’s decision.

“That’s as much as anybody could ask him to do, except for selling all the properties, which I wouldn’t recommend him doing,” Stern said Thursday.

Stern added, however, that placing those assets in a blind trust does not remove the potential that Newsom could face a possible conflict of interest as governor. Under the law, Newsom is required to disclose all assets in the blind trust until those assets are sold, Stern said.

Newsom is in the process of transferring title to and control of the businesses into the blind trust, Click said. Newsom selected family friend Shyla Hendrickson, an attorney and certified public accountant with more than two decades of experience in the investment management business, as trustee, he said.

Under the terms of the blind trust, Hendrickson will have total authority over the assets, Click said, including the power to sell off Newsom’s business ownership without consulting him. She also is barred from discussing those decisions with Newsom.

Picking a family friend to serve as trustee is allowable under state law, Stern said, adding that the fact that Newsom’s sister, Hilary Newsom Callan, serves as president of the PlumpJack Group is “not a problem” under the law.

State law does not require Newsom to divest from PlumpJack Group or release the names of his business associates. And Newsom can legally sign bills or take executive action beneficial to his companies if those decisions affect all Californians or a significant segment of the population in the same way they affect him.

Newsom has yet to announce any details about the financial interests of his wife, documentary filmmaker Jennifer Siebel Newsom, whose foundation could also raise questions for the incoming governor.

Siebel Newsom’s foundation, the Representation Project, which helps fund her documentaries along with education programs and community outreach “to challenge limiting gender stereotypes and shift norms,” has in the past received financial support from Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and AT&T. PG&E and its foundation reported donating $100,000 to the Representation Project in 2017, $85,000 in 2016 and $10,000 in 2015, according to federal tax records and a list of PG&E’s charitable donations on the utility’s website.

As president of the foundation, Siebel Newsom received a salary of $150,000 in 2016, according to the most recent publicly available disclosures filed with the Internal Revenue Service. The foundation also reported paying Girls Club Entertainment, Siebel Newsom’s production company, $150,000 that same year. Newsom’s spokesman said the board of directors of the Representation Project is in the process of determining her future role with the foundation.

In 2018, PG&E also donated $58,400 to Gavin Newsom’s gubernatorial campaign and $150,000 to Citizens Supporting Gavin Newsom for Governor 2018, an independent expenditure committee that backed his candidacy.

Next year, the California Legislature is likely to consider a bill to provide financial relief for any utility whose equipment was involved in a wildfire in 2018. PG&E could face billions in potential liability costs for the deadly Camp fire near Chico, which killed at least 86 people and destroyed thousands of homes.

If approved by lawmakers, the bill would land on Newsom’s desk.

This isn’t the first time Newsom has had to address the intersection of his political and business lives. After he was elected mayor of San Francisco in 2003, Newsom sold his interests in the PlumpJack Group businesses in San Francisco to his longtime friend and business partner, oil heir Gordon Getty, for $1.7 million, according to a financial disclosure filed with the city. But Newsom held on to his investments outside the city limits, including in Napa Valley wineries and a hotel and gift shop at the Squaw Valley ski resort near Lake Tahoe.

“The mayor chose to take this unprecedented action because he feels it is in the best interest of San Francisco for its chief executive not to own businesses that operate in the city,” Newsom’s then-press secretary, Peter Ragone, told the San Francisco Chronicle in April 2004.

As governor, Newsom could face an array of potential ethical dilemmas as long as his assets in the PlumpJack Group remain in the trust.

For example, a corporation could conceivably try to curry favor with the new governor by renting out a bank of rooms at the PlumpJack Squaw Valley Inn or by throwing lavish parties at the Forgery bar in San Francisco, both among Newsom’s holdings. In those scenarios, the spending would likely not have to be disclosed.

Newsom has held campaign events at his restaurants and other businesses for years. His gubernatorial campaign spent more than $83,000 at his businesses from 2015 through election day, campaign finance records show.

In 2014, the California Democratic Party held a fundraiser at Newsom’s CADE Estate Winery in Napa Valley, paying the business $4,229. Just after Newsom was elected mayor of San Francisco in 2003, two Bay Area labor groups spent more than $1,000 at PlumpJack Wines, Newsom’s wine store.

Newsom has vowed to issue an executive order prohibiting state executive branch agencies from doing business with PlumpJack entities. He will also divest from all common stock that he owns in publicly traded companies. According to his latest financial disclosure, Newsom held stock in Intel Corp. and Merck & Co. worth $4,000 to $20,000 in total.

Napa Valley wineries have brought in hundreds of thousands of dollars in income for Newsom annually, according to financial disclosure records and business filings with the secretary of state’s office. Three wineries in the PlumpJack Group founded by Newsom and Getty generated nearly $800,000 in just one year for Newsom, according to his 2015 federal tax returns. Newsom and Getty — who are connected through Getty’s friendship with Newsom’s late father, who once managed Getty’s family trust — share multiple business interests.

Under state law, Newsom will not have to declare a conflict of interest when making a decision — whether to sign legislation or approve an administrative action — unless it “explicitly” affects one of his companies or investments, according to state Fair Political Practices Commission regulations.

For example, Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) is sponsoring a bill that would allow bars in San Francisco, Los Angeles and seven other cities to serve alcohol until 4 a.m. The legislation passed this year but was vetoed by Gov. Jerry Brown. If the bill passes again in the new legislative session, Newsom’s restaurants and bars would benefit financially if he signs it. But he still would be able to so without declaring a conflict of interest because the rules would apply to all restaurants and bars in those cities, not just his.

“He’s certainly allowed to sign bills dealing with wineries or dealing with restaurants,” Stern said.

In this 2004 photo, then-San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, left, Gordon Getty and then-Oakland Mayor Jerry Brown enjoy a pre-dinner glass of wine during an event at Newsom’s PlumpJack Winery in Oakville.

(Eric Risberg / Associated Press)

Although Newsom might be one of the wealthiest governors ever to serve in California, the issues posed by his assets aren’t new to the office, Stern said.

Former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger sold off stock and many other investments, placing the proceeds in a blind trust, although he had also disclosed investments outside the trust, including his Hollywood entertainment firm, Oak Productions.

While in office, Schwarzenegger was criticized for accepting a consulting job for a publisher of health and bodybuilding magazines — Muscle & Fitness and Flex — because a significant portion of the publications’ revenue came from advertising by makers of nutritional supplements. Schwarzenegger vetoed a bill that would have created a list of banned substances for interscholastic sports and barred supplement manufacturers from sponsoring school events.

Rob Stutzman, a GOP strategist and former communications director for Schwarzenegger, said it was difficult to wall off some of Schwarzenegger’s business interests because they were tied to the “personal brand” of the Hollywood action star and former champion bodybuilder.

The best option in those cases is asking full disclosure from public officials, he said.

“I don’t think [Schwarzenegger’s situation] is unique. I think it’s just a matter of scrutiny and watching it,” Stutzman said.

“In Newsom’s case, if he can’t sell PlumpJack or other things he owns, he’s not going to be blind,” said retired attorney Colleen McAndrews, a former member of the state Fair Political Practices Commission who advised Schwarzenegger on setting up a blind trust when be became governor.

Coverage of California politics »

Local government politicians are most affected by the state’s conflict-of-interest law because cities and counties approve regulations, permits, land use restrictions and other items that could affect a single business or part of town. It would be rare to see a conflict arise under state law for the governor, however, because most of the action taken by the state’s chief executive affects all Californians equally, McAndrews said.

“You don’t have to recuse if a decision affects the public the same way it affects you,” she said.

Rick Scott, the wealthiest governor in Florida history who in November was elected to the U.S. Senate, came under intense scrutiny after he placed his assets in a blind trust. Multiple Florida news outlets reported that Scott’s blind trust made identical investments in a separate, private account for his wife, raising questions about just how “blind” the governor was to the trust.

GateHouse newspapers reported this year that the couple’s financial holdings in the pharmaceutical company Gilead Sciences, which makes drugs to combat hepatitis C, had grown substantially. Florida’s Medicaid program has spent millions on those drugs, the report found.

Jamie Court, president of the nonprofit Consumer Watchdog, said that regardless of what the incoming governor decides to do regarding his assets, Newsom should provide full disclosure of all his financial interests.

“I think the governor has to be very open about his business relations, even beyond what the law calls for,” Court said. “If he hides anything, believe me, we will find out later and it won’t be good.”

Times staff writer Maloy Moore contributed to this report.

phil.willon@latimes.com

Twitter: @philwillon

As the destructive Bobcat fire sent plumes of smoke billowing from the Angeles National Forest in 2020, Ryan Huling recalled that at the time news reports claimed the blaze caused “no injuries” and that no homes had been destroyed.

That irked the Sierra Madre writer, who watched from his cabin as flames incinerated the home of bears, coyotes, pumas and squirrels. He believes countless critters were killed or maimed by flames, and points to accounts of mountain lions emerging with singed paws and bears scrambling into communities.

“Anonymity has done them no favors, in the sense that people don’t know where they live, they don’t know what landmarks are important to them, they don’t know what areas carry special significance to bears and other animals,” Huling said.

Yet through his research he discovered that rapidly advancing technology — including artificial intelligence, GPS tracking and crowdsourcing — is revealing more about animal “societies” than ever before. The revelation launched him on a worldwide tour of non-human communities, culminating in his debut book, “The Hidden Nations of Animals.”

The cover of Ryan Huling’s first book, published in June.

(Penguin Random House)

Published this month, the book’s first chapter takes readers to North America’s “beaver belt,” roughly 1,100 miles in northern Canada that are jam-packed with beaver dams. According to Huling, the sheer density of those dams only became apparent thanks to technology that allows researchers to analyze high-resolution satellite imagery and identify them from space. One analysis found 2,700 dams surrounding a town of only about 1,000 people.

Another stop took him to Zambia, where African mole-rats dig complex tunnel systems that include designated nurseries, pantries and bathrooms. Just before Huling arrived, a researcher had used radio trackers to determine that the subterranean animals operate on a biological clock that has them alternate between a few hours of activity and a few hours of napping — not a bad work schedule!

Some of Huling’s other adventures include exploring a tornado of Mexican free-tailed bats outside of San Antonio and red-crowned cranes that have found refuge in the Korean Demilitarized Zone.

But uncovering these hidden worlds isn’t just left to the experts anymore. While the expense or difficulty of tracking wild animals has resulted in knowledge voids in the past, crowdsourcing is helping to fill in the gaps.

Today, any smartphone-toting nature lover can snap a photo of a great horned owl or a ground squirrel and upload it to a citizen science app such as iNaturalist. Some platforms are specialized, for example Merlin for birds and Happywhale for marine mammals. All that data is a rich playground for scientists. According to an article published last year in BioScience, iNaturalist data in peer-reviewed research grew tenfold in the previous five years.

Now, AI is making it so humans don’t have to necessarily look at the raw material. Instead, AI can mine images, videos or sound clips for the appearance of an animal of interest — or even catalogue individual critters. Happywhale has an AI feature that identifies particular humpbacks by unique patterns and shapes on their tails.

Technology is advancing so fast that Huling said it was hard to stay current. In his prologue, he mentions a researcher showing him a prototype of a teeny solar-powered radio tag for monarch butterflies. By the time the book hit the shelves, the concept was already live — harnessed, in one instance, to study how the brilliant orange insects use overwintering groves along the California coast. Just this week on Instagram, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife highlighted a study in which rare bumblebees are tagged with minute QR codes that can be read by remote cameras.

After about a half-year of travel, Huling returned home with a heightened awareness of what he calls “inconspicuous abundance” — that the world is teeming with more life than meets the eye. He puts this new lens to the test by venturing to the storm-battered shores of San Miguel Island off the coast of Santa Barbara. Considered “uninhabited” in the traditional sense, he finds that the rarely visited corner of Channel Islands National Park is a haven for lumpy seals, glimmering fish and squawking seabirds. Sharks lurk beneath the waves.

“For them, as now for me, this distinctive island remains anything but deserted,” he writes.

On San Miguel Island, Huling saw and heard hundreds of sunbathing seals and sea lions.

(Oliver Uberti / Penguin Random House)

In other animal news

• Earlier this month, in Big Bear Lake, a memorial service was held for Sandy Steers, the late conservationist who was best known for turning two bald eagles into an international phenomenon by livestreaming their nest. It was a touching gathering, where Steers’ friends and colleagues got personal about a woman who they said was willing to go to the mat for her beloved raptors.

An illustration for “Hidden Nations” depicts author Huling at home, surrounded by the natural environment — including a black bear.

(Oliver Uberti / Penguin Random House)

• For decades, Steers battled a planned development near the nest of famed eagle couple Jackie and Shadow, and helped to negotiate an agreement in which a land trust could buy the site for $10 million. The nonprofit she led is now racing to raise the money by July 31 so it can be bought and conserved.
• In the desperately needed good-news department, endangered steelhead trout that scientists feared had perished in last year’s Palisades fire unexpectedly survived — and even had babies. It’s a big deal: they represent the last known population of steelhead in the Santa Monica Mountains.
• A civil grand jury has found that the L.A. Zoo needs new leadership, citing deterioration of its facilities and rapidly declining membership. In less than a year, membership dropped 23% and exhibits for lions, bears, sea lions and pelicans have closed because they need major renovations.
• Last summer, researchers made an astonishing discovery off the Sonoma County coast — 18 sunflower sea stars, a species decimated by disease and all but gone from California waters. SF Gate writes that the finding was only just announced, with scientists now racing to learn all they can about the survivors. As previously reported, the stars with up to 24 arms could hold the key to restoring the state’s ravaged kelp forests.

And news about the environment

This is the latest edition of Boiling Point, a newsletter about climate change and the environment in the American West. Sign up here to get it in your inbox. And listen to our Boiling Point podcast here.

For more wildlife and outdoors news, follow Lila Seidman at @lila_seidman on X and @lilaseidman.bsky.social on Bluesky.

The Space Shuttle Endeavour is approaching its final mission. But this time, it won’t be blasting into a different atmosphere.

The California Science Center on Wednesday announced its Samuel Oschin Air and Space Center will open to the public on Nov. 13. The $450-million, 200,000-square-foot addition will permanently house the Korean Air Aviation Gallery and the Kent Kresa Space Gallery. But its centerpiece will be the Samuel Oschin Shuttle Gallery, where the Space Shuttle Endeavour will be on permanent display in its vertical “ready-to-launch” position.

When it debuts, the gallery will be the only place in the world with a complete shuttle stack, including orbiter, solid rocket boosters and an external tank.

“I’ve been here a long time. We’ve done a lot of great stuff, but this just keeps getting better. Everybody on our team was so proud of it,” said Jeffrey Rudolph, the Science Center’s president and chief executive. “We are incredibly excited, and we actually think people are gonna come from all over the world to see this thing.”

The Samuel Oschin Air and Space Center will open to the public on Nov. 13. The $450-million, 200,000-square-foot space includes the Samuel Oschin Shuttle Gallery, where the Space Shuttle Endeavour will be on permanent display in launch position.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

The Air and Space Center opening will mark the completion of the master plan adapted by the Science Center in 1993. One of three surviving space shuttles, the Endeavour made 25 successful missions into space between 1992 and 2011. In 2012, the shuttle arrived at LAX atop a modified Boeing 747 before being taken on a procession through the streets of Los Angeles to reach Exposition Park. Construction on the Samuel Oschin Air and Space Center, a sleek, 20-story building designed by ZGF Architects, finished in April.

“This shuttle really represents everything that my husband loved,” said Lynda Oschin, the widow of Samuel Oschin. “He was very involved in relativity, exploration, inspiration, children, math, science.”

Dennis R. Jenkins, project director at the California Science Center, estimated that at the height of construction, the team averaged about 400 construction workers a day. For Jenkins, who spent 30 years of his career as a NASA contractor working on space shuttles, seeing the Endeavour in its vertical position is “particularly special.”

“I walk in there 50 times a day, and 50 times a day it takes my breath away,” Jenkins said. “Especially when we have the theatrical lights on instead of the work lights, it is just so stunning to me. I’ve been around space shuttles for exactly 50 years now, and it still takes my breath away.”

Retired astronaut Barbara Morgan, who flew aboard Endeavour in 2007, said the shuttle will inspire space enthusiasts.

“This takes me back! I am right there again, strapped in, excited to launch,” Morgan said in a statement. “But this is even better, because here now is Endeavour for our future generations. She will launch big dreams.”

Jeff Rudolph, president and CEO of the California Science Center, gets a close-up view of the aft section and main engines of the Space Shuttle Endeavour, displayed in a vertical, launch-ready configuration at the new Samuel Oschin Air and Space Center at the California Science Center.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

The gallery will open with a video of the shuttle’s history, produced by J.J. Abrams’ company, Bad Robot. The video ends with a simulated launch of the shuttle — complete with fog machines — before the walls retract, letting visitors take in the Endeavour in all its massive glory.

The Endeavour is visible from several angles. Visitors walking around the bend of the center’s second-floor gallery can peek inside the payload bay, which was used to transport cargo like satellites into space. Step downstairs, and viewers can walk underneath the shuttle’s massive engines. To catch a bird’s-eye perspective of the Endeavour, guests can take a glass elevator to the 20th story to look at the shuttle through a glass floor.

“You go up slowly, [the elevator] stops at different levels. You see inside where the payload is, and at every stop you see something else, and when you get to the top and you look down,” Oschin said, the view is just unbelievable. It’s breathtaking. I don’t know what other word I could use.”

Despite the grandeur of the Endeavour, the Science Center didn’t want to glorify it either. Rudolph explained that the tiles on the shuttle’s wings, which were part of its thermal protection system, show the damage on each launch. The shuttle reflects the physical toll space took on the vessel.

“This thing went 25 missions into space, and you can see,” Rudolph said. “When we first got [the Endeavour] at LAX and had it in the United hangar a couple of weeks before we moved it through the street, the United guy said, ‘Do you want us to paint it?’ and we said ‘No! We wouldn’t think of it.’”

Jeff Rudolph, president and CEO of the California Science Center, walks through a doorway toward the Space Shuttle Endeavour during a tour and preview of the new Samuel Oschin Air and Space Center at the California Science Center.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

The center’s goal is to present the shuttle as close to mission-ready as possible. Rudolph explained that the exhibit’s hardware, including its bolts and nuts, are unique and extremely specialized. Since the space shuttle program concluded in 2011, many of Endeavour’s missing pieces are no longer produced. Jenkins spent years sourcing pieces of equipment.

However, the largest artifact of the exhibit was the most challenging to source. ET-94 — the exhibit’s ginormous, bright orange external fuel tank— was particularly difficult to get a hold of because it shouldn’t still exist.

“External tanks were only used once. … We jettisoned them on the way to orbit, and it burned up in the atmosphere before it hit Earth,” Jenkins said.

Jenkins explained that the ET-94 was built for a future Columbia Space Shuttle mission, but after the Columbia was destroyed, the fuel tank was used for research. To complete the Endeavour’s full shuttle stack, Jenkins persuaded NASA to donate the $65 million to the Science Center.

The Endeavour will not be alone in the gallery. Plans are in the works for a variety of unique, ancillary creations including a 15-second slide that mimics the path of reentry as a space shuttle descends back into Earth’s atmosphere. Visitors will start inside a dark slide that gives way to an orange glow followed by a double sonic boom. The slide finishes with an S turn, which the Endeavour executed to burn energy.

For Rudolph, the effort represents a giant leap toward the Science Center’s goal of making space exciting for “the next generation of scientists, engineers and explorers.”

“I just can’t wait to stand there and watch people come in, and kids especially. There are going to be a lot of tears looking at this, that I can tell you, happy tears,” Oschin said. “It’s something for children. Children are our future and our hopes for the future. This is going to be very inspiring for them and extremely exciting for them to see.”

WASHINGTON — The House passed Congress’ most significant housing legislation in decades on Tuesday, sending the bill to President Trump’s desk — a bid by both parties to show midterm voters that they’re paying attention to affordability concerns ahead of November’s election.

The legislation, which the Senate passed Monday, aims to boost the housing supply through dozens of targeted provisions whose effects are expected to be seen over the next several years. In California, measures to unlock some federal block grant dollars for new housing in big cities could be particularly significant.

The bipartisan agreement over the legislation, after weeks of negotiation, marks a highly unusual collaboration in the divided Congress. It reflects growing public pressure on Washington to address economic issues at a time when Americans’ economic woes are deepening amid inflation, elevated gas prices and the ongoing effects of Trump’s tariffs.

The bill passed in the House with a 358-32 vote after it was approved by the Senate on Monday in an 85-5 vote. Those opposed in both chambers were Republicans. The Trump administration has signaled support for the bill, meaning it will probably become law.

“This legislation must serve as a foundation for continued action, not the final step in addressing our nation’s housing crisis,” Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles), one of the lawmakers who put together the deal, said on the House floor before the vote.

The bill aims to help housing supply by removing regulatory barriers to building affordable housing units, preventing large investors from buying up single-family homes and incentivizing new housing in cities with federal funding, among other measures.

The package focuses on addressing housing supply constraints and making federal programs easier to use, said David Gonzalez Rice, senior vice president of public policy at the National Low Income Housing Coalition. Though the legislation does not create major new funding streams, advocates see the bipartisan acknowledgment of the need for housing reforms as significant.

“It’s a big step in the right direction,” Gonzalez Rice said, “and there’s still a lot of work to do.”

Addressing cost-of-living issues has become high stakes for lawmakers engaged in midterm reelection campaigns, as Americans increasingly disapprove of Trump’s handling of the economy. Democrats are hoping to leverage affordability issues to gain control of at least one chamber of Congress, while Republicans are fighting to maintain their majorities.

It was politically crucial for members of both parties to be able to tell voters they had worked in good faith to address housing affordability, said David Garcia, deputy director of policy at UC Berkeley’s Terner Center for Housing Innovation.

“It would’ve been hard to justify to voters during their campaigns that their party did not do everything they could to advance the first meaningful legislation on housing policy in decades,” Garcia said.

The legislation was a product of intense bipartisan negotiations led by Waters and Rep. French Hill (R-Ark.), as well as Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Tim Scott (R-S.C.), after months of discussions in both parties about how to address housing.

“The work has been extraordinary between the majority and minority in this House, answering the call [for] solutions from the American people,” Hill said on the House floor.

Trump — who has largely dismissed the affordability issue, last week calling it “a fake word” — had indicated support for housing reforms.

In a March statement of policy, the administration indicated it “strongly supports” passage of the bill, saying it represented “significant advances in federal housing policy.” Trump also signed an executive order suggesting that regulatory barriers to home building should be removed, a concept reflected in the bill.

The nationwide affordability crisis has been driven for years by rising costs, a shortage of affordable housing, higher mortgage rates and other factors. Recent rising construction costs and labor shortages have exacerbated the issue, according to the National Assn. of Home Builders.

The number of new housing starts in May dropped by more than 15%, according to a report last week from the U.S. Census Bureau and Department of Housing and Urban Development.

California has added housing supply in recent years, but its shortage remains significant and prices high. The state has among the highest rates of households spending disproportionate amounts of their income on housing, according to the Public Policy Institute of California.

The momentum in Washington to respond to those pressures — which came as something of a surprise to advocates — can be viewed as a reflection of current public sentiment, Gonzalez Rice said.

“It speaks to the broader understanding of the public that housing is a policy problem, that government can do something about it and the expectation that government will do something about it,” he said. “It’s clear elected officials are hearing from their constituents.”

The bill includes nearly 50 provisions, including the prohibition on investor purchase of single-family homes, which is intended to help increase the housing supply for individual buyers. It also seeks to help cities convert abandoned buildings into new housing and help landlords and homeowners make home repairs.

Two measures are expected to be particularly significant for cities such as Los Angeles and San Francisco, Garcia said: One ties some federal funding under the Community Development Block Grant program to housing production to motivate cities with low housing supply and high costs to build more housing. The other allows block grant money to be used for affordable housing construction, opening a new revenue source for cities.

California’s big cities may be spurred to increase new housing in future years, Garcia said, and they also could benefit from the ability to direct the block grant funding to housing.

“Costs to build are so high,” he said, “that any new funding could be critical.”

Among other steps that could have swift results is a plan to preserve a rental assistance program for nearly 400,000 rural homeowners and a measure to streamline the leasing process for families using vouchers, Gonzalez Rice said.

The bill also exempts certain projects from a set of environmental regulations, a step aimed at speeding up the review and construction process. And it seeks to make it easier to build manufactured homes by removing a requirement that they be built on a chassis, which the Senate committee estimated would reduce the cost of each new unit by up to $10,000.

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom and Democratic leaders of the California Legislature plan to approve a proposed constitutional amendment this week that would ask voters to give them more flexibility over state spending and allow them to save money that could otherwise go back to taxpayers.

The proposal seeks to exempt deposits into state savings accounts from a spending limit that voters adopted through a series of ballot measures dating back to the late 1970s and to increase the share of tax revenue that can be put into the rainy day fund.

“Putting money aside to protect ourselves from future uncertainties isn’t just good government; it’s common sense,” Newsom said in a statement. “California is strong and resilient, but we’re not immune to economic headwinds. At a time when our essential services are under pressure, we have a responsibility to safeguard the programs and investments that Californians rely on.”

Assembly Constitutional Amendment 20, which Democrats are calling the “Save for California’s Future Act,” could receive push back from taxpayer advocates.

Under an existing state appropriations restraint, also known as the Gann limit, lawmakers cannot spend more than an amount determined by a formula that takes into consideration annual tax proceeds and changes to the population and cost of living. Tax revenue above the limit must be divided between schools and refunds to taxpayers.

With few exceptions, the limit applies to most appropriations of tax revenue, including money that lawmakers tuck away into the rainy day fund and other reserves. California voters have also capped the amount of money lawmakers can set aside in the rainy day fund to 10% of general fund proceeds in a given year.

Since taking office, Newsom has argued that it doesn’t make sense for savings to count as spending under state law.

State budget revenue is subject to dramatic swings from year to year based on stock market activity. The law, Newsom has said, prevents the state from saving more money in good years to stave off cuts to programs in bad years.

The proposed changes would exempt deposits into the rainy day fund and a short term reserve, called the “Projected Surplus Temporary Holding Account,” from the state appropriations limit. The cap on the rainy day fund would grow from 10% of general fund tax revenue to 20%.

“Californians live by a simple, bipartisan truth: set money aside when times are good so you’re ready when they’re not,” Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas (D-Hollister) said in a statement. “The Save For California’s Future Act is what responsible leadership looks like — and future taxpayers will thank us for it.”

The measure could incentivize Democrats to save more money because funds tucked away in the rainy day fund would no longer be considered expenditures counted toward the spending limit. By allowing lawmakers to set aside more money that is not subjected to state spending limits, it could also allow them to hold onto money that would be returned to taxpayers under current law.

The measure is slated for a vote Thursday. If approved by two-thirds of lawmakers, voters will consider the proposal on the November ballot.

Attorneys general in seventeen states are suing California over its landmark single-use plastic law, which went into effect on June 1.

The lawsuit comes after a coalition of environmental groups sued the state over the same law this month, arguing the new final regulations create loopholes so large they gut the law.

The states are led by Nebraska Atty. Gen. Mike Hilgers, and the plaintiffs include the National Assn. of Wholesaler-Distributors. The coalition is asking the court to block enforcement of the law immediately.

“Once again, California is trying to enact a policy that negatively impacts the rest of the country,” said Hilgers in a news release. “If California goes unchecked, consumers will be forced to pay more for basic necessities.”

The other states in the coalition are Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and West Virginia. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court of Eastern California in Sacramento on Monday.

State Senate Bill 54, the Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act, was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2022. It was considered landmark legislation because it requires plastic and packaging companies to use less single-use plastic and ensure by 2032 that all food packaging is either recyclable or compostable.

Accumulating plastic waste is overwhelming waterways and oceans, sickening marine life and threatening human health.

The intent was not only to reduce single=use plastic, but also to put the onus and cost of dealing with it on packaging producers and manufacturers, not consumers and local governments. It was supposed to incentivize companies to consider the fate of their products and spur innovation in material redesign.

Plastic bottles of dishwashing liquid at Compton’s Market in Sacramento on June 17, 2022.

(Rich Pedroncelli/AP)

According to one state analysis, 2.9 million tons of single-use plastic and 171.4 billion single-use plastic components were sold, offered for sale or distributed during 2023 in California.

The single-use plastic law is what is known as a producer responsibility law. It emphasizes the idea of a “circular economy” in which the producer of a material must consider its fate — making sure it can be reused or recycled, or at least reduced.

In California, all producers of single-use packaging and plastic foodware (plates, knives, spoons, etc.) join a private entity known as a producer responsibility organization. Only one such organization has been approved in California: the Circular Action Alliance.

The states and the National Assn. of Wholesaler-Distributors say the plastic law discriminates against businesses selling into the state in two ways: by making them change or alter their plastic packaging and by conferring government authority upon the alliance, enabling a private entity to regulate and impose taxes and fees on businesses selling into California.

“California is not entitled to pronounce nationwide policies,” Eric Hoplin, president and chief executive of the wholesalers group, said in a statement. “Because the Act extends California’s regulatory reach far beyond its borders and brings within its sweep conduct wholly unconnected to California, the Act violates principles of federalism, the horizontal separation of powers, and due process.”

In addition, the attorneys general say the law suppresses their free speech by compelling companies to join and fund the speech of an organization with which they may disagree.

Hoplin and his organization filed a similar suit in Oregon in February. Oregon has a comparable single-use plastic law. A federal judge blocked enforcement of that law. A trial begins on July 13.

Heidi Sanborn, executive director and CEO of the National Stewardship Action Council, which advocates for the producer responsibility laws and a more circular economy, said in May that both SB 54 and the Oregon law are public policies that were “passed by legislatures and implemented with government oversight.”

She said the laws create clear and consistent rules so all producers contribute fairly to the cost of recycling and waste management.

Meanwhile, environmental groups are also unhappy.

On June 2, Oceana, the Natural Resources Defense Council and Californians Against Waste Foundation filed a lawsuit in San Francisco Superior Court.

They allege that the final regulations for the law, drafted and approved by the state’s waste agency, include exclusions for large categories of plastic packaging that companies could use indefinitely. In addition, they say, the regulations also allow for recycling technologies that pollute, such as chemical recycling, which the law as originally drafted forbids.

“While SB 54 remains a monumental achievement as the nation’s strongest single-use plastic reduction law, some of the final regulations implementing the statute undermine the law’s ambitions,” Christy Leavitt, Oceana’s senior campaign director, said in a statement.

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by the Trump administration that sought to block what it called L.A.’s “illegal” sanctuary city law.

In a weekend ruling, U.S. District Judge Fernando M. Olguin granted the city’s motion to dismiss the complaint, which alleged that the city ordinance violates the intergovernmental immunity doctrine by regulating and discriminating against the federal government.

Olguin ruled that the government’s allegations were “insufficient to establish that the Ordinance violates the intergovernmental immunity doctrine,” but granted the administration permission to file an amended complaint by July 3.

“The Ordinance does not directly regulate the federal government,” Olguin said in his ruling. “Rather, it ‘controls the actions of [the City’s] own agents and agencies.’”

The White House and the Department of Justice did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Although the administration could refile its complaint, L.A.. City Atty. Hydee ‌Feldstein Soto celebrated the dismissal as a legal victory.

“This order reinforces the well-established principle that local governments have the authority to decide how to use their personnel and resources,” Feldstein Soto said in a statement.

The lawsuit, filed by the Trump administration in California’s Central District federal court last June, said the country is “facing a crisis of illegal immigration” and that its efforts to address it “are hindered by Sanctuary Cities such as the City of Los Angeles, which refuse to cooperate or share information, even when requested, with federal immigration authorities.”

The lawsuit came as immigration agents descended on Southern California, arresting thousands of immigrants and prompting protests across the region.

“The situation became so dire that the Federal Government deployed the California National Guard and United States Marines to quell the chaos,” the lawsuit states. “A direct confrontation with federal immigration authorities was the inevitable outcome of the Sanctuary City law.”

The law was proposed in early 2023, long before Trump’s election, but it was finalized in the wake of his victory in November 2024.

Under the ordinance, city employees and city property may not be used to “investigate, cite, arrest, hold, transfer or detain any person” for the purpose of immigration enforcement. An exception is made for law enforcement investigating serious offenses.

The ordinance bars city employees from seeking out information about an individual’s citizenship or immigration status unless it is needed to provide a city service. They also must treat data or information that can be used to trace a person’s citizenship or immigration status as confidential.

“The goal of this ordinance, and of LAPD’s immigration-related policies … is to encourage victims of and witnesses to crime to feel safe coming forward to seek help from LAPD regardless of their immigration status,” Feldstein Soto said in her statement. “It does not obstruct or impede lawful federal immigration enforcement operations.”

The government in its original filing said that Trump campaigned and won the 2024 presidential election on a platform of deporting “millions of illegal immigrants.” By enacting a sanctuary city ordinance, the City Council sought to “thwart the will of the American people regarding deportations,” the lawsuit states.

“The Supremacy Clause prohibits the City of Los Angeles and its officials from singling out the Federal Government for adverse treatment — as the challenged law and policies do — thereby discriminating against the Federal Government,” the lawsuit says.

Trump’s Department of Justice contends that L.A.’s sanctuary city ordinance goes much further than similar laws in other jurisdictions by “seeking to undermine the Federal Government’s immigration enforcement efforts.”

There are few things a Los Angeles local is less likely to do than take a Hollywood sightseeing tour on a big, garish bus. Only rush-hour traffic and $20 tacos inspire the same level of dread.

Yet nearly everyone aboard the open-air bus for a Tuesday night production of “California Gothic: A Bus Tour” was an L.A. resident. The show, which is produced by the aggressively hip New Theater Hollywood, recently wrapped its third “season” after debuting in February and returning for an April encore. Set on a moving bus, the 1.5-hour-long experience is part esoteric Tinseltown history lesson, part immersive theater. The narrative conjures meaning from the Los Angeles cityscape by fusing a hodgepodge of textbook theories about the sprawling metropolis onto the gritty reality of daily life.

“We originally organized this thinking there would be more people coming who aren’t from here,” said Oliver Misraje, the show’s writer and primary tour guide, as the bus pulled away from the curb at Santa Monica and Wilcox. “But this just goes to show how much people love the city and are from here, contrary to popular belief.”

In lieu of celebrity-hungry tourists, “California Gothic” has been packing its bus twice a night with rowdy young scenesters and in-the-know locals eager to absorb its heady mix of California history, public intellectualism and performance artistry.

While the show wrapped its latest run in mid-June, it will reopen its automated doors during the last week of October for a special “ghost tour” edition co-written by Misraje and New York it girl Ruby McCollister.

The bus arrives for New Theater Hollywood’s “California Gothic: A Bus Tour.”

My tour was far less steeped in irony than I feared. As the bus wound its way through the streets of Hollywood, starting at the New Theater’s doorstep before eventually circling the Hollywood Walk of Fame, Misraje led the audience through his take on the death of the “California dream” and the rotting carcasses of empty buildings and broken promises left in its wake. Along the way, we encountered a haunted-eyed Marilyn Monroe impersonator (Brooks Ginnan), a masked Hollywood legend known as the Duchess of Argyle (Shauna Frente) and a singing, swaggering “Rat Czar” with a lot to say about real estate developers (Loren Kramar).

Yes, it’s whimsical, and yes, it references Mike Davis’ “City of Quartz” more than any of the TMZ-type excursions it gently parodies, but it’s still, at its heart, a bus tour.

In a nod to classic Hollywood tour advertisements, the show’s winkingly all-caps poster declares, “You Will See: The Hollywood Sign, Marilyn Monroe, the Schizo City State.” There is also a stash of BuzzBallz ready-to-drink cocktails for trivia winners, but Misraje and his cast do not deliver their performances with smirks or smarm. They commit full-throatedly to playing out Misraje’s vision of a Hollywood haunted by the dreamers it’s wronged and the secrets it’s plastered over.

“Ultimately, we are trying to pay homage to the bus tour format, which is intrinsically ‘carny,’” Misraje said, likening himself to a carnival barker espousing aesthetic philosophy aboard an ever-changing “Ship of Theseus.”

Before the performers infiltrate the ship, “I’m trying to intentionally set up audience expectations to think they’re going to get this run-of-the-mill Hollywood death tour,” he explained. “I consider myself a kind of impish person, but still fundamentally sincere.”

1

2

3

1. Tour guide Oliver Misraje begins the show. 2. Rat Czar, portrayed by Loren Kramar, performs during the bus tour. 3. Guests board the bus.

Given the show’s monologue-heavy format and bevy of literary references, it’s no surprise that the concept began as an essay. Misraje, a 27-year-old writer and self-described “Hollywood hustler” raised primarily in the Inland Empire, was inspired after the 2025 Palisades and Eaton fires to stage a piece he had written bridging his love of Gothic literature with his “welfare class” upbringing in a family of seven raised by a single mother, which he considered gothic in its own right.

“We were in the Inland Empire and it was the 2008 financial crisis,” he said. “There was all this imagery of things famously California-coded, like the suburban house, the pool, the strip mall, and when we were there, it was just, like, destroyed. There were abandoned housing subdivisions rotting in the sun.”

The perfect setting, he explained, for the kind of “literature that emerges after the failure of a historical project.”

After reaching out to New Theater co-owner Calla Henkel and conceiving the project, Misraje and his producers elected to turn the funhouse mirror onto Hollywood, framing the neighborhood with historical context and Freudian theory but ultimately letting it speak for itself.

The bus passes the TCL Chinese Theatre.

The highly mutable nature of street life and the participatory character of the show means its tone can shift drastically from tour to tour, even within the same night. Sometimes, the streets appear glittering; other times, seedy and dangerous. Once, there was a showdown with another tour bus — one presumably not carrying theatergoers. At a different show, a drunk pedestrian tried to board the bus during faux-Monroe’s speech. One particularly harrowing night, someone circled the bus on an electric scooter, shouting homophobic slurs at the all-queer cast.

“It’s almost like surfing,” Misraje said. “There’s so much chaos you’re confronting, and you have to find a way to ride it and let it be a part of the show.”

The show’s high production costs make bringing in a profit difficult, but Misraje said he and the New Theater Hollywood team plan to revive it periodically, with an evolving story and cast of characters.

On my tour, no performer better represented the blurred line between theater and street life than the Duchess of Argyle, a.k.a. the Mysterious Masked Lady of Hollywoodland, a.k.a. Shauna Frente, a busty Blanche DuBois figure in an eyeless flapper mask and gartered stockings. Just three days before, she had been evicted from a home on Argyle Avenue that once allegedly belonged to Cecil B. DeMille. This happened after a lengthy legal battle, during which the show helped raise money for temporary housing.

As the Duchess spilled neighborhood secrets, our bus repeatedly passed an Extra Space Storage facility painted with images of old Hollywood behemoths: Lucille Ball, Groucho Marx and the like. The intermingling smells of sizzling hot dogs, urine and marijuana wafted through the open windows.

Hollywood may be ghostly, the Duchess told us, but it was hers to haunt.

Duchess of Argyle (Shauna Frente) tells Hollywood stories during the tour.

(Carlin Stiehl / For The Times)

The U.S. Department of Justice — make that the U.S. Department of “Justice” — is sniffing around Gavin Newsom and his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom.

This is widely seen as a throw-me-in-the-briar-patch gift from President Trump, coming as California’s governor edges ever closer toward a 2028 run for the White House. The presumed effort to cut down a political foe could instead boost Newsom’s chances of winning the Democratic nomination, or so it’s being suggested.

After all, look at how Trump’s verbal bludgeoning elevated former Rep. Adam Schiff. The House has typically been a dead end for lawmakers seeking statewide office in California. Today, the former Burbank congressman and Trump tormentor is a United States senator.

In truth, however, it’s far too early to say how the investigation of Newsom and his wife plays out politically, not least because it’s unclear whether there’s merit to the probe or if it’s merely a fruitless search-and-destroy mission by Trump’s Department of Retribution, Vengeance and Settling Old Scores

Beyond that, the first ballots of the 2028 campaign won’t be cast for roughly a year and a half. The Democratic National Convention, where the party will install its nominee, doesn’t begin for another 778 days.

Your friendly political columnist won’t resort to that hoariest of cliches about such-and-such duration being a lifetime in politics. But for some perspective, let’s go back 778 days.

President Joe Biden was running for reelection and about to challenge Trump to a pair of early debates. Trump was sequestered in a New York City courtroom being prosecuted on 34 felony counts.

A lot happened in the weeks and months that followed, including Biden’s self-immolation on the debate stage and Trump’s criminal conviction. A lot more will happen in the weeks and months to come. There’s no telling what. But it’s safe to say the fight for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination will not be decided by anything that’s taken place in June 2026.

Still, Newsom is once again sunning himself in the national spotlight and for that he has Trump to thank.

With his exquisitely tuned political antennae, the governor jumped out front of the president by announcing last week the feds were targeting him and his wife. (Naturally, Newsom’s revelation was accompanied by a rage-bait email — subject line: “Because I am thinking of running for president” — that denounced the “political witch hunt” and asked for money.)

“After calling for my arrest last year, Donald Trump directed his Department of Justice to investigate me,” Newsom said in a 4 ½-minute, direct-to-camera video that framed the investigation before prosecutors had the chance. “And just in the last week, I’ve learned his campaign has reached my own home: To get me, he’s coming after my wife, Jen.”

• Share via Close extra sharing options

Newsom and his wife both adamantly denied any wrongdoing and, of course, they must be presumed innocent until and unless proven otherwise.

But there was something a bit disingenuous about the governor’s chivalrous defense. Siebel Newsom, a documentary filmmaker who calls herself California’s “First Partner,” is no mere housewife baking cookies and holding teas, in the famous words of Hillary Rodham Clinton. (Hold the outrage, folks, this is not some retrograde criticism of career-seeking women.)

Among her many public-facing activities, Siebel Newsom heads The Representation Project, a nonprofit focused on challenging gender stereotypes. The organization has faced criticism for accepting donations from companies that lobby the governor, so it’s not unreasonable to ask whether those interests have improperly sought to influence Newsom by giving money to Siebel Newsom’s causes.

My Times colleagues reported that an investigation related to Siebel Newsom has been underway for about a year and was launched by federal prosecutors in Sacramento based on whistle-blower information provided in California. It was not, their source said, the result of a directive out of Washington.

A second probe, they reported, is related to Newsom’s ex-chief of staff, Dana Williamson, who pleaded guilty last month to bank and wire fraud involving a scheme to steal campaign funds from Xavier Becerra, the Democratic candidate for governor.

The problem with all this federal sleuthing is the utter lack of credibility attached to Trump’s Justice Department. Which is what happens when you turn the department into an arm of Trump’s malevolent fiefdom and deploy its prosecutors as henchmen targeting the president’s perceived enemies.

“This is a huge problem,” Randall Eliason, former chief of the Public Corruption Section of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington, told Politico. “In any political corruption prosecution, the defense almost always claims it is a ‘political witch hunt,’ that prosecutors are targeting him or her for some political reason.

“The best defense to that has always been [the Justice Department’s] tradition of independence from politics and long track record of pursuing corruption cases based only on the facts and law, without regard to political considerations,” Eliason said. “The Trump administration has abandoned that independence without even trying to hide it.”

The probe of Newsom and his wife presents more questions than answers.

It’s grody, but not criminal on its face, for lobbyists to curry favor with the governor by throwing cash at his wife’s endeavors — if, in fact, that’s been the case. Special interests spending money to gain access and influence is about as common in Sacramento and other capitals as statues, domed buildings and manicured lawns.

So why then are the feds investigating Newsom? Why now? Is there any fire, or is it all a lot of smoke?

Perhaps most important, where can you turn to get an impartial answer?

A new commission made up of legislators, public defenders, academics and advocates seeks to push California — one of just two states that don’t pay for basic public defense — to begin providing resources and enforcing minimum standards for county public defender systems.

The California Independent Commission on Public Defense includes three assemblymembers and two senators — among them Jesse Arreguín and Nick Schultz, chairs of the Senate and Assembly Public Safety Committees — as well as chief public defenders from several counties, retired judges, the directors of criminal justice nonprofits, and the heads of organizations representing thousands of defense attorneys in the state.

“We have discussed the problem of our public defense system for years,” said Schultz, a Democrat from Burbank and former prosecutor who has sponsored legislation to improve public defense.

The goal is to “move past discussion and study, and come up with an actionable road map of what we need to do to really build out the robust public defense infrastructure that Californians are rightfully entitled to,” he said.

The commissioners plan to develop a five-year plan to phase in state funding, along with enforceable standards like caseload limits and access to defense investigators.

A CalMatters investigation last year found that criminal defendants across the state are routinely convicted without anyone investigating the charges against them, significantly increasing the likelihood of wrongful convictions. Many California counties do not employ a single defense investigator who can interview witnesses, review police reports, visit crime scenes and retrieve video surveillance footage. CalMatters also found that lawyers in some rural counties are handling caseloads that far exceed even the most permissive standards, making them less likely than other defense attorneys to challenge the prosecution’s evidence in legal motions and take their cases to trial.

But the state has resisted stepping in. After a proposed bill that would have created an official state commission to address the issue was abandoned, two advocacy groups, the Wren Collective and UC Berkeley’s Criminal Law and Justice Center, decided to form an independent commission and began assembling participants who could develop and act on reforms. These types of commissions, which have facilitated significant improvements in other states’ public defender systems, are usually established by the governor.

“It became clear that this was an issue that was not a high priority for Sacramento, especially during a budget crisis,” said Chesa Boudin, the Berkeley center’s founding director and a former San Francisco district attorney. It also became clear, Boudin said, that “there was a tremendous gap between what experts understood to be the crisis and the public perception of California government as a kind of progressive leader in the country.”

In the decades since the U.S. Supreme Court established the right to an attorney in state court criminal proceedings, California has saddled its counties with the responsibility of providing lawyers to poor people accused of crimes. Many of those counties have opted for the cheapest path: paying private lawyers and firms a flat fee to represent indigent defendants, regardless of how many cases they handle or how much time they spend on each case.

“You’ve got some offices that have an incredibly high caliber of representation that they can provide, and you have other offices that are doing these flat-fee contracts where the quality has been documented to be pretty bad,” said Eve Brensike Primus, a law professor at the University of Michigan.

Primus is the only member of the new commission from outside of California. She was asked to join because of her extensive research and writing about the structure of indigent defense.

An indigent defense commission in Michigan, which was formed by the legislature in 2013, has led to significant reforms and a substantial influx in state funding.

The California commission’s work, Primus said, can serve “as a catalyst for political actors to do the right thing and start to fund and improve indigent defense delivery, or as fodder for lawsuits that then can try to get the judiciary to push the political actors to do what is necessary to provide for effective representation.”

The commission is scheduled to hold its first in-person meeting, which will be open to the public, in Berkeley in October, with additional meetings planned for Los Angeles, the Central Valley and Northern California over the next 12 months. Commissioners say they will work in subcommittees in between these quarterly sessions to develop a concrete fiscal plan for the state, draft legislative language, and establish minimum standards for how counties should structure their public defender offices, compensate their attorneys, provide access to experts, and report on their work.

Anat Rubin writes for CalMatters.

They are the warrior class of politics. The consultants, the Bob Shrums and Paul Maslins and Roger Stones and Roger Aileses and Ray Strothers and the others–Washington masters in the dark arts of campaigns, mercenaries holding sway over our dreams and our dreads. Only a few outsiders recognize them by name. Mostly they are known, in the romanticized jargon of their trade, as simply the hired guns of democracy–gloried, feared and hated.

And they are on their way to do battle in California.

For better or worse.

Drawn by tales of incredible riches to be made, of trendy and prolific initiative campaigns, and also drawn by the looming possibility that California will become the presidential “Super Tuesday” of 1992, a gold rush of political consulting is under way. It is a westward-ho migration of professional campaign talent without precedent.

Looking to Expand

Some of the biggest names in the business have moved their homes here from Washington. Others are opening Western offices or looking to expand. Still others are scouting for opportunity. Some are willing to work on the cheap just to get a toehold.

And with this new wave of national consultants comes renewed debate and alarm over familiar concerns.

Are consultants growing too numerous and expensive? Do they swallow up so much of the campaign budget that they weaken the candidate or the cause that they were hired to promote? Is there enough work in the elections of 1990 and 1992 in California, or will consultants have to bird-dog more candidates and ballot initiatives to pay the bills? And the most stubborn riddle of all: To what extent are consultants at the root of the negative, cynical, blow-with-the-wind, overly technological campaign politics of today?

Low Voter Turnout

More than just questions, these are expressions of simmering frustration. Around the world democracy is grabbing big, inky headlines–in China, in Russia, in Poland. But domestically, the news is of record-low voter turnouts and declining voter registration. And anyone close to the process is a target for blame. Consultants, because of their win-at-any-cost bravado, are easy to locate in the cross-hairs.

“Don’t come!” snaps Pat Caddell by way of advice to his former colleagues in the consulting business. “Stay home!”

In the course of a career as pollster and strategist in five Democratic presidential campaigns, Caddell has been everything from the creative boy genius of politics to its temperamental Darth Vader. As much as anyone, he is responsible for the flamboyant gunslinger mystique of the celebrity consultant: the man and woman who can mix polling and advertising and sheer cunning into electoral victory, never mind the attributes of the candidate.

Now living in Los Angeles, Caddell has angrily turned his back on the business, forswearing politics-for-profit. He is now one of the most colorful and energetic critics of Washington political consultants.

“These people are not coming out here for the good of California,” Caddell growls.

“Sometimes politics is a clash of ideology and ideas. But that’s not what this is about. This is about coming out here and making money. And if the consulting corps does for California what it’s done to the nation’s politics, it will be an unmitigated disaster. . . .

“What voters here are going to get is going to horrify them. Campaigns in California aren’t particularly edifying anyway. And they’re going to get worse–the kind of smear, mud and sleaze that we’ve already seen is nothing compared to what’s coming.”

Caddell represents the most astringent view, to be sure.

But most everyone in the political community has something to say, or fret about, as he beholds the invasion of the consultants:

* Bob Shrum (speech writer for Edward M. Kennedy, and media consultant for Richard Gephardt for President, Alan Cranston reelection, Leo T. McCarthy for Senate, John K. Van de Kamp for governor) moves from Georgetown, where he is one of the most storied names in the Washington business, to Los Feliz.

* Paul Maslin (baby-boomer pollster for Gary Hart for President, Paul Simon for President, Michael S. Dukakis for President, Cranston, McCarthy, Van de Kamp) likewise moves from Washington to Venice, Calif.

* Roger Stone (George Bush political lieutenant) signs up at a nominal fee to assist GOP state treasurer candidate Angela Bay Buchanan.

* Roger Ailes (Bush national television advertising, George Deukmejian reelection) is courted by GOP Treasurer Thomas W. Hayes. One political pro believes that Ailes, probably the most celebrated Republican consultant in the nation right now, will be asked to handle up to six campaigns in California before 1990 is over.

* Ray Strother (who has moved from a specialist in Southern campaigns to be a national figure in Democratic politics) is opening a Beverly Hills office. Strother is willing to work at “negotiable,” reduced rates as he tries to work his way into the state’s political network. Sergio Bendixen (Bruce Babbitt for President) is spending an increasing share of his time in California and is actively looking for work. John Russonello (Babbitt, Cranston) is anxious for work here.

* A broad assortment of other, perhaps lesser-known consultants are joining in the gold rush. Philadelphia’s Campaign Group, headed by Doc Sweitzer (Al Gore for President), has opened a San Diego office under Bill Wachob. Pollsters Mark Mellman and Ed Lazarus of Washington (Gore and Ohio Sen. Howard M. Metzenbaum and former California gubernatorial contender state Sen. John Garamendi) are actively shopping for work here. Pollster Alex Evans (former Caddell associate) has moved from Washington to San Francisco. Celinda Lake of Greenberg-Lake pollsters in Washington (Dukakis campaign in California and Texas) is working for state treasurer candidate Kathleen Brown and pushing for a statewide initiative on children’s issues. And so on.

“The only thing that surprises me is that it has taken this long for the migration to take place,” Los Angeles lawyer and political adviser Darry Sragow said.

“And if there is a silver lining, it’s that with all the national talent and attention, California is bound to benefit as an originator of political ideas and trends, much as it is now viewed in the consumer arena as where trends start.”

Two men are most responsible for the migration.

One is a home-grown product, Clinton Reilly of San Francisco.

Prop. 103 Battle

Reilly (now managing Democrat Dianne Feinstein for governor) was the full-service consultant–strategy, polling, advertising, the works–for insurance companies in their $63.8-million California ballot initiative campaign of last year.

Reilly lost. The initiative backed by his insurers was defeated, and the rival Ralph Nader-backed rate-rollback Proposition 103 passed. But as the most expensive single-state campaign in U.S. history, jaws of consultants everywhere went agape.

It is assumed that Reilly set a record for consulting fees. Estimates of his earnings range from $6 million to $9 million, and occasionally higher.

“You put those kind of millions around anything that people vote on and consultants will swarm all over it. They’ll flatten the Rockies to get out there,” said James Carville, a Washington-based strategist who is not working here, at least not yet.

Reilly will not discuss specifics about his earnings. But he calls the estimates inflated, and says it is unfair to publish guesses of fees without considering his full-time staff of 20 to 25 who must be paid in off-years the same as in the heat of battle.

Still, Reilly’s campaign stands as an important milepost in the brief history of professional politics, starting back in those days when campaign work came mostly from the heart. Those were the days when the individual made the choice–if he wanted to make money, he went elsewhere; if he believed in something or someone, he threw himself into politics.

Career Option

Now, consulting is a career option just the same as accounting or law. Wholly self-made, Reilly at age 42 bears the fruits of such labors with ownership of his own three-story office building in downtown San Francisco, a showcase home in tony Sea Cliff, a luxury car, fine suits and a cultivated palate.

“I am rich. I have made money. Sometimes when I look at my assets they surprise me. And other times, like (when being interviewed) now, they embarrass me. But I tell you, my motive has never been just money. I am more interested in the professionalization of this business.

“I wanted people to get a fair fee rather than what I saw. Which was a politician waiting until the last minute, hiring you and asking how little could he pay you. Then, expect you to work crazy hours, seven days a week. And then fire you the day the election is over.”

But Reilly is also among a growing number of consultants with a twinge of doubt about how they have altered American politics.

“All this increasing emphasis on political money seems to have been detrimental to the public interest, where interest groups who have the money to give have created a paralysis in the system,” Reilly says. “It’s a byproduct of this professionalism that I didn’t anticipate.”

Gilded Reputation

The second person who has stimulated the migration of fellow national consultants to California is Bob Shrum.

Former speech writer to Sen. Edward M. (Ted) Kennedy (D-Mass.), Shrum and his partner, strategy guru David Doak, built their gilded reputation on the strength of the campaign they designed for Cranston’s uphill reelection to the Senate from California in 1986.

Since then, they have become one of the dominant forces in California Democratic politics, producing the advertising and strategy for Lt. Gov. McCarthy’s 1988 run for the Senate, Atty. Gen. Van de Kamp’s 1990 gubernatorial campaign, and for Occidental Petroleum’s Los Angeles ballot proposition campaign in 1988 to drill for oil in Pacific Palisades. They also were on retainer for Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley in his easy reelection this year.

As he spent more and more time on business in California, the unexpected happened.

“I fell in love and got married, that’s why I moved here,” he said. His wife is Times society columnist MaryLouise Oates, now on leave writing a book.

Cupid aside, Shrum proved a pathfinder among the national consulting corps. Not only is it possible for a Washington consultant to be successful, and quickly, in California, Shrum showed that a California homestead does not necessarily reduce one’s clout in the Capitol. And he showed that an Easterner can survive here without changing habits. Shrum refuses to learn to drive.

Target of Criticism

Because of his high profile and his strong, lingering connection to the Kennedy wing of the Democratic Party, Shrum gets more than his share of criticism for work on behalf of non-Kennedyesque clients. In particular, he is criticized in some liberal circles for his campaign on behalf of Occidental’s proposal to drill in Pacific Palisades, which was venomously opposed by environmentalists.

In truth, though, political professionals long ago ceased being driven solely by their devotion to a cause. Increasingly like lawyers, they are willing to sell their skills to a greater range of clients even though they remain sensitive to the charge they are selling out.

“There are certain basic guidelines,” explains Shrum about his approach to the business. “No Republican campaigns. No campaigns for someone I disagree with on a fundamental issue. . . . Occidental was not a litmus test.”

In the face of this westward migration of consultants, California’s home-grown corps of political professionals is sounding a game note.

“Bring ‘em on!” says Richie Ross, a combative strategist who earned his stripes in Democratic legislative races and San Francisco municipal elections. He is now state manager of Van de Kamp’s 1990 Democratic gubernatorial effort.

He’s Not Impressed

“They’re the guys who swagger around doing stuff we’ve done 10 years ago. Now we get a chance to beat them. I’ve seen their stuff. They don’t know anything about direct mail or targeting. Their TV (advertising) is pedestrian. And none of their strategic thinking knocks me away,” Ross said.

“The field of national politics is rotating west. Now we get an opportunity for visibility. I want people to say, ‘Hmmm, who is this guy who beat Atwater.’ ” (In this case, Atwater being Republican National Chairman and former Bush campaign manager Lee Atwater.)

Many in the consulting community agree that Californians are ahead of the nation in the sophistication of computerized direct mail. In its simplest form, it is nothing more than identifying a narrow community of interest–say, Greek-American voters. Then, these voters are sent special appeals pointing out that one’s candidate is endorsed by some Greek religious leader or that one’s opponent once cast a vote supporting Turkey, Greece’s adversary.

One reason why California consultants are unruffled by the added competition here is that they are moving direct mail and other technologies eastward just as rapidly and eagerly as Washington consultants are galloping west.

One firm, Winner/Wagner/Mandabach Associates, is a California company that drifted away from direct lobbying and campaign consulting here. But it has become heavily involved in ballot proposition campaigns in other states.

Where It’s At

“The things you learn in California you can take elsewhere. . . . It’s not like California was first with the initiative. But there is no question this is the ground where the technology has been developed,” says the company’s Scott Fitz-Randolph.

Still, for the money and thrills, California’s biannual orgy of ballot initiatives is tops in the consulting world, both for the home-staters and the newcomers. Here is a chance to get rich and do battle over driving issues of the day–insurance, political reform, transportation–all without distraction of a candidate.

So refined have initiatives become, they are promoted in classic congressional “pork barrel” fashion. The cases in point are a 1988 park bond and a proposed 1990 rail bond issue sponsored by the environmentalist Planning and Conservation League. In both instances, sponsors of the huge bond issues solicited campaign funds and political support from those who would benefit from the measures.

GOP consultant Dick Dresner, who has been spreading himself between San Diego and New York for seven years, says some national consultants are in for a surprise.

“You may think this a vast, open place. But you’ll be disappointed. You’ll find that whatever you do, there is somebody just as good already doing it here,” Dresner says.

Instant Credibility

On the other hand, there is an undeniable Washington cachet about these big-name consultants.

Candidates seek them out. Just by hiring one, a candidate can gain credibility with the press. If the press takes one seriously, so do campaign contributors. And, quickly, they are on their way.

“That’s what we’re selling,” says consultant Strother.

Pat Caddell believes the cozy relationship between the political press and consultants has subtly shielded the consulting business from the probing scrutiny given politicians, lawyers and other groups that wield substantial influence in society.

“Nobody questions the money, nobody questions the win-loss records, or what they will do to win. Nobody questions anything,” he grumps.

Aside from money, power is a sure draw on consultants. And there is an emerging view that the West, no longer the South, will be the site of the decisive presidential power play in upcoming elections. The political arithmetic of 1988 seems unchanged for 1992 and beyond: A Democrat will have tremendous trouble reaching the White House without California.

That is in the general election. In the primaries, California political leaders of both parties seem determined to move up the June primary, and some consultants figure an early vote here will become the “Super Tuesday” of 1992.

Taking Inventory

Given that, many consultants are taking inventory of their knowledge and contacts here. And they are worried. Looking back on 1988, there is considerable evidence that national consultants of both parties were weak in their understanding of the state.

Both Republican Bush and Democrat Dukakis often seemed slightly uncertain where to go or what to say. Dukakis finally showed how little his campaign understood the state when he decided to make his famous I-am-a-liberal-and-proud-of-it statement in the San Joaquin Valley, an act of geographic silliness not unlike a candidate going to San Diego and announcing his plan to mothball the Navy.

“National consultants know there is a need to get out here and become familiar with California if they’re really going to be effective,” says Kam Kuwata, a Santa Monica consultant of rising stature.

There is something else drawing consultants out of Washington. Call it the need for fresh perspective.

“I felt that to stay clearheaded, I needed to get out of Washington,” says pollster Maslin. “Money? Sure, that’s a factor. And it’s a growing part of the national dynamic. But I needed a chance to recharge outside of Washington.

“After 11 years in the cockpit of national politics, if you will, I needed to get my feet back on some ground. Even if that ground is the San Andreas Fault.”

Just days after the Trump administration completed millions of dollars in renovations on the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool to make it American flag-blue, residents and online users noted it had turned a phosphorescent green.

Here’s why:

The calm, still waters of the Reflecting Pool make it an ideal nursery for algae growth. Algae need nitrogen and phosphorus to grow, and the Reflecting Pool is primarily fed by the Potomac River, which gets heavy doses of those nutrients from nearby urban and agricultural lands.

The Potomac also absorbed one of the largest sewage spills in U.S. history earlier this year when a pipe burst five miles upstream of Washington, although that event probably happened too long ago to contribute to the algal bloom today.

Untreated sewage is high in nitrogen and phosphorus. When nutrient levels are high, feasting algae can quickly reproduce.

The Department of the Interior said when the algae first appeared that it was “residual,” from the supply lines to the pool.

Experts also speculate that the darker blue color may be helping the Reflecting Pool absorb more heat. The higher temperatures promote algae growth by allowing their metabolisms to shift into overdrive.

Summer temperatures in D.C. aren’t helping. This week, temperatures are as high as 95 degrees in the city, prompting a heat alert.

The combination probably explains the excessive growth, turning the water surface an opaque green and preventing onlookers from seeing the new blue hue of the concrete basin.

Algae are important and beneficial organisms when the ecosystem is in balance. They’re the base of the aquatic food chain, fed on by herbivores of all shapes and sizes, including shrimp and juvenile fish, which in turn feed organisms higher up the food chain. The single-celled organisms use the power of the sun to produce energy through photosynthesis, similar to houseplants on your balcony.

In an effort combat the algae in the Reflecting Pool, employees of the National Park Service were seen pouring in gallons of hydrogen peroxide, a chemical commonly used in pool maintenance.

The Department of the Interior also is employing a “high-tech nanobubble ozone technology” to destroy the cells of the algae.

Ozone — yes, the same irritant that is in smog — is a gas composed of three oxygen molecules, and the small size of the bubbles allow the most gas transfer into the water, where it can damage algal cells, similar to how it irritates our lungs.

This only treats the symptoms, however. Generally, ozone nanobubbling is effective as a temporary solution for algae blooms. Longer-term fixes would have to address what makes the Reflecting Pool so ideal for algae, such as its depth, darker color and inflow of nitrogen and phosphorus.

In California, ozone nanobubbles also have been used in a project to improve water quality in the Tijuana River. The 120-mile river that runs near the border in northern Mexico and Southern California was the site of a pilot study in 2025. The U.S. section of the International Boundary and Water Commission reported that the nanobubbling reduced “odors and bacteria,” but the project concluded prematurely after a flood swept some of the instrumentation into the river.

I was only about 30 minutes from my home, but there I was in the solitude of the San Gabriel Mountains without another soul on the trail.

Dozens of butterflies, likely variable checkerspots with hints of yellow and red on their wings, fluttered all around. A territorial hummingbird repeatedly buzzed past my head, resembling the sound of either the world’s largest bumblebee or a tiny angry drone zipping past my face. Western whiptails flitted across the trail and onto rocks. A cacophony of birdsong and calls filled my ears, including, per my birding app, spotted towhee, Western wood-pewee, wrentit, bushtit and a purple finch I looked long and hard to try to identify in the treetops. Later, a gray squirrel expressed its displeasure at an interloper disrupting its peace.

These are special and common experiences that I frequently find hiking along the Gabrielino Trail, a 28(ish)-mile route through the San Gabriel Mountains that runs from Chantry Flat north of Arcadia to a lush riparian area along the Arroyo Seco east of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Lab near Pasadena. Although it offers hikers an epic close-to-home backpacking experience, you do not need to complete the entire trail to enjoy it.

Because of its length and proximity to other trails, it is replete with epic day-hike opportunities and, because of that, it’s a great place to spend the summer solstice, both the mark of the beginning of summer and the longest day of the year.

This weekend, we will see just over 14 hours of sunlight on Friday, Saturday and Sunday. The sun will rise around 5:40 a.m. and set just after 8 p.m. It offers hikers the opportunity to not only travel longer distances, but also take rests along the way to really savor their surroundings.

In this edition of The Wild, our weekly outdoors newsletter, I will suggest a few routes along the Gabrielino Trail. I encourage you, though, to take a look at a paper map of Angeles National Forest (available at most local outdoors gear stores) or use a mapping service such as CalTopo or onX Backcountry to discern what would be the most fun for you and your hiking party.

Before we discuss the hikes, a few safety reminders:

• 🙅 Don’t drink water straight from the creek (unless in a serious emergency). Always use a filter or pack your own water.
• 🫗 Pack more water in summer than you would in other seasons. Dehydration can evolve into a serious and life-threatening situation.
• 🤮 Never relieve yourself in or next to a river, as it’s a major contributor to pollution; never leave toilet paper in the woods.
• 🥾 Wear water-resistant or waterproof footwear with good traction, and pack extra wool socks to better ensure you won’t get blisters.
• 📡 Bring a cellphone with satellite messaging capabilities or a satellite communicator to ensure you can call for help; you likely won’t have cellphone reception in the San Gabriel Mountains.
• 🤔 Freshen up on Leave No Trace principles and how to best pack your bag for the safest best day.

Additionally, please note that the segment of the Gabrielino Trail in and around the West Fork and Devore Trail camps was damaged in recent storms. The Lowelifes Respectable Citizens’ Club, a trail maintenance crew, is repairing it and hopes to have it online soon.

OK, here’s what I recommend along the Gabrielino Trail. Have fun out there!

A hiker meditates near the Brown Mountain Dam just off the Gabrielino Trail in Angeles National Forest.

(Jaclyn Cosgrove / Los Angeles Times)

1. Gabrielino Trail near JPL to Brown Mountain Dam (or beyond)

Distance: 7.6 miles
Elevation gained: About 650 feet
Difficulty: On the easier end of moderate
Dogs allowed? Yes
Accessible alternative: Paved segment of Gabrielino Trail from Windsor Avenue

This 7.6-mile out-and-back trek takes hikers along the Arroyo Seco, under the canopy of massive coast live oaks and past aromatic native plants such as California bay laurel.

You will park in the large dirt parking lot and take the steep paved road a very short jaunt to join the trail. If hiking with a wheelchair or if you’re a hiker who prefers pavement, it’s better to park in the lot south of the dirt lot.

Once on the Gabrielino Trail, you can hike as far as you’d like. Short on time? Hike two miles to Gould Mesa campground, have a little snack (and maybe a swim) and head back.

To reach the dam, follow the trail in the northwesterly direction for about 3.4 miles from the starting point. You’ll come to an intersection where the Gabrielino Trail continues northwest, leading you away from the river. Instead, you’ll want to follow the footpath along the river to reach the man-made-but-still-lovely waterfall.

1a. Want a longer day?

If you want a longer day, you could continue on the Gabrielino Trail after your side quest to the Brown Mountain Dam waterfall and ask a friend to pick you up at this gate off Angeles Crest Highway at a specific time. This point-to-point journey will be about 7.6 miles. The extension is also much more challenging than the first 3.7 miles, as it gains about 1,500 feet over 3.9 miles. This trail through Dark Canyon can be overgrown, so please plan accordingly, including downloading a map and bringing a paper map with you. (See map)

Switzer Falls in Angeles National Forest.

(Raul Roa / Los Angeles Times)

1b. Big adventure day

For an even longer point-to-point journey, leave the Brown Mountain Dam waterfall and take the Gabrielino Trail all the way to Switzer Falls, asking a friend to pick you up at the Switzer Picnic Area at a specific time. This point-to-point route will be about 11 miles, and you will gain about 2,350 feet in elevation. This is the most rugged option, and this trail can be overgrown in places. Plan accordingly! (See map)

The Gabrielino Trail, a 28-mile trek through Angeles National Forest, passes through various plant communities and canyons, providing pockets of shade along the way.

(Jaclyn Cosgrove / Los Angeles Times)

2. Red Box to Valley Forge Trail Camp via Gabrielino Trail

Distance: 4.8 to 6.6 miles, depending on your route
Elevation gained: About 1,200 feet
Difficulty: Moderate
Dogs allowed? Yes
Accessible alternative: Mt. Wilson Observatory paved walking path

This 4.8- to 6.6-mile out-and-back trek will take you along a delightful path that always feels a little bit like a fairy wonderland to me. You’ll pass under shady oak canopies and past moss-covered rock walls. You end at the Valley Forge Trail Camp, which has lovely tall conifers and a vault toilet (that’s usually clean).

To begin, you’ll park in the Red Box Picnic Area parking lot, which can fill up on the weekends and does require you to display an Adventure Pass or other federal public lands pass. You’ll find the trail’s start down some rock steps in the southern area of the lot.

Valley Forge Trail Camp, left, and mossy rocks.

(Jaclyn Cosgrove / Los Angeles Times)

Just over two miles in, you’ll near the trail camp. Take good care to ensure you’re on the right trail. Instead of following the Gabrielino Trail, keep your eyes peeled for the trail that descends toward the riverbed. After a nice rest at the trail camp, you can take the trail or fire road back. (See map)

As of mid-June, the Red Box Picnic Area is experiencing active bear activity, so be mindful if returning to your car around dusk.

2a. For those feeling hardcore

From near Valley Forge Trail Camp, you could consider taking the very steep Valley Forge Trail, a 2.6-mile trek that gains about 1,550 feet, to the Eaton Saddle. From here, you could take the Mt. Lowe Motorway to the San Gabriel Peak Trail, head north briefly using the Mt. Disappointment Road to take the Bill Riley Trail down to Mt. Wilson Red Box Road. The downside is that you’ll have to then take the road about a third of a mile down to Red Box, and drivers zoom through here like they suddenly learned burgers at In-N-Out are free for only the next hour. That’s to say: Proceed with caution.

City lights glow after sunset in a view along the road to Mt. Disappointment in Angeles National Forest.

(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

Additionally, parts of this trip extension might be overgrown. It is about 5.5 miles and gains 2,300 feet in elevation. It will be through a beautiful area of the forest though! (See map)

Regardless of which route you take, please make sure to check the weather, pack smart and be OK with turning around if the conditions on the trail aren’t passable. Additionally, please be mindful of trails that remain closed under the Eaton fire area closure order.

The stretch of the Gabrielino Trail between Red Box and Switzer picnic areas offers great views of nearby peaks in the San Gabriel Mountains.

(Jaclyn Cosgrove / Los Angeles Times)

3. Red Box Picnic Area to Switzer Picnic Area

Distance: About 8.6 miles
Elevation gained: About 1,450 feet
Difficulty: Moderate
Dogs allowed? Yes
Accessible alternative: West Fork National Scenic Bikeway

Earlier this week, I took this 8.6-mile moderate route, parking at the Red Box Picnic Area before heading down into the canyon on the segment of the Gabrielino Trail that runs parallel to Angeles Crest Highway. (See map)

This trail is both beautiful — lush with native plants and the last blooms of wildflower season with great views of nearby peaks — and exposed. There will be shady patches as you hike under healthy oak and maple tree canopy, but wear ample sun protection.

One of many deep pools along the rivers that run next to the Gabrielino Trail.

(Jaclyn Cosgrove / Los Angeles Times)

Although the trail runs parallel to the Arroyo Seco for a stretch, you cannot easily access the river because of a steep drop-off from the trail to the river. I didn’t cross the river until 3 miles in, and by then, I was feeling hot and ready for a quick dip.

That said, when I arrived at the Switzer Picnic Area, I felt like I’d won the lottery. I had skipped the nightmare that it has become to park here, but I still got to swim around in one of the river’s deep pools. It was 1.8 miles farther to Switzer Falls, one of the best cascades in Angeles National Forest.

Great views from the Gabrielino Trail.

(Jaclyn Cosgrove / Los Angeles Times)

***

If you have any questions or feedback about the suggested routes, you can simply reply to this email if you’re a Wild subscriber. It will go directly to me. I love hearing from you. Have fun out there and happy summer!

3 things to do

Volunteers work at a Channel Islands Restoration event.

(Channel Islands Restoration)

1. Serve the river in Santa Paula
Channel Islands Restoration, a Santa Barbara-based habitat restoration nonprofit, needs volunteers from 9 a.m. to noon Sunday at Santa Clara River Preserve (1368 Mission Rock Road in Santa Paula). The preserve spans almost two miles and is about 1,000 acres. All ages and skill sets welcome. The site is ADA-friendly, and restrooms are on-site. Register at cirweb.networkforgood.com.

2. Eradicate invasive plants in Irwindale
The California Native Plant Society San Gabriel Mountains Chapter needs volunteers from 8 to 10:30 a.m. Saturday to yank weeds from the Santa Fe Dam natural area. Volunteers will also learn from plant society members about the local flora and fauna. Learn more at chapters.cnps.org.

3. Investigate the invertebrates in Rowland Heights
The Invertebrate Club of Southern California will host a 1.5- to 3-mile hike from 6:30 p.m. to 9 p.m. June 26 through Big Dalton Canyon. Participants will learn about scorpions, beetles and other interesting creatures. Learn more at the group’s Instagram page.

The must-read

The Malibu coastline just south of Point Dume.

(Jackie Snow)

Freelance writer Jackie Snow was feeling inspired to get outdoors. After reading my 2024 piece about walking the entire 27.4 miles of Washington Boulevard, she came up with an idea: Walking the entire L.A. County shoreline. Snow took 10 trips from November through mid-January to accomplish her goal, walking 70(ish) miles in total. She maps out in her piece how you can do that too! “I have seen whale-watch perches, burned-out Malibu lots, crowded boardwalks and magnificent waves. The coastline is both fragile and welcoming — and walkable — if you’re willing to chase the tides,” Snow wrote in her article for The Times.

Happy adventuring,

P.S.

It’s ladybug season in Los Padres National Forest. Volunteers with the Los Padres Forest Assn. recently discovered thousands of the insects while they were working on the Piedra Blanca Trail. “If you know where to look, you can find them hibernating on rocks, leaf litter, and trees in masses called ‘lovelinesses,’” the association wrote on Instagram. “But, have you ever seen the next generation hatch and fly away in the springtime?” No, but I hope to someday.

For more insider tips on Southern California’s beaches, trails and parks, check out past editions of The Wild. And to view this newsletter in your browser, click here.

President Trump recently took action that could pave the way for opening many more federal lands to recreational off-road enthusiasts. When I heard about it, I immediately thought of the battle over off-highway vehicle access in California’s Mojave Desert.

Earlier this year, a judge ordered the Bureau of Land Management to close roughly 2,000 miles of off highway vehicle trails in the western Mojave to reduce ongoing harm to the endangered desert tortoise, a keystone species of the local ecosystem whose numbers are in steep decline.

That court decision capped off a decadeslong legal fight led by environmental groups including the Center for Biological Diversity and the Desert Tortoise Council.

Under the ruling, which the BLM has appealed, the agency has roughly three years to redraw the network of Mojave off-road trails.

In the latest action, Trump has rescinded a pair of 1970s executive orders that directed federal land managers to minimize damage to wildlife and natural resources, as well as conflicts between off-roading and other types of recreational land use, when choosing where to locate OHV trails.

He described them as “excessive regulation” that used “ill-defined criteria” to minimize vehicle impacts. “These vague, subjective criteria often result in barriers to energy and timber production and utility maintenance, permit delays, and de facto bans on hiking and other forms of recreation that require accessing remote areas, all while doing little to benefit multiple use of Federal lands,” he wrote.

I called up Lisa Belenky, who’s representing the Center for Biological Diversity in the Mojave proceedings, to ask whether Trump’s order changed anything about the case, or the rules the BLM must follow as it revises the trail network.

The short answer, she said, is no.

Each federal land management agency has its own regulations with criteria for managing off-road vehicle use — for instance, the BLM uses travel management plans to determine where vehicles are allowed on specific pieces of land. Trump’s order rolled back the executive directives that guided those regulations, but the regulations themselves remain in place.

Still, Trump’s order directs federal agencies to reexamine their regulations.

In some cases, such a reexamination appears to be already underway, said Paul Sanford, director of policy analysis at The Wilderness Society. The administration last year signaled its intent to repeal the rule that governs motorized access to Forest Service lands, he noted, the Travel Management Rule.

“The rescission of the executive orders makes that easier,” he said.

The Forest Service said in a statement that the rule is expected to be addressed later this year.

“It’s absolutely irresponsible and stupid,” said Jim Baca of Trump’s order. The former BLM director said it was already hard enough to regulate OHV use when he led the agency from 1993 to 1994. “It was difficult to do anything, especially if oil and gas people, mining people and others wanted to get into an area,” he said. To Ryan “Cal” Callaghan, president and CEO of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, the order reflects “the prioritization of one set of user groups over all others.”

Increasing vehicle access in remote areas can cause erosion, stress animals and transport weeds into the backcountry, where they can outcompete native plants, and there’s a strong correlation between roads and human-caused fires, he said. Plus, there’s no indication that any increase would mean funding for more personnel to handle enforcement and lessen negative consequences, he said.

To the contrary, between the end of 2024 and the end of last year, the BLM lost nearly 20% of its staff, and the Forest Service and National Park Service each lost roughly 16%, according to an analysis of Office of Personnel Management data by Hawk Eye Strategies and Prospect Partners. Together, those three agencies responsible for managing more than half a billion acres of public land — about 23% of the United States — count fewer employees than the Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, per the figures provided by the consulting firms.

The staffing cuts and regulatory rollbacks — which also include the recent rescission of the public lands rule that put conservation on equal footing with other uses of BLM land — are part of a strategy to “suffocate” federal land management agencies, said Jora Fogg, public lands policy associate director at the Conservation Lands Foundation.

“There’s an effort to undo regulations and protections on public lands because there is a push for this energy dominance and extractive uses,” she said.

I’ve met plenty of OHV enthusiasts who care deeply for public lands. I’ve also encountered degradation and damage.

Earlier this year, tortoise biologist Ed LaRue told me he could show me a corner of the desert that had been scarred by off-roaders departing from designated routes. In the tawny hills of the Ord Rodman Natural Area, a smattering of legal trails had widened into a thick braid so intertwined that it was difficult to tell which were authorized. And while the area was once among the most densely populated tortoise spots in the western Mojave, on that warm February afternoon, LaRue could find no evidence of them.

Reached by phone last week, he said he found some comfort in the fact that certain restrictions on off-roading still remain in place, and that the public will be given the opportunity to weigh in should agencies seek changes.

Still, he said, it’s not clear whether anyone will listen.

More recent land news

Republicans have introduced an amendment to a federal wildfire bill that would repeal the 2001 Roadless Rule protecting certain national forest lands from logging and roadbuilding, reports Brooke Larsen of the Salt Lake Tribune. That comes nearly a year into the Trump administration’s effort to rescind the rule via the rulemaking process, which has faced public opposition.

The Forest Service has cited cost savings as the impetus for a reorganization that will shutter dozens of research facilities. But much of the agency’s research is already inexpensive, and closing these local facilities could make it less so while encouraging workers to leave, according to Chiara Eisner of NPR.

Why is Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins dead set on saving a failing Northern California dam? Grist’s Jake Bittle and Ayurella Horn-Muller report this tale, which also includes a ranch-animal veterinarian and his daughter, a Riverside County water district and an X post from county Sheriff Chad Bianco.

New proposed grazing rules appear to prohibit Indigenously managed bison from grazing on federal public lands. That has tribes urgently seeking government-to-government talks with Interior Department officials in a bid to win an exemption, according to Blaine Harden of Inside Climate News.

A few last things in climate news

As a historic El Niño supercharges the Pacific Ocean, a crumbling Pacifica pier has become a climate battleground over what to save — and who pays, my colleague Susan Rust reports.

The Times’ Grace Toohey visited Santa Rosa Island to learn how a recent wildfire has affected a piece of North America’s so-called Galapagos. Here’s what she saw.

Clean water advocacy groups say recent changes to California’s “cap-and-invest” climate program could mean less help for hundreds of thousands of people who live with contaminated water, our water reporter Ian James writes.

This is the latest edition of Boiling Point, a newsletter about climate change and the environment in the American West. Sign up here to get it in your inbox. And listen to our Boiling Point podcast here.

For more land news, follow @phila_lex on X and alex-wigglesworth.bsky.social on Bluesky.