limits

Santa Paula voters approved Measure P, an initiative that bars rent increases when a mobile home is sold and was opposed by owners of the city’s six mobile-home parks.

In supporting Measure P’s vacancy controls, voters Tuesday rejected a well-funded campaign by opponents, who said the city would raise taxes to defend the measure in court.

Measure P’s well-organized backers from the city’s 1,500 park residents were forced to scramble late in the campaign after opponents raised more than $47,000 in their attempt to defeat the measure.

In a newspaper-like mailer sent to voters, Measure P’s critics contended that the ballot initiative would also result in shabby parks because of restrictions on the type of repairs that could be charged to park residents.

But supporters increased their efforts after the opposition’s critical mailer and telephone campaigning raised doubts among voters, said Helen Currier, who headed the ballot measure drive.

Rather than rely on the person-to-person campaign that they had planned, supporters placed ads in the local newspaper and on Spanish-language radio stations to combat the high-profile opposition, Currier said.

Others said the park owners had miscalculated by hiring a campaign manager from outside the area.

“They used Los Angeles tactics in a Midwestern-type town,” City Administrator Arnold Dowdy said.

ANOTHER UK airport is hiking its drop-off fees while making time limits shorter in a double blow for travellers.

The transport hub has confirmed that the cost of dropping passengers off at the departures terminal will go up by £3.

East Midlands Airport has introduced the higher fee after Gatwick, Heathrow, Edinburgh, Birmingham, Bristol, Stansted, Leeds Bradford and more did the same earlier this year.

The Derby-based airport will charge £8 for a 10-minute stay at its rapid drop-off zone as of September 29 at 3pm.

The price is up by £3 for less time allowed, with drivers previously being charged £5 for a 15-minute stay.

Airport bosses confirmed that the hike was brought in as a result of “significant inflationary pressures”.

EXPLORE MORE

The sneaky European travel pass that lets you visit 33 countries for £227

SANDS GOOD

10 of the best travel destinations & experiences from ‘flightseeing’ to surfing

The extra money is also set to go towards paying for an ongoing £120million investment to improve the airport.

Prior to the recent increase, the fee remained unchanged for five years.

Last year, the airport swapped its barrier system and introduced automatic number plate recognition cameras to improve the flow of the drop-off system.

Along with the ANPR tracking, new drop-off fee and shorter drop-off window, customers have until midnight the day after their airport visit to pay the charge.

The fee can be paid online or via phone – and those who do not pay in time are slapped with a £100 fine.

While the fine is dropped to £60 if paid within 14 days, North West Leicestershire MP Amanda Hack has hit back at the scheme.

Arguing that the new drop-off rules is “setting people up to fail”, she said: “The announcement by East Midlands Airport of changes to its rapid drop-off pricing and a reduction in the permitted waiting time is frustrating.

“While I welcome the investment the airport has made over the last couple of years, the way the rapid drop-off is currently set up feels stacked against consumers.”

The MP added hat having less time to complete drop-offs and the responsibility to remember to pay will no doubt mean more users face hefty fines.

“I already deal with numerous complaints from constituents and people across the UK who have received a £100 parking penalty notice because they simply forgot to pay,” she told the BBC.

“Increasing the price while simultaneously reducing the time allowed is only likely to make this situation worse.”

Hack says that she has asked the airport to install machines that allow them to pay the drop-off fee there and then.

“My concern has always been that the current arrangement at East Midlands Airport appears to set people up to fail,” she added.

Responding to the criticism over the new fee, East Mindlands Airport said in a statement: “Airport drop-off areas help to manage on-site congestion, with charges managing what is the most polluting form of transport to the airport.

“The new fees are proportionate in the context of inflationary increases and brings East Midlands Airport in line with other UK airports.

“The airport is well served by frequent 24/7 bus services from Nottingham, Derby and Leicester and surrounding communities, with stops close to the terminal.”

WASHINGTON — Expectations were low entering President Trump’s meetings with China’s leader, Xi Jinping, this week, after officials on both sides tempered hopes for a breakthrough. Yet the summit’s stark lack of substance surprised even the closest China watchers.

It was a visual affair designed to project a new phase of managed competition between a prevailing superpower and a rising one — a message that Washington and Beijing are ultimately capable of responsible leadership. But even a cursory look beneath the surface revealed the challenges ahead for the world’s most consequential bilateral relationship.

Industry pleas and bipartisan calls for Trump to negotiate a meaningful framework on artificial intelligence fell on deaf ears. A trade truce between the two sides was extended for a mere two months. And Trump again warned Xi not to assist Iran as the U.S. war there continues — a warning that, so far, has gone unheeded, with millions of dollars’ worth of crucial Chinese parts reportedly arriving in Tehran by the planeload.

“The U.S.-China relationship has settled into a managed stalemate. It has stabilized at the top without stabilizing underneath,” said Craig Singleton, a senior fellow on China at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

“The elaborate pageantry matters precisely because there is still relatively little substantive progress to showcase,” Singleton said. “Trump appears to value the personal relationship as an end in itself. Xi treats his relationship with Trump as a means to shape U.S. choices and forestall future competitive actions.”

President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump stand with Chinese President Xi Jinping and First Lady Peng Liyuan before Thursday night’s state dinner.

(Kevin Dietsch / Getty Images)

The summit followed a playbook from Trump that has become familiar over the last decade, placing his direct relationships at the center of diplomacy and reducing the complexities of statecraft to blunt attempts at charm.

As he did during his lavish state visit to Beijing this spring, Trump repeatedly patted Xi on the back, a gesture considered highly inappropriate in Chinese political culture that nevertheless reflected Trump’s strategic focus on personal friendship.

He toured Xi around a series of controversial renovations to the White House, including the South Lawn — now paved over with a massive helipad designed as the presidential seal — and the Rose Garden, also paved over in order for Trump to host al fresco dinner parties.

Before entering a heavily gilded Oval Office, Trump walked Xi along a renovated colonnade now adorned with gold-framed portraits of U.S. presidents. He paused at one for his predecessor, President Biden, replaced with a mocking image of an autopen, suggesting the former president was incapable of signing documents himself.

Trump patted Xi on the back once more, and the two men laughed, in a moment that generated outrage online.

“Let’s be very clear on this one point,” John Delaney, a former Democratic member of Congress, wrote on social media. “The President mocking a former President in front of the communist leader of China is the most un-American thing an American president has ever done.”

Tim Cook, executive chairman of Apple Inc., during the state dinner for Chinese President Xi Jinping.

(Annabelle Gordon / Bloomberg / Getty Images)

Part of the state visit included a dinner at the White House that was attended by some of the country’s most prominent tech executives, such as Elon Musk, Sam Altman and Mark Zuckerberg. The tech giants’ presence at the event was notable given that there was heightened public interest in knowing how China and the United States are planning to regulate artificial intelligence.

During the visit, Xi called for artificial intelligence to remain “under human control” as the two countries race for technological advancement in the industry. Lawmakers and AI industry leaders have also called for guardrails on the nascent technology, which experts warn could soon surpass human understanding. Trump, however, has been reluctant to embrace limits on the industry, and it is unclear how much the topic was discussed while Xi was in Washington.

Xi Jinping’s remarks reflect growing concern within China over whether governments in Washington or Beijing will be able to contain a technology with potentially transformative capabilities, according to a U.S. official.

But the visit showed a surprising alignment of visions between the U.S. and Chinese presidents, embracing fierce competition that avoids miscalculation and conflict. Both stressed the importance of dialogue, with Xi invoking the concept of the Thucydides trap, a historical paradigm that holds that rising powers inevitably clash with established ones.

“I don’t think anyone will be surprised if there are no significant agreements,” said David Ochmanek, a senior researcher at Rand. “My sense is that Xi sees little reason to compromise with us on anything right now.”

Trump and Xi arrive for a state dinner in the East Room of the White House on Thursday night.

(Brendan Smialowski / AFP / Getty Images)

The two men are expected to meet twice more this year, alongside other world leaders, at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Shenzhen, China, and the Group of 20 summit in Miami.

“We do not need to avoid mentioning competition, but our competition should be a healthy one, and should be kept within bounds,” the Chinese president said Thursday from the Cross Hall of the White House. “It should be a race of catching up with one another, not a wrestle in which one either wins or loses. China and the United States must hold the line of no conflict, and no confrontation between us.

“Our two militaries should maintain regular dialogue, and improve mechanisms for crisis communication and prevention,” he continued. “The Thucydides trap can be overcome.”

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has blocked President Trump’s plan to restrict voting by mail, ruling it is too late to impose new postal service rules for the November election.

The justices on Monday turned down an emergency appeal from Trump’s lawyers, who argued the government needed a new and untested system of unique bar codes to track all the ballots of the tens of millions of people who vote by mail.

Instead, the justices left in place a judge’s order that prevents the U.S. Postal Service from enforcing the new rules for the midterm elections.

Concurring, Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh agreed it was too late to enforce the new rules for this election.

Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Clarence Thomas dissented.

The decision in USPS vs. California is a victory for California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta and the attorneys general for 22 other Democratic-led states who sued to block the new rules.

Last week, they warned there would be chaos and confusion if Trump’s rules were put in effect now.

Bonta cheered the decision late Monday, calling it “a victory for our democracy and a powerful affirmation of the rule of law” in a case where the stakes “could not have been higher.”

“Voting is the fundamental right from which all other rights flow, and all 50 states allow ballots to be cast by mail in some form. In California and several other states, mail voting is the primary way elections are conducted,” Bonta said. “Had this rule been allowed to take effect, the consequences would have been catastrophic.”

He said his office “will remain vigilant in safeguarding our elections,” and urged voters to make their voices heard.

Under the proposed rules, state and county election officials across the nation would be required to enroll each voter with a unique bar code and submit this data to a new online portal that, as of last week, was not yet functioning.

Without the individualized bar codes, states could not send ballots through the mail. In California, that would mean election officials would have to enroll 23 million voters with new bar codes before state ballots could be mailed.

“Compliance with the USPS’ rule would be impossible ahead of the midterms, meaning that millions of voters would be unable to vote by mail and some would not be able to vote at all,” the state attorneys general told the court last week.

The impact would not be limited to Democratic-leaning states. Utah Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson said it would be “an unmitigated disaster” if the new rules were put into effect now. About 30% of the nation’s voters — and 80% of Californians — cast ballots by mail in 2024.

But Trump has maintained, without providing evidence, that voting by mail leads to widespread cheating and fraud.

In March, he issued an executive order that called on the postal service to do more to “enhance election integrity.”

“Unique ballot envelope identifiers, such as bar codes, enable confirmation that only citizens receive and cast ballots,” he said.

Elections experts say there is no evidence of such widespread fraud, despite robust audits and other searches for it.

State attorneys general argued that the Constitution entrusts states, not federal officials, to conduct elections. While Congress may impose new rules, it is not done to limit voting by mail or to empower the postal service to do so, they said.

Trump and his lawyers maintained the administration had a duty to combat fraud, including in elections.

Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer described the new rules as “modest measures that will help prevent and restrain potential gross abuses of the mails to perpetrate a fraud on the Nation.”

And he said the federal government, the states and the voting public would face irreparable harm if the new Postal Service rules were not allowed to be applied to the coming election.

But U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, in Boston, ruled the postal service may not put its new regulations into effect for the Nov. 3 election. She found the Trump administration had presented no evidence to the court of widespread fraud existing, while the states had presented ample evidence that implementing such a system on such a fast timeline posed tremendous risk.

The 1st Circuit Court affirmed her order and said the administration’s lawyers “have not even seriously challenged the … detailed findings about the chaos and widespread disenfranchisement that would occur between now and November 3 should the USPS rule take immediate effect.”

On Sunday, U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols — a Trump appointee — also blocked the new Postal Service rules from being implemented in separate cases brought by the NAACP and Democratic groups, finding they clearly exceeding the Postal Service’s authority in elections.

What the future will hold is unclear. The courts did not declare the new rules to be illegal or unconstitutional, though multiple lower courts have suggested that parts of the plan likely would be — including by exceeding the Postal Service’s authority to intervene in elections.

Much of the debate before the appellate and high court related to the rushed timeline under which the Postal Service was seeking to implement the changes. With that set aside by the Supreme Court’s ruling that the rules will not apply this election, the debate in the lower courts may shift focus to whether the new regulations can be applied to the 2028 elections.

Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar, chair of the Democratic Assn. of Secretaries of State, said the high court’s ruling was a clear loss for Trump, and that state election officials are ready to continue their fight to protect U.S. elections if necessary.

“This ruling affirms what our Constitution has always held: Elections belong to the American people, not a desperate man in Washington,” he said.