officers

Spearheading the campaign in opposition of Proposition 38 is Robert Kaplan, senior scholar at the Clinical Excellence Research Center at Stanford School of Medicine, and David Panush, who served as a senior health policy and budget advisor to five state Senate presidents.

Kaplan stated, “As written, Proposition 38 is deceptive,” because the proposed criteria for awarding the grant funding would appear to create an extremely minuscule pool of qualified recipients.

To qualify, a recipient institution must be established since Jan. 1, 2025, and have at least 200,000 square feet of research space it controls. From that start date, the recipients also must have an affiliation agreement with a UC campus and be affiliated with a UC Health system that records more than 35,000 inpatient admissions and 3.5 million outpatient visits annually. The qualification requirements also include having identified at least $250 million in philanthropic support and securing two $50-million commitments for designated research programs.

Kaplan argues medical research grants should be awarded through a competitive process that gives all applicants equal opportunity. Instead, his campaign states, only the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy, co-founded by billionaire Gary K. Michelson, would qualify under the proposed criteria. In a Cal Matters report, a UCLA spokesperson confirmed that among all nonprofit entities affiliated with the school, “only the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy could satisfy the stipulations of Prop. 38.”

Robin Swanson, spokesperson for the Yes on 38 campaign, said that “lots of institutions would qualify for funds under this measure.”

“But it is very likely that [the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy], which is a research institute affiliated with UCLA, will qualify for half of the funds under the current criteria,” she added during a virtual news conference in mid-September.

Swanson said it was likely that other research institutions from Stanford, Scripps Research, USC and Cedars Sinai would qualify for the other 50% of funds, “and that really is what we wanted to ensure that we had research institutes that were ready to hit the ground running.”

Ultimately, she said, the decision lies with the California Department of Public Health.

Michelson’s institute first became a nonprofit in 2022, and the co-founder has donated at least $120 million to the research organization. The billionaire is the board chair of the institute, which is housed at a research center owned by UCLA, according to the opposition campaign.

The Vote No on Prop. 38 campaign also argues against the financial model of the measure, saying a bond would saddle taxpayers with decades of debt and that any potential future revenue from the research is uncertain.

The proposition creates a down payment loan program, totaling up to $25 billion, for middle-income families looking to buy a new home in California. The program would be run by the California Housing Finance Agency, which already oversees several homeownership assistance programs.

The state would sell bonds to fund the program. It would pay back investors using interest and loan payments from the program — not taxpayer money. The California Housing Finance Agency would administer the program, including setting interest rates for the loans.

To qualify, prospective borrowers would need to buy a newly constructed home or a home that never has sold before, such as a commercial building that was converted into condos. Borrowers wouldn’t need to be first-time homebuyers, but they would need to earn no more than 200% of the median local income; for a family of four in Los Angeles County, that amounts to no more than $216,200 a year.

There also would be limits on the sales prices of homes bought with help from this program. While the exact price would depend on the county, generally the homes would need to sell for between $1 million and $1.5 million. Homebuyers would need to put at least 3% down, and the state finance agency could provide a loan up to 17% of the sales price.

The loans would function like fixed-rate second mortgages.

According to the California Budget and Policy Center, the earnings that would qualify a family for down payment assistance could vary greatly depending on where they planned to buy a home. Per the center’s calculations, a family of four buying a home in Madera County would have to earn no more than $166,800 a year, while a family in Santa Clara County could earn up to $375,800 a year and still qualify.

Other specifics would be worked out if voters pass the measure. That includes the interest rates charged on this second mortgage, which, according to the Budget and Policy Center, likely would be higher than the current rates for conventional mortgages, which have hovered around 7% for a 30-year mortgage.

Because revenue bonds, which would be used to fund this program, are riskier than other bonds, investors might demand a higher return, translating to a higher interest rate.

Following a series of scandals that shook public trust in local government, Los Angeles City Council launched a massive charter reform to boost accountability across city departments. Charter PRT emerged from that reform.

McOsker, who co-sponsored the amendment, said it would offer greater public access and participation into government processes. He believes it is important that those overseeing LAX and Van Nuys understand how neighboring communities are affected by airport decisions.

“The folks that live and work and drive around and experience the impacts of the airport operations should have some say in the future of airport operations,” McOsker said. “They know the best of what the impacts are on the tens of thousands of folks that live around each of those facilities.”

McOsker stressed that the port is on public land and another space that residents should have greater insight into by offering transparency into how leaseholder agreements affect the local economy.

The two sides disagree sharply over what the changes to the law would mean in practice.

Dan Dunmoyer, president and chief executive of the California Building Industry Assn., a trade group supporting the measure, said the state is the slowest in the nation when it comes to reaching a conclusion about whether projects can be built. Per Dunmoyer, it’s one of the top two reasons housing here is so pricey.

Supporters point to accumulating interest on loans, shelling out for litigation and rising costs for materials.

Dunmoyer believes the measure would make the review process faster and easier. He estimated it will reduce the cost of building single family homes by $75,000 a pop.

“We think … it will allow us to provide more housing of all types, not just for sale, but for rent and legally defined affordable housing, even homeless shelters, more quickly than under the current environmental review process,” he said, “and we think that’s beneficial to Californians who very much want a place to call home.”

Proponents of the measure characterize the effort as procedural: It will firm up timelines, but projects still will be reviewed. But those fighting it, as well as some legal experts, say the 41-page proposal essentially guts CEQA for projects that qualify.

Aruna Prabhala, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, a conservation group opposing the measure, said it would eliminate the need to analyze a project’s specific impacts, such as how it affects people living nearby. Instead, the process would become a “checklist” to see if the project complies with existing environmental laws.

The measure also states it “should be interpreted and implemented to afford the fullest possible weight to the interest of, and the approval and realization of, essential projects.” Prabhala and others believe it flips the purpose of CEQA to approve projects, rather than protect the environment.

“So much of what’s in the initiative mirrors what we’re seeing from the federal level and the Trump administration from rolling back environmental review, from really limiting public participation,” she said. “For not only failing to enforce protections for our air and water quality, but making it that much harder for agencies to do that.”

PARIS — Some 70,000 law enforcement officers will be deployed across France on Saturday while the Louvre and several other major Paris museums will be closed as authorities seek to prevent renewed violence during planned protests.

Protests last week devolved into mayhem, with people setting fires, storming public buildings, smashing shop windows, looting and clashing with police. It was France’s most violent unrest in years.

Demonstrators plan to take to the streets again Saturday to denounce the high cost of living. Students, members of the CGT labor union and activists from the “yellow vest” movement, whose demonstrations against social injustice shook France in 2018 and 2019, are all set to join.

While some protests have been banned for security reasons in several cities, including Lyon, Nice and Montpellier, marches are expected in many other places including in Paris and Marseille.

French Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez said some 70,000 police officers and gendarmes would be deployed, along with helicopters, armored vehicles and water cannons. In addition, elite police units will help secure public buildings like city halls in a “highly mobile” security operation, he said.

“There have been numerous calls from radical far-left groups on social media to commit acts of violence and vandalism. There have also been renewed calls for looting, with those messages clearly being spread by rioters,” Nuñez said at a news conference.

“We will be absolutely uncompromising” with those involved in violence, he added, warning that police will have a “very firm approach to making arrests, and there will be legal consequences.”

Paris museums to be closed

In a statement to the Associated Press, the Culture Ministry said the Louvre, the Orsay and Picasso museums as well as the Grand Palais would be closed. The ministry called on all institutions under its authority to adopt any necessary measures to ensure “visitor safety, staff protection and the preservation of artworks,” according to the statement.

After two days when admission was by invitation only, Art Basel Paris opened to the public Friday — but only for the day, with the threat of unrest prompting organizers to cancel the weekend program. One of the world’s most prestigious contemporary art fairs, Art Basel includes exhibitions by 211 international galleries at Paris’ Grand Palais.

“This decision has not been taken lightly, and the safety of everyone involved in the fair remains our utmost priority,” organizers said in a statement Thursday.

Saloni Doshi, an art collector who traveled to Paris from India for the fair, grew worried Saturday as she saw the fires and panicked people, and she received phone calls from friends asking whether Paris was safe. She agreed with the organizers’ rationale to close.

Antoine Donzeaud and Elisa Rigoulet, the owners of the gallery exo exo, felt the same.

“We understand this decision, which we consider reasonable and consistent with the urgency of the social demands currently unfolding in France,” they said in a text message.

But some visitors were disappointed.

“It’s very sad, because we just came here to the fair, and we could not get in because they canceled it for the weekend,” said Fabián Hernández, 32, from Mexico City. “So it’s very busy today, and it’s disappointing to me because I love the art fair, you know? But it is what it is.”

An anti far-right protest is planned

A demonstration Saturday in the city of Orléans, about 70 miles south of Paris, will also be closely watched.

About 50 organizations have called for a protest against the far right on the sidelines of the two-day congress of Marine Le Pen’s nationalist, anti-immigration party ahead of next spring’s presidential election. Organizers include labor unions, left-wing political parties, student organizations and anti-racism groups.

Hugues Moutouh, the prefect of the Loiret region, said that 20,000 to 30,000 demonstrators from across the country were expected.

Le Pen, whom opinion polls place as the front-runner in next year’s election, accused left-wing organizations and political parties of trying to “disrupt a political party’s democratic congress” on news broadcaster Franceinfo.

Still, she said she had “no concerns” about security because the government had “recognized the need for measures allowing the congress to proceed safely.”

Gadeva and Corbet write for the Associated Press. AP writers David Biller and Samuel Petrequin in Paris contributed to this report.

Gomez, 51, won a special election to Congress in 2017, replacing Becerra, who stepped down after then-Gov. Jerry Brown nominated him for state attorney general.

On Aug. 17, the House Ethics Committee announced it was investigating Gomez for “inappropriate sexual contact with a House staffer.”

Two days later, attorneys Lisa J. Banks and Sarah E. Nesbitt said in a statement that they represented a woman the committee interviewed. The woman accused Gomez of sexual harassment and assault, according to the attorneys, who declined further comment.

Gomez acknowledged in a statement earlier this year that he made “personal mistakes outside my marriage,” but said that his “actions were consensual in nature and haven’t violated the law or House Ethics rules.”

He declined an interview request and is keeping a low profile during his reelection campaign. He successfully fended off challenges from David Kim, a progressive Democrat targeting him from the left, in 2020, 2022 and 2024. Kim has endorsed Gonzales-Torres.

Since Trump’s immigration crackdown, Gomez has focused on the treatment of immigrants and congressional oversight of federal detention centers. He and 12 other House members successfully sued the Trump administration after he was blocked from entering a detention facility and has said he trained legal observers to document ICE abuses.

His campaign touts his record as chair of the affordability-focused Congressional Renters Caucus and his support for proposed legislation that seeks to lower housing costs, expand supply and strengthen pathways to ownership.

He also backs two hallmark progressive initiatives, the Green New Deal and Medicare for all.

Gonzales-Torres, 31, previously worked as a part-time counselor for formerly incarcerated Pasadena City College students, interned in Mayor Karen Bass’s administration and volunteered on the Metro Public Safety Advisory Committee.

She is backed by the Los Angeles branch of the L.A. chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America, as well as Justice Democrats, the influential left-wing PAC known for helping Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-New York) win her first election in 2018.

If elected, Gonzales-Torres would focus on dismantling the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and seek a federal wealth tax on the ultra-rich.

She is calling for a moratorium on new data center construction until federal standards are in place and wants to end federal fossil fuel subsidies.

Gonzales-Torres has not held elected office beyond her two years — one as president — on the Historic Highland Park Neighborhood Council in 2023-25.

Several board members criticized her tenure. One, Caroline Aguirre, filed a police report alleging Gonzales-Torres thrust a finger into her face at a meeting. Aguirre shared the incident report with The Times but said police ultimately took no action.

Darren Gold, who is now board president, said Gonzales-Torres falsely accused him of shaking her, prompting a city investigation. Gold denied the interaction, accused Gonzales-Torres of lying and won reinstatement.

Both Gold and Jens Jonasson, another board member, described Gonzales-Torres’s leadership as chaotic, adding that she used the position to express personal views on gentrification and out-of-neighborhood issues such as Gaza.

“She was not effective at turning priorities into results, working through disagreements and staying with the job when things didn’t go her way,” said Jonasson.

Gonzales-Torres declined to comment on the incidents Aguirre and Gold alleged. She said that she was proud of her work connecting businesses with city services and other achievements.

She said she stepped down as president to volunteer for Kim’s 2024 campaign.

Outside money

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee has repeatedly backed Gomez’s re-election campaigns, including this cycle, prompting criticism by both the Justice Democrats and Gonzales-Torres.

Gomez’s campaign points to his call for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s resignation, a push for humanitarian aid in Gaza and a ceasefire.

In July, Gomez voted against an amendment to cut off aid to Israel, even as many other Democrats supported the initiative.

Gomez told Politico the amendment was “overly broad and would also restrict programs that facilitate humanitarian aid for Palestinians and refugee resettlement, peace-building efforts, and our ability to confront terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah.”

“It would empower the Trump administration to determine what gets funded and what does not,” he said.

AI is also an issue in the race, although both candidates support regulation.

Guardrails Alliance, a political action committee seeking stricter regulation of the tech industry, backs Gonzales-Torres.

A PAC affiliated with the AI industry, Leading the Future, supports Gomez, though it has yet to announce spending in his race.

This runoff election for an open seat features two veteran attorneys with extensive experience as public defenders: Justin Allen Clayton and Anna Slotky Reitano.

Clayton is in charge of the Inglewood branch of the public defenders office and has defended three cases with life sentences.

Reitano represented juvenile and adult clients, many of them accused of felonies, before joining the county counsel’s office.

The Los Angeles County Bar Assn. considers both qualified to serve. Here’s more of what you need to know about the candidates.

Justin Allen Clayton, L.A. County deputy public defender

Bar rating: Qualified

Clayton is a Los Angeles native who attended public schools, earned a bachelor’s degree in criminology and passed the bar in 2012. He joined the public defender’s office two years later and since 2023 has served as deputy in charge of the Inglewood branch.

Clayton describes himself as a “working supervisor” who conducts arraignments and represents clients at preliminary and other hearings. He has completed dozens of trials, including three with life sentences, according to his website.

The position involves overseeing and training attorneys, as well as law clerks and summer interns, on misdemeanor and felony case preparation and trial strategy.

Clayton said a priority is improving court efficiency through pretrial preparation and “firm but fair enforcement of deadlines.”

Time as a candidate, he said, has shown him the importance of effective communication within the court system in bridging language and cultural differences. He called that a guiding principle, particularly for clients who lack counsel.

“Sometimes, one additional question, or one additional statement, can make all the difference in resolving an issue,” he said.

Clayton said running a public defender branch office, which brings him in contact with judges, sheriffs, court clerks, interpreters and others, combined with 14 years as a trial attorney, gives him a “comprehensive understanding” of the courtroom.

“That combination of courtroom experience, leadership and daily interaction with the many people who make our justice system work has uniquely prepared me to serve as a Superior Court judge,” he said.

Anna Slotky Reitano, L.A. County deputy county counsel

Bar rating: Qualified

Reitano spent the early part of her career in criminal defense, contract law and other sectors. In 2014, she joined the L.A. County public defender’s office. A decade there included three years in juvenile court, where she primarily handled felony cases, and five years at the San Fernando Courthouse, where she represented indigent clients facing felony charges.

Reitano focused on mental health diversion and treatment, aiming to support rehabilitation when possible. Having a brother with schizophrenia and witnessing how families navigate the legal system when dealing with mental illness has informed her approach.

“This has given me a deeper understanding of both the challenges individuals and families face and the ways in which the system can fall short in addressing those needs,” she said.

This is not her first bid for office. She lost a campaign for a judgeship in 2022 and two years later assumed her position in the county counsel’s justice and safety division, where she supervises litigation and advises county departments.

Reitano, a former child actor, volunteers with local schools and, according to her website, mentors “future lawyers” through moot court competitions.

Campaigning, Reitano said, has shown her that constituents, no matter how different, uniformly want “a judge who is experienced, prepared, fair and willing to listen.”

“My experience across criminal, juvenile, civil, administrative and government law has uniquely prepared me to serve wherever the court needs me,” she said.

This race for an open seat pits a former U.S. assistant attorney who represented President Obama, the FBI and NASA against a seasoned Los Angeles County public defender who has taken more than 100 trials, some with three-strikes implications, to verdict.

David DeJute, who defended Obama against the so-called birther claims, spent a decade as vice president of litigation at Sony Pictures Entertainment. He now works in litigation at a private firm.

Anthony “A.J.” Bayne’s background includes nearly two decades serving in the Compton Courthouse, where he for a time served as deputy in charge. He’s now handling serious felony cases at the Torrance branch.

DeJute is rated “qualified” to serve by the Los Angeles County Bar Assn. Bayne is rated a notch higher, “well qualified.”

Here’s what you need to know about the candidates.

Anthony “A.J.” Bayne, L.A. County deputy public defender

Bar rating: Well qualified

Bayne’s 31-year legal career includes more than a quarter-century as an L.A. County deputy public defender. He has taken more than 100 jury trials to verdict, including murder, special circumstances and three-strikes cases, some of which carried sentences of death or life in prison.

“Even during the [election] primary period, I continued taking cases to trial rather than continuing them, because my clients should not be prejudiced by unnecessary delay,” he said.

He spent 19 years at the Compton Courthouse, where for a time he served as deputy in charge, supervising misdemeanor trial deputies. He now is stationed in the Torrance branch, where he handles serious felonies.

Bayne is an inventor, with patent-pending applications for artificial intelligence tools that automate legal workflows. One helps with closing arguments; another uses court reporter transcripts to generate cross-examination questions.

Using AI to address the county’s heavy caseload is a priority. He argues the technology could modernize court infrastructure, aiding in case management, scheduling and document processing.

Bayne, who trains in jiujitsu and Krav Maga self-defense, said extensive jury trial experience has prepared him to be an effective judge.

“Wherever I go, people want the same things: a judge who is prepared and fair, who will listen to their side of the case, and who treats them with respect,” he said.

David DeJute, law professor/attorney

Bar rating: Qualified

The son of a late judge, DeJute has had a 35-year legal career. After graduating from law school, he clerked for a U.S. district judge and then worked at a boutique litigation firm. He spent nearly a decade as vice president of litigation at Sony Pictures Entertainment.

In 2005, he was appointed as an assistant U.S. attorney. Over more than a decade, he worked on 10 trials, including successfully defending President Obama against “birther” lawsuits that challenged his eligibility to hold office. DeJute represented the FBI and NASA in other cases.

He joined Michelman & Robinson in 2017 and is part of the complex litigation group.

An adjunct professor at Pepperdine’s Caruso School of Law, he’s taught ethics, antitrust, copyright and patent law. After last year’s wildfires, he returned as director of the disaster relief clinic, where he instructed students who provided pro bono legal services to victims of the Palisades and Eaton fires.

“I continue to provide free legal help to wildfire survivors who have asked me to stay involved,” he said, though he no longer runs the clinic.

DeJute said he has experienced discrimination as an openly gay man, which drives his desire to ensure that everyone in the justice system is treated with dignity and respect.

“Justice requires more than achieving certain results,” he said. “It requires a fair process untainted by bias.”

This runoff for a vacant seat on the bench features a longtime public defender running against a veteran alternate public defender. Both boast extensive trial experience.

Donna Tryfman, a deputy public defender, serves in the major cases unit, where she handles homicide and other high-profile defendants. She also has extensive experience in juvenile cases.

David Ross is an alternate in the Torrance branch of the public defenders office and also works in Bellflower and Long Beach. He claims to have represented more than 10,000 clients at hearings and in trials.

The Los Angeles County Bar Assn. rates both attorneys as “qualified” for office. Here’s more of what you need to know about the candidates.

Donna Tryfman, L.A. County deputy public defender

Bar rating: Qualified

Tryfman began with the public defender’s office in 1998, logging more than 100 jury trials. Her experience includes supervising Eastlake Juvenile Court, where she ran a branch with 15 lawyers and represented clients in the collaborative drug court. She is stationed in the major cases unit, focusing on capital homicide litigation.

Tryfman has served as a Superior Court judge pro tem, handling traffic and small claims cases. She has proctored teen courts at Dorsey and Hamilton high schools and last year received the peer-bestowed Gideon felony attorney of the year award.

Conversations on the campaign trail have helped her understand what works and what doesn’t in the justice system.

“It has reinforced for me that experience and knowledge of the law matter enormously, but so does how people are treated when they walk into a courtroom,” she said.

Tryfman said the heavy caseload of a public defender has prepared her for the bench’s rigors. She also cited her life experience as the daughter of immigrants, a single mother and a widow who was faced with the decision of whether to discontinue life support for her husband.

“Experiences like that teach you something about responsibility, compassion and judgment that cannot be learned from a law book,” she said.

Outside the office, Tryfman spent five years as president of the California Public Defenders Assn. and chaired the Rent Stabilization Commission for the city of Beverly Hills. She has served as vice chair of the L.A. County Bar Assn.’s Conference of California Bar Assns., where she helps develop state legislative proposals.

David Ross, L.A. County deputy alternate public defender

Bar rating: Qualified

Ross has more than three decades in the legal field, but it was not his original calling. The Los Angeles native served as a legislative aide to the late U.S. Rep. Floyd Fithian (D-Ind.) on Capitol Hill, then worked as a television journalist and documentary producer in Washington, D.C., Tennessee and Kansas.

“I grew up wanting to be Peter Jennings, not Clarence Darrow,” he told The Times.

Ross passed the bar in 1994, joined the Riverside County public defender’s office the following year and began as a Los Angeles County deputy alternate public defender in 2000. He has litigated 113 jury trials, conducted more than 2,000 preliminary hearings and represented some 10,000 indigent clients. Assigned to the Torrance office since 2018, he also has worked in the Bellflower, Long Beach and Pomona branches, among others.

Ross, who lives in Long Beach, said he has spoken with more than 60 Democratic clubs, unions and other organizations on the campaign trail and frequently has heard a desire for qualified and independent judges who will listen to all sides.

A priority would be ensuring that even if a party loses, they walk out of the courthouse knowing the judge paid attention.

Ross said his mix of legal and life experience and his time as a journalist, in which he “listened to real people, gathered the facts and told objective stories,” provide a unique perspective.

Dozens of groups have lined up behind the proposal, including the Trust for Public Land, TreePeople, Friends of the Los Angeles River and many others. At City Hall, the measure is backed by Rodriguez and several other council members as well as City Controller Kenneth Mejia.

Rodriguez and Mejia signed the ballot argument in favor of Charter Amendment PRK, as did Rev. Gregory Boyle, founder of Homeboy Industries, Nicole Chase, president and chief executive of the Boys & Girls Club of the San Fernando Valley, and several others.

Backers of the measure say the parks department provides an essential safety net for the city’s low-income residents, offering summer camps, sports activities and senior programs for free or at reduced prices.

When temperatures soar, the city’s recreation centers welcome residents who lack air conditioning. During emergencies, those facilities are converted into places of refuge from fires, floods or other disasters.

Despite those varied responsibilities, the department has been underfunded for years, said Tori Kjer, executive director of the Los Angeles Neighborhood Land Trust, who pushed for the measure to reach the ballot.

“If you talk to many Angelenos, they are unhappy with their local park, and that is because we have not funded it with the resources it needs,” she said.

Kjer said the department never recovered from the 2008 recession, when city leaders cut staffing by more than 25%, leaving it with about 1,500 workers last year. The city also began charging the department for the cost of water, electricity, trash pickup and other city services.

The measure aims to tackle the cost of what it takes to run a campaign and to broaden the pool of people who could run for office without being tethered to any individual, group or special interest.

“The increasing costs of political campaigns can force candidates to rely on large contributions from wealthy donors and special interests, which can give those wealthy donors and special interests disproportionate influence over governmental decisions,” the measure states.

There have been several attempts to allow for public campaign financing in California. Five charter cities, including Los Angeles, and at least 14 other states already allow some version of it.

“This bill will restore control to local governments and the state by giving counties, districts, general law cities, and the state the same option that charter cities currently have to enact public financing of campaigns,” a Senate rules committee analysis states.

Money generated by Proposition 3, like the current tax, would flow to education, with 89% going to K-12 schools and 11% to community colleges.

Then, because the state constitution requires minimum levels of spending on education, more dollars are freed up to pay for services including healthcare and the University of California and California State University systems, said Kayla Kitson, a senior analyst with the California Budget and Policy Center.

Proposition 3, like the current high-earners tax, has the added effect of raising the minimum levels of funding required to flow to K-12 schools and community colleges, because of the complicated formulas California uses to set its budget, Kitson said.

If Proposition 3 fails, the state could expect to lose between $5 billion and $15 billion annually in tax revenue starting in 2031, according to estimates from the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

The California Democratic Party is backing Ma, whose quarter-century in electoral politics includes stints on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, in the State Assembly and on the State Board of Equalization. She was elected treasurer in 2019 and is termed out.

The California Republican Party has endorsed Romero, who has been campaigning with Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton on what the two term a “golden ticket” (though voters elect each office separately).

The Republican designation is relatively new for Romero. She was a Democrat when she served in the Legislature from 1998 to 2010. She became a Republican in 2024, asserting that Democratic party standards no longer aligned with her beliefs.

“I consider myself to be common sense, a new Republican with the values of American exceptionalism that once upon a time the Democratic party stood for, but it’s been overrun by the socialists and the communists that have taken over the party,” she told the Times.

Ma’s parents emigrated from China and eventually settled in New York. Her father started a design and manufacturing firm, and her mother was a high school art teacher. Fiona Ma played sports, was a Girl Scout — “a top cookie seller,” she boasts on her campaign website — and graduated from Rochester Institute of Technology. She moved to San Francisco, started an accounting practice and became a part-time field representative to Assemblymember John Burton. She won her San Francisco supervisor’s seat in 2002 and, four years later, was elected to the Assembly.

Romero grew up in a Catholic household in Barstow, with pictures of the Pope and President Kennedy on the walls. She described her parents, a railroad worker and a mother who once cleaned houses, as “Depression-era Democrats.”

She started in community college and eventually earned a PhD. She was a college professor, an L.A. Community College trustee and a city of L.A. charter reform commissioner before being elected to the state Assembly in 1998. She moved to the Senate in 2001 and became the first female majority leader. Today she lives in El Sereno.

WASHINGTON — Federal immigration officials need to ensure that body cameras worn by officers are uniformly activated when needed, a government report released Wednesday said, following a series of contentious shootings and aggressive arrests by ICE officers.

The agency rejected the recommendation, saying that using cameras that automatically activate when an officer pulls their weapon or activates a car siren could risk privacy concerns.

ICE has come under intense scrutiny after numerous incidents where officers have opened fire during enforcement operations and the agency has claimed they were under threat but officers weren’t wearing body cameras. Critics say the cameras could help hold officers accountable and promote transparency at a time when the agency is operating at a high tempo across the country and increasingly accused of excessive use of force. The report by the Government Accountability Office covers the period from February 2025 until September of this year. The report, conducted at the request of Democratic members of Congress, delves into policies governing the use of body-worn cameras by ICE and U.S. Customs and Border Protection and details improvements both agencies can make to improve their programs. But it did not go into any of the high-profile ICE-involved shootings that have focused attention on the agency’s body-worn camera usage, such as the shooting deaths of Renee Good in Minneapolis or Lorenzo Salgado Araujo in Houston.

A fatal shooting exposed gaps in ICE’s camera rollout

Former Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced in February that every Homeland Security officer on the ground in Minneapolis would be issued body-worn cameras. Noem, who was later fired by Trump, said officers across the country would receive them as funds became available.

The department later received $20 million from Congress to finish the ICE body-camera rollout plan. But then came a shooting in July of Salgado Araujo, when Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers shot and killed the Mexican man who lived in the U.S. for more than 35 years. Those officers were not wearing body cameras, raising questions about why the agency still hadn’t gotten the cameras out to officers in the field. Homeland Security said after Salgado Araujo’s death that body cameras had been deployed to more than half of ICE field offices and that the remainder would get them in the next 60 days. In the GAO report, DHS said all ICE offices had received the body-worn cameras as of Aug. 5 and that officers were being trained on their use.

In a statement Wednesday, DHS said that while they’d purchased devices for all ICE officers across the country, the required training was still ongoing and that they expected to be finished “soon.”

DHS rejects automatic recording, citing privacy concerns

The report recommended ICE take additional steps such as “automated camera activation” that it said would be particularly helpful in situations where “unexpected and unplanned incidents, unrelated to sensitive operations, result in use of force by or against personnel.” The report said this would improve transparency and public trust. But DHS disagreed, saying that cameras that automatically activate could result in “the unauthorized recording of sensitive interactions with informants or victims.” The agency said the body-worn cameras are required to be turned on at the beginning of pre-planned enforcement activities.

Confusion over camera rules kept one ICE office from using them

The report also said some of the officers they talked to at both ICE and CBP were confused as to when they should activate the cameras. For example, some officers told the GAO they didn’t know whether to activate the cameras during vehicle searches or when transporting detainees. The report noted that at one ICE office, staff was so uncertain about when they were supposed to use the cameras that they hadn’t begun using them even after they’d been trained.

The report also found that neither agency had updated the plans that oversee their body-worn camera programs even as their staff had grown significantly.

Santana writes for the Associated Press.

Carlos Dammeier, administrative law judge, California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board
Bar rating: Qualified

Dammeier began in law enforcement, working for a decade as a dispatcher, jailer and police officer. He went to law school and, for a quarter-century, represented police and other public-sector unions, “handling employee rights cases at every level from administrative hearings to the U.S. Supreme Court,” he said in an email.

In 2013, The Times reported, a law firm in which he was a named partner dissolved after two Costa Mesa City Council members sued one of his clients, the city police union, over legal and political tactics the politicians asserted were overly aggressive.

Dammeier recently said his team was the focus of “antiunion attacks by political forces” and said that after multiple investigations, none of the firm’s attorneys faced charges or disciplinary action.

In 2022, Dammeier became an administrative law judge. His campaign website states he has heard and issued decisions in more than 2,000 unemployment, disability and tax appeal cases.

Priorities are addressing case backlogs and making thoughtful, unbiased decisions.

“Win or lose, everyone needs to know they had fair treatment by our courts,” he said.

He ran for Superior Court seats in Merced and San Bernardino counties in March 2024, losing both races, and also ran unsuccessfully in San Bernardino County in 2016.

David Ross, deputy alternate public defender
Bar rating: Qualified

Ross worked as a legislative aide for an Indiana Democrat in Congress and as a TV reporter and documentary producer before becoming a lawyer in 1994, according to his campaign website.

His legal career began in Riverside County, where he served five years as a deputy public defender. In 2000, he became a Los Angeles County deputy alternate public defender in regional branches, including Long Beach and Compton. He has been at the Torrance office since 2018.

Ross, according to his website, has represented more than 10,000 indigent defendants and completed more than 110 jury trials.

A priority would be ensuring people feel recognized in his courtroom.

“My goal is to hear everyone out, so that even if a party ultimately loses, they will walk out of court knowing the judge listened,” he said in an email.

Troy W. Slaten, administrative law judge, state Department of Industrial Relations
Bar rating: Qualified

After roles as a child actor on “Cagney and Lacey” and “Parker Lewis Can’t Lose,” Slaten began a two-decade law career in 2005.

He first worked as a private criminal defense attorney, then spent 11 years at an international firm where he focused on criminal, civil and administrative law and, for a time, managed the criminal defense division. He’s regularly cited as a legal analyst on TV and in The Times.

Slaten volunteered as temporary Superior Court judge from 2016-20 and in 2021 became a full-time administrative law judge presiding over workers’ compensation hearings.

“I have uncovered fraud and have helped when injured workers have been denied healthcare and other benefits,” he said in an email.

He has twice run for Superior Court, falling short in 2020 and 2022.

He would prioritize fairness and efficiency. “I would work to ensure cases move forward in a timely and organized manner while preserving due process,” he said.

Outside the courtroom, Slaten announces and deejays UCLA men’s and women’s water polo games.

Donna Tryfman, L.A. County deputy public defender
Bar rating: Qualified

A deputy public defender since 1998, Tryfman has had assignments countywide. From 2016-19, she supervised 25 attorneys and mentored new hires as deputy in charge of Eastlake Juvenile Court. She’s worked in collaborative drug court, coordinating with prosecutors, judges and others to help individuals dealing with addiction.

Her current assignment is in the Major Crimes Unit, where she exclusively handles homicides with special circumstances.

Tryfman spent five years as president of the Public Defenders Assn., according to her campaign website, and has proctored a high school program on civic duties and constitutional principles. She has served as a Superior Court judge pro tem, handling traffic and small claims cases. She received the peer-decided Gideon Award as felony attorney of the year in 2025, her bio states.

“I would champion further access to justice by exploring and expanding digital access to the courts in underserved communities,” she said.

Under an existing state appropriations restraint, also known as the Gann Limit, lawmakers cannot spend more in the state budget 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. More recent carve-outs in the law also allow leaders to direct excess funds to infrastructure and local government.

The limit applies to most other appropriations of tax revenue, including money that lawmakers tuck away into the “rainy day” fund and other reserves.

California voters also have capped the amount of money lawmakers can set aside in the rainy day fund at 10% of general fund proceeds in a given year.

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%.

In effect, the measure would allow the governor and the Legislature to put more money into budget reserves, creating another option to avoid triggering rebates.

For example, if the spending limit is $400 billion for the year, and revenue hits $410 billion, the measure would give lawmakers the option to deposit the $10 billion above the spending limit into the rainy day fund, direct the money to infrastructure or give it to local governments, instead of returning the funding to taxpayers and increasing funding for schools.

WASHINGTON — Federal immigration officers opened fire on a Dominican man in New York because he drove his car into officers’ vehicles and they believed their lives were in danger, a senior Immigration and Customs Enforcement official said Friday.

The 28-year-old man, whom New York City police identified as Oscar Belgal, was shot “superficially” in the neck as ICE officers attempted to arrest him, said Marcos Charles, head of ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations. Authorities have not released details of Belgal’s condition.

Officers used their vehicles to block the man as he attempted to drive away, but he accelerated toward them, Charles said during a news conference with U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin in Washington. The Department of Homeland Security said the news conference was about the “dangerous consequences of sanctuary city policies.”

“Our officers, using their training and believing that their life and the life of the partners and the general public were in danger, used their training and fired weapons,” Charles said.

Belgal had his 5-year-old son in the car with him when the shooting happened, officials said.

Mullin said ICE agents didn’t know the child was in the car, but that Belgal “was aware” and chose to put the boy at risk by trying to evade officers.

ICE previously tried to detain Belgal, Charles says

Belgal was associated with a robbery crew that used mopeds and weapons, and was convicted of grand larceny last year and sentenced to five years of probation, Charles said, adding that he evaded officers in September when ICE tried to arrest him for deportation.

The Legal Aid Society, which was representing Belgal in an ongoing drug case, called Friday for a “full and transparent” investigation of the shooting, the officers involved to be held accountable and an end to “ICE’s escalating presence in New York City.”

Federal agents walk near the scene where a man was shot by an ICE officer during an operation in the Bronx borough of New York on Oct. 8, according to local media and police.

(Charly Triballeau / AFP via Getty Images)

Belgal has pleaded not guilty to narcotics-sale charges in the drug case. The Legal Aid Society did not comment further.

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, both Democrats, said late Thursday that they had pressed Mullin and Republican President Trump to release Belgal, but to no avail. They also urged the administration to immediately release ICE officers’ body camera footage of the shooting and to halt immigration enforcement operations in the city.

Mullin said Belgal was being held in a “highly secured” detention facility outside New York City but declined to say where.

Attorneys representing Belgal filed an emergency petition Thursday night calling for his release. A hearing is scheduled for Friday afternoon.

He also confirmed ICE officers were wearing body cameras that were activated, but didn’t say when any of that footage would be released. Under agency policy, bodycam video can be released within 72 hours if “determined that it is in the best interests of the agency.”

On Friday, New York City police released footage from its officers as they arrived at the scene following the shooting. The department previously said its officers were not involved in the arrest and not at the scene when the shooting happened.

The video shows a city officer responding to a chaotic scene where Belgal — sitting on the ground with his hands behind his back and head drooping to one side — was surrounded by several officials. The video shows officers lifting Belgal and placing him in a black SUV. Police said he was taken to a hospital.

“Yo put pressure. Put pressure,” an officer can be heard saying as the SUV reverses down the block.

New York City Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch said Belgal was pulling into a parking space when a federal officer in plainclothes approached with his gun drawn, followed by another federal officer who also wasn’t in uniform. Belgal started to pull the car forward, and at least one of the officers fired seven rounds, hitting the man below his left ear.

Protesters and local officials decried the shooting as an example of the dangers of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown.

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani arrives to speak to the media about the ICE shooting in the Bronx borough of New York on Oct. 8. Mamdani said he would ask President Trump to remove federal immigration agents from the city as tensions flared over the latest shooting involving ICE.

(Charly Triballeau / AFP via Getty Images)

Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin takes questions from reporters during a news conference at U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement headquarters on Friday in Washington, DC. Mullin, joined by ICE officials, addressed Thursday’s shooting of a man in New York City by a federal immigration agent as he spoke out against sanctuary city policies.

(Kevin Dietsch / Getty Images)

“There is no justification for what we have seen today,” Mamdani said late Thursday at the scene of the shooting.

Federal officers who surrounded the vehicle wore construction vests and masks, making it difficult to identify them as immigration officers, he said.

Mullin criticizes NYC’s immigration policies

Mullin devoted much of Friday’s news conference to criticizing Mamdani and New York City’s limits on cooperation with ICE. The Democrat, who took office in January, has restricted local cooperation with immigration enforcement operations and repeatedly called for the abolition of ICE.

“Sanctuary politicians, they create an environment for criminal activity to thrive, not for the American citizens to be safe,” Mullin said.

Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin takes questions from reporters during a news conference at U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement headquarters on Friday in Washington, DC. Mullin, joined by ICE officials, addressed Thursday’s shooting of a man in New York City by a federal immigration agent as he spoke out against sanctuary city policies.

(Kevin Dietsch / Getty Images)

ICE has asked local officials in New York to hold onto more than 14,000 people for federal officers to collect and place in immigration detention, he said.

“Silence. Absolute silence is what we have gotten back,” the secretary said. “Why would they release these individuals back onto the streets?”

“We’re enforcing our nation’s laws. We’re not picking and choosing,” Mullin continued. “Why is that controversial? We should all want law and order on our streets.”

ICE has justified other shootings with perceived threats to officers

During Trump’s second term, Homeland Security has often accused suspects of attempting to ram officers with vehicles or otherwise pose a threat and using that as justification for opening fire. But evidence from other shootings involving immigration enforcement officers has sometimes called into question that rationale.

In the Jan. 7 shooting death of Renee Good in Minneapolis, Homeland Security officials initially claimed an ICE officer opened fire in self-defense after Good attempted to run him over with her vehicle. Videos filmed from multiple angles challenged the administration’s narrative.

On July 10, ICE officers fatally shot Lorenzo Salgado Araujo in Houston as the Mexican national was driving his construction crew to a job site. DHS maintained Salgado Araujo rammed an ICE vehicle, but the three men inside his vehicle disputed the narrative.

Last year in a Chicago suburb, immigration officers fatally shot Silverio Villegas González after they say the Mexican national drove at them and dragged one with his car, causing “serious injuries.” But body camera videos from local police showed the agent who shot Villegas González walking around afterward and dismissing his own injuries as “nothing major.”

Santana and Marcelo write for the Associated Press. Marcelo reported from New York. AP reporters Anthony Izaguirre and Jennifer Peltz in New York City and Ryan Foley in Iowa City, Iowa, contributed to this report.

The shooting prompted protests in New York City as officials defended ICE and Mayor Zohran Mamdani condemned the incident.

The United States Department of Homeland Security has defended Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) shooting of a man in New York City while his child was present. Federal officials used the incident to criticise sanctuary-city policies that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities.

New York officials have condemned the shooting and have called for ICE to end its operations in the city.

The shooting took place on Thursday afternoon when ICE officers attempted to arrest a man identified by New York City police as Oscar Belgal.

Homeland Security officials gave their account of the incident on Friday during a news conference, saying that Belgal refused to exit his car when approached by officers and then accelerated, striking two ICE vehicles.

They said officers then opened fire, grazing Belgal’s neck while his five-year-old child was in the back seat.

According to Homeland Security officials, Belgal received first aid and was taken to hospital before being transferred to a secure detention facility outside New York state. They did not disclose where Belgal is being held.

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Markwayne Mullin said that the agents did not know the child was inside the vehicle when they fired.

ICE senior official Marcos Charles said agents had attempted to arrest Belgal as part of an investigation into suspected gang involvement in an earlier shooting of a US Customs and Border Protection officer.

According to US officials, Belgal is an undocumented migrant from the Dominican Republic who had previously evaded arrest and received a five-year sentence for grand larceny in April 2025.

“[Belgal] was a thug,” Mullin said at the Friday news conference. “The absolute worst of the worst.”

Mullin confirmed that officers were wearing body cameras but the footage has not been made public. New York City police released bodycam footage on Friday of police officers on the scene who had responded to a 911 call about the incident.

In other violent incidents involving federal immigration officers, video evidence has contradicted initial accounts from ICE and Homeland Security officials, including in Minneapolis, where footage of the fatal shootings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good challenged federal officials’ descriptions of the encounters.

The latest shooting prompted protests on Thursday night in the Bronx, where the shooting took place, with demonstrators condemning ICE and calling for the agency to be abolished. Tensions rose after NYPD officers clashed with some of the protesters.

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani condemned the shooting and said he had called US President Donald Trump to demand an end to ICE enforcement in the city.

Speaking to reporters late on Thursday at the scene of the shooting, Mamdani said he had tried unsuccessfully to secure Belgal’s release in phone calls with Trump and Mullin.

“These actions are making the city less safe,” Mamdani said. “ICE is rotten to its core.”

Mullin accused Mamdani of prioritising politics over public safety and said Trump had offered to transfer Belgal to New York police custody if they pursued charges. Mullin said Mamdani refused this offer.

Business groups such as the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Teachers Assn. and Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California oppose the proposal.

Gov. Gavin Newsom and Democrat Xavier Becerra and Republican Steve Hilton, who are running to replace Newsom, also have spoken out against it.

Opponents describe the wealth tax as a “flawed experiment” that will harm California’s economy because companies and rich people will flee the state.

“If they leave, it will create a huge hole in our budget, threatening core services like education, healthcare and public safety,” arguments against the proposition say.

Opponents of the measure say the proposal is an ineffective attempt to address the long-term effects of the healthcare cuts and would harm California’s economy and budget.

The state budget in California already is largely dependent on income taxes paid by its highest earners. Because of that, revenues are prone to volatility, hinging on capital gains from investments, bonuses to executives and windfalls from new stock offerings, and are notoriously difficult for the state to predict.

Billionaires such as Palmer Luckey, the co-founder of defense tech startup Anduril Industries, and entrepreneur Mark Cuban have pushed back against the proposal on social media. Some tech executives have been relocating or moving their assets to try to avoid the potential tax. Google co-founder Sergey Brin has been cutting ties to California, relocating to Nevada while funding groups such as Building a Better California that are backing ballot measures that could nullify the billionaire tax.

More than $187 million has been spent opposing the proposition, with the bulk coming from Building a Better California, cryptocurrency company Ripple Labs and its co-founder Chris Larsen, data from the secretary of state show.

Proposition 39 is opposed by leading state Democrats, major civil rights organizations including the American Civil Liberties Union and major labor unions in the state, who say the measure would disenfranchise eligible voters and expose voters to identity theft by forcing them to write personal ID numbers on mail ballot envelopes.

According to campaign finance reports, the ACLU of Northern California has contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to defeating the measure. Quinn Delaney, a major Democratic donor and fundraiser for former President Obama, and Patty Quillin, a major philanthropist and wife of Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings, both have given $1.5 million.

The Service Employees International Union Local 2015, which represents long-term caregivers, provided $1 million, the SEIU California State Council for Working People gave $500,000, and the California Teachers Assn., through its independent expenditure committee, gave another $500,000.

Arnulfo De La Cruz, president of SEIU California and SEIU Local 2015, said in a statement that the group’s members “know our nation is stronger when working people make their voices heard and have their ballots counted,” and that strict voter ID laws “are part of Trump and MAGA extremists’ agenda to rig the election system so they can cling onto their own power and get richer from corporate corruption.”

Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) recently convened a news conference where a slate of Democratic leaders — including state Senate President Pro Tempore Monique Limón (D-Goleta) and Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas (D-Hollister) — called on Californians to vote no on Proposition 39.

The Democrats called the measure a “dirty trick” from “Trump acolytes” akin to historic poll taxes designed to disenfranchise Black voters, and a power grab that would seriously harm millions of eligible voters, especially in Black and Latino communities.

“Proposition 39 is a direct assault on everything California stands for. Our people, our values and our fundamental belief that every eligible voter here in California deserves to have their voice heard and deserves to have their vote counted,” Rivas said.