year

For more than three decades, Liz Phair and Sleater-Kinney existed in parallel without ever quite meeting. They admired one another from afar, brushed shoulders only in passing, and, in some ways, represented opposing ways of challenging the limits placed on women in indie rock. Phair, who found novel and peerlessly smart ways to write about heterosexual skirmishes, used her ambitions to edge closer to the mainstream; Sleater-Kinney, one of the great duos of American rock, have succeeded in becoming the last band standing from the underground scene in which they emerged.

Both acts are about to share the stage for the first time, co-headlining a tour they’ve cheekily and earnestly named the Flannel and the Fury, with stops across the country, from El Cajon, Calif., to Ocean City, Md., and a night at Los Angeles’ Greek Theatre on Tuesday.

Yet, despite having spent more than 30 years orbiting the same world, they have had surprisingly little time together. This interview is one of a few substantial conversations they’ve ever had. It is, at first, slightly stilted. Carrie Brownstein and Corin Tucker (Sleater-Kinney) are in sync as always; Phair is clearly excited, but seemingly unsure of where to place herself in the dynamic. Now all in their 50s, the women have been asking similar questions of the same culture, and are only now getting the chance to compare answers.

“Sorry, I know you’re like, ‘Why aren’t you better friends?’ For me, that’s the point. I’m trying to be better friends,” says Brownstein. “Yeah, talk to us again when tour’s over,” Tucker adds.

Brownstein is sitting in a parking lot in Los Angeles, wearing a cardigan and glasses, people walking past her window, unaware of who’s inside. Tucker calls from her home, a blurred background behind her, wearing a white blouse and lipstick. Phair is at home too, makeup on and hair straightened, various musical instruments on the wall behind her. It’s a few weeks before their co-headlining tour, and Tucker has already loaded up all the equipment. She’s packed her suitcase too, full of socks she’ll throw away by the end of tour, and a wardrobe almost entirely of black.

“This is news to me,” says Brownstein. “I was thinking more of a chocolate brown. I will be all brown town.”

Phair is going for wine-like jewel tones. “A Cab Sav,” to be specific.

Phair, who’s had an on-and-off relationship with touring, is noticeably more nervous than Brownstein and Tucker. “It takes me two or three shows to get into it. At first I’m like, why are you all staring at me?”

Phair had been sitting on the idea of a co-headlining tour with Sleater-Kinney for a few years. She sheepishly says that she didn’t reach out herself, but got her manager to do it while she was working on the second half of her memoir. She’s been keen to share a bill with Sleater-Kinney ever since she heard their 1996 album “Call the Doctor.”

“By then, I’d started to pull back from indie rock,” says Phair. “I had gotten married, and I didn’t know I was pregnant at the time, but I was starting to drift out of this scene, and then they put out this kick-ass record, and I just remember thinking, I kind of want to be back in the game. It inspired me. It stuck with me.”

Phair felt she was atomized from the female coalitions of the ’90s, and that this co-bill might be a way to rectify that. “I’d love to be able to go back and sew it together again,” she says. “Here’s a band I was a fan of that meant something to me and now I can play with them.”

For Sleater-Kinney, Phair has long been more than a neighboring act. Tucker and Brownstein describe her as one of their “biggest inspirations.” Both have the same Phair favorite song: “Divorce Song.” “It’s a perfect song,” says Tucker. “I think I’ve put it on every mixtape I’ve ever made,” Brownstein adds.

By the time Phair released her debut album, “Exile in Guyville,” in 1993, she was the one of the two acts edging toward the mainstream. Within a year, she was on the cover of Rolling Stone.

“I still have a copy of the magazine,” says Brownstein. “We were all so excited. Like, an actual artist made the cover.”

Nirvana had made this small corporate alliance permissible a couple of years earlier, finding a loophole as Cobain wore a T-shirt that read “Corporate Magazines Still Suck” on their Rolling Stone cover. It was a time when an antiauthoritarian stance was the only artistically credible one. Before we started calling one another “performative,” Tucker, Brownstein and Phair came from a time when “poser” was the worst insult and sin. They came from a scene of ideological puritanism.

“You know when people die their life flashes before their eyes, sometimes, it’s like that when I do a deep dive, and I’m like, God, there were a lot of rules. There was a lot of fear. And I don’t think anyone who wasn’t there would be able to picture it,” says Brownstein. “It took us a long time to get over it.”

“OK, can I ask the question? Can I get right in here? Because I want to know,” Phair chimes. “Do you think that’s because there weren’t enough women? You think women would have brought the inclusivity to inclusivity?”

“Unfortunately, no,” replies Tucker.

“We had these all-female festivals in Olympia, and we had our own publicist, and they were like, how dare we?” says Brownstein. “You know, it was just gatekeeping, that now seems sort of repugnant. But it was also a way to establish yourself in opposition to what felt like the only way to be.”

It’s part of why Sleater-Kinney declined an invite to play Lilith Fair, the mainstream precedent for so-called female solidarity in music. One of history’s most famous traveling all-female festivals, Lilith Fair was considered by many in the Riot Grrrl movement to be an early symbol of the commodification of “girl power,” female solidarity aligned with corporate ideals.

Sleater Kinney

(Robin Laananen)

“It seems like they haven’t really given credit to women in an independent milieu who have organized a lot of female-only shows for years,” Brownstein told the Dallas Observer in 1998.

“I think at the time we thought we were too cool to play Lilith,” Tucker reflects.

“I’ll just leave your answer,” says Brownstein.

Then she changes her mind four seconds later.

“I saw the Lilith Fair documentary last year and got FOMO, I kind of regretted not playing” she says. “But at the same time we had a handicap from a small indie punk community that was kind of didactic, there was a real rigidity to what you were and weren’t allowed to do. Even us signing with Matador in the U.K. was considered too big.”

Selling out, they all conclude, is no longer a concern for anyone. Phair’s son, who is Gen Z, often says the phrase “it’s time to get the bag.”

“You know, every artist has the right to get their bag,” says Phair. “I always felt that way and I was especially vilified for it.”

That vilification reached its apex when she released her mainstream-aspiring self-titled album in 2003, an album Sleater-Kinney said they hated in an interview with Rolling Stone that year, and which Pitchfork gave a rare 0.0 score in one of its most notorious reviews.

“I’d be on tour doing 10 interviews a day back-to-back, and I almost had to give these interviewers therapy, because they were so sad about my turn from indie rock,” says Phair.

Phair is adamant she made her mark on “every one of those songs, except maybe ‘Favorite,’” she says, referencing the chintzy, awkwardly phrased track where she sings about her underwear. Maybe it’s a metaphor, but more likely, it is just a song about her underwear. Safe to say it won’t be on the show’s setlist: “I will never play it live.”

The old argument about selling out now sits inside a very different touring economy. Sleater-Kinney and Phair’s co-headlining tour happens to follow a flood of co-headlining tours this year, from indie acts like Waxahatchee and MJ Lenderman to big marquee names like Usher and Chris Brown. With higher ticket prices and more competition — not only with other touring bands but with the allures of home comforts — audiences need a bigger draw. Artists want an opportunity to play to big audiences, as well as a better chance of “getting the bag.”

All three artists insist they won’t necessarily bring home the bag, nor is that why they’re doing this.

“All our budget’s gone on to the lighting designer,” jokes Brownstein.

“When I do these interviews with you guys, I get kind of excited and nervous because I feel challenged in the best way,” says Phair. “I think co-headlining bills, it does let you go into bigger venues than you could by yourself. But it also, for me, gives me creative food, like nutrition. It makes me grow.”

ANY Brits planning a bucket list holiday to Japan will be able to explore more of the city thanks to one airline offering free flights.

All Nippon Airways (ANA) is offering domestic flights at no extra cost between December 2026 and February 2027.

Free domestic travel is part of a campaign with the tourism board to encourage travel across the country.

It was first brought about last year and after its success, is doing so again.

Called the ‘Stopover & Add-on Free Fare’ – the ticket offers free domestic flights between December 1 and February 28, 2027.

Bookings need to be made between 1-30 September 2026 and Brits can add up to two ANA domestic flights at no additional cost.

ALL IN

UK holiday parks where you can go ALL INCLUSIVE from £25pp with shows & waterparks

RETRO RATES

Our fave childhood holidays that have stayed ridiculously CHEAP – from £9.50pp

You do have to book it at the same time as international flights though, and the offer applies to all cabins.

ANA’s domestic network covers more than 40 destinations – so there’s plenty to choose from.

Most Brits will fly into Tokyo (Haneda) – from there you could explore the likes of Okinawa which consists of tiny islands with tropical beaches.

Another is Fukuoka, a city the island of Kyushu which is famous for its seafront location and food with specialities like Hakata Ramen and Mentaiko.

If you’re looking for some snow, head to Sapporo which is Hokkaido’s capital and one of the world’s snowiest cities.

You could even stop by the Sapporo Snow Festival which is being held between February 4-11 next year.

A NEW theme park deal is letting you buy a 2027 annual pass which includes visiting for the rest of 2026 for free.

Merlin – who operates 20 top UK attractions including all the major theme parks – has launched a mega September deal on their annual passes.

Anyone buying a Gold or Platinum Merlin Annual Pass for 2027 can visit all of the attractions for free for the rest of the year.

This means three extra months free on top of the 12 months of 2027.

Merlin 2027 Annual Passes with FREE 2026 access

It also includes some of the top events including Fright Nights at Thorpe Park and Alton Towers‘ Scarefest, along with Christmas at Legoland.

The Gold Merlin Annual Pass includes 485 days of attraction access as well as additional extras worth £250.

PLAY ON

Alton Towers to offer guests FREE second day tickets to the theme park this summer

CHEAP THRILLS

Short break deals at UK theme parks where you can stay on-site from £34.13pp

This includes free parking and 20 per cent off food, drink and shops.

There are some exclusions, such as Alton Tower Fireworks, and from November 6-8.

Opt for the Platinum Merlin Annual Pass and it includes all of the above AND even more perks worth more than £500.

This includes a free Fastrack per visit, as well as four Bring a Friend tickets per year and a free Coke Freestyle cup that comes with two refills.

Not only that, but there are no exclusion dates (apart from some paid-for events).

The Gold Merlin Annual Pass currently costs £239 (or £19.99 a month), which works out to just 50p a visit.

Merlin 2027 Annual Passes with FREE 2026 access

The Platinum Merlin Annual Pass costs £299 (or £24.99 per month), which works out to

The deal is on offer until the end of the Month (September 30).

Here are the full list of attractions included in the passes:

• Alton Towers
• Thorpe Park
• Chessington World of Adventures Resort
• Legoland Windsor Resort
• Cadbury World
• The London Eye
• Warwick Castle
• Madame Tussauds
• The Dungeons (London, Edinburgh, York)
• Shrek’s Adenture! London
• Legoland Discovery Centres (Birmingham, Manchester)
• Sea Life (Manchester, Blackpool, Brighton, Weymouth, Great Yarmouth, Hunstanton, Scarborough, Loch Lomond)

Eating breakfast in a South Dakota coffee shop, Gloria Steinem was all too aware of the couple eyeballing her from the next booth. He was sporting chains. She wore leather pants and what Steinem later recalled as “an improbable hairdo.” The place was packed with tough-looking, mostly male bikers pumped about a huge rally they were attending. Steinem, returning from a Sioux powwow honoring ancient tribal women, knew she wasn’t in her element.

Finally, the leather-clad woman came over and spoke up. “I just want to tell you how much Ms. magazine has meant to me over the years — and my husband too,” she told an astonished Steinem.

There was a time, the woman said, when rolling down the road meant perching on her husband’s back seat. But now she had her own sweet ride: “I even put ‘Ms.’ on my license plate, and you should see my grandkids’ faces when Grandma rides up on her purple Harley!”

The image of that breezy, boisterous grandma stayed with Steinem for years. “I’ve come to believe that inside, each of us has a purple motorcycle,” she wrote in her 2015 memoir. “We have only to discover it — and ride.”

Steinem, the co-founder of Ms. Magazine and for six decades a charismatic leader who urged women to pursue self-affirmation, political power and equality both in the workplace and at home, died Wednesday at her home in New York City, according to her foundation’s social media pages. She was 92.

“Gloria lived true to her independent spirit, always with curiosity and a great sense of humor,” the posts said.

An activist, journalist, and relentless traveler who said she went for 20 years without spending more than eight consecutive days in her New York apartment, Steinem described herself as “an entrepreneur of social change.”

“I raise money. I talk. I write. I tell stories. I want to do justice to the women I meet,” she told The New Yorker in 2015.

Steinem, who struggled with stage fright most of her life, talked with women at gigantic conferences and in intimate kaffeeklatsches. At book signings and on barstools, she sought their stories, sometimes re-telling them in her essays and on her countless speaking tours. Her portfolio of issues was vast, from sexual violence, female genital mutilation and racism to the more mundane injustices that helped fuel a movement for sweeping social change.

At one campus visit, the discussion turned to men who expect women to pick up after them. A young Japanese woman, silent for most of the increasingly raucous session, stood up, turned around to address 500 other audience members and said: “When my husband leaves his underwear on the floor, I find it quite useful to nail it to the floor.”

She had never before said a word in public, she told the cheering crowd.

Steinem had a “gift for empathy,” New York Times columnist Gail Collins wrote when the feminist icon turned 80 in 2014.

“Women who read about her or saw her on TV felt that if they ran into her on the street, they would really get along with her. And women who actually did run into her on the street felt the same way. More than a half-century into her life as an international celebrity, she remains stupendously approachable, patient with questions, interested in revelations.”

Gloria Steinem, left, and Pat Carbine, two of Ms. magazine’s founding editors, in 1980.

(Dave Pickoff / Associated Press )

Famously attractive, Steinem over the years gave hope to young women who wanted to “stand up for their rights without being called man-haters,” Collins wrote. “She was evidence that it was possible to be true to your sisters while also being really, really attractive to the opposite sex.”

At the same time, she alienated the religious right with her fervent pro-choice advocacy. When Lands’ End featured an interview with Steinem in its 2016 catalog, outraged readers threatened a boycott. Company officials then cut their ties with the woman they had headlined as a “legend.”

Steinem first drew public notice when she was in her 20s and struggling to establish herself as a freelance writer. Her breakthrough story was a funny, scathing account of her two weeks as a Playboy “bunny” — a scantily clad cocktail waitress at Hugh Hefner’s Manhattan nightclub.

In some ways, the story backfired. Steinem became known not as a crusader for women but as a former bunny. For several years, her magazine assignments continued to veer toward “women’s page” topics — in 1964, she wrote about textured stockings for the New York Times — and even after she delved into serious political issues for New York magazine, she wasn’t taken as seriously as she would have liked.

In 1968, a Washington Post columnist described her as “the mini-skirted pinup girl of the intelligentsia.” Two years later, a headline in the Los Angeles Times read, “Gloria: Beautiful Brain in Ditto Body.”

Meanwhile, the women’s liberation movement had propelled itself into the mainstream, ignited by writers like Betty Friedan. For Steinem, though, it became a passion only after she covered a meeting during which women opened up about their illegal abortions. The event was held to protest a legislative hearing on abortion where the only witnesses were 14 men and a nun.

“Suddenly I was no longer learning intellectually what was wrong. I knew,” Steinem recalled in 1983. “I had had an abortion when I was newly out of college, and I told no one. If one in three or four adult women shares this experience, why should we be made to feel criminal and alone?”

Nearly 60 years after her unwanted pregnancy, Steinem dedicated her memoir to the British physician who arranged her abortion after she agreed to two conditions.

The first was that she never reveal his name. (She did, long after his death.)

The second: “You will do what you want to do with your life.”

Born on March 25, 1934, in Toledo, Ohio, Steinem didn’t attend school regularly until seventh grade. Most winters, her father Leo, an ebullient, 300-pound dreamer who was often in debt, would drive the family down back roads in a trailer, stopping here and there to sell antiques he’d picked up along the way.

Ruth Steinem, Gloria’s mother, was a former journalist who was hospitalized for long periods with severe mental health problems. From the age of 11, after her parents divorced and her older sister Susanne left home, Gloria often cared for her mom.

In an essay, “Ruth’s Song (Because She Could Not Sing It),” Steinem recalled her mother cutting her arm when she smashed a window to escape the Nazi invaders that only she could see. “I remember a long Thanksgiving weekend holding on to her with one hand and holding my eighth-grade assignment of ‘Tale of Two Cities’ with the other,” Steinem wrote.

Despite her patchy schooling, Steinem received a scholarship to Smith College, where she graduated Phi Beta Kappa after majoring in government. After spending two years in India on a fellowship, she worked briefly for an international youth organization funded by the CIA.

Basing herself in New York in 1960, she quickly became known for her stylish prose, sharp wit, and striking appearance. Within a decade she was “Gloria-Steinem-the-antiwar-gorgeous- bachelor girl who was pictured with Henry Kissinger in Time and Life…,” according to a breathless 1970 account in the Los Angeles Times.

But she was also the Gloria Steinem who helped start New York magazine, who wrote insightfully about the intersection between racism and sexism, and who in 1971 became the first woman chosen to address an annual banquet of the Harvard Law Review.

She zeroed in on the school’s failings.

“There is a course on international whaling law but none on women’s rights internationally,” she told the black-tie gathering. “An eminent professor of administrative law said as late as last night that he didn’t know what the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission was. The same man replied to a request that at least one full-time female professor be hired by answering that women faculty brought problems because of ‘sexual vibrations’…”

The following year, Steinem, with several other feminist journalists, founded Ms. Its first, tentative edition, a 40-page insert into New York magazine, sold out in eight days.

The debut issue of Ms. included pieces on gender stereotypes, lesbian relationships, and job discrimination. It also featured an open letter from 53 prominent women — including tennis great Billie Jean King, singer Judy Collins and Steinem — who revealed that they had undergone abortions.

While the magazine’s monthly circulation eventually topped 500,000, it also fueled skeptics. “I’ll give it six months before they run out of things to say,” newscaster Harry Reasoner predicted on national TV.

Ms. also took flak from some of Steinem’s sister feminists, who contended that it cast women as victims. As new waves of feminists confronted different issues, some became exasperated by Steinem’s seemingly perennial role as the face of the women’s movement.

“Guys in the media chose Gloria as our leader,” said feminist writer Susan Brownmiller in 2016. “A lot of us, our hope is that eventually, history will straighten this all out and say, no, Gloria came in a little later, and her very loyal supporters have backtracked that history.”

Steinem remained a contributing editor to Ms. for 15 years.

Gloria Steinem at home in New York City, 2010.

(Annie Leibovitz / Penguin Random House)

Meanwhile, she was crisscrossing the country, campaigning for liberal Democratic candidates, fighting laws restricting abortion, and urging legislators to adopt the Equal Rights Amendment.

“Like Sky Masterson, the wandering gambler in Damon Runyon stories, I’ve been in more hotel rooms than the Gideon Bible,” she wrote, “and he didn’t wash his hair with hotel soap, eat from vending machines, or sit up late organizing with the hotel maids.”

In 2013, President Barack Obama gave Steinem the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian honor.

Her books include a 1983 essay collection, “Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions”; a 1986 portrait of Marilyn Monroe; her 2015 memoir, “My Life on The Road”; and works on aging and self-esteem.

Over the years, Steinem had longstanding romantic relationships with a number of men but vowed never to marry or have children.

However, at 66, she broke her vow and married David Bale, a British businessman and animal rights advocate. By then, the institution of marriage had changed for the better, she later explained.

“We spent 30 years in the United States changing the marriage laws,” she said. “If I had married when I was supposed to get married, I would have lost my name, my legal residence, my credit rating, many of my civil rights.”

Three years after their marriage, Bale died of brain cancer. Steinem’s stepchildren include the actor Christian Bale.

At 80, Steinem celebrated her birthday by riding an elephant in Botswana.

In the following years, she campaigned for Hillary Clinton, spoke at the Women’s March on Washington, helped save her hometown’s last abortion clinic and gave numerous interviews denouncing President Trump’s views on women. She was the subject of an off-Broadway play and was honored by Rutgers University with the Gloria Steinem Endowed Chair in Media, Culture, and Feminist Studies.

For fun, she danced. When asked by TV hosts, she occasionally demonstrated a well-worn soft shoe routine, though her heart was with the tango.

“It’s a sick, authoritarian dance,” she told a reporter, “but I loved it.”

Chawkins is a former Times staff writer.

For years, Hollywood has talked about a federal film and television tax credit that could help the industry combat the growing number of productions fleeing overseas.

This week, the entertainment business got a glimmer of hope.

After more than a year of quiet work from California lawmakers, industry lobbyists and Hollywood unions to build a bipartisan coalition, President Trump endorsed the effort in a post on Truth Social, providing a major boost to the issue.

If passed, a federal incentive is expected to help draw some productions back to the Golden State, industry experts and advocates said. While it probably won’t immediately end Southern California’s production crisis — as many states now have established film hubs stocked with experienced crews and more generous tax breaks — an added federal credit could certainly help make California more competitive, they said.

“I will put our crews and our talent against any talent anywhere in the world,” said Rep. Laura Friedman (D-Glendale), a former producer who has been pushing for a national film tax credit. “If we have a level playing field upon which to shoot, where we are not much more expensive than other locations, productions will come back to Los Angeles.”

Trump’s Truth Social post came after a meeting with actor Jon Voight, one of the president’s designated Hollywood ambassadors who has played a key role in lobbying for the film industry and advocating for a federal tax credit. Though Trump has had frosty relations with Hollywood, particularly since many heavyweights did not support his presidential campaign, the industry’s jobs push aligns with his focus on re-shoring work, marking a rare moment of agreement.

Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, Trump said Wednesday that he has done “a lot of work” in the last week to get something done on federal tax incentives for the film and television industry.

Trump said he has spoken to streaming giant Netflix; Ari Emanuel, chief executive of TKO Group Holdings Inc.; and “many others,” and that he is hopeful there will be a bipartisan push to revive productions in Hollywood with “big subsidies and big credits.”

“We don’t give anything and we should,” Trump said, referring to proposed tax breaks for U.S. productions. He added that he wants legislation to “match” what other countries are offering.

Now, lawmakers must hammer out the details of that legislation.

The bill will have a Republican sponsor from a state known for film and TV production, but Friedman declined to name the person, saying she was waiting for Republicans to make their internal decision about that lead lawmaker.

The bill is likely to go through the House Committee on Ways and Means. While exact provisions are still being negotiated, the expectation is that the credit will be stackable with states’ incentives — similar to how Canada’s tax credit works. A 20% federal tax credit on all labor costs — including for salaries of actors and crew members — is being discussed.

An earlier proposal from Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) had called for a baseline labor-based tax credit of 15% to 20%, in addition to bonus add-ons for indie productions among others, a Schiff spokesperson said.

Schiff has previously noted that 45% of all U.S. films and scripted TV shows were shot internationally last year, up from about 33% in 2022.

Having Schiff and Trump on the same side of this national tax credit is emblematic of the odd bedfellows the effort has gathered.

The Motion Picture Assn. studio lobbying group has released a statement backing the proposal, as have unions such as the Screen Actors Guild — American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, the Directors Guild of America and the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees.

“I am in strong agreement with the President,” Schiff wrote Monday in a post on X. “Congress should immediately take up and pass a federal film tax incentive to bring back these good-paying jobs that we’ve lost to other countries.”

Production incentive experts say any national film tax credit will need to have a seamless process, one with minimal red tape.

One idea is to make the national production incentive an overlay that’s attached to states’ incentives, so the federal government doesn’t need a separate agency to vet the same criteria, which could slow the process, said Peter Marshall, managing principal of media insurance services at Epic, an insurance broker and consultant.

Parameters will also need to be clear, and the program easy to access, said Kathleen Thompson, vice president of tax incentives at payroll service Cast & Crew.

“There is an excitement and an energy and a hopefulness right now from the production community,” she said. “I’ve certainly gotten notes from clients, potential clients and industry colleagues that are very excited about the possibility of this passing and becoming a reality.”

Stacking a federal tax credit on top of the newly bolstered California production incentives could help give the state an edge when producers are pricing out location shoots.

“California is still the leader in production,” said Joe Chianese, senior vice president at Entertainment Partners, which tracks production incentives worldwide. “Producers would like to stay home if they can, but it boils down to the math.”

But even with the improvements to California’s film and TV tax credits, the state’s program still has limitations.

California has an annual funding cap of $750 million, has designated application windows and does allow the cost of actors’ salaries — a major driver of movie budgets — to be counted toward the tax breaks.

Beyond the program, the Golden State is just more expensive than other U.S. locales, and some filmmakers have criticized the red tape that makes shooting in L.A. more difficult.

“Can we be more competitive with a federal incentive? Absolutely,” Thompson said. “Can it completely turn the tide? I don’t know, but I hope so for our industry and our state.”

Industry stakeholders say they are hoping for quick movement on the issue, particularly since it will probably take more than a year after any tax credit is passed for producers to start making plans to move filming back to the U.S. due to lengthy production timelines for movies and TV shows.

“There is a ticking clock,” said Marshall of Epic. “If something isn’t done by the end of the year or in sight, there will be a further solidification of offshoring.”

For Peter Max-Muller, owner of The Ruby, a North Hollywood contemporary clothing rental business, the loss of film and TV shoots in L.A. is one of many threats his business faces, in addition to the use of AI production.

His sales typically mirror the production data from the nonprofit FilmLA, which recorded a 13% drop in shoot days in L.A. County in the second quarter over the same period a year ago.

The goal of a federal incentive, Max-Muller said, “is that we get that runaway production back.”

It’s why Friedman said she is pushing to get the tax credit legislation done as soon as possible.

“The film industry is deep in the identity of Los Angeles,” she said. “And it’s worth saving.”

Staff writer Ana Ceballos contributed to this report.

The Quintanilla family is taking their personal disputes to the public.

On Tuesday, A.B. Quintanilla III — brother of the late Tejana singer Selena Quintanilla — uploaded a statement to Instagram claiming that there is a lawsuit involving Suzette Quintanilla Arriaga, as well as “facts and circumstances” related to their father, Abraham Quintanilla Jr.

According to the Latin Grammy-winning producer and songwriter, the lawsuit began a “few months ago,” but he shared that the circumstances surrounding the case have been simmering for years.

“What led me to this point did not start a few months ago. It comes from years,” stated A.B. “Years of accumulated situations, decisions and circumstances that for a long time I chose to keep silent out of respect, out of loyalty, and above all, because it involved my own family.”

While no clear wrongdoing was presented in his statement, the Kumbia Kings musician shared that, when the time is right, he will disclose his side of the story. “I was never the type to wait for the paycheck from someone else’s hard work to come to my door,” he added.

After his post, Suzette and Marcella Quintanilla, their mother, published a joint statement Wednesday morning on the official Selena Instagram account, claiming that the parties involved were not served a lawsuit, nor have they been able to locate the alleged lawsuit in public records.

“[Suzette] has received no court-filed complaint, summons, petition, or other legal pleading concerning the allegations A.B. is describing,” read their statement. “So, we ask a simple question: What lawsuit? Where was it filed? What is the case number?”

In a subsequent Instagram post uploaded Wednesday by A.B., he alleged that Suzette and her lawyers were notified with the corresponding documents via mail and electronic mail; the carousel also contained a letter by Manatt, Phelps & Phillips addressed to Michael A. Trauben, Esq., of Sign, Sign & Trauben.

“She was notified of a lawsuit related to her fiduciary duties, that is, her legal obligations to act with loyalty, transparency and in the best interests of those she was responsible to,” read the statement uploaded by A.B. “She responded, but did not provide what was being requested: contracts, documentation and financial information.”

The Times attempted to locate the lawsuit in Nueces County, Texas, court — headquarters for Q-Productions, an entertainment company founded by Abraham, as well as the Selena Museum — but was unable to locate any case filings related to “Suzette Quintanilla” or “Suzette Arriaga.”

The only available case involving Suzette is a California lawsuit she filed against clothing company Shein in March over unauthorized merchandise that featured her late sister.

In their Sept. 2 Instagram post, Suzette and Marcella claimed that A.B.’s insinuations concerning Suzette, Abraham and the overall Quintanilla family were false.

The pair also addressed rumors that Suzette is selling personal belongings related to Selena, stating that “any potential sale of an ownership interest in a company is entirely separate and should not be mischaracterized as the sale of Selena’s personal items.”

“There was no theft by Suzette. Suzette has not stolen, misappropriated, or improperly taken money or property belonging to A.B., Abraham, Chris, Selena’s estate or any family-owned or jointly owned business,” read the statement. “If A.B. has evidence that Suzette stole or misappropriated anything, he should present it.”

This online dispute comes almost nine months after Abraham’s death on Dec. 13, 2025. The patriarch played a crucial role in the development of his daughter Selena’s career, establishing his family-led band Selena y Los Dinos in the 1980s as a way to meet financial needs. With A.B. on bass, Suzette on drums and Selena as the tender vocalist, the group would eventually sign their first recording contract with Freddie Records in 1984.

In 1995, after Selena’s tragic death at the hands of Yolanda Saldivar, the former president of her fan club, Abraham dedicated his life to safeguarding her legacy and overseeing primary control over her estate. This included managing the rights to her image, name and likeness — at times, to controversial ends.

“If he is alleging wrongdoing by Abraham, he should clearly state what he is alleging rather than leaving the public to speculate about a man that is no longer here to respond for himself,” stated Suzette and Marcella jointly.

A.B. and Suzette’s representatives did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In his Wednesday Instagram statement, A.B affirmed that more information will be shared via his lawyer on Friday.

Boom, goes the Clippers.

Steve Ballmer has been tattered. Lawrence Frank has been shredded. Their team future has been flattened.

Boom, goes those damn Clippers.

They had transformed themselves from the ridiculed Clip Joint to a top-shelf NBA organization, with the billionaire owner, the beautiful arena, the best coach and the most devoted fans … but they apparently got greedy, seemingly played dirty, and now have been affixed with a scarlet eight letters that will follow them forever.

Cheaters.

The NBA has ruled that the Clippers are cheaters.

Ballmer, cheater. Frank, cheater. Even president of business operations Gillian Zucker, cheater.

The NBA suspended Ballmer and Zucker for one year and Frank for six months Wednesday for violating salary cap rules when they signed Kawhi Leonard in 2019.

In arguably the harshest punishment in sports since SMU was given college football’s death penalty in 1987 — this is even worse than the USC sucker punch of 2010 — the league added injury to insult by stripping the team of five consecutive draft picks from 2029 to 2033.

The league also fined the team $30 million and Leonard $700,000 but the issue here is not money.

The issue is trust.

How can any of the Clippers partners or sponsors or fans trust this team with their dollars or their time or their affection after they were apparently caught knowingly breaking one of the NBA’s cardinal rules?

You don’t mess with the salary cap. Period. It’s the one thing that keeps these disparate teams and markets competing on a level field. Period.

Yet according to the findings of a lengthy investigation by the NBA, the Clippers’ top three executives — Ballmer, Frank and Zucker — helped arrange rich endorsement deals for Leonard that allowed him to make considerably more money than his contract states. Leonard did little if any endorsing, collected the extra checks, and essentially was paid above and beyond the salary cap.

The circumvention was first revealed a year ago by the podcast “Pablo Torre Finds Out,” which cited a $28-million endorsement deal with the now-bankrupt Aspiration, a sustainability services company. The subsequent NBA investigation discovered three more endorsement deals that amounted to similar salary cap circumvention, a charge which drew the particular ire of the league because the Clippers had been warned about salary cap circumvention with Leonard before.

Kawhi Leonard, above during a game against the Golden State Warriors at Intuit Dome in January, signed with the Clippers in 2019.

(Sean M. Haffey / Getty Images)

Bottom line, the Clippers seemingly flouted the rules, got burned, got punished, and now you have to wonder, how on earth do they move forward from this?

They started the recovery process immediately Wednesday by issuing a statement that accused the NBA of not playing fair.

“We vehemently reject the NBA’s findings, which are the result of a heavily biased investigation seeking to justify a predetermined narrative rather than facts and evidence,” the statement began.

They can let out one of those trademark Ballmer screams and it still won’t matter. There is no arbitration or appeals process available. The NBA’s ruling is final.

All of which leaves the Clippers facing serious questions about their future.

First, will Ballmer still have the local support to own the team? His absence from his traditional seat under the basket will serve as a nightly reminder that he commanded a dirty ship. Their most vocal cheerleader is now their biggest scoundrel, and how do you come back from that?

Although he made great strides in dragging the Clippers back into relevance since buying the team from the shamed Donald Sterling in 2014 — even building that cool arena in Inglewood — Ballmer has lost much credibility with this decision.

He may need to sell to help the organization shed its stink. There’s been so much peddling of billion-dollar franchises around town lately, surely some rich group is in a position to take the Clippers off his hands.

Stan Kroenke? Too late. Bob Iger and Josh Kushner? Too late. Mark Walter? Um, no. How about those Buss kids, or are they too busy making nice with Manny Machado?

Then there’s the matter of Frank, who was struggling to build sustained success before this scandal. It would be a surprise to see him return, just as it would be a surprise to see Zucker return. For the Clippers to come out of this mess, they’re going to need to retool at the top.

Which brings this story to one Clipper leader who was not indicted in the investigation. How much longer will Ty Lue, one of the league’s very best coaches, want to stick around this mess? He has three years left on his contract. That could be three long years.

Finally, what of Kawhi Leonard? The Clippers thankfully traded him back to Toronto this summer, and hopefully that is where he’ll stay if the trade gets taken off hold with the investigation complete.

In all, just when you thought the Clippers reputation in this town had long since moved past all those years of losing and insults and embarrassments and Sterling scandals, just when you thought it couldn’t get any worse…

It just got worse.

The NBA handed down sweeping penalties to Clippers owner Steve Ballmer, team executives, the team and star Kawhi Leonard following an investigation into allegations the group circumvented the league’s Collective Bargaining Agreement.

The Clippers said in a statement that they “vehemently reject the NBA’s findings” and vowed to challenge them. Leonard issued a statement saying he had no direct knowledge of the rule violations.

The findings announced Wednesday, the result of a nearly yearlong investigation conducted by Wachtell Lipton Rosen & Katz, a high-powered New York law firm, determined the Clippers broke NBA rules by initiating off-court income opportunities between Leonard and four companies doing business with the team: Aspiration Partners, Boingo Wireless, Daktronics and Lockton Insurance.

The firm’s report stated that the Clippers facilitated endorsement agreements between the companies and Leonard, induced the companies to enter into the agreements by offering them business from the team, paid personal expenses on behalf of Leonard and his representatives and failed to report improper solicitations for off-court income made on Leonard’s behalf by Dennis Robertson, his then-business manager.

The investigation found Leonard received $66 million in endorsement pay from four companies facilitated by Ballmer and Clippers executives at the behest of the star’s then-manager. Ballmer invested $60 million in Aspiration and three other companies received $22 million from the Clippers in consulting fees.

As a result, the NBA issued the following sanctions:

• The Clippers are forfeiting first-round draft picks, one apiece in the 2029, 2030, 2031, 2032 and 2033 NBA drafts.
• The Clippers are fined $30 million.
• Ballmer is suspended from all league and team activities for one year for “knowingly seeking to help Leonard obtain off-court income opportunities, for approving a business deal that he knew was a precondition for Aspiration to enter into an endorsement agreement with Mr. Leonard, and for his failure to create conditions under which his organization abided by the NBA’s circumvention rules.”
• Clippers president of business operations Gillian Zucker is suspended without pay for one year for “being primarily and directly culpable for the impermissible endorsement arrangements and for providing false and misleading statements to investigators.”
• Clippers president of basketball operations Lawrence Frank is suspended without pay for six months for “his involvement with the impermissible endorsement arrangements and for approving impermissible expenses incurred by Mr. Leonard and his family.”
• The Clippers organization and personnel are subject to a compliance and monitoring program overseen by the league office for five years.
• Leonard is required to pay the league $700,000.
• Dennis Robertson, Leonard’s uncle and previous business manager, is banned from conducting business or otherwise engaging with NBA teams and their affiliates on behalf of or with respect to any player, employee or other league or team personnel for a period of five years.

The Clippers said in a statement they cooperated fully with the investigation and will fight “to demonstrate our innocence.”

“The NBA’s findings … are the result of a heavily biased investigation seeking to justify a predetermined narrative rather than facts and evidence,” the team statement read. “What the league told us privately differs from what it announced today publicly, and they have not held themselves close to the standard Commissioner [Adam] Silver set at the start of this investigation to ensure it’s fairness and accuracy.”

”… We intend to vigorously challenge these findings and penalties through every avenue available to us and look forward to an ethical and impartial arbitration process.”

The Clippers most likely will have to take their claims to court. A league source not authorized to discuss the sanctions publicly said there is not an arbitration or appeal process available for the team to pursue. Arbitration is reserved for players and the National Basketball Players Association declined to pursue use of it in this case.

The Clippers released a letter sent to Silver arguing Ballmer spent nearly $50 million funding the investigation and cooperated in every way possible.

“Mr. Ballmer’s reputation has been irreparably damaged as he now finds himself embroiled not only in this heavily biased investigation, but in civil litigation, the Aspiration bankruptcy proceeding, and more,” the letter stated. “It seems increasingly likely that Mr. Ballmer will spend years defending himself and the team against a podcaster’s baseless claims.”

Leonard issued a statement denying knowledge of the salary cap violations without contesting the league’s findings.

“I accept full responsibility for lapses in judgment by people within my inner circle and regret the distraction this situation has caused the fans and my family,” Leonard’s statement read. “I entered into my contract with the Clippers as well as the agreements in question in good faith, fully committed to fulfilling my obligations and with no knowledge of any intent on anyone’s part to circumvent the salary cap.

“For 15 years, my priority has been giving everything to my family, the game, and those I share the court with. As I return to Toronto, I am focused on what I can control, closing this chapter, and moving forward with a clean slate.”

It remains unclear whether Leonard’s trade to Toronto, which was put on hold until the NBA investigation was completed, will be finalized.

The probe was triggered when the “Pablo Torre Finds Out” podcast aired an episode Sept. 3, 2025, detailing the contract Leonard received from Aspiration, a self-described “socially-conscious and sustainable banking services and investment products” firm.

The deal with Leonard came to light in Aspiration’s bankruptcy documents. Joseph Sanberg, co-founder of the company, pleaded guilty in October to federal charges of conspiring to bilk investors out of $248 million and on June 1 was sentenced to 14 years in federal prison.

One of the primary investors in Aspiration was Ballmer, the former longtime CEO of Microsoft whose estimated net worth is $139 billion. He has owned the Clippers since 2014.

Ballmer invested $50 million in Aspiration in September 2021. A month later, the Clippers announced a $300-million sponsorship deal with the company. Ballmer nearly granted Aspiration naming rights to the team’s new $2-billion arena, but instead chose financial services firm Intuit.

Two years later when Aspiration was experiencing severe financial difficulties, Ballmer invested an additional $10 million and Clippers co-owner Dennis Wong — Ballmer’s former college roommate — invested $1.99 million in Aspiration nine days before Leonard received a $1.75 million payment from the company. Leonard was paid $21 million of the $28 million agreed upon in his contract with Aspiration.

Leonard was traded to the Toronto Raptors on June 30 for Brandon Ingram, Gradey Dick and a slew of draft picks, but the deal was put on hold pending the outcome of the investigation. Leonard led the Raptors to the NBA championship in 2019.

Leonard would not talk about the allegations during the 2025-26 NBA season because the investigation was ongoing and brushed it off during media day in September 2025.

“None of us did … wrongdoing and, yeah, that’s it,” he said. “We invite the investigation.”

Asked if he performed any endorsement work for Aspiration, Leonard said, “I understand the full contract and services that I had to do. Like I said, I don’t deal with conspiracies or the click-bait analysts or journalism that’s going on.”

Players are allowed to have endorsement and business deals, but at issue was whether the Clippers participated in arranging the side deal beyond simply introducing Aspiration executives to Leonard. Doing so would be a violation of Article 13 of the NBA collective bargaining agreement.

ESPN reported Aug. 17 that NBA investigators had met with Ballmer and other Clippers officials in an attempt to agree to findings before the case went to arbitration. Although ESPN wrote that three sources told reporters the NBA found no evidence showing Ballmer funneled money through team sponsors to pay Leonard to circumvent the salary cap, the NBA immediately pushed back, releasing a statement that read “ESPN’s article regarding the L.A. Clippers investigation — for which the NBA declined to cooperate — contains numerous and significant inaccuracies. The results in this matter will be made clear once the investigation is concluded.”

In his only public comments since the salary cap circumvention accusations first surfaced, Ballmer told ESPN in September 2025 that he was “conned” by Sanberg and Aspiration. He also said he knew nothing of the endorsement deal between the company and Leonard.

“We were done with Kawhi, we were done with Aspiration,” Ballmer said. “The deals were all locked and loaded. Then, they did request to be introduced to Kawhi, and under the rules, we can introduce our sponsors to our athletes. We just can’t be involved.”

Ballmer cannot wipe his hands clean of Aspiration yet. He was added as a defendant in a civil lawsuit against Sanberg and others associated with Aspiration — renamed Catona Climate in 2025 just before the bankruptcy filing — brought by 11 investors in the company. Ballmer and other defendants are accused of fraud and aiding and abetting fraud, with the plaintiffs seeking at least $50 million in damages.

WASHINGTON — The House voted Tuesday to censure Rep. Chuck Edwards (R-N.C.) following a House Ethics Committee investigation that concluded he engaged in persistent unprofessional and inappropriate conduct toward two young female staffers in his office.

A censure registers the House’s deep disapproval of a lawmaker’s conduct that does not meet the threshold for expulsion from office.

The 413-2 vote was just the latest instance of the House grappling with revelations about lawmakers’ behavior toward female staffers, a trend that prompted House leaders to launch a bipartisan review this year focused on making Capitol Hill a safer job environment for women.

Rep. Michael Guest, the chairman of the House Ethics Committee, said the Edwards case did not involve what he called “quid pro quo sexual harassment,” but rather conduct and behavior that created a hostile work environment.

“While Representative Edwards denies that his conduct was intended to be sexual or romantic, his pattern of behavior would lead a reasonable person to interpret it as such,” Guest said.

Guest said that behavior included providing the aides with lavish gifts, making comments about their appearance and dress, sending notes regarding his affection and inviting them to intimate dinners and vacations. He also said Edwards was aware that the women were uncomfortable with his behavior.

Edwards apologized to the two women, who are no longer on his staff, for actions that put them in an uncomfortable position. He said his intentions were “only grounded in what I understood our friendship to be” and said he admired them. He also apologized to his wife and family, saying they carried a burden they did not create or deserve.

But he also forcefully rejected the committee’s most damaging conclusions and the recommendation that he be censured. He emphasized that the investigative report itself concluded there was no evidence he engaged in sexual activity or explicitly propositioned any staff member.

“I am imperfect. I have made mistakes, but I do not believe I committed sexual harassment,” Edwards said on the House floor. “The factual findings of this investigation do not justify branding me as though I did.”

Edwards was one of the two lawmakers who voted against the resolution. The other was Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.).

Edwards told reporters after the vote that he had expected the result would not go his way. House Speaker Mike Johnson sat with Edwards for a few minutes before the vote and told him how he thought it would go.

“It would not have been politically expedient for anyone to vote against a resolution accusing someone of sexual harassment,” Edwards said.

Edwards stood in the well of the House as the censure resolution was read. When he left the chamber, he remained highly critical of the Ethics Committee’s findings and at one point said the investigation was “very much akin to a Russian show trial.”

Edwards becomes the 29th member in the history of the House to be censured. He was asked about that distinction after the vote and said he lived a terrific life before he got into politics.

“I look forward to getting my life back,” Edwards said.

Edwards is serving his second term in Congress representing a district in western North Carolina. He chose not to seek reelection after the committee issued its report.

Edwards is the latest in a line of ethics cases this Congress

Earlier this year, Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell and Republican Rep. Tony Gonzales faced calls for their expulsion before they stepped down.

And last month, the Ethics Committee announced it was reviewing allegations that Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.) may have engaged in inappropriate sexual contact with a House staffer. He said he would cooperate with the investigation but his actions were consensual in nature and didn’t violate the law or House Ethics rules. He also apologized to his family and constituents.

House members are prohibited from engaging in sexual harassment or making unwanted advances toward their subordinates. The Ethics Committee said that despite the absence of an explicit proposition, a reasonable person could interpret Edwards’ “intimate and effusive attentions, where he prioritized the personal over the professional, as thinly veiled advances.”

Rep. Mark DeSaulnier, the committee’s ranking Democratic member, said the investigation spanned more than four months and included interviews of 16 people and a review of nearly 1,500 pages of documents.

He said Edwards provided the two women with jewelry, designer purses, shoes and flowers and commented on their appearance. He also sent deeply personal letters and even skipped a vote series to decorate a Christmas tree at the home of one of the staffers.

“These are not innocuous, isolated instances,” DeSaulnier said. “They are part of a sustained, unprofessional and inappropriate conduct by Representative Edwards toward two young women he employed.”

Rep. Teresa Leger Fernandez (D-N.M.) said Edwards’ behavior was “outlandish and disturbing.”

“If we don’t take action today, there is no opportunity for these women to receive justice,” Leger Fernandez said.

Freking writes for the Associated Press.

BOSTON — Climate change has been the backdrop to Charles Hughes’ entire life, from kindergarten lessons about disappearing habitats to wildfire smoke billowing through the air he breathed while growing up in Colorado. But now that he’s a college student in Massachusetts, he said global warming is rarely a top issue.

“Honestly, it doesn’t come up as much,” said Hughes, who chairs the state’s chapter of the College Democrats.

What a difference six years makes.

During President Trump’s first term and especially during the Democratic primaries to determine who would run against him in 2020, Democrats spoke constantly about climate change. They used it to rally young voters such as Hughes, fueling protests and sweeping demands to remake the economy with proposals like the Green New Deal.

But there has been a national shift in the conversation that is sharp enough for some researchers to coin the term “climate hushing” to describe it. The Searchlight Institute, a Democratic think tank, urged the party to stop mentioning climate change because it is not a priority for voters. The Sunrise Movement, a left-wing group that pushed global warming as a top issue for young people, switched its mission last fall to a broader mandate of fighting the Republican president.

The shift was encapsulated by the Democratic primary for U.S. Senate in Massachusetts on Tuesday as the incumbent, Ed Markey, 80, fended off a challenge from U.S. Rep. Seth Moulton, 47. Markey still talked about sponsoring the Green New Deal, but focused more on other issues to burnish his left-wing bona fides and prove to voters that he is not too old for the job.

It was the latest example of how climate change has been eclipsed by issues such as affordability, U.S. support for Israel and, above all, how to confront Trump.

“Six years ago, Green New Deal was every phrase out of Ed Markey’s mouth every chance he got,” said Mary Anne Marsh, a veteran Democratic strategist in Massachusetts. That wasn’t the case this cycle. “It’s about who’s best to fight. Period, full stop. Everything falls under that.”

‘People are increasingly freaked out about other issues’

Even if the political discussion on climate change has quieted, the planet has not. Scientists say there is an increasing chance that by the end of the year, 2026 could be the hottest year on record, or at least come close. A strengthening El Nino is forecast to be off the charts, spiking global temperatures.

Some advocates expect the issue to return to center stage if Democrats retake the U.S. House in November and climate-sparked disasters dominate the winter.

U.S. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, a prominent Democratic voice on climate change, said in an interview that ignoring the issue is a major strategic “blunder.”

“Climate change has moved from the science department into the economics department,” he said. “It’s now battering people’s home insurance, property values, pocketbook concerns. So I think it’s a very powerful argument.”

Trump has falsely claimed climate change is “a hoax,” and his administration has undone policies one by one that would make it less damaging in the future.

The Sunrise Movement, founded in 2017 to mobilize young voters over climate issues, announced in October that it was shifting to a broader fight against “fascism.” The group’s executive director, Aru Shiney-Ajay, said that was a prescient move because of reports that federal agents infiltrated protest meetings during Trump’s immigration raids in Minneapolis.

“We just live in a significantly more authoritarian country. Because of that, a lot of the Democratic primaries are about more existential questions,” Shiney-Ajay, whose network generally backs left-wing Democrats, said in an interview. “It has felt less like people care less about climate and more like people are increasingly freaked out about other issues.”

About 6 in 10 Democrats say climate change is “a very big problem” for the country, according to a Pew Research Center poll from April. That is roughly the same as in 2016. Still, climate has often taken a back seat to other issues in Democratic voters’ priorities, such as inflation, healthcare affordability and the role of money in politics.

Affordability concerns have dominated the political debate this year.

McKenzie Wilson of Blue Rose Research, a Democratic data firm, said voters have called for sweeping changes in response to economic discontent, demonstrating a level of anger not seen in years.

“In that kind of environment it’s hard to think about long-term, existential problems,” Wilson said. “If we don’t talk and focus our attention on the number one thing the electorate wants to talk about, as we saw in 2024, we’re not going to be connecting with the electorate.”

‘Don’t say climate change’

That view was summed up by the Searchlight Institute, a Democratic think tank that last year released a provocative suggestion: “The First Rule About Solving Climate Change: Don’t Say Climate Change.”

It contended that voters saw it as such an intimidating, complex issue that Democrats were more likely to win by focusing on other subjects — thus enabling them to regain power and tackle the crisis that they were not talking about.

Leah Stokes, a political scientist at the University of California, Santa Barbara and author of “The Carbon Wave,” a book about Democratic President Joe Biden’s domestic agenda, said it was “galling” when politicians made the issue less of a priority.

“The climate crisis is accelerating and we can’t really not talk about it for like a decade, because the planet will be even more on fire if we do that,” she said.

Anthony Leiserowitz, director of the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, agreed with those concerns.

“What happens over the course of the next decade will profoundly shape the habitability of the planet for literally thousands of years to come,” he said.

Some are making climate an affordability issue

Climate has come up as part of the national backlash to data centers, but it is only one part of the conversation about the projects’ impact. Many climate advocates are adjusting how they talk about the issue, stressing how green energy can lower prices and ease insurance costs.

“What we’re seeing right now is, whether you’re advocating for healthcare reform or climate action or some niche tech issue, everything is filtered through some cost frame,” said Jared Leopold, a veteran Democratic strategist who has long focused on climate change.

That is how the Green New Deal came up at a recent debate between Markey and Moulton, when a voter asked how each candidate would reduce energy prices. Notably, the questioner asked about increasing nuclear or gas generation, not clean energy, to deal with cost. Markey turned the opportunity into a slam against the president.

“There was a plan in place in order to have a strong, clean affordable energy future for our commonwealth,” Markey said, “and Trump attacked it.”

Tatishe Nteta, a political scientist at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, said that is how Markey has used climate change this election — to signal his willingness to fight Trump as well as his alliance with the left flank of the Democratic Party, which has run up a series of primary wins this year. But other issues have become even more useful in doing that.

“The definition in where you’re at in terms of a progressive candidate and a progressive elected official is your viewpoint on Israel,” Nteta said. “You’re not hearing this in most races, that I’m the candidate who’s going to protect and save our planet.”

Massachusetts’ summer has been the hottest that Eileen Cefail can recall in the 30 years she has worked in the Roofers Local 33 office. “The roofers are tough as nails, and they work so hard, and their work is so grueling,” she said. “This heat has been horrendous for them.”

Cefail is backing Markey in the primary, but climate, she said, was not the main reason.

“He’s always been a union guy,” Cefail said. “He’s just for the labor.”

Riccardi, McDermott and Willingham write for the Associated Press. Riccardi reported from Denver and McDermott from Providence, R.I. Associated Press writer Linley Sanders in Washington contributed to this report.

EMPORIA, Kan. — Adam Hamilton has spent decades trying to bring people to Jesus as founder of the nation’s largest United Methodist church. Now he wants to bring Kansas voters to the polls as the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate.

A first-time candidate, Hamilton faces an unusual balancing act between political ambition and spiritual obligation. His pastoral role has given him rare prominence for a Democrat in a state where Republicans have won every Senate race for nearly a century, and some in his party are hoping for an upset victory over incumbent Sen. Roger Marshall.

But conservatives are also trying to use Hamilton’s religious leadership against him. They suggest that his sermons prove he’s too liberal for Kansas or even that he’s a heretic for suggesting that non-Christians have a path to salvation after death.

Marshall said in an interview that Hamilton is “too woke for Kansas.”

Hamilton isn’t turning the other cheek. If Jesus were standing before them now, he said, “Roger Marshall would call him ‘woke.’”

Only a few ordained ministers have served as senators over the past 100 years and just one — current Democrat Raphael Warnock of Georgia — remained an active pastor. If elected, Hamilton plans to continue as senior pastor at his Church of the Resurrection in the Kansas City area, preaching 12 to 18 times a year.

As Hamilton tries to win over center-right churchgoers as well as secular liberals, he’s promising that he wouldn’t use his perch in Washington to evangelize. He’s on unpaid leave, going 11 weeks without giving a sermon this summer, although he peppers his remarks with biblical references, discusses Jesus’ teachings with voters and spends several hours weekly on pastoral duties such as hospital visits.

“I need that interaction with people and the caring for people,” he said after a meet-and-greet at a coffee shop in Emporia, a university town of 24,000 that’s smaller than his congregation 110 miles to the northwest.

Hamilton brings skills that built a huge church to a tough race

Hamilton, 61, built his church from a few members meeting in a funeral home chapel in 1990 into a 25,000-member congregation with nine locations across the Kansas City area. He’s demonstrated an ability to raise money and has gained national attention by writing more than 30 books, mostly on Christian theology.

Hamilton describes himself as a centrist, running partly on “bringing people together.” His congregation, he notes, is nearly evenly split between Democrats, Republicans and independents.

Republican-leaning Kansas has a sizable bloc of moderate voters, protects abortion rights and regularly elects Democratic governors. But Democrats haven’t come within 10 points of winning a Senate race in more than 50 years, and they haven’t won one since 1932.

Marshall, 66, is focused on rallying rural conservatives, a strategy that perennially works for Republicans. A fifth-generation farm kid who became an obstetrician, the senator is fluent in agriculture policy. He jibed that suburbanite Hamilton “doesn’t know a heifer from a steer.”

Marshall also warned that the Senate could fall under Democratic control if Hamilton wins the race.

“His party is too crazy for Kansas,” Marshall said.

The campaign has included an allegation of heresy

This year’s race is unusual because of attacks from the Christian right branding Hamilton a heretic.

At issue is a 2022 sermon, reposted on X after Hamilton won the Democratic primary in August. Hamilton cited New Testament passages to argue that non-Christians can receive “the saving grace of Jesus” after death, avoiding eternal torment in Hell.

Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas declared that Hamilton had rejected “the central tenets of Christianity,” quoting a verse in the Gospel of John where Jesus declares, “No one comes to the Father except through me.”

Marshall thanked Cruz for raising the issue, suggesting the sermon was “one of hundreds” of examples of Hamilton being out of step with Kansans.

Hamilton acknowledged that some Christians agree with Cruz — but cited other prominent Christians who might share his own view, including Methodist founder John Wesley and “Chronicles of Narnia” author C.S. Lewis.

“If he’s going to call me a heretic, he’s not the first,” Hamilton said. “He won’t be the last.”

Hamilton seeks to reassure voters wary of church-state mix

Hamilton also has faced skepticism from Democrats wary of mixing government with religion.

Republican conservatives routinely highlight their faith, suggesting that God wanted them to seek office and profusely thank God after winning.

This year during Lent — the 40 days of self-reflection and repentance before Easter — Hamilton said he skipped a meal each day and prayed about entering the Senate race.

“I’m never 100% sure about the will of God, so I tell people I am 87.2% sure I am supposed to be doing this,” he said. “The Kansas voters will decide whether I’m supposed to win, but I feel like I was being called to step into the arena.”

In Emporia, Hamilton said that as a senator, he’d “fight for the rights of all people, whether they have any faith or not.”

“I’m not running for the Senate to make everybody in this country Christian or United Methodist,” he said.

Nolan Guyer, a 72-year-old Navy veteran and retired nuclear plant operator, said he initially worried about voting for a minister, but Hamilton won him over enough that he donated to the pastor’s campaign.

“I don’t think it’s the government’s business to teach morals, and that is a preacher’s job,” Guyer said.

Some familiar issues are prominent

Republican political action committees have attacked Hamilton as so radical on climate change that he urged his congregation to repent for eating beef. They base that allegation on a misleading stitching together of two parts of a 2020 sermon, with one clip showing Hamilton calling Christians “to repentance” for not protecting God’s creation and a second, earlier clip of him saying that “maybe changing your diet” is among personal actions that could reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Another ad claimed that Hamilton’s church helped pay for a drag queen story hour for children — a claim his campaign denies.

Marshall blamed Hamilton for a split in the United Methodist Church over allowing LGBTQ+ clergy, something it did in 2024. While Hamilton did support that change — at least since 2019 — he also had worked to prevent a split by backing a plan for a local option on whether to ordain or marry LGBTQ+ people.

Hamilton said his views on human sexuality and same-sex marriage evolved gradually, as he came to know gay and lesbian people in his congregation. His church now has a Queer Inclusive Collective ministry and participates in Pride events.

“One small part of my ministry has been trying to make sure that people who felt alienated from the church and pushed away knew that Christ welcomed them and they were loved by our congregation,” Hamilton said.

Hamilton’s watchwords include ‘decency’ and ‘affordability’

One of Hamilton’s assertions, that he is “running on decency,” resonated with Jann Briggs. She’s a retired teacher from Reading, a small town where the Methodist church is across the street from the Miracle Cafe.

Briggs and several friends came to Hamilton’s event in Emporia with a copy of his latest book, “Holy Spirit: God’s Presence and Power at Work in Us.” He signed it for them.

“Finally, somebody who’s speaking the right words,” Briggs said.

Hamilton is also focusing on affordability, a key issue for Democrats this year. He has criticized Republican cuts to federal programs for the poor, such as food assistance and Medicaid coverage.

“I just want to know, when did it become ‘woke’ to care for your neighbor?” he asked.

Hanna writes for the Associated Press.

That Girl is back.

Olympic gold medalist Jordan Chiles announced her intention to train for the L.A. Olympics on Wednesday, publicly beginning her attempt for a third Olympic Games in a video narrated by NBA legend Michael Jordan.

“Why again?” says Jordan, whom Chiles is named after. “Because the dream is still there.”

Chiles helped the United States to a team gold medal in 2024, competing in all four events in the final. She won her first individual Olympic medal, a bronze on floor with her energetic Beyoncé-inspired routine, but that result still is being considered by the Court of Arbitration for Sport after controversy involving the inquiry process that led to Chiles’ score being upgraded to overtake Romania’s Ana Barbosu.

Chiles is the fourth member of that gold medal-winning team to announce a comeback for the 2028 Olympics, joining Suni Lee, Jade Carey and Hezly Rivera. Simone Biles, the 29-year-old, 11-time Olympic medalist, has not officially come out of retirement.

Before Biles, a U.S. female gymnast had not competed in three Olympic Games in 24 years. Dominique Dawes, who competed in her third Olympics in 2000, Linda Metheny and Muriel Grossfield are the only other American women to accomplish the feat. But in a sport no longer dominated by teenage one-hit wonders, there will be three women vying to join the exclusive triple Olympian club in 2028.

Chiles used college experience to help raise her game after winning a team silver in her first Olympic experience in Tokyo, and after returning from Paris with gold, she finished a standout college career at UCLA. The 23-time All-American won her second and third individual NCAA titles, on bars last year and floor this year, and won the AAI Award, which goes to the top senior gymnast in the nation. She had 19 perfect 10s in her college career, which ranks third in UCLA history. On Tuesday, UCLA announced Chiles would return to the team as a student coach.

“Jordan has made an incredible impact on our program over the years,” UCLA gymnastics coach Janelle McDonald said in a statement. “I’m excited to watch her continue that influence in a new capacity as she steps into this next chapter with student coaching. Her energy, passion, leadership and gymnastics experience will make a unique and positive impact on our team this coming year!”

Outside of the gym, Chiles has capitalized on her Olympic stardom. She was a finalist on “Dancing with the Stars” and authored a memoir, “I’m That Girl: Living the Power of my Dreams.” She was named to Time Magazine’s 100 most influential people in sports this year and has been a ubiquitous presence on red carpets and at major sporting events and galas.

With her post-gymnastics life rolling, Chiles still is choosing to return to training with less than two years remaining until the 2028 Games.

“When the world asks why she’s back for a third time,” Jordan says in Chiles’ announcement video, “the answer’s simple.”

“Why not?” Chiles chimes in.

The $1 coin designed to celebrate America’s 250th birthday and seemingly President Trump, whose face gazes from one side of the gold finish, will go on sale Wednesday, according the U.S. Mint.

The coin’s design — Trump’s visage as “heads” and the Great Seal of the United States as “tails” — was given the stamp of approval this year by the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, whose members Trump appointed. In past comments, the president said that the idea to stamp his face on a coin was “very unusual” but that he was “honored by it.”

The president’s second term has come with several such brandings, or attempts at them that have become tangled up in lawsuits. That includes moves to put Trump’s name on the Kennedy Center, as well as the U.S. Institute for Peace, as Trump works to leave his stamp on history and Washington, D.C.

The coins, which can be used as legal tender, stirred some criticism particularly because of federal law that bars the depiction of a living president on U.S. currency. But in some circumstances, the treasury secretary does have authority to authorize the minting and issuance of special coins.

The coins were struck to “honor 250 years of great American heritage,” the U.S. Mint wrote on its website. In an arc above Trump’s face is written “LIBERTY,” and below is “1776 — 2026.” On the flip side is the Great Seal of the United States, with the bald eagle gripping arrows in one claw and an olive branch in the other. In a banner clutched in its beak is written “E PLURIBUS UNUM,” Latin for “out of many, one”

A roll of 25 coins will cost $61, and a bag of 100 will cost $154.50, and the U.S. Mint said they randomly hid some special-issue coins among the rolls and bags. Those will be marked “July 4th,” because they were stuck on that day, the anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.

Households are limited to only two orders, the U.S. Mint wrote, but that cap will lift at 2 p.m. Eastern time on Thursday.

Bedayn writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — A bipartisan group of U.S. lawmakers is pressing the Army to explain why it told a unit based in Europe to stop specializing in drone warfare, an order that comes as the world’s battlefields rapidly evolve and military tactics increasingly rely on uncrewed systems to fight.

The 173rd Airborne Brigade was building its own drones and practicing the kind of warfare that Ukraine has pioneered against Russia and that Iran has fought against the U.S. — warfare that has killed and wounded American troops. The brigade of 600 soldiers was set up in November to be deployed anywhere that drones were needed.

“We have deep concerns that eliminating this specialized drone unit will limit our ability to learn from allies, particularly the Ukrainian Armed Forces, and hinder our efforts to modernize drone warfare at the speed necessary to compete on the modern battlefield,” the lawmakers said in a letter shared with The Associated Press.

It requests a briefing from the Army to explain its decision and was sent Tuesday to departing Army Secretary Dan Driscoll and Gen. Christopher LaNeve, the Army’s acting chief of staff. It was signed by Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Republican Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, independent Sen. Angus King of Maine and Republican Rep. Mike Turner of Ohio.

“This specialized unit was a prudent response in a moment when the character of warfare is changing faster than a conventional formation’s ability to adapt,” the lawmakers say.

They said they were particularly keen to understand the data, analysis and process behind the change after less than a year of the drone unit being active. They also want to know if the decision was based on guidance from Pentagon leadership or made internally by the Army.

LaNeve, who is filling in as the Army’s top uniformed officer, recently ordered the battalion to refocus on its core mission of being an airborne infantry unit. The move followed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s sudden ousting of the Army’s prior chief of staff, Gen. Randy George.

Integrating drones into the Army’s tactics was a major focus for George. Last year, he and Driscoll had rolled out what they called the Army Transformation Initiative, which pushed to add “modernized (unmanned aircraft systems) into formations.”

George, who became Army chief of staff under President Joe Biden, regularly spoke about the need to accelerate development of new drone systems and get them in the hands of regular soldiers, not just specialized units. Driscoll supported such efforts and focused on cutting the red tape for military contractors to quickly develop more drones.

After George was ousted by Hegseth without explanation in April, he was replaced by LaNeve. This week, Driscoll submitted his own resignation and later said on social media that Wednesday would be his final full day on the job. A reason for his departure was not publicly revealed, but he was an ally of George, and his tensions with Hegseth have been widely reported.

“We are supportive of the transformative initiatives the Army has taken under Secretary Driscoll’s leadership in this area and would like to see that momentum maintained even as uniformed leadership changes,” the lawmakers wrote.

Toropin and Finley write for the Associated Press. Toropin reported from Nuremberg, Germany.

NEW YORK — Whenever Venus and Serena Williams decide to permanently close the door on their storied careers — the duo are competing in the U.S. Open’s women’s doubles this week after receiving a wild-card invitation — the extraordinary tale of two sisters from Compton, just 15 months apart, who both reached No. 1 and won bushels of major titles will continue to reverberate. It might be the most implausible sports story of the last 50 years.

Although Serena’s career accomplishments exceed her older sister’s by considerable margins, including a 23-7 advantage in singles majors, what if Venus had been the baby of the Williams bunch? Would those numbers have evened out?

It’s a fair question.

Research has shown that younger siblings often benefit from being last in the birth order, sometimes called a “younger-sibling effect.” Turns out, the proverbial runt of the litter may have an edge. And while the Williams sisters remain the gold-standard example in tennis, the sport has no dearth of cases, from Alexander Zverev and Andy Murray to Naomi Osaka and Tracy Austin, to name a few.

The birth-order advantage

Serena and Venus Williams hold their trophies after winning the women’s doubles final at Wimbledon on July 9, 2016.

(Tim Ireland / Associated Press)

To researchers, Serena’s rise is not an isolated miracle of genetics, but a classic expression of family dynamics. Dr. Joseph Baker, a sports scientist at the University of Toronto, has found that elite athletes are statistically far more likely to be later-born children. “The birth-order effect means there’s some kind of social or genetic element in the family environment that’s driving it,” Baker says.

Dr. Frank Sulloway, a psychology research associate at the University of California, Berkeley, has found that the younger-sibling effect is a modest but reliable and statistically significant trend. While not deterministic — elite firstborns like John McEnroe and Novak Djokovic remain towering counter-examples, and both had younger siblings that played professionally — the later-born tilt repeats across the athletic landscape.

The backyard crucible

Some investigators trace the younger sibling effect to “situated learning.” That is, developing mastery through hands-on engagement, social modeling, and “vicarious experience,” according to Baker.

“Seeing someone from the same family unit achieve greatness gives the younger sibling the confidence to achieve the same,” he says.

For Serena, who is the youngest of five sisters in the blended Williams family, that meant learning to return Venus’s blistering serve on Compton’s public courts. It meant watching her more heralded older sibling navigate a mostly white women’s tour as a teenager. Because Venus was more experienced and stronger, Serena was forced to accelerate her development just to compete. And since their father, Richard Williams, largely kept them out of junior tournaments, that interdependent learning likely proved especially potent.

“I was able to learn, so I didn’t make the same mistakes she made,” Serena said in 2009. Now 44, Serena returned to compete at Wimbledon in singles and has teamed up for several doubles events this season, including in Cincinnati last month with 46-year-old Venus, after saying she was “evolving away from tennis” following her last appearance at the 2022 U.S. Open.

Sisters Jessica Korda and Nelly Korda walk on the ninth green at the Aramco Championship on April 3 in Las Vegas.

(Harry How / Getty Images)

This crucible is not unique to tennis.

Michael Jordan famously credited his older brother, Larry, with igniting his competitive fire. Golfer Nelly Korda followed older sister Jessica onto the LPGA Tour before surpassing her with major titles and an Olympic gold medal, while Peyton and Eli Manning grew up amid the backyard competition of a football-obsessed family that produced two Super Bowl-winning quarterbacks.

The “rough draft” of parenting

Beyond hardwood or turf battles, younger siblings can benefit from a profound shift in parental behavior, a phenomenon Louisiana Tech University sport and exercise psychology professor Dr. Jordan Blazo calls the “rough draft hypothesis.”

Firstborn children are often a parent’s athletic test drive. Parents often face a steep, expensive learning curve when navigating youth sports with older children, overscheduling them and committing developmental mistakes. By the time a younger sibling arrives, parents know the ropes and the pathways to pursue, according to Blazo, who studies sibling relationships and social comparison in sports. They are more attuned to financial and other feasibilities, which gives them a clearer road map to success.

Southern California native Austin, the youngest of three accomplished tennis children and the youngest U.S. Open champion in history at 16 years and 9 months, says her physicist father maintained healthy boundaries. When Tracy once invited him to watch her play German great Steffi Graf, he declined because of a computer club meeting. “Having a parent that wasn’t overly engrossed in my winning and losing was the healthiest thing,” Austin says.

Meanwhile, her mother, having navigated four older siblings’ athletic careers, was free to travel with 14-year-old Tracy because the nest was empty.

Russia’s Mirra Andreeva, 19, agrees. The reigning French Open winner followed her sister, Erika, three years older, onto the pro tour. “I had more benefits because I’m younger,” said fifth-ranked Mirra of her sister, who has been ranked as high as No. 65. “[My] parents obviously knew what to do. Tennis-wise… maybe that saved me some time.”

Zverev, who followed brother Mischa, 9 years his senior, says traveling to pro events as a kid helped normalized the ATP Tour early. “Maybe I wasn’t as nervous… because I’ve seen them and known them for years,” says Germany’s Zverev, who captured his first major title at this year’s French Open and is the top seed in New York.

Swing for the fences: Risk-taking

This competitive ecosystem also shapes how younger siblings play. Sulloway’s research on birth order and risk-taking reveals that later-borns are more psychologically wired to take strategic risks to carve out their own niche and stand out in the family.

Sulloway’s 2010 study of Major League Baseball brothers, conducted in collaboration with psychologist Richard Zweigenhaft, found that later-born siblings were vastly more likely to attempt to steal bases (and were more successful at it) than their first-born brothers. They were also far more likely to strike out because they were literally swinging for the fences, a high-risk, high-reward strategy. In tennis, this could translate to a willingness to play more aggressively, such as going for more on second serves rather than playing it safe, according to Sulloway.

Warmth over hostility

Yet, this sibling incubator seems to work best with one critical condition: the familial relationship is based on warmth and companionship. Blazo’s research shows that when sibling dynamics are colored by hostility and toxic comparisons, younger siblings experience “differentiation.” They can suffer from lower perceived competence, burn out, and ultimately quit or flee to other sports to escape the older sibling’s shadow, which isn’t necessarily a negative course correction. Sometimes it works out best for both.

In other words, the most successful sporting siblings preserve their emotional bonds. Richard and Oracene Williams famously enforced a sisters-first rule, allowing Venus and Serena to battle on court but walk off as best friends. Mirra Andreeva says her parents taught them that sisters are “the closest people we’re gonna have in life,” and to protect that bond they rarely practice together to keep emotions from getting “messy.”

Sisters Venus and Serena Williams hold the U.S. Open doubles winners’ trophy on Sept. 12, 1999.

(Al Bello / Getty Images)

When Venus and Serena were leapfrogging each other early in their careers, often clashing in Grand Slam finals across continents and surfaces, Serena insisted their competition existed in a supportive environment. Certainly it did in doubles, where they teamed up to win three Olympic gold medals and 14 major titles, including two at the U.S. Open in 1999 and 2009.

At the 2001 U.S. Open, where Venus beat Serena in the first all-Williams Grand Slam final, Serena said: “If anything I prefer to play Venus because that means that we have reached our maximum potential and that we’ll both go home winners. So for me, I always want to see Venus do well. I never want to see Venus lose.”

The long shadow

The McEnroe brothers, John and Patrick, separated by seven years, also saw their supportive relationship boost Patrick’s career. When Patrick, the youngest of three boys, was struggling in college and his mother pressured him to take the law boards, John stepped in, telling her to let Patrick chase his pro tennis dreams. Patrick eventually cracked the top 30 in singles and reached No. 3 in doubles, though he never reached the heights of John, who won seven Grand Slam titles and reached No. 1 in both singles and doubles.

“I think it holds water,” Stanford University alum Patrick said of his last-born experience, citing other examples such as Andy Roddick, whose older brother John was an accomplished collegiate player, and Hall-of-Famer Arantxa Sánchez Vicario, the youngest of four whose two older brothers, Emilio and Javier, were top ATP players. “It just so happened that my brother was exponentially more talented than I was as an athlete, but it’s definitely what at least got me into tennis.”

John McEnroe, left, and his younger brother Patrick compete during in a doubles match in Richmond, Va., on Sunday, Feb. 6, 1984.

(Joanna Pinneo / Associated Press)

The comparisons to John, however, played both ways. Patrick said they motivated him as a junior, but felt like a burden when he was trying to establish himself on tour.

With many physical, emotional and psychological variables in play, researchers admit it’s hard to pinpoint where DNA ends and drive begins when it comes to sibling dynamics. Ultimately, genetics and talent establish the ceiling, but the evidence suggests a supportive sibling ecosystem helps alchemize raw potential into greatness, and the sibling that benefits most is the one that comes later.

For Serena, the competitive yet protective shield provided by Venus was critical to her own success. Venus went first. She absorbed the bulk of pressure, provided the model and set the standard her younger sister spent a lifetime chasing, and eventually surpassing.

“Just everything that she does inspires me,” Serena said.

MELANIE C is in fine shape after raking in £1million last year from her solo work and Spice Girls royalties.

New accounts for Mel’s touring company, Red Girl Media Ltd, show Sporty Spice raked in £550,000 from solo shows in the year to 31 August 2025.

During that time Mel embarked on a DJ tour of the UK, Ibiza and Australia.

Latest paperwork for her publishing firm, Red Girl Productions Ltd, shows she took home a further £300,000 last year from solo royalties.

She also earned her share of Spice Girls royalties worth £600,000.

The money is set to keep rolling in for the recently married singer, as the accounts don’t cover the release of her latest album Sweat earlier this year.

posh accent

Mel C breaks silence on wedding & how Victoria Beckham helped after missing it

WEDDING MELS

Inside Mel C’s lavish wedding from menu to Geri & Mel B coming face to face

The 52-year-old, is also set to start a solo world tour, including gigs in London, Birmingham and Glasgow in October.

Last week Mel shared her new tattoo tribute to her summer nuptials and wild honeymoon.

The Spice Girl married partner of three years Chris Dingwall in a stunning ceremony in the grounds of The Country House Cumbria in July.

The happy couple were surrounded by their loved ones and a host of celeb guests, including her bandmates – bar Victoria Beckham who was away supporting husband David at the World Cup.

Shortly after saying I Do, Mel and Aussie model Chris were seen snogging in the sea during their Ibiza honeymoon – and her latest body art marks their first trip as husband as wife as well as her work on the White Isle.

In a new video posted to TikTok, Mel was seen having a cherry icon tattooed onto her forearm.

The cute design, which featured the striking red fruit on its stalks, also commemorated her fifth year DJing at Ibiza club Pacha, which has the twin cherry as its emblem.

Texts lit up my phone this morning from friends who had wasted most of their lives rooting for the Angels: Arte Moreno finally was selling the team.

“First order of business: it’s the Anacrime Angels,” Nelson Rodriguez cracked before sending a meme of Stringer Bell in “The Wire” wearing an old-school California Angels cap and saying, “I want you to put the word out there that we back up.”

“This news honestly made my year,” texted Anaheim City Councilmember Natalie Rubalcava, who graduated a year ahead of me from Anaheim High and whose daughter works at my wife’s restaurant. “Excited to leave the controversy and negativity behind and look forward to a new era of Anaheim baseball.”

“Shame this didn’t happen when [Shohei] Ohtani was an Angel,” the Mountain shared on a group text thread of childhood friends who call each other by long-standing nicknames — I’m the Consigliere.

“I get invited to the games but hell no,” replied the Butcher, who’s been a fan since the days of Hall of Famer Nolan Ryan in the 1970s.

“I’ll finally go back” to a game in person, my cousin Plas added. “A Trumper [Latino] what could’ve gone wrong …” he wrote, referencing Moreno, before asking if Kurt Suzuki was still manager because “that’s how little I’ve kept up with the team.”

Those are the texts I can print in a family newspaper.

Moreno is selling to Los Angeles Rams owner Stan Kroenke, whose company also owns perennial contenders in the NBA (Denver Nuggets), NHL (Colorado Avalanche) and England’s Premier League (Arsenal). Sources told my colleagues that the price was $4 billion, which would be a baseball record and speaks to the Halos’ untapped potential.

Major League Baseball still needs to approve the deal, but I guarantee that Commissioner Rob Manfred and the 29 other team owners are reacting with the silly swaying dance that Dodgers players do every time they get on base.

“The Moreno Family has been honored to steward the Angels for 23 years,” the soon-to-be-ex-Angels owner said in a statement.

You stewarded nada, Arte: You destroyed.

You started with so much hope and ended up with fans like my friends shooting venom at you like pissed-off cobras. There’s a reason why you’ll leave as one of the most loathed owners in baseball history. Your underperforming reign makes the McCourts of Dodgers infamy seem as amazing and beloved as the O’Malleys.

Not even Shohei Ohtani, at spring training when he played for the Angels in 2023, could change the team’s fortunes under Moreno.

(Morry Gash/Associated Press)

The Tucson native, who made his billions in the billboard industry, bought the Angels from Disney in 2003, the year after they won their sole World Series championship. At a festive press conference, Moreno handed a sombrero to then-skipper Mike Scioscia to wear, then announced that the first order of business was to cut beer prices.

The new owner quickly signed the best players in baseball — slugger Vladimir Guerrero and pitcher Bartolo Colón. Moreno walked Angel Stadium during games to ask fans what they wanted, what they needed, what they dreamed of. That first decade, he made the Angels what they never had been for a prolonged period: winners.

Fans packed the stands — more than 3 million each year from 2003 to 2019, the third-longest streak in baseball. Anaheimers donned Halos jerseys and hats like never before. More incredibly, Moreno was at the cusp of the impossible: convincing a generation of Latino baseball fans in Orange County to side with the Halos instead of the Dodgers.

But there were always signs that something was off.

Moreno renamed the team the Los Angeles Angels two years after he bought them, a ridiculous moniker that made them a national punchline. The renaming also cost Anaheim millions of dollars in legal fees after the city unsuccessfully sued to force Moreno to keep my hometown in the team’s name.

Moreno openly talked about moving the Angels to a city that would build him a new stadium. He also fell into the terrible habit of signing conservative-leaning, past-their-prime ballplayers like Josh Hamilton, Albert Pujols and Anthony Rendon to massive contracts that weighed down the team for years, like one of Angel Stadium’s legendary cinnamon rolls.

Die-hards like my pals trudged on, buoyed by generational talent Mike Trout and the occasional flash-in-the-pan prospect. But even they were turned off by the last three years.

Former Anaheim mayor Harry Sidhu pleaded guilty in 2023 to federal tax evasion charges stemming from accusations that he solicited an illegal $1-million campaign donation for an attempted sale of city-owned Angel Stadium to a Moreno-led company.

That same year, the Halos let Ohtani — who was on his way to a second most valuable player award and already had established himself as one of the most talented baseball players ever — walk away as a free agent while gaining nothing in return.

This season kicked off with Moreno telling the Orange County Register about a survey supposedly revealing that winning wasn’t “a top priority” for Angels fans. The Angels hadn’t made the playoffs in 11 years, hadn’t finished with a winning record since 2015, had landed in last place in their division for the last two years — and that’s what he offered as a speck of hope? No wonder the team is on pace to lose 100 games for the first time in franchise history. No wonder disgusted fans have protested both inside and outside Angel Stadium all summer.

At the only game I went to this year — a sparsely attended afternoon snoozer against the Chicago White Sox — I found the stadium more beat-up than ever: peeling paint, beat-up seats, tinny PA system. For about $25 each, my friends and I bought tickets behind the first-base dugout that would have cost hundreds of dollars at Dodger Stadium.

Billboards along Southern California freeways have broadcast the Angels’ desperate attempts to draw in fans via pathetic promotions. Fireworks every Saturday. A bobblehead giveaway of light-hitting shortstop Zach Neto, who never has made an All-Star team. A “yard sale” that sounds like a giant casting off of crappy memorabilia a week away from the trash can.

Angels fans wave signs and urge owner Arte Moreno to sell the team to an ownership group willing to invest more in winning during a pregame protest at Angel Stadium.

(Joaquin Ruiz / For The Times)

I never cared for the Angels, but I always wanted them to do well. Any success they achieved rubbed off on my hometown, as it did during that magical 2002 run.

I also wanted Moreno, the first Latino to own a major professional sports team, to succeed, so his fellow Trump supporters might know that our kind can excel at the highest echelons of American society, if only we get the chance.

But for the last few years, I cheered each time the Angels lost. I wanted them to tank, to forever seal Moreno’s legacy as a loser. To serve as a warning to all professional sports owners that they can abuse a host city and its fan base for only so long before people revolt by just not caring.

Good luck to Kroenke as he tries to resuscitate a franchise deader than a stump in the Petrified Forest.

The California Legislature just passed two bills that advocates say will greatly improve access to small-scale solar for renters, people in condos and others who don’t have access to their roofs or can’t afford a full rooftop array.

On Sunday night, lawmakers approved Assembly Bill 1813, a third-time effort to force the California Public Utilities Commission to develop a more robust community solar program, in which residents sign up to participate in a small solar array near where they live and pay monthly at a discount on their electrical bills.

“California’s clean energy transition should benefit everyone, not just those who can afford rooftop solar,” said Assemblymember Chris Ward (D-San Diego), the bill’s author.

Last week, with Senate Bill 868, California’s Legislature also became the latest to legalize plug-in solar. Also known as “balcony solar,” these systems allow anyone — renter or owner — to set small panels on their patios or fences and plug them directly into wall outlets to lower bills without having to navigate utility permissions.

“It’s an idea whose time has come,” said bill author Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), who noted the devices can bring down bills by hundreds of dollars a year. “It’ll be very beneficial for people who are looking to lower their cost of living.”

The votes come after some difficult years for rooftop solar in California thanks to strong pushback from utility companies. The state had been a leader nationally on solar energy in the 2000s. But installation rates plummeted in 2022 after Gov. Gavin Newsom’s Public Utilities Commission sharply cut back incentives for customers.

Utilities that lobbied for the change argued that compensating rooftop solar at a higher rate meant that people without solar panels were disproportionately paying the costs of maintaining the overhead lines that everyone uses.

This year, utilities made similar arguments against both the community solar and balcony solar bills.

Pacific Gas & Electric was successful in inserting an end date for Wiener’s SB 868 balcony solar bill, so, if it is signed into law, the Legislature will have to reauthorize it before 2030.

“While the bill establishes additional guardrails, it also creates a period through 2030 during which plug-in solar devices not meeting key safety and certification requirements could be purchased and used in California,” PG&E spokeswoman Lynsey Paulo said. “We believe customers and emergency personnel deserve the protections that come from clear safety standards and established interconnection processes from the outset.”

Both bills now go to the governor’s desk.

If signed, the balcony solar bill will go into effect once systems have been certified as safe for use in the U.S. by a nationally recognized testing laboratory like UL Solutions. Balcony panels are already certified in Germany, where plug-in solar is popular. Advocates say U.S. certifications will come through soon.

Community solar reform could have a harder time clearing Newsom’s desk, as the Public Utilities Commission, appointed by the governor, has previously opposed this type of program.

All the state’s big investor-owned utilities lobbied against the community solar bill, AB 1813, which would require them to compensate community solar developers and customers at higher rates than those established under the Public Utilities Commission’s current program.

That program, finalized this year, relies on canceled federal funding and incentives that developers say are too low for them to launch new projects.

“We remain opposed to AB 1813 because it would shift significant costs to customers who do not participate in the program,” PG&E’s Paulo said. “This legislation is about profits for solar companies, not customer affordability.”

The Public Advocates Office, the independent consumer advocate at the Public Utilities Commission, said recent amendments to the bill did not address its concerns about shifting costs from one group of ratepayers to another.

“We support expanding community solar so renters and other Californians who cannot install rooftop solar can benefit from clean energy. But the savings for participants should not be financed by raising bills for everyone else,” said Mary Flannelly, a spokesperson for the Public Advocates Office. “Our analysis of AB 1813 estimates that it could shift about $1.5 billion a year onto customers who cannot participate — roughly $12 more per month on average — a sizeable cost.”

Southern California Edison also has opposed the bill. SCE spokesperson David Eisenhauer said it would “expose customers to higher rates and unreasonable costs compared to more cost-effective clean energy sources.”

But Ward disputes that any costs will be shifted to people who don’t have solar. He cited two recent studies that indicate all consumers will benefit from reduced costs when community solar is more available. One found if the state added 5.4 gigawatts of community solar and energy storage, all ratepayers could save $6.5 billion by reducing costs for gas generation, electricity imports and transmission.

Ward and a coalition of environmental groups, solar developers and the Utility Reform Network, a ratepayer advocacy group, have tried for years to get the Public Utilities Commission to adopt their vision for a community solar program that would serve people who don’t own or don’t have access to their roofs. Several other states have them.

The bill would compensate community solar developers and customers at a rate that advocates say more accurately accounts for the savings solar brings to the grid, especially on hot days when the system is stressed.

Wiener said both bills are important for helping individuals and communities “to not be trapped in the monopoly utility model that is so expensive.”

“We should empower people to generate their own electricity and to lower their electric bills,” he said.

The Legislature also passed Senate Bill 913, which would allow batteries, electric vehicles, smart thermostats and other consumer-owned devices to be bundled together and counted as a reliable source of electricity for the state’s grid.

Brandon Garcia, California director for Advanced Energy United, an association representing clean energy businesses, said it would help reduce strain on the grid and keep electricity costs in check while “giving customer-owned resources a fair opportunity to compete and deliver reliable energy at an affordable price.”

SACRAMENTO — California lawmakers passed laws that would ensure insurance companies provide better coverage for smoke-damaged homes and financing for upgrades protecting residences from future fire damage.

The measures were among a slew of bills approved during the 2026 legislative session to deal with the continuing aftermath of the devastating 2025 Los Angeles area fires.

The Eaton and Palisades fires, which destroyed more than 16,000 structures and killed 31, were two of the deadliest and most destructive fires in state history. Like with catastrophic fires before them, tragedy spurred action.

Much of the focus on wildfire issues by Gov. Gavin Newsom and California lawmakers in the waning days of the legislative session focused on a proposal to shift liability away from utilities whose equipment ignites wildfires.

The complex, high-stakes policy debate attempted to address the needs and financial risks faced by the utilities, their customers and insurance companies following the catastrophic wildfires that have plagued California in recent years, but a proposed compromise recently pieced together by lawmakers and the governor fell through Tuesday.

However, lawmakers did pass several bills this year to help fire victims navigate burdensome insurance requirements in the aftermath of a disaster and increase prevention efforts. All head to Newsom for his consideration.

Two complementary bills approved Monday ensure homes that survive a wildfire but are contaminated by the onslaught of smoke are properly remediated before residents move back in.

The bills were prompted by the 2025 Eaton fire, which left thousands of homes contaminated with lead, some at levels hundreds of times what the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency considers safe. Homeowners routinely reported that their insurance companies refused or delayed claims, advocated for cleaning methods that experts deemed insufficient and pushed residents to move back before testing showed their homes were safe.

The first bill, AB 1642, would direct the Department of Toxic Substances Control to create scientific standards for what constitutes a safe home and provide guidance on how to properly remediate homes. The second, AB 1795, would require insurers to abide by those standards in the claims process and do so in a timely manner.

The companion laws only take effect if Newsom signs both.

The two bills originally conflicted with one another. The scientific standards bill was supported by many Eaton fire survivors from the get-go. However, the insurance bill — born out of a Department of Insurance task force — was widely criticized by survivors for leaving insurance companies wiggle room to deny claims and placing a burden on homeowners to prove their home was in fact contaminated by a fire.

In an eleventh-hour sprint of “sleepless nights,” “five-hour Zooms” and intervention from the governor’s office, advocates won additional protections for fire survivors in the insurance bill and brought the two into harmony, said Dawn Fanning, managing director at the smoke-damaged home advocacy group Eaton Fire Residents United.

“It took a lot of work to get here, and we’re really happy where we landed,” Fanning said.

After the Eaton fire, “it was the Wild West, trying to scramble to find answers,” she said. “If these laws were in place, so many thousands of people would be back home by now.”

Separate legislation by Sen. Benjamin Allen (D-Santa Monica), who is in a hotly contested race for California Insurance Commissioner, seeks to give homeowners more notice and options before being dropped by their insurer, a problem homeowners increasingly face as wildfires have become more frequent and destructive.

Many nonrenewal notices sent by insurance companies include vague reasoning, Allen said during a May hearing on the bill, SB 1301. His legislation would require specific information so property owners can have a chance to mitigate problems and keep their insurance.

Another bill from Allen, who represents the Palisades area that burned in 2025, would create a new loan program to help property owners mitigate fire risks through home hardening, or installing fire-resistant materials on the outside of a structure.

“It can sometimes cost tens of thousands of dollars for homeowners and there’s simply not a lot of financing for this kind of work. There’s not a market for that,” Allen said during an April hearing.

The program is expected to help fund 1,000 projects in its first year and up to 2,400 within five years, according to a bill analysis.

A budget bill approved Tuesday morning also includes $25 million for home hardening grants, rebates or loans to be distributed through a separate program to be created by the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services. It would cap assistance at $25,000 per homeowner or property.

But other proposals to provide financial incentives for home hardening did not pass, including bills by Assemblymember Steve Bennett (D-Ventura) to exclude home hardening upgrades from property tax reassessment and to require insurance companies to provide two quotes to inquiring homeowners: one for the property as is, and another for if it met full home-hardening certification by the state.

Another bill on Newsom’s desk seeks to get restitution for victims of utility-caused wildfires who in some cases have waited more than a decade, said Assemblymember Joe Patterson (R-Rocklin).

In 2019, the state established a wildfire fund paid by utility companies that reimburses claims stemming from wildfires caused by the companies’ equipment. But the fund was not retroactive, and some people who suffered losses before its creation are still waiting to be paid.

Patterson’s bill requires the California Public Utilities Commission to determine how much is still owed to those victims, including for losses from the deadly Camp fire that was sparked by a PG&E power line and destroyed the town of Paradise in 2018.

“For years, wildfire survivors have been forced to wait for answers while restitution shortfalls remain unresolved,” Patterson said in a statement after the bill passed. “AB 2700 is about doing what is right for wildfire survivors who have waited far too long to be made whole.”

When the Angels won their lone World Series, this was the headline in the Los Angeles Times: “Fantasyland!”

Can we run that headline again?

For your new owner, Angels fans, you get a proven winner and real estate developer — more on that in a second — whose very name drips with baseball history.

You know him as Stan Kroenke, the owner of the Rams. His full name is Enos Stanley Kroenke, so named in honor of two St. Louis Cardinals Hall of Famers: Enos Slaughter and Stan Musial.

As he assembled his sports empire, baseball was the one sport that eluded him. He has the Rams, the Denver Nuggets, the Colorado Avalanche and Arsenal. He badly wanted the Dodgers, a runner-up in the bidding when Mark Walter bought them in 2012.

Now he is acquiring the Angels — at a $4-billion valuation, a record for a baseball team — and getting the closest thing to a blank slate that any owner can get without buying an expansion team.

The general manager? He’s an interim, and his contract expires this year.

The manager? His contract expires this year too.

The roster? The only players currently under contract for next year are outfielder Mike Trout — the Angels’ answer to Musial — and pitcher Yusei Kikuchi.

The stadium? The lease expires in six years.

The Angels’ playoff drought? The longest in the majors, going on 12 seasons. Go, Super Bowl champ, go!

For Kroenke, the first order of business might well be a comprehensive search for what would be the Angels’ answer to Les Snead and Sean McVay, the GM and head coach duo that led Kroenke’s Rams to a Super Bowl championship. The players might not be the next order of business. The deal is not expected to be approved until early 2027, according to a sale announcement, and who knows whether owners still will be locking out players by then?

But Kroenke appears to be the perfect guy to resolve the longest-running and most critical order of business in Anaheim: resolving the Angels’ future there.

For 60 years, the Angels have played in a stadium surrounded by 130 acres of parking lots. For 60 years, fans have driven into the parking lots, watched the game, and driven home. For 60 years, the city has lost untold millions in tax revenue by failing to build anything atop those parking lots.

Kroenke just does it. He is doing it around SoFi Stadium, which he built. He is doing it around the Rams’ training facility in Woodland Hills, which he built. He plans to do it around the sports arena he is building in San Diego.

Now Kroenke could lobby for a new ballpark in Inglewood, in place of the Forum, and call it synergy. James Butts, the mayor of Inglewood, has said he would frown upon a ballpark there.

But here’s betting Kroenke won’t ask. The sale announcement highlighted Kroenke’s “presence in one of the largest sports and entertainment markets in the United States” and said the purchase of the Angels “extends this footprint south into a market of more than three million residents with its own distinct civic identity, corporate base and tourism economy.”

Kroenke wants what all sports owners want these days: money coming out of a stadium site 365 days a year, not just on game days. That means shops, restaurants, homes, hotels, offices, parks, music venues, and food halls. And good luck to Kroenke or any other developer trying to find a vacant 130 acres in any urban area in Southern California, much less one adjacent to a train station and within three freeways.

This is already happening across the 57 Freeway from Angel Stadium, where Ducks owners Henry and Susan Samueli are putting up what they call the OC Vibe. Kroenke’s history indicates he would do something just as fun, and likely grander given that he’ll have more land, and suddenly Anaheim could be the coolest place to be in Orange County (*unless Olivia Rodrigo is putting on another Daisy Chain Fields festival in Irvine).

And, if Kroenke is willing to rename the team the Anaheim Angels, the city and its local assemblyman just pushed through a new law that could provide him with a significant financial incentive for development, which in turn could reduce his cost to build the new ballpark the Angels so desperately need.

The city owns the stadium and parking lots, so they were not part of the team sale. City officials have not met with Kroenke.

“Fans and residents welcome the start of a new chapter for baseball in Anaheim,” Mayor Ashleigh Aitken said. “I am encouraged by Stan Kroenke’s track record with the Rams and his commitment to investing in and uplifting neighborhoods.

“I look forward to working with the team’s incoming ownership to advance our city’s priorities around housing, open space and youth sports at the right time.”

For decades, Anaheim has loftily labeled the land around the neighborhood around the “Platinum Triangle.” Now the city might well have struck gold.

The local assemblyman that introduced that law, Avelino Valencia, could hardly have been any happier Tuesday.

“This is a big day for Anaheim,” Valencia texted me. “For 60 years, our community has filled Angel Stadium, raised a World Series banner as the Anaheim Angels, and shown up through every season.

“Few cities can offer a new owner a foundation like that. New ownership means new possibilities, and Anaheim is ready for them.

“I congratulate Stan Kroenke and Kroenke Sports and Entertainment on their agreement to purchase the Angels, and I welcome them home. Let’s build a partnership rooted in pride of place, a team that reflects the city it calls home, and the return of the Anaheim Angels.

“Anaheim is ready to work together, and Anaheim is ready to win.”

In a statement, Sen. Tom Umberg (D-Santa Ana) called it “a great day for Angels fans and Anaheim.”

As the stalemate between the city and Angels owner Arte Moreno grew more entrenched, the condition of Angel Stadium deteriorated. So did Moreno’s investment in the team.

Three years ago, the city commissioned an assessment of what it would take to keep Angel Stadium up and running for decades to come. We’re still waiting.

Those words, in a nutshell, exemplified the relationship between the team and the city in recent years. When the news broke Tuesday, a city official reached out to me to ask if it were true. And, after years of city officials sniping that the Angels had for a decade clipped the “of Anaheim” from their “Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim” name, the Angels emailed a statement confirming the sale with this headline: “Kroenke Sports & Entertainment to Acquire the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim.”

After a season of “Sell The Team” chants, Moreno did. And, after Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Valencia’s bill into law last week, the title of the law actually sounded more appropriate Tuesday: “The Home Run for Anaheim Act.”

BUTLIN’S has announced that eight new shows will launch at all three parks in 2027.

The new shows include Britain’s Got Talent and DreamWorks’ Madagascar musical.

Britain’s Got Talent will headline every school holiday break in 2027 with the talent show brought to life in Studio 36 across the Minehead, Bognor Regis and Skegness resorts.

Each show will be hosted by a mystery celebrity presenter and feature a line-up of faces seen on the TV show.

Guests can even show off their own talents as well.

Every break from February Half Term will then also featureDreamWorks’ Madagascar musical with Alex the Lion, Marty the Zebra, Melman the Giraffe and Gloria the Hippo.

Read more on travel inspo

GO ON

All the little-known websites for cheap or FREE tickets to gigs, theatre & festivals

TRAVEL TIP

The £2.99 SIM hack that can save Brits HUNDREDS abroad

The much-loved film will be transformed into a musical, following the friends as they escape New York to head to Madagascar.

On selected Showtime Midweek breaks, families with kids under the age of five can join children’s TV star Andy Day with Andy’s Dino- Rap.

Other shows include K-Pop Forever on every school holiday break and a new Animal Guyz show from February Half Term.

There will also be three new West End-style productions including A Billion Streams, which will feature some of the world’s biggest songs and Playtime Party with Billy and Bonnie Bear.

What makes it even better is that you could head to one of the resorts during February Half Term for just £54 – which is £13.50 per person or just £3.50 per person, per night.

Mike Godolphin, Entertainment Director at Butlin’s, said: “As the Home of Entertainment, live shows are at the heart of what we do, and our 2027 line-up is one of our most exciting yet.

“We’re taking things to another level by bringing Britain’s Got Talent to our resorts for the first time, with celebrity presenters and performers that families will recognise from the show.

“From Madagascar and K-pop to dinosaurs and some of the biggest songs in the world, we’ve created a line-up with something for every age.

“Best of all, it’s all part of the Butlin’s experience, so families can enjoy brilliant live entertainment throughout their break at no extra cost.”

State lawmakers have approved a series of modest changes intended to bolster California’s film and TV tax credit program.

Among the key revisions, independent filmmakers would be exempted from the $5 million state corporate tax credit cap that was approved earlier this year as part of Gov. Gavin Newsom’s state budget.

Film industry advocates lobbied hard for a carve-out, saying the cap would undercut gains made under the current film and TV tax credit program at a time when Hollywood has been reeling from job losses.

The exemption is a compromise. Film industry advocates were hoping all types of producers would be exempt from the corporate tax cap.

The bill includes other changes intended to help Hollywood, such as allowing companies to carry forward older tax credits for up to 15 years (the old limit was nine) and reducing the discount they are charged when they opt to seek a cash refund on unused credits.

Producers will also be able to collect their refund money more quickly — within two years instead of five.

California offers tax credits of up to 35% on qualified expenses, which can be applied to any tax liabilities the production companies have in the state. The program allocates $750 million annually in film and TV tax breaks.

The budget trailer bill was introduced to the Senate on Friday by Assemblyman Rick Chavez Zbur (D-Los Angeles), chair of the Assembly Democratic Caucus and Senator Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica).

The new cap, issued by Gov. Newsom, would have undermined the “competitiveness” of the current California Film and Television Jobs Program, said the Entertainment Union Coalition, an advocacy group that supports the bill. But with these new modifications, the group — which represents the Directors Guild, SAG-AFTRA, IATSE and more — said the program will be able to continue to “support the fragile recovery of our industry here in California.”

“Most importantly, we want to recognize the major role our members played in today’s success as advocates for their industry in California,” Rebecca Rhine, the coalition’s president, said in a statement. “They sent an unprecedented 450,000 letters to the California legislature, making clear the negative impact that SB 122 [the new cap] would have on their livelihoods, their families, and their communities.”

Over the program’s first full year in its expanded $750-million form, the California Film Commission says it delivered $6.6 billion in direct production spending and $4.3 billion in qualified expenditures, supporting nearly 35,000 cast and crew jobs across 6,630 filming days statewide.

The bill cleared the Assembly floor by a vote of 68-2, with the Senate approving its companion measure by a vote of 32 in favor, 8 against the same day. It now awaits Gov. Newsom’s signature.

“It’s a good day that we took steps to strengthen the program and while we have to do more next year, this was a crucial first step,” Zbur said in an interview.

Zbur said he believes everyone in the state’s film and TV tax credit program should have been exempted from the corporate tax credit cap and he plans to look at that within the context of next year’s budget.

“There were budget implications to doing that, so we really did all the things that are viable to do in this legislative session,” Zbur said.