Amid growing energy demands from the tech sector, California legislators have examined a number of ways to use more nuclear power to fill the gap. That includes potentially extending the lifespan of the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant in San Luis Obispo County.
(
Lionel Hahn
/
Reuters
)
Topline:
Energy demands from big tech, including for AI, has elected officials giving an old power source a second look.
Why it matters: Artificial intelligence is so wasteful, in fact, that its rapid spread could endanger California’s goal of eliminating all carbon emissions by 2045 — even as AI companies may be flooding the state treasury with tax revenue.
Why now: The conundrum has legislators considering what was once unthinkable: Bringing back nuclear power as a driver of innovation and economic growth, sort of like it was the 1960s all over again.
The backstory for CA: Some lawmakers are pushing for exemptions to the state’s 49-year-old moratorium on the construction of new nuclear power plants; they’re also mulling a possible future for the once-left-for-dead Diablo Canyon on the Central Coast, the state’s last operational plant whose operator, Pacific Gas & Electric, says it is prepared for the possibility of the plant staying open longer.
If you’ve used ChatGPT to write a breakup text or figure out how to not burn the Christmas roast, you might’ve actually helped create jobs and profits in California, where the artificial intelligence tool was born.
Unfortunately you’ve probably also contributed to climate change. Artificial intelligence is an energy hog, and every query to ChatGPT is like running a lightbulb for 20 minutes, a research scientist recently told NPR.
Artificial intelligence is so wasteful, in fact, that its rapid spread could endanger California’s goal of eliminating all carbon emissions by 2045 — even as AI companies may be flooding the state treasury with tax revenue.
The conundrum has legislators considering what was once unthinkable: bringing back nuclear power as a driver of innovation and economic growth, sort of like it was the 1960s all over again.
Some lawmakers are pushing for exemptions to the state’s 49-year-old moratorium on the construction of new nuclear power plants; they’re also mulling a possible future for the once-left-for-dead Diablo Canyon on the Central Coast, the state’s last operational plant whose operator, Pacific Gas & Electric, says it is prepared for the possibility of the plant staying open longer.
Those are some of the signs of a subtle shift among state legislators and agencies, who just a few years ago seemed assured in their determination to close the book on nuclear power in California. They are being encouraged by a few outside influences: Sweating their own emissions goals, the state’s Big Tech companies have begun national efforts to rejuvenate the carbon-neutral energy source. And last summer, federal lawmakers overwhelmingly passed a bill, signed by President Biden, to accelerate the development of nuclear reactors and new technologies.
“There have been a couple times where there’s been momentum, where people use the word ‘renaissance’” around nuclear energy, said Maureen Zawalick, PG&E vice president of business and technical services. “But nothing like it is now, where there’s bipartisan support, a significant amount of federal funding, programs and incentives.”
Democratic State Sen. Henry Stern, a member of the Senate Energy Committee and an environmental attorney, was mentored by anti-nuclear advocates/environmentalists and has been a critic of Diablo Canyon and PG&E. But he, too, believes “there’s going to be broader and broader bipartisan support to just put this stuff on the table,” he said, referencing certain forms of nuclear energy in the state.
It’s possible artificial intelligence could grow more energy efficient, reducing the need for new power plants. Energy stocks recently sold off after a Chinese company, DeepSeek, unveiled a powerful AI model it said was produced with a fraction of the resources used by its American rivals. The accuracy of those claims, and how DeepSeek might change industry practices, are hotly debated.
There’s going to be broader and broader bipartisan support to just put this stuff on the table.
— State Sen. Henry Stern, member of senate energy committee, environmental attorney
Even assuming AI continues to stoke demand for electricity, nuclear power remains anathema to much of the statehouse, which in the last legislative session kept a measure to partially lift the moratorium bottled up in committee. Reactors are consistent sources of energy but also incredibly expensive to build and maintain, requiring stringent regulatory oversight, staffing and upkeep. Disposing of radioactive waste is a time-intensive process with potential environmental harms, and there are always concerns of catastrophic outcomes at nuclear facilities: reactor meltdowns, cyberattacks and other security threats. Building new facilities in the state means lifting the moratorium and clearing not only the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission, but also a thicket of California agencies like the Public Utilities Commission, Water Resources Control Board and, depending on site location, potentially the Coastal Commission and State Lands Commission.
These are among the reasons nuclear power skeptics are dubious of a comeback. Critics similarly question the merits of an emerging, allegedly safer form of nuclear power known as small modular reactors, and whether tech companies are committed in their push for nuclear, or if they’ll lose interest once they face the inevitable headwinds.
“Nuclear is desperate to seem relevant, new, and improved,” said Sharon Squassoni, a research professor at George Washington University who specializes in the risks posed by nuclear weapons and nuclear energy. Of the use of nuclear power to power AI she added that “it’s a marriage that looks good on paper.”
Big Tech's boost
Renewed interest in nuclear hearkens to earlier times. President Richard Nixon once called for the construction of 1,000 nuclear reactors in the United States by the year 2000. That moonshot missed by roughly 900 reactors, and there are approximately 90 commercial reactors today.
Tech companies have signaled that they’d like to boost those numbers — and they’ve already taken steps outside of California to harness nuclear power.
Citing the need to add “carbon-free electricity and capacity in the grids where we operate,” Microsoft signed a deal in late September to eventually get one of the reactors at Three Mile Island in southeastern Pennsylvania, site of a partial meltdown in 1979, back up and running. In mid-October, Amazon and Google separately announced agreements with energy companies — one of which, Kairos Power, is based in California — that are in the business of designing small modular reactors.
“The grid needs new electricity sources to support AI technologies that are powering major scientific advances, improving services for businesses and customers, and driving national competitiveness and economic growth,” Google wrote in a statement about its deal with Kairos Power.
Meta announced in early December that it was seeking proposals from nuclear energy developers who could help in the pursuit of “AI innovation and sustainability objectives.”
Big tech’s ambitions for new plants are especially focused on small modular reactors. The idea behind the reactors is that they’d function as mini-reactors, producing roughly one-third of the energy as a conventional facility, but with factory-designed components that could be shipped to a predetermined location. This would, in theory, cut down costs, allow for more flexible siting and reduce the lengthy construction period typical for larger nuclear reactors. The International Atomic Energy Agency characterized proposed designs as simpler and safer than already-running reactors, and more recently, the Department of Energy accepted applications to help fund the design and development of these smaller reactors.
The problem is that small reactors exist more in the abstract than in reality. “They’re totally unproven. They exist basically on a computer,” said Allison Macfarlane, former chair of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission under the Obama administration. “Nuclear reactors aren’t like software or social media products. They’re not fungible in the same way. ... You can’t apply the tech bro mentality to these nuclear facilities, but that is what is happening.”
You can’t apply the tech bro mentality to these nuclear facilities, but that is what is happening.
— Allison Macfarlane, former chair, Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Squassoni released a study in April 2024 noting that, “Although they are marketed as new and advanced, small modular reactors so far feature few true innovations among the scores of designs. Quite a few are old wine in new bottles.”
Other than Microsoft’s Three Mile Island investment, and a Bill Gates-backed venture in Wyoming, it’s hard to say which other states could someday house the tech industry’s hypothetical nuclear facilities — small reactors or otherwise. California is currently one of the only states that isn’t an option.
In 1976, a California law placed a moratorium on the development of additional nuclear facility sites in the state until the federal government could come up with a permanent nuclear waste disposal plan. The moratorium was largely in response to environmentalist and anti-nuclear groups in California. Almost five decades later, the federal government still has not figured out a permanent disposal method. Nowadays, spent fuel often ends up in dry casks, which are generally considered a solid, but interim, solution for storing radioactive waste. California remains one of nine states with a nuclear energy moratorium, according to the Department of Energy. Four states have repealed their moratoriums since 2016, and Illinois recently carved out an exemption for the construction of small modular reactors.
View of the San Onofre Nuclear Power Plant in northern San Diego County in March 2011.
(
Mark Ralston
/
AFP via Getty Images
)
In 2013, Southern California Edison announced it would shutter reactors at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station in San Diego County due to defects in new steam generators. That reduced California’s nuclear energy arsenal to just the two reactors at Diablo Canyon.
The issues at San Onofre, in addition to the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster in Japan, further limited California lawmakers’ appetite for nuclear energy. Diablo Canyon was scheduled to shut down beginning in 2024, but those plans have been postponed a half-decade. The site’s two remaining reactors are a vital part of California’s power grid, even more so because of environmental concerns brought about by climate change, as well as the state’s growing energy needs.
The world’s largest tech companies are racing to train and develop AI tools, which require immense amounts of electricity. The exact metrics, as far as total AI energy consumption is concerned, remain murky, largely because the tech industry has been murky on the subject. It’s clear, though, that tech companies are reliant on big, windowless data centers to power AI, and that these data centers are extremely energy-intensive — and prevalent in California. The Los Angeles Times reported in August that the state has at least 270 data centers, many clustered, perhaps unsurprisingly, in Silicon Valley. Tech companies have eyed dozens more data centers up and down the state, the Times reported.
The legislators trying to spark a chain reaction in the Capitol
Those sorts of statistics are a major concern for California lawmakers.
“Tech is a new part of the equation because of data centers, AI, and all these things,” said Republican Assemblymember Josh Hoover, a proponent of nuclear energy from the Sacramento suburbs. “The reality is that even before all of that, our grid was not nearly prepared for the energy demands of a clean energy future. And so I am a big believer that nuclear energy needs to be part of that conversation.”
Hoover is referring to California’s power grid and the state’s mandatory transition to 100% carbon-free energy by 2045, under a 2018 measure. California has made significant strides toward the target but scores a low D-minus rating for its resilience to extreme weather events and other disruptive threats, according to measurements by the nonprofit Grid Clue. Despite an ongoing shift to renewables, California is still heavily reliant on fossil fuels, and its grid is increasingly imperiled by wildfires, heat waves and other weather events linked to climate change.
Diablo Canyon provides roughly 9% of the state’s electricity, which is partly why Gov. Gavin Newsom supported extending the use of its reactors to 2029 and 2030. “That struck me as a courageous decision and the right decision, and I would hope that that’s reflective of his belief to look at all different energy sources,” said Republican Assemblymember Diane Dixon, who represents Newport Beach.
Representatives for PG&E, which owns and operates Diablo Canyon, have typically adopted a defensive posture when asked about their nuclear facility and the cost overruns it routinely incurs. But the utility company is singing a different tune lately.
Zawalick, the PG&E vice president, demurred when asked if she thinks Diablo Canyon will ultimately stay open past the station’s latest deadline. “We have to be asked by the state legislators to go longer than 2030,” she said. “But we will be ready, is what I say. And we’re planning to be.” She told CalMatters she hasn’t had any “formal” conversations with tech companies about Diablo Canyon’s future.
Stern described Diablo Canyon as a “cost-suck” and “old,” adding, “if you were building new nuclear, you would not build it like Diablo Canyon.” But Stern conceded that San Onofre’s shutdown strained the state’s energy grid (it also led to more greenhouse gas production), and he’s come to accept Diablo Canyon’s role, at least for now.
Democratic Assemblymember Joaquin Arambula, who represents Fresno and has co-sponsored nuclear energy legislation, also worries “about what would occur if a member of our energy portfolio was taken offline, how that would increase rates for the rest of us.” Hoover echoed Arambula’s view and said he wants Diablo Canyon to stay open indefinitely.
An opening for small modular reactors
Diablo Canyon is one (complicated) piece of the nuclear puzzle. Then there’s the separate conundrum of whether to roll back all, or some, of the state’s nuclear energy moratorium. As it stands, Republican lawmakers are the political faction that has pushed to change the moratorium. Last year, Dixon was a co-sponsor of Assembly Bill 2092, which would’ve asked the California Public Utilities Commission to conduct a feasibility studies about the possible benefits and effects of small modular reactors by the beginning of 2027. The bill never got a vote on the Assembly floor.
“It’s good to have stretch goals,” Dixon said of the state’s zero emissions target. “But we have to be mindful of the impact on the local economy, on jobs and driving businesses out of California. I want to at least start the process to study this important possible new alternative.”
Another recent proposal, Assembly Bill 65, would have created a moratorium exemption for the development of small modular reactors. Hoover and Arambula were co-sponsors of AB65, and Arambula said he hopes to introduce a similar measure in the 2025-26 legislative session.
In April 2023, the last time lawmakers debated the bill to allow small modular reactors, Arambula was one of few Democratic politicians to publicly back pro-nuclear legislation. Los Angeles Democratic Assemblymember Rick Zbur, for instance, told his colleagues he couldn’t support the measure because, while he “used to be someone who believed that nuclear was part of the solution to a carbon-free future,” he changed his views after the 2011 nuclear power plant disaster in Japan. “I don’t think that the California public supports this,” he continued. “I don’t think that we need this to get to a carbon-free future.” (Zbur confirmed to CalMatters that his stance hasn’t changed.)
Other prominent Democratic politicians are beginning to sound more bullish on nuclear. Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener of San Francisco told CalMatters that he’s noticed “a gradual increased openness among Democrats to nuclear,” and that he thinks nuclear “should certainly be part of the conversation.” Stern, the Senate environment committee member, said he’s interested in giving consideration to some nuclear power bills.
Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener of San Francisco told CalMatters that he’s noticed “a gradual increased openness among Democrats to nuclear,” and that he thinks nuclear “should certainly be part of the conversation.”
Stern previously authored a law that required the California Energy Commission, in consultation with other state agencies, to write an assessment of commercially feasible energy sources. That assessment, which was released in August 2024, suggested more research and development into small modular reactors, and recommended that the legislature pass a law to exempt such reactors from the state’s nuclear moratorium.
In a statement, Newsom’s office left the door open to the possibility of small modular reactors and a nuclear moratorium exemption in California. “The Governor has always maintained an interest in new, promising technologies, including advancements in emerging nuclear power technologies, that follow strong safety, cost, and environmental considerations,” Newsom’s Deputy Director of Communications Daniel Villaseñor wrote to CalMatters.
State Sen. Josh Becker, the new chair of the Senate Energy Committee, also left the door open to nuclear technologies in California: “Climate change is an urgent crisis demanding a comprehensive and proactive response,” the Silicon Valley Democrat wrote in a statement. “To address it effectively, we must consider every viable solution.”
What happens next?
The 2025-26 legislative session will be instructive in showing state lawmakers’ willingness to embrace nuclear energy. Any policy changes in California — followed by a hypothetical nuclear site selection process — would proceed at a slow, methodical pace, the exact opposite of how tech companies prefer to operate.
In addition to needing a carve out from the state’s nuclear moratorium, and approvals from various state and federal entities, backers could well face lawsuits and other pushback from anti-nuclear groups.
With all those factors in mind, the legislative session will also reveal whether tech companies feel emboldened to push for nuclear energy sites in California, or if they’re satisfied pursuing their energy needs in other states.
After all, just because many key AI companies are based in California doesn’t mean their data centers have to be. The recent failed bills to permit some kind of nuclear power in California were proposed shortly before tech’s fast and furious incursion into the nuclear energy space, and thus weren’t part of the industry’s 2023-24 legislative lobbying efforts. Public support and lobbying for the two bills came from a handful of relatively small pro-nuclear advocacy groups, as well as a handful of labor groups, and the Nuclear Energy Institute, a pro-nuclear trade association.
“It’s too soon to tell how serious these tech firms are about promoting nuclear energy to power their electricity needs,” Squassoni said. “It could be a fad—it could be that once they get a real whiff of the costs and time it takes to build new plants, they may back off a little bit.”
Lawmakers who spoke to CalMatters said they aren’t against tech companies joining in on broader policy debates around California’s energy grid. Hoover said tech’s nascent nuclear interest may “allow for new conversations to happen,” while Wiener characterized the industry’s involvement as a “positive thing,” so long as companies participate in expanded clean energy initiatives that aren’t exclusively nuclear.
Stern, for his part, posited that tech’s interest “certainly doesn’t hurt the zeitgeist around nuclear being a less toxic and scary thing.” He added: “There’s some other incredible tech that in a lot of cases beats nuclear from a cost perspective. But it doesn’t quite make sense to me anymore that we don’t let nuclear compete in that contest.”
A man casts his ballot during early voting in Waukesha, Wis., on March 18.
(
Miguel Gutierrez Jr.
/
AFP via Getty Images
)
Topline:
More than 4 in 10 names flagged as possible noncitizen voters in California by the Trump administration cannot be found on the state’s voter rolls, according to a legal filing Saturday by an immigrant-rights group.
Why it matters: It’s the first outside analysis of a list that the Department of Justice has used to threaten prosecution of election officials. The analysis also found that thousands of U.S. citizens appear to be flagged as ineligible to vote on the government’s list.
Why now: The contention was made in a filing by two data analysts at the University of California, Los Angeles. The breadth of the problems with the list was outlined in Saturday’s filing. It describes an analysis by two members of UCLA’s Voting Rights Project, who filed a lawsuit challenging it with the Los Angeles-based Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, or CHIRLA.
WASHINGTON (AP) — More than 4 in 10 names flagged as possible noncitizen voters in California by the Trump administration cannot be found on the state’s voter rolls, according to a legal filing Saturday by an immigrant-rights group.
It’s the first outside analysis of a list that the Department of Justice has used to threaten prosecution of election officials. The analysis also found that thousands of U.S. citizens appear to be flagged as ineligible to vote on the government’s list.
The contention was made in a filing by two data analysts at the University of California, Los Angeles. They analyzed the 20,930 names that the department demanded that California election officials treat as possible illegal voters by separating their ballots during the vote count on Election Day.
Multiple judges have rejected the demand as unconstitutional and a threat to democracy, and local and state officials have said the list appears riddled with errors.
Court filing outlines problems with government list
The breadth of the problems with the list was outlined in Saturday’s filing. It describes an analysis by two members of UCLA’s Voting Rights Project, who filed a lawsuit challenging it with the Los Angeles-based Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, or CHIRLA.
The research found that 8,880 of the names, representing 42% of the entire list, do not correspond to anyone in California’s current voter file. It also found at least 22 are U.S. citizens, and many more may correspond to those of confirmed citizens.
“The expert analysis further makes clear that the mandated voter list endangers a significant number of eligible California voters,” said the filing, which was cosigned by Xavier Becerra, the Democratic candidate for California governor and an adviser to the UCLA Voting Rights Project. null
The Trump administration had objected to sharing the list, calling it a “fishing expedition” and noting that it included sensitive information. On Saturday, the federal prosecutor who spearheaded the Trump case in California called the analysis “bogus.”
“This is a bogus report by the activist illegal immigrant rights group CHIRLA,” Bill Essayli, who runs the U.S. Attorney’s office in Los Angeles, posted on X.
Also on Saturday, President Donald Trump bemoaned the legal rulings against his effort to force California to separate votes from the individuals his administration labels suspected noncitizens, even though one came from a judge he himself nominated.
In a social media post, Trump claimed his Justice Department found “20,000, but potentially Hundreds of Thousands, and maybe even Millions,” of fraudulent votes, “and the Court has just ruled against it. Why would they reject fixing Election Fraud?”
The Trump administration has also urged Washington state to remove what it says were 400 possible noncitizens on its rolls, though state election officials there say that list is also unreliable and includes one voter who cast ballots in the 1990s.
The Justice Department has warned California election officials they could face criminal liability if they let noncitizens vote and issued subpoenas to election officials there.
Election officials say they have no time to investigate
Election officials have complained that the Trump administration has confronted them with lists of possible illegal voters at the last minute before Election Day, with no time to conduct the painstaking investigation required by law before removing someone from the rolls.
Multiple lawsuits have been filed to stop the administration from continuing to threaten local election officials.
On Friday, a federal judge in California ordered the Justice Department to stop sending demands to state officials, a decision the Trump administration appealed Saturday. Several counties in the state had run quick checks of the Trump list and found numerous errors.
Saturday’s broader analysis was possible because a federal judge on Friday ordered the Trump administration to share the list with the plaintiffs in the case.
CHIRLA and the UCLA project sued the Homeland Security Department in early October to prevent it from using federal immigration data to challenge state voter rolls. The lawsuit cited examples in other states where the federal government’s data has been proven to mistakenly include thousands of citizens.
Case argues that government’s methods pose risk to voting
The case argued that the data-matching methods risk disenfranchising or deterring citizens from voting. On top of that, plaintiffs argued, the lists could disproportionately target naturalized citizens who are legally entitled to vote.
Applying the government’s methodology, the UCLA researchers found that nearly 7,500 naturalized citizens in the state were “highly likely” to be incorrectly flagged as ineligible.
The researchers noted that the administration apparently removed the voter identification number from the names, making it harder for election officials to determine whether the flagged individuals were already on their rolls or were duplicates in the Justice Department list. They described the voter ID number as the most crucial data point.
The Justice Department argues that there is just as much to lose if the ballots aren’t separated.
“Every ballot cast by an ineligible voter cancels out the vote of an American citizen,” Kiersten V. Pels, a spokesperson for the department, wrote in an email. “The Department makes no apology for protecting those votes.”
Josie Huang
is a reporter and Weekend Edition host who spotlights the people and places at the heart of our region.
Published November 1, 2026 5:00 AM
Jordan Delgado picked Lady Gaga's 'You and I' as her debut song with the L.A. Karaoke league.
(
Josie Huang
/
LAist
)
Topline:
The LA Karaoke league turns singing into a team sport, where costumes, props and creativity matter more than hitting the right notes. For performers craving a creative outlet when auditions are harder to come by, the league offers a community to cheer them on.
The backstory: The L.A. league is part of United Karaoke, a national network of chapters that share a competition format, voting app and pledge to always keep the vibe friendly.
What's next: Teams compete for a spot in the finals. The public is welcome to watch and vote for their favorite performances.
For many of us, karaoke is a chance to sing our favorite shower song in public.
But at a North Hollywood bar every Wednesday night, it’s a team sport. And competitors in the L.A. Karaoke league are more serious about putting on an over-the-top production than hitting all the right notes.
At a social in late September, league manager Michelle Goff kicked off a new season of weekly themed showdowns, from dance-floor favorites to internet memes to songs inspired by birds.
Brittany Gates, the CEO of United Karaoke, who was visiting from D.C., did her rendition of 'Let's Hear It For The Boy' by Deniece Williams.
(
Josie Huang
/
LAist
)
"You are going to see numbers that people came up with in their crazy dreams maybe three years ago, and it's going to be amazing,” Goff told performers at the social. “And then they’re never going to be done again.”
Michelle Goff unveils the different themed weeks, from dance-floor favorites to internet memes to songs inspired by birds.
(
Josie Huang
/
LAist
)
Performances range from solos to group numbers, and the crowd votes for its favorites. Props and costumes are highly encouraged.
Here, dark wizards from Harry Potter duet to Taylor Swift. A singer tosses flowers to the crowd while belting Seal's “Kiss From a Rose.” Once, Goff danced around as an erupting Mount Vesuvius as her teammates sang Bastille's "Pompeii."
Like intramural sports but with microphones, teams compete over six weeks, followed by two weeks of playoffs, then the finals.
It all happens at the Good Nite bar, on a darkened stretch of Burbank Boulevard. Inside, there’s an inviting purple glow and warm conversation that can be hard to come by in a city as big as L.A.
“You know, the city, exciting as it is, still has so many strangers,” said Carlos Mulia.
A newcomer to the league, the chef-turned-actor already feels like he belongs.
Want to join the L.A. Karaoke league?
Where: The Good Nite, 10721 Burbank Blvd., North Hollywood.
When: Wednesday nights during the season.
How: Check the chapter’s website or @WeSingLA on Instagram for season announcements. Fall season registration is closed. The next season will start in late January or early February.
Cost: Registration costs $65 to $80, depending on when you sign up and whether you use a discount code.
Can I go watch: Yes! League nights are open to the public, with no cover charge, and anyone can vote for their favorite performances.
“Sometimes you can go to a karaoke bar and everyone’s talking and no one’s paying attention to you — that can be a downer,” he said. “But here, everyone’s contributing, everyone’s cheering for each other.”
For Mulia, the league also offers a creative outlet during Hollywood’s production slowdown, when he says opportunities to perform are scarce.
Actor Carlos Mulia said competitive karaoke gives him a creative outlet and a place to find community in a big city.
(
Josie Huang
/
LAist
)
“There’s not that many auditions," he said. "They’re far and few between, and it can really affect your psyche. So this allows you to just let it all out.”
The L.A. league started in Santa Monica in 2014 before moving among venues around the region and finding its current home at the Good Nite in 2021.
It’s part of United Karaoke, a loose national network with chapters in Washington, D.C., Baltimore and Chicago. The local leagues share a competition format, voting app and a pledge to keep the vibe welcoming.
In the league, friendships spark right away. Mulia hit it off with another actor, Jordan Delgado, who teaches children art at a studio.
They quickly figured out they’re both half-Filipino and grew up with karaoke, a fixture of Filipino social life.
“It is in our blood to do karaoke,” Delgado said. “So yeah, I’m honoring my ancestors in a way by being here tonight.”
Anybody is welcome on karaoke competition nights and invited to vote for their favorite performances.
(
Josie Huang
/
LAist
)
Delgado loves to perform but says the karaoke league promises more than that.
“It’s something to look forward to in the downtime of the part-time jobs,” Delgado said. “A reason to regularly meet up with people, where we could just be silly, without any judgment.”
For her league debut, Delgado is going with a tried and true crowd-pleaser.
“My go-to song that my friends and family have heard me sing a billion times is ‘You and I’ by Lady Gaga," Delgado said. "It really gets the crowd going.”
When it’s her turn, Delgado bounds onto the tiny stage up front with a big confident smile that matches a powerful voice.
“We got a whole lot of money, but still pay rent,” Delgado sings, striding across the tiny stage to whoops and cheers.
Several weeks after her league debut, Delgado would go on to win best performer during Graveyard Week, when the league revives songs so overdone they’re normally off-limits.
Her winning number? “Shallow,” with Delgado singing both the Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper parts.
And she brought the theatrical flair. Dressed as Gaga on one side of her body and Cooper on the other, she was her own duet partner.
Keep up with LAist.
If you're enjoying this article, you'll love our daily newsletter, The LA Report. Each weekday, catch up on the 5 most pressing stories to start your morning in 3 minutes or less.
By Jeremiah Dobruck | Long Beach Post, Dañiel Andres Martinez
Published October 31, 2026 1:34 PM
A sign a Rosies Dog Beach in Long Beach warn visitors of the contaminated water. Photographed at Rosie's Dog Beach on Sunday, Jan. 2, 2022 in Long Beach, CA.
(
Myung J. Chun
/
Los Angeles Times via Getty Images
)
Topline:
All coastal waters in Long Beach — including beaches, lagoons and bays — remain closed Sunday, after health officials say 29,000 gallons of sewage spilled out of a mainline pipe in Belmont Shore on Friday evening.
What happened: The spill happened around 6:30 p.m. near Livingston Drive and Second Street, according to a statement from the city’s Health Department.
The latest update: City crews tried to catch as much sewage as possible before it reached drainage systems that led to the ocean, but about 14,000 gallons ultimately reached the sea, forcing Long Beach to close its coastal waters.
All coastal waters in Long Beach — including beaches, lagoons and bays — remain closed Sunday after health officials say 29,000 gallons of sewage spilled out of a mainline pipe in Belmont Shore on Friday evening.
Joy Contreras, a public information officer with Long Beach Utilities, told LAist that emergency repairs to the sewer main were completed Saturday night.
"The Utilities Department will investigate the cause of the force main break, as a break of this magnitude is extremely rare," Contreras said Sunday.
Water quality testing, Contreras said, will resume on Monday. The Long Beach Health Department, she said, will determine when swimming areas will reopen once samples meet State water quality standards.
What happened
The spill happened around 6:30 p.m. on Friday near Livingston Drive and Second Street, according to a statement from the city’s health department.
“The spill was associated with a force main break, a pressurized pipe to convey wastewater,” according to the statement. There was no word on what caused the break.
Long Beach Utilities stopped the spill by rerouting sewage to bypass the line.
City crews tried to catch as much of the sewage as possible before it reached drainage systems that led to the ocean, but about 14,000 gallons ultimately reached the sea, forcing Long Beach to close its coastal waters.
History of sewage spills
Long Beach is no stranger to beach closures because of sewage spills, but it most commonly happens when sewage flows down the Los Angeles or San Gabriel rivers from upstream cities. Over one recent five-year span, local beaches were closed for 63 days because of upstream spills.
State law requires the closures any time sewage makes its way to the coast until testing shows the water meets quality standards. These rigorous rules don’t hold true for all types of spills.
