Sponsored message
Logged in as
Audience-funded nonprofit news
radio tower icon laist logo
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
Subscribe
  • Listen Now Playing Listen

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • Reflections on his role in 'Inherit The Wind'
    Actors John Douglas Thompson and Alfred Molina stand on stage in a tense confrontation. Looking one another sternly in the eyes, Molina wears jeans and suspenders and points towards Thompson. Thompson, in a long sleeve button down denim shirt, is partially bent towards Molina.
    John Douglas Thompson and Alfred Molina in "Inherit the Wind" at the Pasadena Playhouse.

    Topline:

    Stage and screen actor Alfred Molina is no stranger to performing characters with dimension, subtly, and humor. His latest role is big-shot attorney Henry Drummond in Inherit the Wind, now staged at the Pasadena Playhouse.

    The play: Inherit The Wind tackles the ever-relevant topic of who decides what is taught in schools through the lens of an old debate over evolution. Originally created as a commentary on McCarthyism in the 1950’s, playwrights Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee used a fictional version of the real 1925 Scopes Monkey trial as a proxy for their message.

    Dive deeper: Molina spoke with LAist's Julia Paskin about taking on the role of Drummon, and how both his character and the play are still offering lessons for the culture today.

    Stage and screen actor Alfred Molina is no stranger to performing characters with dimension, subtly, and humor in such roles as Inspector Gamache in the Three Pines, Diego Rivera in Frida, Tevye in Fiddler On The Roof, and even as the villainous Doctor Octavius in the Spider-Man movies.

    Molina now takes on the part of big-shot attorney Henry Drummond in Inherit the Wind, now staged at the Pasadena Playhouse.

    Originally created as a commentary on McCarthyism in the 1950’s, playwrights Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee used a fictional version of the real 1925 Scopes Monkey trial as a proxy for their message.

    In the landmark case, a high school science teacher was prosecuted for teaching evolution. Molina’s character comes to the defense of the high school teacher in a trial that shakes a small, religious town to its core.

    Molina spoke with LAist Weekend Edition host Julia Paskin about taking on the role. The interview has been edited for brevity and clarity.

    Julia Paskin: Your character states he is not there for the money, so why does Drummond take on the case?

    Alfred Molina: He's there to defend the Constitution, I think, in some way.

    [The play] was striking at something that was very, very deep in the American democracy, which is the much vaunted separation of church and state. And here we had laws being passed which were kind of faith-based that were controlling the education of people in the United States.

    And [Drummond] is a warrior wanting to make sure that you know that the laws and people's freedom of thought — in particular, freedom of speech — are protected and cherished.

    JP: Here we are in 2023 with some states still debating what can be taught in schools. Perhaps the subject matter has shifted, but the debate in Inherit The Wind feels current. What does it mean to you to perform the story today? 

    AM: These idea and topics — they're still part of the national discourse.

    It's what theater does best in a way. It's able to illuminate these ideas in a dramatic way that is hopefully going to keep an audience hooked on the arguments. And we've had a lot of excited conversations after the play with members of the audience who are responding very energetically to the questions that the play brings up.

    JP: Your character is going up against Matthew Harris Brady (played by John Douglas Thompson), and despite having very deep disagreements, there is still a respect and reverence between them. That was refreshing to me in today's political climate. How do they maintain a humanity while thinking the other is entirely wrong? 

    AM: That relationship, which has gone through lots of mutations over a period of years, is mentioned quite early on in the play. So you understand that there's a real history here. In fact, Brady says at one point, this friendship was based on a mutuality of admiration. They were clearly on different sides of the fence, but there was still this civility between them and an ability to discuss without rancor, without becoming sort of just angry with each other.

    And I think that gives the relationship a depth which pays off later in the play.

    Set in a courtroom, Alfred Molina stands on stage with his back to the audience, right arm raised addressing John Douglas Thompson who is getting up from his chair on the witness stand. The judge to the left of Thompson and the defendant seated down stage both look on at Molina and Thompson.
    John Douglas Thompson, Alfred Molina, and Cast in Inherit the Wind
    (
    Jeff Lorch
    /
    Pasadena Playhouse
    )

    JP: Your character even comes to Brady’s defense — or in defense of how we just speak about people. What’s happening for Drummond in that moment and how do you see a connection to discourse today? 

    AM: From a personal point of view, as the actor playing the part, it made me realize that you can disagree with people but that doesn't mean you have to hate them.

    I remember many years ago, having a really serious discussion with a relative. And then we both said, you know what, we're never going to convince the other. So let's just leave this aside and enjoy the rest of the relationship which is the vast majority of it.

    And I think that's something we've lost, particularly in this age of social media. And just the decent thing of, you might have disagreed with someone, [but] when they're no longer in a position to argue their case, that doesn't mean you dismiss their whole life.

    Drummond actually says at one point, “I refuse to erase a man's lifetime.” And then he goes on to say “we all have the same right, which is the right to be wrong.”

    JP: You last performed at the Pasadena Playhouse in The Father in early 2020. What keeps bringing you back to the Pasadena Playhouse? 

    AM: Apart from the fact that it's a 10-minute commute, you mean?

    But no, It's a lovely theater. It's got so much history.

    And we're now under the leadership of Danny Feldman, our producing artistic director. We're in a kind of golden age at the theater, in [that] he's really channeled a lot of his energy and creative energy into making it truly a theater that belongs to the community.

    I joined the board about a year or so ago, and we've now created an education committee.

    The Pasadena Playhouse had a very healthy, very vibrant accredited school attached to it. Some of the alumni include people like Gene Hackman and Dustin Hoffman. The school closed down in the late 1960s’s, due to kind of financial restrictions. The theater was going through a bad time.

    But we're hopefully in the next few years trying to resuscitate that side of the theater. And Danny's already started moves towards that, you know, we've had productions involving local school kids.

    So for me, it's lovely to be part of an institution that is truly part of this community.

    Inherit the Wind is directed by Michael Michetti and is being staged at the Pasadena Playhouse through Sunday, November 26th.

    Protip: You can enter a lottery to watch the show from special seating onstage.

  • Group says premiums would increase after new tax
    A person wearing a white shirt with the sleeves rolled up and a burgundy shirt underneath. Eyeglasses hang from their shirt and a stethescope is around their neck. In one hand they are holding a cellphone, the other rests on the keyboard of a silver laptop.
    For more than 20 years, California has levied taxes on health insurers to help fund Medi-Cal, the state’s insurance program for low-income people.
    Topline:
    Doctors and health insurers filed a lawsuit Friday alleging Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Legislature violated the law when they approved a healthcare tax that could substantially increase insurance premiums for Californians.
    The lawusit: The California Medical Association and California Association of Health Plans say in a new lawsuit that the tax violates Proposition 35, passed by voters in 2024. It claims the recently passed tax on health plans, known as the managed care organization tax or MCO tax, circumvents the 2024 initiative that limits healthcare taxes and directs revenue toward specific purposes. The California Medical Association and California Association of Health Plans filed the complaint with the California Supreme Court.

    The backstory: For more than 20 years, California has levied taxes on health insurers to help fund Medi-Cal, the state’s insurance program for low-income people. The state historically taxed private health plans at a lower rate than Medi-Cal insurers, but in June, the Legislature passed a bill substantially raising the tax on private plans. Health insurers said they will pass the cost directly on to consumers, spiking premiums by about $100 per person each year. That means a family of four could pay a $400 annual increase. That would come on top of the rate increases people typically see year to year.

    Doctors and health insurers filed a lawsuit Friday alleging Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Legislature violated the law when they approved a healthcare tax that could substantially increase insurance premiums for Californians.

    The lawsuit claims the recently passed tax on health plans, known as the managed care organization tax or MCO tax, circumvents a 2024 initiative that limits healthcare taxes and directs revenue toward specific purposes. The California Medical Association and California Association of Health Plans filed the complaint with the California Supreme Court.

    “California voters passed Proposition 35 and made it law. The state does not get to ignore that law simply because following the law is inconvenient,” medical association CEO Dustin Corcoran said in a statement.

    Newsom’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. H.D. Palmer, a spokesperson for the Department of Finance, said in a previous statement to CalMatters that the state wanted to balance the affordability concerns of privately insured patients against large-scale federal Medi-Cal cuts.

    Newsom stopped short of opposing the 2024 initiative when it was on the ballot, but he warned at the time it would “hamstring” the state budget.

    For more than 20 years, California has levied taxes on health insurers to help fund Medi-Cal, the state’s insurance program for low-income people. The state historically taxed private health plans at a lower rate than Medi-Cal insurers, but in June, the Legislature passed a bill substantially raising the tax on private plans.

    Health insurers said they will pass the cost directly on to consumers, spiking premiums by about $100 per person each year. That means a family of four could pay a $400 annual increase. That would come on top of the rate increases people typically see year to year.

    “California is breaking the law by blowing through a tax limit voters put in place to protect Californians and businesses from higher health care costs,” said Charles Bacchi, CEO of the health plans association.

    Doctors, hospitals, clinics and Medi-Cal insurers have argued for many years that the revenue from the tax should go toward improving Medi-Cal. They said that the state was inappropriately using the money to replace general fund spending, and that many providers were being paid far less than their services cost. In 2024, they asked voters to approve a limited tax that would be reserved for Medi-Cal improvements.

    But Congress last year changed the rules on taxes used to generate revenue for healthcare, including the ones imposed on health plans. Rather than lose the money generated by the tax, Newsom proposed and the Legislature agreed to submit two taxes to the federal government for approval: one that complied with the 2024 initiative but would be rejected by the feds, and one that complied with federal regulations and largely disregarded the initiative.

    Supported by the California Health Care Foundation (CHCF), which works to ensure that people have access to the care they need, when they need it, at a price they can afford. Visit www.chcf.org to learn more.

    This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

  • Sponsored message
  • State could create multi-billion research agency
    A person with short black hair and light brown skin, wearing a tan jacket, black pants, and black-and-white sneakers, walks in profile along a stone step with a rust-orange backpack over their shoulder. Behind them, the gray granite facade of Benjamin Ide Wheeler Hall has four arched entryways, each with a fan-shaped transom window and a pair of wooden double doors with glass panes.
    A student makes their way to Wheeler Hall at the University of California, Berkeley, on Feb.19, 2026.

    Topline:

    California could create its own multi-billion-dollar science and health research agency under a bill signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom Wednesday, helping to fill a gap left by the politicization of science under the second Trump administration.

    Why it matters: The bill places a $7.5 billion bond measure on the March 2028 ballot to pay for the creation of the California Foundation for Science and Health Research. The new state agency would provide grants and loans for projects in public health, climate science, agriculture and other areas. Panels of scientists would review proposals, and the agency would develop rules allowing the state to share in some of the profits from inventions made with its support.

    The backstory: The Trump administration canceled nearly $2 billion in research grants to the University of California beginning in early 2025, later acknowledging in court that officials searched for keywords such as “health equity” and “sexual orientation” in order to decide what to cut. While a court order restored much of the money, the National Science Foundation has since slowed grantmaking nationwide, and President Trump has proposed giving political appointees more power to veto National Institutes of Health grants that don’t align with his agenda.

    What's next: Voters will decide in a year and a half whether to fund the idea, which the University of California has championed.

    California could create its own multi-billion-dollar science and health research agency under a bill signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom Wednesday, helping to fill a gap left by the politicization of science under the second Trump administration. Voters will decide in a year and a half whether to fund the idea, which the University of California has championed.

    Approved by state lawmakers at a time when federal science funding has become increasingly unpredictable, the bill places a $7.5 billion bond measure on the March 2028 ballot to pay for the creation of the California Foundation for Science and Health Research. The new state agency would provide grants and loans for projects in public health, climate science, agriculture and other areas. Panels of scientists would review proposals, and the agency would develop rules allowing the state to share in some of the profits from inventions made with its support.

    “Scientific advancements are curing and preventing diseases, improving the lives of people living with chronic conditions, protecting our communities from wildfires, lowering the cost of food, and powering our economy,” the bill’s author, state Sen. Scott Wiener, said in a statement. “We cannot allow the federal government to throw away that hope for a better future.”

    Newsom joined Wiener to sign the bill Wednesday atop the Golden Gate Bridge, a landmark built with voter-approved bond money in the 1930s that his press office described as a symbol of California ingenuity. He said the proposed science agency “does the opposite of what Donald Trump is doing (and) will allow us to double down on what makes this state great.”

    It was a dramatic comeback for a measure that almost died in the Legislature earlier this year, when a more ambitious $23 billion version of the plan failed to make it onto the November ballot despite bipartisan support.

    Researchers from UC Berkeley and elsewhere had joined with UC leadership to lobby for the bond, hosting rallies and inviting lawmakers to a science fair highlighting projects that had seen their funding stalled or canceled by the federal government.

    There were plenty to choose from: The Trump administration canceled nearly $2 billion in research grants to the University of California beginning in early 2025, later acknowledging in court that officials searched for keywords such as “health equity” and “sexual orientation” in order to decide what to cut. While a court order restored much of the money, the National Science Foundation has since slowed grantmaking nationwide, and President Trump has proposed giving political appointees more power to veto National Institutes of Health grants that don’t align with his agenda.

    This spring, the National Science Foundation canceled an additional $21 million in grants to UC Berkeley, accusing the projects’ lead researchers of accepting foreign funding without disclosing it, a charge some of those scientists denied. UC President James Milliken has called the disruption of federal research funding “one of the gravest threats to the University of California in our 157-year history.”

    Lawmakers nevertheless declined to move the science bond forward this spring amid worries about competing demands on state funds – including a housing bond on the November ballot and the possible need to backfill other federal cuts. But negotiations among bill supporters, legislative leaders and the governor over the summer led to the scaled-down version that Newsom signed Wednesday.

    Along with the University of California, California State University, private universities, and independent labs would all be potentially eligible for grants from the new state fund. A $7.5 billion state fund would not by itself make up for the instability in federal grants – the UC alone received nearly $5 billion in federal research funding in fiscal year 2024-25. But supporters say it could be especially helpful to researchers in fields such as climate science that are critical to the state’s future but have run afoul of Trump administration priorities.

    ___

    Berkeleyside partners with the nonprofit newsroom Open Campus on higher education coverage.

    ___

    This story was originally published by Berkeleyside and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.

  • Aging buildings could face powerful storms
    A single-story school building with its roof torn open and walls partly collapsed, leaving a large pile of splintered lumber, twisted metal, and pink and yellow insulation on the wet pavement. Bent red steel beams lie in the foreground, and nearby trees are stripped of their branches.
    Planada Elementary School, built in 1955 below flood level, damaged by heavy rains and a levee break on Jan. 6, 2023.

    Topline:

    A winter of potentially devastating weather driven by what scientists predict to be a massive El Niño event could strain many of California’s TK-12 public schools, experts say.

    The backstory: The southern and central parts of the state are expected to be hit hard along with coastal areas, as they were in 2023 when mid-March storms forced the closure of at least 178 schools. Only this time, weather scientists predict El Niño could stress levees to the max, and even bring potential for tornadoes, along with torrential rains, mudslides, storm-driven tides and heavy winds.

    Why it matters: Many schools have leaky roofs heading into El Niño, bond records show. Older school buildings are expected to be damaged by El Niño-driven storms. Coastal flooding could be severe as one small oceanfront school braces for El Niño.

    Why now: One of the things that makes El Niños so dangerous in coastal areas is that they are known in California for also causing rising tides known as Kelvin waves. They are slow-moving and can raise sea levels for weeks. Some could reach shore as early as October. At the same time, an astronomical phenomenon known as super king tides is expected from November to January, Danial Swain, a climate scientist with University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources, said in an online presentation. “That would probably bring record-breaking coastal flooding this year.”

    A winter of potentially devastating weather driven by what scientists predict to be a massive El Niño event could strain many of California’s TK-12 public schools, experts say, likely damaging aging structures and forcing school closures.

    The southern and central parts of the state are expected to be hit hard along with coastal areas, as they were in 2023 when mid-March storms forced the closure of at least 178 schools. Only this time, weather scientists predict El Niño could stress levees to the max, and even bring potential for tornadoes, along with torrential rains, mudslides, storm-driven tides and heavy winds.

    While district superintendents in especially vulnerable areas are already planning ahead, some schools may be ill-equipped to handle punishing weather. At least 59 California school districts are seeking voter approval for bonds in the November election, and have identified the need to repair or replace “leaky,” “dilapidated” and “decaying” roofs, an EdSource examination of local ballot language shows.

    Gov. Gavin Newsom declared a state of emergency on Sept. 21, ordering pumps and sandbags to be stockpiled near vulnerable areas, among other precautions. Federal flood data show roughly 20% of the state’s schools are located within flood plains. In 2023, heavy storms flooded schools in Alameda and Merced counties as well as one near Watsonville, where a levee ruptured.

    “Climate-driven El Niño conditions could mean months of dangerous weather, heavy rain, strong winds, deep mountain snow and flooding,” Caroline Thomas Jacobs, director of the California Office of Emergency Services, said at a news conference, adding that the public shouldn’t underestimate “the power of water.”

    Preparing for a severe El Niño

    As predictions of severe weather spread, there isn’t a school superintendent in an area that the El Niño is predicted to impact “that hasn’t been thinking about this for weeks already,” said Scott Borba, executive director of the California Small School Districts Association. Many small districts have aging buildings — some as many as 75 years old, Borba said.

    “You’ve got leaks and dry rot and all the things that a super wet winter is going to just exacerbate,” he said.

    While district leaders work with other local agencies during weather emergencies, they are largely on their own when making major decisions, such as whether to cancel school, Borba said.

    “Sometimes you have some county office of emergency services’ support. But when it comes to making that decision, that decision lies with the superintendent alone,” he said.

    One small school district leader who may soon be making such decisions is Raven Coit, the superintendent and principal of the 61-student TK-8 Peninsula Union School District on the south end of the Northern Humboldt Peninsula in Humboldt County. It’s perhaps the most isolated coastal school in California, roughly 600 yards from the ocean. Dunes often serve as a play area for students.

    Coit took steps this year to try to limit storm damage. She had trees cut back and used money saved by deferring other projects to complete much-needed roof repairs. “There was a big storm that caused leaking. I’m proud to say that it won’t rain inside this year,” she said.

    But the likelihood of impacts from El Niño remains. The school’s “in a vulnerable spot,” she said. Flooding could cut off access to the only road leading to the school. There’s a backup generator that she’s “trying to figure out if I can make it work.”

    While nearly all the school’s students live nearby, many teachers do not, and may not be able to get to work. Local high school students are bussed to Arcata on the mainland — if buses can get through.

    She said the school could also turn to remote learning in a crisis.

    How El Niño may impact schools in coastal areas

    One of the things that makes El Niños so dangerous in coastal areas like Coit’s is that they are known in California for also causing rising tides known as Kelvin waves.

    They are slow moving, and can raise sea levels for weeks. Some could reach shore as early as October. At the same time, an astronomical phenomenon known as super king tides is expected from November to January, Danial Swain, a climate scientist with the University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources, said in an online presentation.

    “That would probably bring record-breaking coastal flooding this year.”

    A worst-case scenario “would be an El Niño Kelvin, plus a peak king tide, plus a significant storm,” he said.

    A Southern California school leader of one of those districts said it’s bracing for storms.

    Don Austin, superintendent of Laguna Beach Unified School District in Orange County, said that living on the coast, “I have seen our beaches get washed away with recent storms and homes destroyed.”

    His schools have “roof leaks and other issues that will be heavily impacted by an El Niño,” he said.

    The most impactful weather-driven damage to a California school in recent years was in March 2023 when a broken river levee caused the Pajaro Middle school near Watsonville to flood, along with the heavily Mexican immigrant and farmworker community it serves.

    The school reopened in 2024. A complete replacement of the entire levee by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers could take a decade, officials said.

    Mark Strudley, executive director of the Pajaro Regional Flood Management Agency, said the agency is spending roughly $1 million to strengthen the levee, and that the breach that led to the school flooding has been permanently repaired. El Niño, he said, is the obvious concern, and the work is aimed at protecting the town of Pajaro and the middle school.

    Leaders of the Pajaro Valley Unified School District remain concerned about El Niño, but haven’t identified a temporary site to move students to if the school floods again, according to Peggy Pughe, the district’s executive director of teaching and learning.

    Asked what the district officials are doing based on their experience with the 2023 floods and the threat of El Niño, Pughe said they are “canvassing local neighborhoods, encouraging families and residents to sign up for emergency alert services.”

    Data journalist Daniel J. Willis and staff writer Emma Gallegos contributed to this story.

    EdSource is an independent nonprofit organization that provides analysis on key education issues facing California and the nation. LAist republishes articles from EdSource with permission.

  • Public comment period ends Oct. 6
    A small wooden play fort is lined with toys and pillows.
    Head Start providers say the changes could hurt the quality of of the program, which currently provides wraparound services to low-income children and their families.
    Topline:
    Early childhood providers in L.A. are concerned about what could happen next to Head Start amid the Trump administration’s proposal to overhaul the program. The public comment period of the proposed rules ends Oct. 6.
    The backstory: In August, the administration announced a significant overhaul of the program, stripping it of many of its regulations and imposing new requirements, like teaching in English only. Federal officials said the deregulation would provide for more local flexibility, but providers say it could gut the program.

    Why it matters: The Head Start program provides early education and other wraparound services for about 70,000 children across the state. “ It's a holistic program really designed to lift kids out of poverty and to set them up for future success, so what's at risk when the standards are changed are a lot of those elements and guidelines that support the program quality,” said Melanee Cottrill, executive director of Head Start California.

    What’s next: The public comment period ends on Oct. 6 — after which the administration could finalize the new regulation. It’s unclear when that will be, and experts say the plan could be caught up in litigation.

    In August, the Trump administration announced a significant overhaul of the Head Start program, leaving early childhood providers in Los Angeles concerned about their ability to serve low-income children.

    The proposed rules strip Head Start of many of its regulations and impose new requirements, like teaching in English only.

    The public comment period ends Oct. 6 — after which the administration could finalize the new rule. It’s unclear when that will happen, and experts say it could be caught up in litigation.

    Why does the administration want to change the rules?

    Federal officials said the deregulation would provide for more local flexibility.

    An administration statement said the moves reduce both regulatory burden and administrative costs, allowing for more available slots — as many as 236,000 Head Start slots nationwide — and save $2.2 billion.

    “We are removing unnecessary bureaucracy, strengthening nutrition and physical health, trusting parents and local communities, and opening Head Start to hundreds of thousands more children,” said Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the secretary of health and human services. “That’s how we renew the promise of Head Start for the next generation.”

    Earlier in the administration, the White House proposed to cut Head Start entirely from the budget but reversed course.

    The case against the proposed rules

    Head Start providers worry the new rules, if implemented, could be the start of whittling down a program that provides early education and other wraparound services for about 70,000 children across the state.

    “It's a holistic program really designed to lift kids out of poverty and to set them up for future success, so what's at risk when the standards are changed are a lot of those elements and guidelines that support the program quality,” said Melanee Cottrill, executive director of Head Start California.

    For example, Head Start provides support services beyond education, like developmental screenings and dental care, which would no longer be required under the Trump administration’s plan. The new rules would also require documentation beyond self-attestation for families experiencing homelessness.

    “Putting a lot of documentation requirements in place would be very onerous for people who are in really difficult circumstances,” said Donna Sneeringer, president of the Child Care Resource Center, which serves about 2,000 kids in its Head Start programs in northern L.A. County. The program opened up a Head Start center at a family homeless shelter last year.

    The administration’s proposal also sets a 5% cap on administrative costs, down from the current 15%, which Sneeringer said will be hard for nonprofits to implement.

    “I think many Head Start operators are really going to struggle to even keep their programs open,” she said.

    How you can submit public comment on the proposed Head Start changes

    Members of the public have until Oct. 6 to submit comments on the proposed rule change. You can do so by: