The Brief

California lawmakers put top state officials tasked with protecting worker health and safety under intense fire Wednesday for falling short of their mission, as highlighted by a recent state audit.

The hearing in Sacramento exposed deficiencies hampering Cal/OSHA’s ability to prevent job-related deaths and injuries. The agency failed to conduct some on-site inspections and levy appropriate fines, even when doing so would have better protected workers, the report published July 17 said.

The California state auditor identified severe staffing shortages and outdated policies and practices as “root causes,” including handling investigations primarily on paper, which makes it difficult to track the more than 12,000 complaints Cal/OSHA receives annually.

“Employers who put workers in danger are not being held accountable,” Assemblymember Liz Ortega, D-San Leandro, told Cal/OSHA officials at the hearing, including agency Chief Debra Lee. “What I really hope my colleagues and the public understand is the severity of Cal/OSHA’s failure to protect workers.”

California has some of the nation’s strongest workplace safety laws, but advocates have long complained that weak enforcement leaves employees at risk, especially in construction, manufacturing, and agriculture.

Cal/OSHA, also known as the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health, generally is supposed to send inspectors to a workplace soon after receiving a report of a fatality, serious injury, or danger. On-site inspections can result in fines for the employer if violations are found. Less serious hazards often are addressed through letters asking employers to self-investigate and correct issues, without monetary penalties.

The auditor found Cal/OSHA closed complaints and accident reports without verifying employers had fixed safety hazards and declined to conduct on-site inspections, even when state law likely required them. Some cases involved serious injuries, including a chainsaw laceration resulting in surgery and weeks of recovery and a skull fracture rendering a worker unconscious for several minutes.

The agency also reduced penalties without documenting a rationale. In one case, a forklift accident that caused a worker’s death resulted in a $21,000 fine, though penalties could have been twice as high, according to the audit, which reviewed 60 complaints and accident files handled by Cal/OSHA between 2019 and 2024.

Staffing was another major issue. The agency had 32% of its positions unfilled last year, but vacancies were more severe in enforcement, where critical industrial hygienist positions were 81% unfilled.

California State Auditor Grant Parks told lawmakers the agency needs enough staff, clear policies, and systems to monitor employee performance.

“The problems that Cal/OSHA is facing is really a sort of a three-legged stool,” Parks said. “And currently, we don’t have any of those three legs fully fleshed out, in our opinion.”

State Sen. Lola Smallwood-Cuevas, D-Los Angeles, chair of the Senate Labor, Public Employment and Retirement Committee, said lawmakers must ensure Cal/OSHA implements needed changes.

“It’s incredible that an agency that has been around for decades doesn’t have any legs to its stool,” she said.

Lee, a 30-year employee at Cal/OSHA before she was appointed by Gov. Gavin Newsom to head the agency in 2024, seemed at times nervous and tepid in her responses. At one point, she referred to a manual before responding to a question by Ortega about when the agency refers cases for criminal prosecution.

Ortega repeatedly cited three workers who died after being crushed by machinery at a metal manufacturing and recycling plant in her district, without sufficient consequences for the employer.

“When do you decide that it’s time to hold an employer accountable? Is it after the first death? Is it the second death? Is it after the third death?” Ortega asked.

Lee quoted related labor codes but acknowledged the agency does not yet have a clear policy for referring cases to district attorneys.

“I acknowledge the audit’s findings and their recommendations, which makes it clear and certain that improvements are needed at Cal/OSHA,” Lee said. “My priority is to improve the lives of California workers and empower employers to provide a safe workplace. In fact, under my leadership, Cal/OSHA was already working to fix issues identified by the state auditor.”

Records show the agency issued progressively stiffer penalties against San Leandro-based Alco Iron & Metal Co., the workplace Ortega referred to: $7,000 for a 2017 worker fatality, $18,185 for a second death in 2022, and $95,500 for a third earlier this year. It is unclear whether the company has paid the fines. Cal/OSHA did not immediately respond to requests for more information.

In an email, Michael Bercovic, chief operating officer at Alco Iron & Metal, declined to comment on the two most recent fatalities, which remain under investigation and in legal proceedings. He said the 2017 accident was caused by a manufacturer’s design flaw in the equipment that crushed the worker.

“The employee’s family filed a lawsuit against the equipment manufacturer, and they reached a settlement prior to trial,” he said.

Cal/OSHA has prioritized hiring, reducing its overall vacancy rate to 12% this year after eliminating 66 positions due to budget cuts, according to Lee. Vacancies remain higher in enforcement, with 30% of field staff positions unfilled, a spokesperson said.

The agency is modernizing operations with a new electronic data management system that spokesperson Daniel Lopez called the “biggest technology project” in Cal/OSHA’s history. Officials said it will help collect and standardize information.

The state auditor’s office plans to follow up on Cal/OSHA’s progress next month.

Huntington Beach's controversial voter ID law is illegal and cannot be implemented. That’s the upshot following this week's California Supreme Court decision not to review a lower court ruling striking the law down.

The backstory

Huntington Beach voters approved a measure in 2024 allowing the city to require people to show ID when casting a ballot. That contradicts state law — voters in California are asked to provide ID when they register to vote, but generally not at polling places. The state and a Huntington Beach resident subsequently sued the city.

The city’s argument

The city has tried to argue that it can implement its own rules for citywide elections because it’s a charter city, which gives it more autonomy. Last year, an appeals court rejected that argument and blocked the voter ID law.

Reactions to the ruling

California leaders applauded the state high court’s refusal to review the case.

“Today’s victory makes one thing crystal clear: No city in our state, charter and non-charter alike, is above the law,” California Attorney General Rob Bonta said in a statement.

Secretary of State Shirley Weber called the decision “another victory for California, for voters, and for democracy.”

LAist has reached out to Huntington Beach Mayor Casey McKeon and a city spokesperson for comment.

The bigger picture

Voter ID has long been a controversial issue. Supporters say it’s a commonsense measure to prevent voter fraud. Opponents say it’s an unnecessary barrier considering that proven voter fraud is exceedingly rare, despite occasional political stunts meant to expose flaws in the system.

What’s next?

California voters may get a chance to weigh in on the debate this fall if a voter ID initiative makes it to the ballot. The initiative would require people to show a photo ID when they vote, or to include the last four digits of a government issued ID on their mail-in ballots.

With the release of his sophomore album, Fly, in October 2024, jazz vocalist, composer and songwriter Michael Mayo ascended to new artistic heights.

Much like his lauded 2021 debut album, Bones, the Los Angeles-born singer flexed his jazz-influenced musical prowess on Fly, enthusing critics with the album's floating production, expressive songwriting and its highlighting of his expansive vocal range. The album ultimately landed Mayo his first Grammy nominations, with Fly being nominated for best jazz vocal album and best jazz performance for the album's track "Four."

Micheal Mayo's sophmore studio album, Fly, was the follow-up to his critically acclaimed debut album, Bones.

(

Lauren Desberg

)

In an interview with All Things Considered, Mayo said that his artistry is driven by his focus on remaining true to himself and what he wants to express as a singer.

The track "Four" is a reinterpretation of a Miles Davis tune from the 1950s, which became a jazz standard. In an interview with All Things Considered, Mayo said it's important to respect and learn traditional jazz music, but merely copying it would go against the vision of the jazz greats, who tried to push the artform to new places. And though Mayo says he's not consciously trying to modernize jazz, he says leading with authenticity helps him innovate in his music.

"I'm going to make the musical statements that feel the most natural," Mayo said about his stylistic choices on Fly.

While speaking to NPR's Ailsa Chang, Mayo discussed the people who helped make Fly take flight and how he approaches taking artistic risks.

Listen to the full interview by clicking on the blue play button above.

This interview is part of an All Things Considered series featuring first-time Grammy nominees, ahead of the Grammy Awards on February 1.
Copyright 2026 NPR

Tesla's profit dropped 46% year over year, the company revealed in its earnings update Wednesday evening.

That was not exactly a surprise — in fact, it was better than most analysts had expected. Tesla had already reported sales for the quarter, which showed the continuation of a slump that stretched through much of the year. More revenue from other parts of the company, like a growing energy storage business, haven't made up for the fact that Tesla's not selling as many cars as it used to.

Tesla, once the undisputed global leader in electric vehicle sales, has lost that crown as its brand reputation has soured and competition — particularly from China — has grown more intense.

But the company continues to maintain that it's in the process of transitioning from being a car company to a "physical AI company," with value based on its self-driving vehicle technology, its robotaxi service and, eventually, humanoid robots.

As part of that pivot, Tesla is discontinuing its higher-end Model S and Model X vehicles. The vehicles were already made in much smaller numbers than the more affordable Models 3 and Y, but had symbolic value. The Model S, in particular, was a major step forward for Tesla and electric vehicles; Tesla called it the "world's first mass-produced, highway-capable EV," and it was the first vehicle built at Tesla's Fremont factory.

Instead of more traditional vehicles, the company is focusing its attention on its "Cybercab," a vehicle designed without a steering wheel or pedals that's meant to replace existing Teslas in the company's nascent robotaxi business.

"We would expect over time to make far more Cybercabs than all of our other vehicles combined," CEO Elon Musk said on a quarterly earnings call with investors and analysts Wednesday night. "The vast majority of miles traveled will be autonomous in the future … I'm just guessing, but probably less than 5% of miles driven will be where somebody is actually driving the car themselves."

And as for robots, Tesla is taking the Model S and Model X production lines in the Fremont plant and dedicating that space to production of the "Optimus" humanoid robot, which Musk said would launch production this year. (Musk has a history, which he often jokingly refers to, of overpromising on timelines.)

Musk warned Wall Street that as part of these plans, the company would be shelling out a lot of cash in the year ahead — an eye-popping $20 billion, more than double what the company spent on capital expenditures in 2025.

"We're making big investments for an epic future," Musk said.

Tesla lost its spot as world's top EV seller 

A Chinese company, not Tesla, is now the world's top EV maker.

In 2025, the Chinese automaker BYD sold more than 2.25 million battery-powered vehicles, according to the company.

Tesla sold 1.65 million, fewer than it sold in 2024. It's the second straight year of sales declines.

In late 2023, Musk had warned investors that Tesla was in between "growth waves," setting expectations low for 2024 but promising a return to rapid expansion with the launch of a "next-generation" vehicle that was tentatively planned for 2025.

That second growth wave hasn't materialized. Tesla repeatedly teased a much cheaper Tesla, rumored to sell for about $25,000 thanks to revolutionary changes in manufacturing. Even after Reuters reported that the vehicle was dead, Musk publicly maintained it was coming.

But it wasn't. Musk eventually confirmed that the company would focus its major redesign efforts on the Cybercab. Instead of offering a significantly cheaper vehicle, the company rolled out slightly cheaper versions of the Model 3 and Model Y.

Meanwhile, the electric vehicle market in the U.S. has taken a substantial hit. Sales were already underperforming expectations, and then President Trump took office and his administration began to systematically roll back EV incentives and regulations. Sales of EVs rose sharply in the summer of 2025 as consumers tried to take advantage of a disappearing consumer tax credit, and then dropped when the tax credit expired at the end of September. Automakers say it's still not clear what demand for EVs will look like without those tax credits.

Trump's policy changes have affected Tesla even more directly, by taking away a key revenue stream. Under previous government policies, automakers who didn't meet requirements for making their vehicles cleaner could buy "credits" from competitors who overperformed on building EVs, in lieu of paying fines. This was a lucrative source of cash for Tesla, and one that is now dwindling away. Tesla typically does not respond to requests for comment, and did not reply to an inquiry for this story.

Globally, meanwhile, EVs are still ascendant. In December, in the European Union, buyers registered more new pure EVs than traditional gasoline vehicles for the first time ever. Hybrids (like the original Prius) remain more popular than either, but that market isn't growing as fast as EVs. In Europe, EV sales increased by more than 50% year-over-year, while those popular hybrids rose only 6%. Traditional gasoline- and diesel-powered car sales dropped by around 20%.

In China, most new vehicles are already electric or plug-in hybrids. And Chinese exports of EVs are rising, taking off in places like Mexico and Brazil. Canada, too, just struck a deal to allow the import of some Chinese-made EVs without hefty tariffs.

In addition to BYD's conspicuous success, the major Chinese automaker Geely has boosted its battery-powered vehicle sales by 90% year over year, while competitor SAIC grew sales by 33%.

Those figures include the sales of plug-in hybrids, making them less of an apples-to-apples comparison to Tesla's pure electric sales — but compared to Tesla's sales decline, the trajectory is clear. Tesla once had the lead in the EV race, but the momentum is now with Chinese manufacturers.

Brand takes a beating

Meanwhile, Tesla has been grappling with an increasingly skeptical — or even hostile — consumer base in the U.S.

Musk's controversial political activities over the last few years have alienated many left-of-center Americans. While he won some fans on the right, so far, Republicans and conservatives remain less likely to buy EVs.

Evan Roth Smith is a pollster who has been tracking consumer sentiment about Tesla and EVs for the Electric Vehicle Intelligence Report. According to his most recent survey of more than 3,000 U.S. consumers, nearly all car brands have an overall positive reputation. Toyota ranks at the top: Nearly half of Americans have a positive view of the Japanese brand, and only 7% have a negative view. For Tesla, in contrast, 27% have a positive view and 37% a negative view — the company has more haters than fans.

Tesla's degree of unpopularity among the general public is very unusual for an automaker, he says: "Most carmakers don't have any sort of political valence or mass controversy attached to them." 

And brand perceptions affect sales.

Even current Tesla owners, who have long been remarkably loyal to the brand, are showing a little more interest in shopping around. LexisNexis Risk Solutions tracks what brands current car owners purchase for their next vehicle; if they stick with the same brand, that's evidence of brand loyalty. In their data, Tesla — which has ranked first or second for industry loyalty in recent years — has slipped to third place in 2025.

The company still enjoys higher loyalty than the industry average. But it's clear that EV buyers have more options now, and even Tesla enthusiasts are more willing to consider them. In 2020, LexisNexis found that among existing Tesla owners who purchased another EV, a remarkable 98% got another Tesla. In 2025, that number dropped to 78%.

Musk's focus is on AI and robots, not cars 

Musk — who was recently granted an extraordinary pay package worth up to a trillion dollars, contingent on meeting lofty goals for Tesla's growth and valuation — has maintained for years that Tesla's future lies in autonomous vehicles, artificial intelligence and humanoid robots.

But he has frequently missed his own timelines for those achievements; the driver-assistance software in Tesla vehicles still requires human oversight, and the robotaxi service is only available in small pilot programs in Texas and California, despite Musk projecting service to 50% of America by the end of 2025.

Roth Smith's polling has found that this continued focus on autonomy and robotaxis is not helping Tesla win over public opinion. The "Full Self-Driving (Supervised)" software that allows Tesla vehicles to steer themselves — with human oversight — is central to Musk's vision for the company. Roth Smith's survey found that only 14% of respondents said FSD made them more likely to buy a Tesla; 34% said it made them less likely.

And out of more than 20 different auto brands that Roth Smith polled consumers about, the only ones besides Tesla to have a net negative view from the public were Cruise, Waymo and Zoox — all autonomous vehicle companies.

"There's a lot of skepticism from consumers over whether this technology is safe for mass deployment yet, whether regulators are up to the task of creating rules of the road for autonomous vehicles," Roth Smith says.

By focusing so much on autonomy, Roth Smith argues, Musk has associated Teslas with these controversial robotaxis. "They now are perceived like a much more controversial, much more polarizing type of technology," he says.
Copyright 2026 NPR