By Alejandro Lazo and Alejandra Reyes-Velarde | CalMatters
Published August 20, 2025 12:30 PM
Hydrogen-powered trucks at IMC headquarters in Compton on Oct. 29, 2024.
(
Carlin Stiehl
/
CalMatters
)
Topline:
California regulators are stepping up efforts to defend the state’s climate policies after federal pushback from the Trump administration. State agencies unveiled a set of recommendations to lawmakers though critics say the proposals fall short.
Proposals on the table: The proposals include replacing expiring EV tax credits, restoring carpool lane access for electric cars, and streamlining the process for building charging stations. Regulators are also weighing stronger protections for EV owners and new rules to limit diesel pollution at freight hubs.
Mixed reactions from experts: While officials stress the urgency of protecting public health and clean air, environmental advocates and experts argue the plan lacks bold action. Some expected stronger measures in response to federal opposition.
California regulators, responding to the Trump administration’s attacks on the state’s climate policy, propose to fight back in part by asking lawmakers to backfill electric vehicle incentives, recommending more private investment, and beginning to write clean car rules — again.
“Clean air efforts are under siege, putting the health of every American at risk,” said Air Resources Board chairperson Liane Randolph. “California is continuing to fight back and will not give up on cleaner air and better public health. We have a legal and moral obligation.”
Proposals unveiled Tuesday also include replacing expiring federal EV tax credits — a tough ask in a tight budget year — and restoring carpool lane access, which would require federal approval. One recommendation seeks to expand vehicle charging access by streamlining utility hookups and simplifying permits for new stations.
The air board is advancing just a few regulatory ideas: one to enact stronger consumer protections for clean car owners, and another to curb diesel pollution from freight hubs such as ports and warehouses. Randolph also said the board would begin work on a new clean cars rule.
A spokesman for the governor said he would review the agencies’ report.
The recommendations reflect the hard shift the state has experienced from a supportive Biden administration toward a hostile one under President Donald Trump, said Guillermo Ortiz, senior clean vehicles advocate for the Natural Resources Defense Council.
“When you have your federal government using every tool at its disposal to attack its own state …how are you able to see every attack angle, every vector, everything that this administration is willing to do to harm California?” he said. “That's difficult.”
Other experts also said they expected more. “Folks familiar with this kind of policy will read it and feel...underwhelmed,” wrote Earthjustice lawyer Adrian Martinez in an analysis of the plan.
“Nothing jumps out at me as being particularly aggressive,” said Daniel Sperling, a former Air Resources Board member who is the director of the Institute for Transportation Studies at UC Davis. “I'm puzzled, actually, because they had acted like they were really going to do something significant.”
Attacks on the state’s climate policies escalated last week, centered on the Clean Truck Partnership, a voluntary deal between major truck manufacturers and the state that would continue advancing zero emission truck technology even if the waiver programs fell through.
Last week, four manufacturers filed a lawsuit, seeking to dissolve their commitments under the partnership. The Federal Trade Commission, after launching an investigation into California’s program, declared the partnership unenforceable.
Days later, Trump’s Justice Department intervened in two lawsuits, arguing that the decision whether to ban internal-combustion engines in heavy-duty trucks rests ultimately with the federal government.
California’s climate policies matter most in communities near ports, warehouses and railyards, where diesel pollution chokes the air, said Ortiz of the Natural Resources Defense Council. Truck exhaust is a major source of cancer risk and drives respiratory and heart disease.
Without authority to make aggressive rules or strong voluntary measures like the Clean Truck Partnership, experts say the transition to less-polluting trucks could slow down.
A call for bolder action
Experts who called for bolder action said the state has more power than its executive and legislative branches are using.
Sperling said the state could better disincentivize gas-powered cars with a “feebate program,” which could charge fees on high-polluting vehicles in order to pay for clean-car rebates.
“If you really want to put your money where your mouth is, I think really supercharging those programs to advance transportation electrification could be a massively successful strategy,” said Martinez, who directs Earthjustice’s campaign toward that goal.
Martinez said that the state could better structure existing state programs including the Low Carbon Fuel Standard and the state’s Cap and Trade program to pay for electric cars and trucks.
“California shouldn't blink” as the Trump Administration moves “aggressively,” he added.
Ethan Elkind, who directs the climate program at UC Berkeley’s Center for Law, Energy and the Environment, said a statewide rule tightening controls at warehouses and other pollution magnets could achieve similar aims to the truck mandates.
Elkind previously has pushed to go further. If the federal government is getting out of the business of regulating tailpipe emissions and making climate policy, he added, California could fill that vacuum in the future.
“The state could take a pretty aggressive approach here,” he added.
Air Resources Board chair Randolph said that California is not backing down, though she admitted that developing a new clean car rule aimed at phasing out gas-powered cars could take time.
“Because these rulemakings take two, three, sometimes even four years, we decided that it would be good to start that process now, and have it … be ready, ideally for a more receptive U.S. EPA,” Randolph said.
People supporting California's proposed billionaire tax hold signs at the 2026 California Democratic Party State Convention in San Francisco on Feb. 21, 2026.
(
Jeff Chiu
/
AP Photo
)
Topline:
The health care union behind the tax measure argues its plan is the only viable fix for federal funding cuts to Medi-Cal. But even some of the most liberal lawmakers and labor unions aren’t convinced yet.
Why it matters: Publicly, prominent labor and progressive players have largely kept quiet, unlike Gov. Gavin Newsom who has aired his disdain loud and clear. Yet in private, some union leaders and their allies in the Legislature rail against the measure. Of the critics who spoke with CalMatters for this story — three union leaders and five members of the Legislative Progressive Caucus — only one lawmaker would criticize the measure openly.
The backstory: The proposed initiative would levy a one-time tax of 5% on any resident of California whose net worth exceeds $1 billion, which applies to around 200 people, according to Forbes. That money would plug an estimated $100 billion hole left by federal cuts to Medi-Cal and other social service programs.
Taxing the rich to backfill Trump-induced federal funding cuts might sound like a no-brainer policy for the party’s left flank, which counts wealth inequality among its top issues.
But despite a strong show of support from prominent national figures, including Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and liberal economist Robert Reich, the “2026 California Billionaire Tax Act” has become a hot potato for labor leaders.
The proposed initiative would levy a one-time tax of 5% on any resident of California whose net worth exceeds $1 billion, which applies to around 200 people, according to Forbes. That money would plug an estimated $100 billion hole left by federal cuts to Medi-Cal and other social service programs.
Publicly, prominent labor and progressive players have largely kept quiet, unlike Gov. Gavin Newsom who has aired his disdain loud and clear. Yet in private, some union leaders and their allies in the Legislature rail against the measure. Of the critics who spoke with CalMatters for this story — three union leaders and five members of the Legislative Progressive Caucus — only one lawmaker would criticize the measure openly.
Critics question its feasibility and whether the state even knows how to accurately appraise a billionaire’s total wealth, a crucial step to evaluating how much tax they would owe. They fear long-term revenue loss by driving wealthy people out of California. And some resent that the union sponsoring the initiative, SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West, designed the measure to predominantly benefit its members rather than boost the state’s general fund, where it could go to all budget needs.
“It's not that taxing billionaires in itself is wrong,” said Keely Martin Bosler, formerly the top state budget officer to Newsom and former Gov. Jerry Brown. She is now a Democratic consultant who has advised several of California’s most powerful labor groups, including the Service Employees International Union of California, the parent union of SEIU-UHW. “The way in which this tax specifically is constructed is problematic.”
Many progressive state lawmakers and Capitol heavyweights, such as Sen. Scott Wiener of San Francisco and the powerful California Labor Federation, have sidestepped the question of whether they’d support it, declining for now to take a position on an initiative that has yet to officially qualify for the ballot.
“The Labor Federation won’t take it up for an endorsement until July,” said Lorena Gonzalez, the organization’s president, in a text message.
Yet if the tax lands on the November ballot, as it appears on track to do, progressive critics will be saddled with the tricky optics of opposing — or at least not supporting — a measure that embodies one of their base’s core tenets: taxing the rich.
Even the mere threat the measure could qualify for the ballot has already spurred a torrent of opposition spending — more than $50 million in total so far — from billionaires such as Google co-founder Sergey Brin and cryptocurrency mogul Chris Larsen. Brin’s group, known as “Building a Better California,” has also spawned three new competing ballot measures designed to undermine the billionaires’ tax.
Critics fear that if billionaires like Brin become even bigger perennial spenders in California politics, they could neuter the progressive agenda by bankrolling more business-friendly candidates and ousting left-leaning, labor-aligned legislators.
But the measure’s proponents say they are undeterred by the secretive detractors and challenge their critics to put their names behind their words.
Dave Regan speaks to the SEIU-UHW Leadership Assembly in 2013.
(
Steve Yeater
/
Courtesy of SEIU-UHW
)
“What we have is a group of so-called leaders who are not reflecting the attitudes of their own constituents,” said Dave Regan, president of SEIU-UHW and the de facto leader of the billionaire tax measure. “That’s why they want to be anonymous.”
Regan said he’s confident the initiative will amass enough signatures to qualify for the ballot before the end of April. Then, he said, “We believe a lot of those people are going to come around and change because this makes sense, because the public is supportive, because their own members are supportive.”
The case for, and against, the billionaires’ tax
So far, polling has shown the billionaire tax is relatively popular with voters. Recent surveys show just over half of Californians surveyed said they’re inclined to vote for it.
Critics point out that California’s existing state tax structure is entirely based on income, rather than net worth. The state would have to appraise each person’s assets, including real estate, art, automobiles and private and public businesses. The billionaires could pay in installments, handing over 1% of their wealth annually for five years.
Bosler said that with income tax filings, the Franchise Tax Board can use data from federal tax returns to verify its own analysis. Since there’s no federal wealth tax, California would be forging uncharted territory with no tax compliance support from any other source or agency — a risky move that could invite legal challenges.
“The state is not a miracle worker, like, they're not going to suddenly be able to do all of this like perfectly,” said Bosler. “I mean they will do their best, but I just think this is expertise that they have built up over 50-plus years. Like, none of this is in their wheelhouse at this point.”
But champions of the tax argue it is the only real solution on the table so far to save hospitals, health care jobs and, ultimately, patient lives they say are at risk due to federal funding cuts to Medi-Cal and food assistance programs.
Supporters note that the tax is not intended to solve California’s structural budget problems.
“It’s one-time funding to fill what we hope is a one-time hole,” said Brian Galle, a tax law professor at UC Berkeley who helped craft the measure. Galle said only around 200 people would be subjected to the tax, so the extra burden on the Franchise Tax Board wouldn’t be too great.
“It's not like FTB is going to get a blizzard of tens of thousands of new returns that they're going to have to figure out a whole new data system for cracking,” said Galle.
Why some progressives aren’t on board
Those who have qualms with the initiative have largely kept their criticisms private.
One liberal state legislator, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the infighting among the unions puts progressive lawmakers in a difficult position. While he empathizes with the urgency that health care workers feel, he and other Democrats are not convinced the policy could withstand legal challenges and worry about the wealthy employing savvy accounting maneuvers to skirt the tax altogether.
Some organizations that are synonymous with progressive politics in California, such as the Working Families Party, also haven’t taken a position, even as other unions such as the Teamsters and AFSCME California support it.
Even the powerhouse labor union SEIU California is choosing not to take a position on the measure, which is spearheaded by one of its local affiliates, SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West.
Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, right, speaks with Assemblymember Chris Ward at the state Capitol in Sacramento on Sept. 12, 2025.
(
Fred Greaves
/
CalMatters
)
Assemblymember Chris Ward, a member of the progressive caucus, called the measure a “well-meaning effort by UHW,” but criticized the proposal for being just a one-time tax primarily benefiting the health care sector rather than boosting the state’s overall revenues. Regan said SEIU-UHW made the tax one-time to nullify the argument that it would push billionaires out of the state.
Ward noted that he and his colleagues are considering “superior” bills, such as one that would close a corporate tax loop to generate $3 billion per year, and another that would create a new tax on corporations that pay workers so little that they qualify for Medi-Cal and nutrition assistance.
Regan argued these measures would only make California more unaffordable, since businesses would pass their increased costs along to consumers.
Ward, the sole state lawmaker who would candidly share his concerns about the initiative with CalMatters, said he and his colleagues have heard pushback from “a number of other labor organizations that don't support that initiative,” primarily because its members would not directly benefit from any of the revenue. Uniting labor, he said, is the key to any successful revenue solution.
“There's a need to look at a wealth tax for a more broad range, including health care workers but other purposes that are state priorities,” Ward said, “and that will be left off of the table if this is the only question we're seeing.”
CalMatters' Nadia Lathan contributed to this story.
Robert Garrova
explores the weird and secret bits of SoCal that would excite even the most jaded Angelenos. He also covers mental health.
Published April 9, 2026 2:53 PM
An orange pockmarked and scarred by sweet orange scab, a fungal disease.
(
U.S. Department of Agriculture
)
Topline:
Sweet orange scab, a plant disease that can harm citrus trees, continues to expand in our region. The California Department of Food and Agriculture recently expanded a quarantine in parts of L.A. and Orange counties.
What is it? SOS is a fungal pathogen that causes young citrus fruit to look scarred. The disease can lead to premature fruit drop and stunt the growth of young trees. Tangerines, sweet oranges and other citrus are at risk.
Where is it? After it was previously found in L.A. and Ventura counties last year, sweet orange scab has expanded into both the Irvine and La Puente areas. Officials expanded the quarantine zone to include those areas, which means residents should not move plants.
What if your tree has it? There isn’t currently a treatment for SOS, but you don’t have to pull your tree out and can still eat the fruit. You can call the CDFA’s pest hotline at (800) 491-1899 to report any trees you suspect have the disease.
Why it matters: The CDFA said quarantine areas have expanded to try to keep the disease away from commercial growers. SOS can cause blemishes, lesions and other symptoms on citrus fruit, and no one wants to buy scabbed fruit.
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.
Rows of vinyl records for sale at Sounds of Music store.
(
Alma Lucia
/
Boyle Heights Beat
)
Topline:
Sounds of Music, an East L.A. record store which has specialized in Chicano soul, oldies and “souldies” since 1964, is now at risk of closing if sales don’t improve.
The backstory: Owner Mario Reyes inherited the store from his father, Carlos Reyes, who relocated to East L.A. from Montebello in 1967. Since then, it has been a destination for fans of soul, R&B, Chicano rap and oldies, offering vinyl records, cassettes, CDs and other merchandise. It’s something that other record stores in Southern California haven’t been able to emulate, Reyes’ wife, Adrianna, said.
Building alongside community: To raise funds for the longstanding store, Reyes and Lona recently organized a pop-up on the property. Artists sold custom clothing, vinyl records and other artworks while DJs played funk and oldies to a lively crowd in the parking lot behind the store.
Just a few blocks away from East L.A.’s Whittier Boulevard arch — a symbol of Chicano pride — Sounds of Music has served as a cultural hub for decades.
The record store, which has specialized in Chicano soul, oldies and “souldies” since 1964, is now at risk of closing if sales don’t improve.
“I was going to close up in January,” owner Mario Reyes said. “We’re kind of month to month right now.”
Reyes inherited the store from his father, Carlos Reyes, who relocated to East L.A. from Montebello in 1967. Since then, it has been a destination for fans of soul, R&B, Chicano rap and oldies, offering vinyl records, cassettes, CDs and other merchandise. It’s something that other record stores in Southern California haven’t been able to emulate, Reyes’ wife, Adrianna, said.
“It’s the vibe of our store,” she said. “We’re not like Amoeba Records. They’ll carry the regular Taylor Swift, Tupac, Sade and regular artists but they don’t carry oldies like the way we do.”
Preserving Chicano culture in East LA
Outside the store, a Felix the Cat standee sporting Nike Cortez, a flannel shirt and slacks, invites shoppers to explore East L.A. culture. Inside, Aztec warrior statuettes sit next to Homies figurines.
Bandanas emblazoned with “East Los” and shirts featuring characters from “Blood In, Blood Out” celebrate local heritage.
An original Silver Dollar Bar sign hangs in one corner, a nod to the building’s history as the site where Los Angeles Times journalist Ruben Salazar was killed by a tear gas projectile fired by an LA County sheriff’s deputy during the 1970 Chicano Moratorium. (Sounds of Music moved into the building from across the street in 2018)
A plaque outside and images inside honor his memory.
An original Silver Dollar Bar sign hangs in the store, referencing the site where Los Angeles Times journalist Ruben Salazar was killed during the 1970 Chicano Moratorium.
(
Andrew Lopez
/
The LA Local
)
But for many longtime customers, the music is what kept them returning.
“Since 1993 I’ve been coming to Sounds of Music,” Ricardo “Ziggy” Lona said. “I was into oldies as a teenager in the 90s, and Sounds of Music was one of the only places you could get your Eastside Story, your Art Laboe… your favorite artists.”
Lona, who rode the bus from Commerce as a teenager, said he worries the store may follow the fate of other independent music stores.
“With the internet and music being the way it is, record stores just ain’t making it. Sounds of Music has made it this far from the support of the community. It’s more than just the music, it’s about what’s come out of it,” Lona said.
Building alongside community
To raise funds for the longstanding store, Reyes and Lona recently organized a pop-up on the property. Artists sold custom clothing, vinyl records and other artworks while DJs played funk and oldies to a lively crowd in the parking lot behind the store.
Boyle Heights resident Christina Fernandez said the store holds a special place in her heart.
“My brother’s nina, we called her ‘Guera.’ She’s the one that introduced me to all of this,” Fernandez said. “She brought out all her records when I was little so that’s how I learned about all of the Eastside Story Records and I just fell in love with all of that.”
Fernandez even honors her ‘Guera’ with a forearm tattoo of her name stylized like an Eastside Story album cover.
“It’s just a part of our culture. The familiar sounds bring back memories of people who are no longer here with us and bring us back to that time,” she said.
Records, cassettes, CDs and other merchandise are in stock at Sounds of Music. The store specializes in soul, oldies and Latin music over the decades.
(
Andrew Lopez
/
The LA Local
)
Economic struggles as ICE raids shake East LA
Like many other Eastside small businesses, the Reyes family was affected by immigration raids.
“People weren’t buying at all because they didn’t want to shop because they were scared to come in,” Adrianna Reyes said. “It really affected our business and brought sales down.”
Reyes added that sales haven’t returned to the pre-raids levels and is afraid they may never return. Mario Reyes had said his father had to loan him cash to keep the store afloat at the start of the year.
To keep the store alive, Reyes urges patrons old and new to stop by.
“You don’t have to buy a lot, just buy something,” he said.
Sounds of Music is located near the arch in East LA.
The teenage birth rate in the U.S. fell by 7% in 2025, continuing decades of decline, according to a report published Thursday by the National Center for Health Statistics.
More details: Overall, nearly 126,000 babies were born to mothers ages 15 to 19, according to the analysis of provisional data. The birth rate for that age group was 11.7 births per 1,000 females. By contrast, the teen birth rate in 1991 was 61.8 births per 1,000.
The harder "why" question: Many factors are driving the 35-year decline in teen birth rates, says Bianca Allison, pediatrician and associate professor at the University of North Carolina School of Medicine.
Read on... for more on the report.
The teenage birth rate in the U.S. fell by 7% in 2025, continuing decades of decline, according to a report published Thursday by the National Center for Health Statistics.
"A 7% decline is really quite extraordinary," says the report's lead author, Brady Hamilton, a statistician demographer with the center, which is part of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Overall, nearly 126,000 babies were born to mothers ages 15 to 19, according to the analysis of provisional data. The birth rate for that age group was 11.7 births per 1,000 females. By contrast, the teen birth rate in 1991 was 61.8 births per 1,000.
The report also explored other topics related to births in the United States. The overall birth rate fell 1% from the previous year, also continuing a long decline. The rate of preterm births was unchanged. And the cesarean delivery rate increased to 32.5% in 2025, which is the highest rate since 2013, continuing a slight upward trend.
Notably, the provisional report does not include an analysis of births by the mother's race or ethnicity, even though those were included in this report in the last few years. CDC told NPR in a statement that this year's report is "covering fewer topics than previous provisional birth reports," but also that race data is still available on CDC's WONDER online database.
This provisional report comes out every year in the spring based on more than 99% of registered births for the previous year. "It gives us basically a sneak peek at some key factors that we can expect when we get the final data for that year," Hamilton says. The final data is usually published in August.
The harder "why" question
While birth certificates provide a great deal of demographic, geographic and other kinds of detail about a birth, "the birth certificate does not allow us to address the question of why," Hamilton says.
Many factors are driving the 35-year decline in teen birth rates, says Bianca Allison, pediatrician and associate professor at the University of North Carolina School of Medicine.
"What is actually affecting the birth rates are likely lower rates of teen pregnancy overall, which is in the context of higher use of contraception and lower sexual activity for youth, and then also continued access to abortion care," she says.
While there has been a lot of concern about the declining general birth rate in the U.S., the decline in teen births is harder to parse as a good or bad news story.
"I think it depends on who you're talking to and how they're positioned and looking at the data," says Allison, a fellow with Physicians for Reproductive Health, an advocacy group that favors abortion rights and supports health equity. "From my perspective, as somebody who specifically studies the provision of high-quality reproductive health care and access for young people, this should be celebrated as long as this is aligned with what people are actually wanting for themselves."
She adds that there are a lot of negative narratives associated with teen parenthood in terms of educational and career potential. "Many of those outcomes are due to the lack of societal, institutional and systemic supports that young people receive to parent, not their lack of ability to parent," she argues.
She hopes that the declining teen birth rate doesn't make people think this issue is gone. "We cannot get our foot off the gas pedal of continuing to invest in supports" for teen parents to help them reach their goals. They need educational, social and medical help to thrive, she says: "All those things are incredibly important."
Copyright 2026 NPR
