The Brief

At an electric vehicle showcase in Anaheim, Christopher Grundler — one of the top executives in California responsible for cleaning the air — said despite all the setbacks his agency has faced this year, he’s confident the state can keep making progress.

“This president, this Congress, will not kill the electric car,” said Grundler, a deputy executive officer of the state Air Resources Board. “They won't kill the electric truck, and they certainly won't kill the California spirit.”

Despite that optimism, California officials — now reined in by the Trump administration and growing concerns about affordability and costs — are struggling to come up with new ways to clean up the nation’s most polluted air.

Lacking federal permission to set aggressive emission standards for the first time in almost 60 years, California may be left mainly with voluntary agreements with the auto, trucking and rail industries, and subsidies to entice consumers into buying electric vehicles.

Congress last month revoked the state’s authority to implement three landmark rules that ban sales of new gas-powered cars by 2035 and phase out diesel trucks. In addition, California was forced to abandon four other ambitious rules for zero-emission trucks, locomotives and commercial harbor craft because the Trump administration’s Environmental Protection Agency would be unlikely to grant waivers.

Those seven mandates, now unenforceable, were key to cleaning up the pollutants that leave about 34 million Californians regularly breathing unhealthy air. In another blow to California’s efforts, Congress and President Donald Trump eliminated tax credits for consumers who buy electric cars.

At the same time, California’s air quality rules are facing growing pushback from the public, industry — and even some Democrats in the Legislature — because of the impacts on gas prices and other economic concerns.

Air Resources Board Chair Liane Randolph, in an interview with CalMatters, did not offer any details on how the agency will make up for the voluminous tons of smog-causing gases and soot those rules would have eliminated.

“There's no one strategy that's going to work. It's really going to need to be a suite of different things,” Randolph said. The governor and Legislature will help decide “what strategies are going to be the most effective, the most cost effective, the most likely to be able to scale up," she said.

The air board is hosting four meetings in the coming weeks to hear ideas from industry groups, environmentalists and community members about how the state should now approach clean air regulation.

First: A zero-emission heavy-duty truck shown at an exhibition in Anaheim. Last: Fernando Silva with TEC equipment test drives a Volvo electric truck. Photos by Jules Hotz for CalMatters

A zero-emission heavy-duty truck shown at an exhibition in Anaheim.

(

Jules Hotz

/

CalMatters

)

Fernando Silva with TEC equipment test drives a Volvo electric truck.

(

Jules Hotz

/

CalMatters

)

In an executive order last month, Gov. Gavin Newsom directed the air board to develop a new zero-emission car mandate — apparently in preparation for when the state either wins its lawsuit against Trump or when he leaves office.

Newsom also ordered the air board to develop a plan by Aug. 11 to keep expanding California’s market for electric cars and trucks. As part of the plan, the state agency must consider ways to improve charging infrastructure and offer incentives.

“We know that the federal government is going to be completely useless in our efforts to clean the air, despite rhetoric claiming they care about clean air. State and local governments are going to have to do more,” said Adrian Martinez, an attorney with the San Francisco-based environmental group Earthjustice.

“We just have to go it alone.”

Heart and lungs at stake

It’s been a long, bumpy road to cleaning up exhaust from California’s 36 million vehicles. Gas-powered cars and diesel trucks remain the state’s largest sources of smog and soot despite decades of cutting emissions.

Much of that pollution is inhaled by the most vulnerable Black and brown communities near ports, highways and warehouses. Ozone, a smog-causing gas, and fine particles of soot are linked to premature deaths from heart attacks and respiratory diseases, and increased emergency room visits.

For six decades, a provision in the Clean Air Act has granted California the power to set its own vehicle standards that are stricter than the federal government’s because of the state’s unique and severe air pollution problem.

But last month, Congress invoked the Congressional Review Act to repeal waivers granted by the Biden administration. The state in its lawsuit called this an unlawful action by Congress.

John Dunlap III, who served as California Air Resources Board chair under Gov. Pete Wilson in the 1990s, said in an interview with CalMatters that the Newsom administration “pushed too fast, and I think there were some holes” in their zero-emission car and truck rules.

Dunlap said by moving forward despite concerns about inadequate charging infrastructure, cost and the impacts on trucking, California regulators sent their critics straight into the arms of a more sympathetic federal government.

“They've been all in on zero-emission technology, which is great. It's been a priority. But, they haven't really cared to dialogue much, if at all, with the users of technology, particularly truck fleets,” he said. Dunlap was chair in 1996 when the board repealed deadlines requiring sales of electric cars because the technology wasn’t ready.

Under the landmark rule adopted by the air board in 2022, all new cars sold in California would have to be zero emissions beginning with 2035 models, ramping up from 68% in 2030. For trucks, California enacted two rules, one in 2020 and then one in 2023 that would phase out new diesel trucks by 2042. None will now be implemented.

A fast-charging station in Union City.

(

Loren Elliott

/

CalMatters

)

Automakers say the rules were too aggressive and would have led to manufacturing job losses, higher car prices and limited consumer choices.

“The auto industry has invested billions in electrification and has 144 electrified models on the market right now. Again, the concerns were about the mandate – not the technology,” the Alliance for Automotive Innovation said in a statement.

Conservatives say the air board is an unelected board that wields too much power. (Its members include appointees from Newsom and the Legislature, and local elected officials.) A Democrat in the Legislature last month urged Randolph, the board’s chair, to resign because the agency hasn’t analyzed the economic costs of its rules.

One new clean-air rule, the revamped Low Carbon Fuel Standard implemented last week, was met with widespread, vehement criticism from elected officials and industry since it will raise the price of gasoline by an unknown amount.

Christopher Grundler, the California Air Resources Board’s deputy executive officer of mobile sources and incentives, delivers opening remarks at a zero-emission vehicle showcase in Anaheim.

(

Jules Hotz

/

CalMatters

)

Amid concerns about the costs to consumers, the Trump administration and industry groups also are making it difficult for local agencies to take bold action.

The South Coast Air Quality Management District — responsible for regulating industrial plants and products that pollute the LA basin’s air — recently rejected rules phasing in zero-emission water heaters and furnaces.

The rules would have brought one of the biggest pollution reductions that the district has implemented in decades. But business groups and others were strongly opposed, saying fees imposed on manufacturers would raise the cost of products. And U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli threatened the local air district with a lawsuit if it approved the rule.

South Coast district Board Chair Vanessa Delgado and Executive Officer Wayne Nastri rejected multiple requests for interviews with CalMatters about what they plan to do next to clean the air in the LA basin.

“As you know, 80% of emissions in our region come from mobile sources — planes, trains, ships, heavy-duty trucks — all of which we do not have federal regulatory authority over,” said Nahal Mogharabi, spokesperson for the agency.

She directed all questions to Trump’s EPA.

What else can the state do?

Last month at the clean-vehicle showcase in Anaheim, Brett Ivy, a fleet manager for the aerospace company Northrop Grumman, wandered through Angel Stadium’s parking lot, looking at electric trucks and machines that he could potentially buy for his company.

Ivy knows the state isn’t enforcing its truck mandates, so he doesn’t know what his bosses will direct him to do in the future. He said they could abandon electric vehicles altogether.

But Ivy added, who knows what the next administration would bring, and Northrop Grumman has to think long-term. He wants to be prepared to do his job managing the company’s fleet of trucks.

“If we don’t, a new administration might reverse what (Trump) did,” he said. “Then you’re behind.”

The trucking industry, when the mandate was approved in 2023, predicted economic chaos and dysfunction and that it would “fail pretty spectacularly.” With its repeal, Nick Chiappe of the California Trucking Association expects that fleet owners will keep buying hydrogen and electric trucks when it makes economic sense, such as with smaller vehicles with shorter hauls.

“The industry will continue to work with (the air board) on reasonable steps to advance zero-emissions technology but maintain that the programs being rolled back were infeasible from the moment they were proposed,” Chiappe said.

A zero-emission loader shown at Angel Stadium. Construction equipment powered by diesel is a major source of air pollution.

(

Jules Hotz

/

CalMatters

)

Experts and advocates say California will have to approach clean air policy from many angles — mandates and incentives.

“There is still work that can be done,” said Martinez of Earthjustice. It’ll require “being creative and not losing steam,” he said. “These are big hits (from Trump) but I think still continuing to press on zero-emission vehicles is going to be really critical.” 

Craig Segall, a former deputy executive officer for the state Air Resources Board, said the state should set new standards for cars and trucks. “The only thing that EPA is barred from doing is issuing substantially the same – not similar – waivers in the future,” he said. “The state can actually do quite a lot in terms of new standards.”

Segall said the state also should support companies that have already been buying zero-emission trucks with financing programs and get at the root of the transportation problem by expanding mass transit.

Offering incentives to consumers buying clean cars and trucks will be key. But Grundler, when asked whether California has the funds for more incentive programs, answered bluntly: No.

The state’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, paid for by its cap and trade market program, typically has around $4 billion for programs related to climate change and air pollution. But because of the large deficit this year, the new budget allocated about $1.5 billion of those cap and trade funds to Cal Fire for fire prevention. It’s unclear how much will be left over for other projects.

In the state’s new budget, $132 million is allocated over the next fiscal year for an air board program offering incentives to truck fleet buyers.There also are creative ways that the state can encourage the purchase of electric cars, said Mary Nichols, the longtime chair of the air board under two previous governors and Newsom. Registration fees or sales taxes could be based on whether a car is gas-powered or electric, she said.

“The state of California has authority over everything relating to what cars can operate on our roads, as long as we're not violating any constitutional requirements that deal with commerce between the states,” Nichols told CalMatters. “There's a wide array of things that the state could do to make it clear that they don't wish to continue having gasoline cars sold in the state of California.”

Tackling 'pollution magnets'

Experts say one of the most impactful policies the state could pursue without federal intervention could be regulating “pollution magnets.” These are hotspots, such as warehouses, ports and airports, that don’t directly pollute, but draw high-polluting vehicles, like diesel trucks and trains into communities.

The South Coast Air Quality Management District is developing a rule that would push the Los Angeles and Long Beach ports to install more charging stations for zero-emission trucks and cargo handling equipment. The district also approved a rule for warehouses that environmentalists call a success. These are known as “indirect source rules” since they regulate a place that is a hotspot.

These types of regulations "are definitely a leading strategy that California can continue to pursue environmental justice goals, despite the federal government being completely disinterested in environmental justice,” said Brennon Mendez, an environmental law and policy fellow at UCLA School of Law.

Polluting ports, airports and warehouses “should be held responsible for the air pollution that's released into these neighborhoods because of their operations," he said.

An electric backhoe loader forklift on display at the Anaheim showcase. Zero-emission equipment like this could replace diesels, which emit fine particles of soot.

(

Jules Hotz

/

CalMatters

)

But while local air districts’ power to enact indirect source rules is well-established, the state’s power to do the same isn’t as clear.

A bill in the Legislature that enshrines the state’s power is opposed by labor and industry groups, especially now that the ports are facing economic uncertainty because of Trump’s tariffs. Assemblymember Robert Garcia, a Democrat from Rancho Cucamonga, said action on the bill is delayed until next year.

Also, a Senate bill would limit the South Coast district’s power to regulate the LA and Long Beach ports, requiring the agency to consider the costs and how ports and their tenants would be reimbursed, as well as the energy use and impacts on workers.

Randolph said it’s always been a struggle for California to slash enough emissions in California to achieve health standards, but now Trump’s actions “make the challenge even steeper and even harder.”

“The fundamental question,” she said, is “how do we continue to make progress…in the short-term and the long-term?”

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

Since 1977, Richard Santillan has been to every Opening Day game at Dodger Stadium. 

“The tradition goes from my father, to me, to my children and grandchildren. Some of my best memories are with my father and children here at Dodger Stadium,” Santillan told The LA Local, smiling under the shade of palm trees near the entrance to the ballpark Wednesday morning. He was there to protest the team less than 24 hours before Opening Day.

Santillan, like countless other loyal Dodgers fans, is grappling with his fan identity over the team’s decision to accept an invitation to the White House and owner Mark Walter’s ties to ICE detention facilities.

More than 30 people joined Santillan on Wednesday morning for a press conference held near 1000 Vin Scully Drive to convey a message directly to the team. 

“We are demanding the Dodgers stop participating in funding of inhumane treatment of families and do not go to the White House to celebrate with the criminal in chief,” Evelyn Escatiola told the crowd. “Together, we have the power to make a change.”

Escatiola, a former dean of East Los Angeles College and longtime community organizer, urged fans to flex their economic power by “letting the Dodgers know that we do not support repression.”

Jorge “Coqui” Rodriguez, a lifelong Dodgers fan, spoke to the crowd and called on Dodgers ownership to divest from immigration detention centers owned and operated by GEO Group and CoreCivic.

Jorge Coqui H Rodriguez speaks at a press conference outside Dodger Stadium on March 25, 2026, to demand the Dodgers not to visit the White House following their 2025 World Series win.

(

J.W. Hendricks

/

The LA Local

)

In a phone interview a day before the protest, Rodriguez told The LA Local he did not want the Dodgers using his “cheve” or beer money to fund detention centers. 

“They can’t take our parking money, our cacahuate money, our cheve money, our Dodger Dog money and invest those funds into corporations that are imprisoning people. It’s wrong,” Rodriguez said. 

Rodriguez considers the Dodgers one of the most racially diverse teams and said the players need to support fans at a time when heightened immigration enforcement has become more common across L.A.

The team’s 2025’s visit to the White House drew ire from the largely Latino fan base, citing the Trump administration’s ongoing attacks on immigrants. 

In June, the team came under further scrutiny when rumors swirled online that federal immigration agents were using the stadium’s parking, which immigration authorities later denied in statements posted on social media accounts.

The team again came under fire after not releasing a statement on the impacts of ICE raids on its mostly Latino fan base at the height of immigration enforcement last summer. The team later agreed to invest $1 million to support families affected by immigration enforcement.

When he learned the Dodgers were pledging only $1 million to families in need, Rodriguez called the amount a  “slap in the face.” 

“These guys just bought the Lakers for billions of dollars and they give a million dollars to fight for legal services? That’s a joke,” Rodriguez said. “They need to have a moral backbone and not be investing in those companies.”

According to reporting from the Los Angeles Times, former Dodgers pitcher Clayton Kershawsaid last week that he is looking forward to the trip.

“I went when President [Joe] Biden was in office. I’m going to go when President [Donald] Trump is in office,” Kershaw said. “To me, it’s just about getting to go to the White House. You don’t get that opportunity every day, so I’m excited to go.”

The Dodgers have yet to announce when their planned visit will take place. 

Santillan sometimes laments his decision to give up his season tickets in protest of the team. His connection to the stadium and the memories he has made there with family and friends will last a lifetime, he said. On Thursday, he will uphold his tradition and be there for the first pitch of the season, but with a heavy heart.

“It’s a family tradition, but the Dodgers have a lot of work to do,” he said.

A local favorite mom-and-pop bookshop in Eagle Rock is facing displacement due to a steep rent hike. The owners say theirs is just one of several small businesses along Eagle Rock Boulevard struggling to keep up with lease increases.

Over the past 19 years, many in the neighborhood have come to love READ Books for its eclectic collection of used titles and shop dog Florence.

Co-owner Jeremy Kaplan said it’s been a delight to grow with the community over the years.

“Like seeing kids come back in, who were in grade school and now they’re in college,” Kaplan said.

But the building where Kaplan and wife Debbie rent was recently sold, and the rent increased by more than 130% to $2,805 a month, Kaplan said. He told LAist it was an increase his small business simply could not absorb.

Kaplan said he originally was given 30 days notice of the rent increase. After some research, assistance from Councilmember Ysabel Jurado’s office and some pro-bono legal help, Kaplan said he pushed back and got the 90-day notice he’s afforded by state law.

California Senate Bill 1103 requires landlords to give businesses with five or less employees 90 days’ notice for rent increases exceeding 10%, among other protections.

Systems Real Estate, the property management company, did not immediately respond to LAist’s request for comment.

What can small businesses do? 

Nadia Segura, directing attorney of the Small Business Program at pro bono legal aid non-profit Bet Tzedek said California law does not currently allow for rent control for commercial tenancies.

Outside of the protections under SB 1103, Segura said small businesses like READ Books don’t have much other recourse. And even then, commercial landlords are not required to inform their tenants of their protections under the law.

“There’s still a lot of people that don’t know about SB 1103. And then it’s very sad that they tell them they have these rent increases and within a month they have to leave,” Segura said.

She said her group is seeing steep rent hikes like this for commercial tenants across the city.

“We are seeing this even more with the World Cup coming up, the Olympics coming up. And I will say it was very sad to see that also after the wildfires,” Segura said.

Part of Bet Tzedek’s ongoing work is to advocate for small businesses, working with landlords who are increasing rents to see if they are willing to give business owners longer leases that lock in rents.

What’s next 

After READ Books posted about their situation on social media, commenters chimed in to express their outrage and love for the little shop.

While he looks for a new spot, Kaplan says he’s forming a coalition of local businesses and activist groups to see what can be done to help other small businesses facing similar displacement. He wants to address the displacement issue for businesses like his, which have made Eagle Rock the distinctive neighborhood that it is today.

Owl Talk, a longtime Eagle Rock staple selling clothing and accessories in a unit in the same building as READ Books, is facing a “more than double” rent increase, according to a post on their Instagram account.

Kaplan said he’s been in touch with the office of state Assemblywoman Jessica Caloza and wants to explore the possibility of introducing legislation to set up protections for small businesses like his, including rent-control measures or a vacancy tax for landlords. Kaplan said he also reached out to the office of state Sen. Maria Durazo.

By his count, Kaplan said there are about a dozen businesses within surrounding blocks that are at risk of closing their doors or have shuttered due to rent increases or other struggles.

When READ Books was founded during the Great Recession, Kaplan said he knew it was a longshot to open a bookstore at the same time so many were struggling to stay in business.

“It was kind of interesting to be doing something that neighborhoods needed. That was important to me growing up, that was important to my children, that was important to my wife growing up,” Kaplan said.

“And then somebody comes in and says, ‘We’re gonna over double your rent.”

Topline:

Frozen budget: Most of the city’s Bureau of Street Lighting budget comes from an assessment that people who own property illuminated by lights pay on their county property tax bill. The amount people pay depends on the kind of property they own and how much they benefit from lighting. A typical single-family home currently pays $53 annually, and in total, the assessments bring in about $45 million annually for the city to repair and maintain streetlights. Changing the amount the Bureau of Street Lighting gets from the assessment requires a vote among property owners who benefit from the lights.

Ballots: L.A. City Council’s vote gives city staff the green light to prepare and send out those ballots. Miguel Sangalang, who oversees the bureau, said at a committee meeting earlier this month that he expects to send out ballots by April 17. Notices about the ballots will be sent out prior to the ballots themselves.

Near unanimous vote: L.A. City Councilmember Monica Rodriguez was the only “No” vote Tuesday, saying she wanted to see a more current strategic plan for the bureau. Sangalang said the bureau developed a plan in 2022 that lays out how money will be spent. Councilmember Imelda Padilla was absent for the vote.

Vote count: Votes will be weighted according to the assessment amount. Basically, the more you’re asked to pay yearly to maintain streetlights, the more your vote will count. Ballots received before June 2 will be tabulated by the L.A. City Clerk.

How much more money: According to a report, the amount needed in assessments from property owners to meet the repair and maintenance needs of the city’s streetlighting in the next fiscal year is nearly $112 million.

Use of the money: Sangalang said at a March 11 committee meeting that the extra funds would be used to double the number of staff to handle repairs and procure solar streetlights, which don’t face the threat of copper wire theft. That would all potentially reduce the time it takes to repair simple fixes down to a week. Currently, city residents wait for months to see broken streetlights repaired. The assessment would come with a three-year auditing mechanism.