The Brief

If you’re a typical American, you get home from work and start flipping switches and turning knobs — doing laundry, cooking dinner, watching TV. With so many other folks doing the same, the strain on the electrical grid in residential areas is highest at this time.

That demand will only grow as the world moves away from fossil fuels, with more people buying induction stoves, heat pumps and electric vehicles.

That’s a challenge for utilities, which are already managing creaky grids across the United States, all while trying to meet a growing demand for power. So they’re now trying to turn EVs from a burden into a boon.

More and more models, for instance, feature “vehicle-to-grid,” or V2G, capabilities, meaning they can send power to the grid as needed.

Others are experimenting with what’s called active managed charging, in which algorithms stagger when EVs charge, instead of them all drawing energy as soon as their owners plug in. The idea is for some people to charge later, but still have a full battery when they leave for work in the morning.

A new report from the Brattle Group, an economic and energy consultancy, done for EnergyHub, which develops such technology, has used real-world data from EV owners in Washington state to demonstrate the potential of this approach, both for utilities and drivers.

They found that an active managed charging program saves up to $400 per EV each year, and the vehicles were still always fully charged in the morning.

Utilities, too, seem to benefit, as the redistributed demand results in less of a spike in the early evening. That, in turn, would mean that a utility can delay costly upgrades — which they need in order to accommodate increased electrification — saving ratepayers money.

How it works

Active managed charging works in conjunction with something called “time of use,” in which a utility charges different rates depending on the time of day. Between 4 p.m. and 9 p.m., when demand is high, rates are also high. But after 9 p.m., they fall. EV owners who wait until later in the evening to charge pay less for the same electricity.

Time-of-use pricing discourages energy use when demand is highest, lightening the load and reducing how much electricity utilities need to generate. But there’s nothing stopping everyone from plugging in as soon as cheaper rates kick in at 9 p.m. As EV adoption grows, that coordination problem can create a new spike in demand.

“An EV can be, on its own, twice the peak load of a typical home,” said Akhilesh Ramakrishnan, managing energy associate at the Brattle Group. “You get to the point where they start needing to be managed differently.”

That’s where active managed charging comes in. Using an app, an EV owner indicates when they need their car to be charged, and how much charge their battery needs for the day. (The app also learns over time to predict when a vehicle will unplug.) When the owner gets home at 6 p.m., the owner can plug in, but the car won’t begin to charge. Instead, the system waits until some point in the night to turn on the juice, leaving enough time to fully charge the vehicle by the indicated hour.

“If customers don’t believe that we’re going to get them there, then they’re not going to allow us to control their vehicle effectively,” said Freddie Hall, a data scientist at EnergyHub.

The typical driver goes only 30 miles in a day, Hall added, requiring about two hours of charging each night. By actively managing many cars across neighborhoods, the system can more evenly distribute demand throughout the night: Folks will leave for work earlier or later than their neighbors, vehicles with bigger batteries will need more time to charge, and some will be almost empty while others may need to top up.

They’re all still getting the lower prices with time of use rates, but they’re not taxing the grid by all charging at 9 p.m.

“The results are actually very, very promising in terms of reducing the peak loads,” said Jan Kleissl, the director of the Center for Energy Research at UC San Diego who wasn’t involved in the report. “It shows big potential for reducing costs of EV charging in general.”

Active managed charging would allow the grid to accommodate twice the number of EVs before a utility has to start upgrading the system to handle the added load, according to the report. (And consider all the additional demand for energy from things like data centers.) Those costs inevitably get passed down to all ratepayers. But, the report notes, active managed charging could delay those upgrades by up to a decade.

“As EVs grow, if you don’t implement these solutions, there’s going to be a lot more upgrades, and that’s going to lead to rate impacts for everyone,” Ramakrishnan said.

Vehicle-to-grid technology

At the same time, EVs could help reduce those rates in the long term, thanks to V2G, a separate emerging technology.

It allows a utility to call on EVs sitting in garages as a vast network of backup power. So when demand surges, those vehicles can send power to the grid for others to use, or just power the house they’re sitting in, essentially removing the structure from the grid and lowering demand. (And think of all the fleets of electric vehicles, like school buses, with huge batteries to use as additional power.)

With all that backup energy, utilities might not need to build as many costly battery facilities of their own, projects that ratepayers wouldn’t need to foot the bill for.

Active managed charging and V2G could work in concert, with some batteries draining at 6 p.m. as they provide energy, then recharging later at night. But that ballet will require more large-scale experimentation.

“How are we going to fit in discharging a battery, as well as charging it overnight?” Hall said. “Because you do want it available the next day.”

To cut greenhouse gas emissions as quickly as possible, the world needs more EVs. Now it’s just a matter of making them benefit the grid instead of taxing it.

Queer Mercado started as a monthly pop-up event at the East L.A. Civic Center in the summer of 2021. Now, the community marketplace is launching a new residency at the historic Olvera Street plaza in downtown L.A.

The event will feature local queer-owned businesses, makeup tutorials, live artist paintings, drag performers and a fashion show.

Queer Mercado's founder, Diana Diaz, said the goal is to promote culture and inclusivity, and to empower marginalized communities in the area.

“ You're gonna see a lot of culture, fashion, a wide range of ages and genders, and performers that really reflect the landscape of LA,” she said.

Diaz is a handbag designer and high school counselor based out of East L.A. She’s been vending with her family since she was a young girl and started a community marketplace called the Goddess Mercado in 2021 to reconnect with friends and other local vendors after the pandemic. One of her students gave her the idea to create a similar space for the queer community.

“He told me, 'Miss, this is great that you're doing for the women of East L.A., but what about the queer community? I'm tired of going to the West Side. I don't fit in,'” she said.

Diaz has her own kiosk at Olvera Street and said foot traffic has been down in recent months, in part due to fears of immigration raids. But she said the event is a chance to create a more inclusive space and to reflect more of the diverse, cultural fabric that exists within Los Angeles.

“ It's full of history and love and positivity, and it gave birth to a lot of businesses and movements,” Diaz said. “And it's a site of celebrations and rituals and protests.”

Event details: Queer Mercado will be held 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. at Olvera Street every Saturday through at least June.

Secret menu: Stop by Juanita's Cafe, and ask for the “queer combo.” It’s not on the menu, but you’ll get a free drink.

For America’s 250th birthday this July 4, the Queen Mary in Long Beach is promising to pull out all the stops: a WW II aircraft flyover, buffet and music, all capped off with an extra-long fireworks display — 20 minutes of pyrotechnics exploding over the bay.

But just a few miles down the coast, the city’s Alamitos Bay will be quiet over the holiday weekend. The July 3 Big Bang on the Bay couldn’t get the OK from state regulators, so longtime organizer John Morris canceled it.

“I’m just fed up with everything,” Morris said in a phone call. “The bureaucracy just sucks.”

Both Morris and the Queen Mary got approval for their shows from the state’s Water Resources Control Board, which found no tangible rise in water pollution after previous shows, water board spokesperson Ailene Voisin said. But, unlike the Queen Mary, Morris also had to convince the Coastal Commission. That process has gotten significantly more difficult.

For years, Coastal Commission staff routinely approved Morris’ permit, but after complaints and a lawsuit alleging the fireworks polluted the water and harmed migratory birds nesting nearby, the statewide board has given him more scrutiny. In 2024, the Coastal Commission gave him an ultimatum: It was time to switch to drones, which they viewed as more environmentally friendly and less disorienting to the birds. They warned in 2025 that it was the last time they would approve fireworks over Alamitos Bay.

So why did the Big Bang need Coastal Commission approval, but the Queen Mary didn’t?

The commission has ceded its authority over the Queen Mary show to the Port of Long Beach, where it’s permanently docked, according to commission spokesperson Joshua Smith. Because the Coastal Commission previously approved a master plan from the port that defines what’s allowed in its boundaries and what isn’t, the commission doesn’t weigh in on individual events. Anything with potential environmental impacts falls under the port’s scope, Smith said.

The port, apparently, is fine with the fireworks. Spokesperson Lee Peterson said he could find no record of the port requiring any permitting or exercising any oversight of the Queen Mary show.

So with another fireworks show happening in Long Beach as well as others up and down the California coast, Morris tried to charge ahead with his show — even with the Coastal Commission’s previous warning. He asked for one more approval.

He told commissioners there was no safe way to launch the drones. Plus, he said, they were prohibitively expensive.

It wasn’t fair, he argued, to force him to abandon fireworks while other shows continued.

John Morris, owner of the Boathouse on the Bay restaurant and longtime Big Bang on the Bay organizer in Long Beach on May 14, 2025.

(

Thomas R. Cordova

/

Long Beach Post

)

Commissioners were unmoved. They denied his request for fireworks, saying he’d had ample warning, and Morris canceled his event altogether.

Last week, commission staff sent Morris a letter saying they were “disheartened” that he chose that route. They offered a compromise. They’d be willing to consider a fireworks show at an alternate location — just not over Alamitos Bay and its nesting birds.

In a phone call last week, Morris called their offer “a joke.”

Moving the show would ruin his chances of getting funding from residents whose homes ring the bay. They’ve gotten used to having the fireworks essentially in their backyards and have given generously to support the show in the past. Additional proceeds, nearly $2 million since the Big Bang began in 2011, go to charity, according to Morris.

When Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office took notice of the cancellation, Morris hoped he would intervene. With no progress so far, Morris said he’s holding out hope a state bill — the so-called Fireworks for Freedom Act — will garner enough votes to pass the legislature. It was introduced April 30 by Rep. Ken Calvert (R-41) and would pave the way for any fireworks display “by temporarily suspending Federal and State regulatory restrictions” for this year only.

If it doesn’t pass, he’ll have to find something else to do with his fireworks barges.

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

Hardly a year after the city of Inglewood’s firework sales ban went into effect, city residents could vote to overturn it.

The initiative that will be in the June 2 special election looks to make firework use and sales legal again in the city.  Mail-in voting has already begun. 

The new ballot initiative comes after the Inglewood City Council voted to ban fireworks outside of permitted shows in February 2025, delighting residents who worried about noise and safety, but frustrating some local nonprofits who rely on annual firework sales as a fundraiser. 

“They had just as much fireworks as they always had,” said D’Joy Robinson, whose family counseling nonprofit, All Families Matter, sold fireworks for several years before the ban.

Inglewood resident Mari Morales Rodriguez said she doesn’t mind small fireworks, but that she’s watched local fireworks get larger and more dangerous over the years. She wants to see the fireworks ban continue.

“They are out of control,” she said. “Nobody can control it.”

Fireworks manufacturers TNT Fireworks and Phantom Fireworks are the ballot initiative’s biggest backers — drafting the initiative and, according to state documents, funding  a campaign in support.

Inglewood Mayor James Butts said the city’s ban last year came after years of public feedback.

“We have received complaints for at least 12 years,” Butts said. “The council took action to outlaw them.”

Roughly two dozen cities in L.A. County permitted the sale and use of designated “safe and sane” fireworks last Fourth of July, according to the L.A. County Fire Department. Firework sales are only permitted June 27 through July 6 in California.

Here’s what would change under the proposed fireworks ordinance

Dennis Revell, a consultant for TNT Fireworks who drafted the initiative, said the new proposed ordinance would not be a return to the fireworks regulations Inglewood had in place before 2025.

“We felt that there were many deficiencies in the prior ordinance,” Revell said. “[This] is much more dynamic and should provide a level of confidence in public safety.”

The new rules would make it easier for the city to issue citations, Revell said, and expand who could be found responsible for violations. It would also put in place a mechanism for the city to recoup some of the costs of enforcement. 

Revell, who said he has drafted hundreds of local fireworks ordinances, said the proposed Inglewood rules are inspired by others put in place across California. 

“The trend is to take this seriously and protect the city but still allow for responsible people to celebrate the Fourth of July with fireworks,” Revell said. 

The LA Local reached out to Phantom Fireworks but did not receive a response.

Making fireworks legal again would allow nonprofits like All Families Matter to resume their annual firework sales. Robinson, the administrator of the nonprofit, said without the extra $5,000 boost the fireworks stand could provide each year,  the nonprofit has had to trim the free family counseling services it provides.

Robinson also said the stand helped the nonprofit stay in touch with the neighborhood.

“We had families that came back year after year,” she said. 

Revell argued that legalizing “safe and sane” fireworks would also help keep more dangerous, illegal fireworks off the street. 

Morales Rodriguez, the Inglewood local, said legalizing some fireworks would make it difficult to report and control illegal variants because firework users could simply claim they’d bought their own fireworks at a permitted stand. 

“It looks like a war zone,” she said. “It doesn’t feel like something happy.”

When you're leading the polls, everyone takes their shots. Xavier Becerra found that out Thursday night as six gubernatorial rivals ganged up on him in the final debate before California's primary — attacking everything from his ethics to his ideas to his choice of political consultants.

It was their last chance to make a personal appeal to California voters ahead of the June 2 election to replace Gov. Gavin Newsom.

While the San Francisco debate was calmer than the brawls in the last few meet-ups, everyone’s target was the Democratic frontrunner Becerra.

These are five takeaways:

Becerra was the one to beat:

Opponents piled on with anything that might stick, from his acceptance of a campaign contribution from Chevron to his failure to answer questions at a housing forum last week to fraud in the hospice system while Becerra was secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services in the Biden administration.

But the Becerra weakness du jour was the guilty plea earlier Thursday of his former political strategist Dana Williamson, who admitted to conspiring with Becerra’s former longtime chief of staff to steal money from his campaign account.

Opponents were unified in their skepticism about Becerra’s repeated claims that he wasn’t involved. Despite the plea deal that did not accuse him, Democratic rival Katie Porter went so far as to say he could still be implicated in the case.

San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, a moderate backed by tech leaders, went out of his way to call Becerra the “embodiment of the status quo” in Sacramento.

Several candidates attacked Becerra over his lack of a funding plan for his ideas, including Porter, who pulled out a makeshift whiteboard in a callback to her signature move in Congress.

“What is Mr. Becerra’s revenue plan?” she pressed.

The former health secretary took a page out of Newsom’s book, pointing to an idea to restrict some corporations’ use of tax credits.

Newsom proposed that earlier in the day as part of his state budget.

Once lagging in polls and fundraising, Becerra has surged since ex-Rep. Eric Swalwell dropped out in early April over sexual assault allegations, offering Democratic voters a familiar face who’s held public office for decades and who frequently talks about fighting with Trump.

And he made the most of it:

Becerra appeared pleased with the attention.

“This is what happens when you take the lead in the polls,” he said. “They all come at you.”

Republican frontrunner Steve Hilton, a former Fox News host, quickly jumped in to correct him: Hilton is leading, per some polls. (Accounting for margins of error, both candidates are essentially tied.)

But Becerra used the moment to try to shut the door on the Williamson scandal, touting a statement from the prosecutor’s office Thursday saying that “no candidate running for governor has been implicated” in the case.

Former Becerra political strategist Dana Williamson arrives for a hearing in Sacramento on May 14, 2026.

(

Fred Greaves

/

CalMatters

)

Earlier in the week, he refused to answer when a reporter asked if he was sure Williamson couldn’t connect him to the case. Asked Thursday if he could guarantee the case wouldn’t be a “distraction” if he advances to November, he responded, “I can.”

Mahan looks to separate from Republicans:

San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan has made a name for himself as a moderate Democrat willing to take on his own party. That has included his early support for Prop. 36, the tough-on-crime ballot measure that Newsom and the party opposed in 2024 but which voters passed overwhelmingly, and his campaign proposals to tie pay to performance in the public sector that rankle organized labor.

But on TV in a state where Democrats vastly outnumber Republicans and Trump is anathema, he sought to clarify that he’s not a Republican.

“I’m going to offer something different,” he said. “Not MAGA and not more of the same.”

Mahan appeared to relish his spats with Hilton, taking care to point out Hilton’s association with Trump and his former employer, Fox News. Mahan criticized the Republican’s plan to expand California suburbs by building on undeveloped land as likely to drive up carbon emissions, and attacked him over rumors he was pushed out of British Prime Minister David Cameron’s government.

“I attacked the extremes on both sides,” Mahan said after the debate.

Mahan was the only Democrat not to say on stage that he would support any of the other Democrats if they advanced to November and he didn’t, instead naming fellow moderate former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, because “mayors get things done.”

Later, he wavered, first saying “it depends” when asked if he would support another Democrat, clarifying, “I would vote for a fellow Democrat against a Republican.”

Everyone but Hilton would restrict chatbots:

When moderators asked a lightning-round “yes or no” question on whether the state should more strictly regulate artificial intelligence chatbots that interact with children, the candidates appeared united across party lines.

Democrats in the state Capitol this year are already pursuing stricter chatbot regulations after advocates decried a law Newsom signed last year as too weak. Steyer promoted his brother’s influential work on the topic.

In contrast, Hilton hesitated, then refused to answer yes or no, saying “it’s not as simple as that” and expressing a desire not to over-regulate the industry.

“It’s not the right way to discuss a very important and serious issue,” he said as opponents and moderators tried to pin him down. “It causes problems that are unintended.”

Hilton moved to California from the United Kingdom to Silicon Valley in 2012 to join his wife Rachel Whetstone, a prominent tech executive.

Republicans boost each other:

Even before the moderators asked the candidates who else they would support if they didn’t make it onto the November ballot, the two Republicans were already practically high-fiving.

In previous debates, interviews and TV ads the two have attacked each other, but by Thursday they were often referencing each other’s points.

“Only two of us actually represent real change,” Hilton said of himself and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco.

With numerous Democrats competing for liberal support, Hilton has consistently led in the polls. While he and Bianco have previously declined to specifically endorse the other, the only realistic way for a Republican to win in blue California is for both Republicans to come in Nos. 1 and 2 and shut Democrats out of the general election.

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