The Brief

The Trump administration announced plans to repeal limits on greenhouse gas emissions and other airborne pollutants from the nation's fossil fuel-fired power plants.

The proposal is part of the Environmental Protection Agency's plan, under the Trump administration, to roll back more than two dozen rules and policies. The proposal is likely to face legal challenges, but if it is finalized in its current form, that would eliminate limits on the second-largest source of climate pollution in the U.S., behind transportation.

The EPA argues pollution from U.S. power plants are a small part of global emissions and they're declining. The agency also claims that eliminating climate pollution from power plants would have little effect on people's health.

The proposed rule reads, "The EPA is further proposing to make a finding that GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions from fossil fuel-fired power plants do not contribute significantly to dangerous air pollution."

In announcing the proposal, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin argued that the Trump administration aims to protect the environment while boosting the economy.

"Rest assured President Trump is the biggest supporter of clean, beautiful coal," Zeldin said from a wood-paneled room at the agency. "EPA is helping pave the way for American energy dominance because energy development underpins economic development, which in turn strengthens national security."

The EPA announcement brought swift criticism from environmental groups.

"These regressive proposals are bad for public health and bad for climate, all to prop up some of the highest polluting power plants in the nation," Shaun Goho, legal director at Clean Air Task Force wrote in a statement.

This proposal would eliminate rules the EPA finalized during the Biden administration that required existing coal and new natural gas-fired power plants to significantly reduce their carbon dioxide pollution, starting in the 2030s. Carbon dioxide from human activity is the main driver of global warming.

The EPA labeled carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses a danger to public health and welfare in 2009. But legal challenges from fossil fuel interests and their allies delayed the finalization of rules to rein in greenhouse gas pollution. Now, the Trump administration also wants to eliminate that 2009 endangerment finding, which could make it easier to roll back other climate regulations.

What Trump's EPA is doing

The Trump administration wants to redirect the federal government away from former President Joe Biden's climate agenda and toward an even deeper embrace of fossil fuels.

"We will drill, baby, drill," Trump said to cheers from supporters at his January inauguration speech. He has started the yearlong process to withdraw from the 2015 Paris Agreement, in which countries agreed to limit climate pollution and avoid the worst effects of global warming. Trump declared a national energy emergency and placed a moratorium on new wind energy projects on federal land and in federal waters.

Now, the Trump administration argues U.S. power plants are responsible for only about 3% of the global greenhouse gases that are heating the planet. It says that number is declining — it was 5.5% in 2005. So, the administration argues, reducing it further would provide little benefit to public health.

That ignores that the U.S. is responsible for nearly a quarter of the climate pollution in the atmosphere today, which is more than any other nation, historically. When former President Barack Obama announced rules to cut emissions from power plants in 2015, the goal was to encourage other countries to do the same.

But the U.S. coal industry opposed the limits on power plant climate pollution from the start. The industry has pushed back against decades of declining demand. In 1990 52% of the country's electricity was generated by burning coal and by 2023 that was down to 15%.

"We applaud the Trump administration's work to counter the Biden administration's direct assault on coal power," Rich Nolan, National Mining Association president and CEO, wrote in a statement.

The industry has argued that coal-fired power is needed to meet increasing electricity demand, including for the expansion of data centers for the growing artificial intelligence (AI) industry.

West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey, a Republican, welcomed the proposal, calling it "a major victory for West Virginia, our energy producers, and every American who depends on reliable, affordable electricity."

As that coal-producing state's former attorney general, Morrisey led the effort to overturn climate pollution regulations on power plants over the past decade.

In April Trump signed executive orders to boost the struggling coal industry and power data centers by allowing older coal plants to keep operating, exempting them from federal pollution limits for two years and increasing coal mining on public lands. During his first term Trump tried, and failed, to save individual coal plants as operators switched to more profitable gas-fired power plants.

"The EPA is hoisting the white flag of surrender on the power plant pollution that's poisoning the air we breathe and harming our climate," Manish Bapna, president and CEO of Natural Resources Defense Council wrote in a statement.

The Biden administration's power plant rules aimed to get the country closer to the primary goal in the Paris climate accord — to zero out greenhouse gas pollution by 2050 in order to rein in worsening catastrophes driven by climate change, such as more intense heatwaves, floods and fires. The proposed Trump rules would move the U.S. further away from that goal.

The EPA also proposed to weaken a Biden-era rule that required power plants to limit other pollutants, such as mercury — a neurotoxin that limits brain and nervous system development, especially in infants and children. Coal power plants are the country's largest source of mercury pollution.

"As Trump and his EPA continue to shovel dirty old coal down our throats, they're now adding more toxic heavy metals like mercury, lead and arsenic to the mix," Ryan Maher, environmental health attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity wrote in an emailed statement. "If these reckless rollbacks are allowed to stand they'll only fan the flames of extreme heat and wildfires, and they'll trigger more child deaths, more cancers, more lung diseases and more heart attacks."

Power plant pollution rules delayed for more than a decade

The legal basis for rules to limit climate pollution from power plants started with the Supreme Court's 2007 Massachusetts v. EPA decision. It concluded that the EPA is required to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. That led to the EPA's 2009 endangerment finding that designated greenhouse gas pollution as a threat to human health.

In 2014 the Obama administration proposed a "Clean Power Plan" aimed at cutting carbon dioxide emissions from power plants 32%, from 2005 levels, by 2030. That plan faced legal challenges and never went into effect. Still the country met that goal well before 2030, as coal-fired power plants were replaced by natural gas plants that emit less climate pollution and renewable energy.

In 2019 Trump replaced the Obama-era Clean Power Plan with his Affordable Clean Energy rule, which allowed plants to emit more climate pollution.

Then Biden came into office in 2021 with the most ambitious plan to address climate change of any major party candidate in U.S. history. The administration set a goal of eliminating climate pollution from the power sector by 2035. Scientists say that's what's needed to limit warming to 1.5 Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) over pre-industrial levels and avoid the worst effects of climate change. So far, the world's continued fossil fuel use puts it on track to exceed 1.5 Celsius — 2024 was the hottest year ever recorded.

In 2022, the Supreme Court weighed in again and restricted the EPA's options for regulating power plant emissions. Justices said that without a specific law, the agency cannot force the entire power generation industry to move away from fossil fuels toward less-polluting energy sources.

So instead, the EPA created regulations governing individual power plants. The agency and environmental groups believed that would allow the rules to survive scrutiny from a court dominated by conservative justices.

Instead, the Trump administration is eliminating the regulation altogether. Once the rule is finalized — possibly at the end of this year — it's likely that will also be challenged in court.

Copyright 2025 NPR

Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman promised at a Tuesday night town hall that MacArthur Park will see “amazing progress” in public safety before the 2028 Olympic Games.

Several community members told LAist they have seen crime return to the Los Angeles park after months of joint drug enforcement operations by the Los Angeles Police Department and federal agencies. Those efforts led to dozens of arrests for alleged drug sales in the area.

An LAPD captain attending the town hall confirmed to LAist that the department is aware of renewed safety problems.

Hochman acknowledged those concerns and said the recent operations made progress and created an opportunity for lasting change.

“If we keep this focus and the energy on this area, MacArthur Park, Skid Row and everything in between,” Hochman said, “then we will see amazing progress before the Olympics, and that is actually a promise.”

Hochman previously promised, during a drug enforcement operation on June 4, to have a picnic at the park on Labor Day. Hochman told attendees he kept that promise when he held an event at the park on Sept. 5 with other local and federal law enforcement officials.

As district attorney, Hochman works with law enforcement agencies to prosecute criminal cases in L.A. County. He said that it will take more work from policymakers and community members to remove the open-air drug market that has been entrenched there for decades.

The area is represented by L.A. City Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez, County Supervisor Hilda Solis, state Assemblymember Mark González and state Sen. María Elena Durazo. Staff members from some of those offices, and the mayor’s office, sat in on the town hall organized by the local nonprofit California Rising.

“Feel free to put the fire under the feet of our politicians,” Hochman told about two dozen residents who attended. “All too often it is easy to spend some effort on something and then get distracted and spend some effort somewhere else.”

'Temporary' relief

Some residents and business owners agreed with Hochman that the large-scale drug enforcement operations from March through June made the area feel safer, at least for a while.

“It was temporary, but we got to see, actually, families at the bus stops with their kids — before it wasn't like that,” Elaine Alaniz told LAist Tuesday. “I think it does help us, but on the other hand I still think that we need more help. It's not just a one, two, three-day thing.”

Alaniz lives nearby and is the president of the Westlake North Neighborhood Council, which begins a block northeast of MacArthur Park.

She said she has seen some crime move away from the park and into the surrounding neighborhoods.

Capt. Ben Fernandes, who leads LAPD’s Rampart Division, said the earlier operations were successful, but there have been some setbacks.

“We made a lot of headway in the beginning,” he said. “There are some issues that we've had some repopulation, especially with addicts.”

Fernandes said that the department will continue to arrest people suspected of selling drugs near the park, while connecting people who are addicted with services to help them get sober and off the streets.

A call for community involvement

Hochman and Fernandes each emphasized that making MacArthur Park a safe and welcoming place can’t be done by law enforcement alone.

“My advice: take the park back — it's your park,” Hochman said at the town hall, calling for community organizations to plan regular outings there. “That starts to send a message that the community really cares about this park.”

He asked that performers like Justin Bieber, who played an impromptu set in the park last month, have more events there as well.

Fernandes said people can get involved to change perceptions about MacArthur Park so it's no longer thought of as a place to go to score drugs.

“What we need to do is — we as a community — come together and show [people using drugs] that it's not their place to go,” he said. “That you're going to be there with your children, with your parishioners, with your friends, with your family.”

Inglewood city officials are launching an audit of their financial relationship with SoFi Stadium and claiming the stadium could owe years of ticket taxes, one month after a judge voided the 2015 contract that brought the stadium to Inglewood. 

The Inglewood City Council voted unanimously Tuesday to commission the audit. Mayor James Butts said the move is a necessary next step after the court ruling, which threw the terms of the financial relationship between the city and Hollywood Park stadium development into question. 

Millions of dollars are at stake for both the city and the stadium businesses. City officials say that the ruling means a cap that limited the amount of admissions tax that Inglewood could collect no longer applies. They also plan to investigate the authenticity of $376 million worth of infrastructure bills Hollywood Park claims the city owes. The findings of the audit could also factor into discussions of how the city will address its current $30.8 million deficit.

The City Council motion — put forward by Butts and co-sponsored by Councilmember Dionne Faulk — requires the city attorney to retain an accounting firm to conduct the audit and report back to the public on its findings within 30 days. It set aside $325,000 from the city’s General Fund to pay for the audit. You can read the city’s full explanation of the audit here.

Butts, who was at the city’s helm a decade ago when developer Stan Kroenke brought his Hollywood Park pitch to Inglewood, said city officials built what they thought was a partnership with their stadium counterparts.

But that partnership has crumbled. Since last summer, the city and stadiums have been slugging it out in a complex series of court cases over the stadium’s contract and Inglewood’s network of video billboards. The conflict has spilled over into the Nov. 3 election via ballot measures that would change the city’s commercial advertising and ticket tax rules. 

The audit approved by the City Council on Tuesday will dig into the entire financial relationship between the stadium and city since 2015, unpacking what is owed and what was received from taxes on everything from tickets to parking. City officials plan to continue auditing the taxes on a quarterly basis into the future.

Still, it’s not guaranteed the city would be able to force the stadium development to pay any debt the audit does claim. Hollywood Park could still appeal the court ruling that voided its contract with Inglewood, while Butts said the city wants to negotiate a new contract to replace it. 

A Hollywood Park spokesperson said the stadium development has lived up to its financial obligations, including paying all of its taxes.

“This is yet another thinly veiled attempt to distract from scrutiny surrounding the City’s own fiscal mismanagement and the questionable actions of its Mayor,” the spokesperson wrote in a statement.

Some locals at Tuesday’s meeting said during public comments they were baffled why the city hadn’t set up an audit process earlier.

“We have needed an audit from day one. We can’t sit here and claim we didn’t know or have an inkling what we were doing with Hollywood Park,” Diane Sambrano said. 

Exterior of Sofi Stadium in Inglewood

(

Gary Coronado

/

The LA Local

)

Speaking during the meeting, Butts said the audit was triggered because of the void left by the development agreement and because major events including the 2027 Super Bowl and 2028 Olympics are about to hit Inglewood.

The mayor first claimed the development agreement was illegal in a letter written directly to Stan Kroenke last year, saying the city’s lawyers made the determination while researching billboard litigation.

Millions in tax revenue at stake

After the judge ruled in agreement with the city, Butts told The LA Local that city officials were still researching the specific implications of the court’s ruling. In Tuesday’s council motion, city staff highlighted what they say is one major change they’ve discovered: There’s no longer a limit on how much admissions tax the city can collect.  

Inglewood collects a 10% tax on tickets sold at SoFi Stadium, but the 2015 initiative that brought the stadium to the city put a cap on that revenue, starting at $15 million a year and increasing annually with inflation. 

The admissions tax cap also happens to be the subject of the current ballot Measure AT. WOW Media, the billboard operator allied with the city in its dispute with the stadium, is funding a campaign in favor of the initiative.

Admissions tax has been a sizable revenue stream for the city — bringing in an average $20 million a year since SoFi Stadium opened — but city officials have said it could be significantly bigger. A city analysis of Measure AT estimated that getting rid of the cap could bring in as much as an extra $50 million in future years. The city did not estimate how much admissions tax revenue it has missed out on while the development agreement was in effect.

The Inglewood audit seeks to clarify basic questions about how taxes are assessed on ticket sales and whether those taxes are actually forwarded to the city. Officials say it will provide transparency about ticket sales, pricing and fees, which have been heavily scrutinized in recent years across the state. 

Gray gets support on proposal for future billboard revenue audit

Councilmember Gloria Gray attempted to amend the audit motion Tuesday, asking the city manager to also audit the revenue the city gets from billboard fees.

“I believe the same standard of financial transparency should apply to every city agreement,” Gray said.

Though her motion didn’t receive a second, Councilmember Eloy Morales said he’d support putting a billboard revenue audit on the council’s agenda in the future. 

“I think we all support all those audits,” Morales said. 

Gray’s move was a rarity for a council that seldom debates motions during public meetings and almost always votes unanimously. The councilmember is currently running for mayor against Butts.

Inglewood pulls in as much as $8 million a year from billboards, according to budget records. Much of that comes from a series of deals the city cut with WOW Media, allowing the billboard company to construct and operate the billboards on public medians and sidewalks. In return, WOW gives the city a cut of ad revenue along with other concessions.

The post Inglewood is investigating if SoFi Stadium owes years’ worth of ticket taxes appeared first on LA Local.