The Brief

As California lawmakers grapple with a multibillion-dollar deficit and looming federal cuts that could undo the state’s health policies for immigrants, they’re banking on a tenuous budget strategy: hope.

Legislators today rejected some of Gov. Gavin Newsom’s cost-saving proposals to limit Medi-Cal for immigrants without legal status, and expanded others. And in the long run, they hope that some good financial news will help them handle the rising costs of the state health insurance and preserve future access for immigrants.

Newsom in May proposed freezing Medi-Cal enrollment for immigrants 19 and older without permanent legal status, canceling dental care and implementing a $100 monthly copay for immigrants.

In contrast, the legislators want to expand that Medi-Cal freeze to block enrollment by more people — all non-citizens with “unsatisfactory immigration status,” which includes some legal permanent residents. But they also want some provisions designed to help immigrants: Stipulating that people already enrolled in Medi-Cal will not “age out” and awarding a six-month grace period to re-enroll if they fall off of the program because their income rises temporarily or other disqualifications.

The lawmakers also want to lower the $100 monthly premium Newsom proposed for immigrants to $30 and limit it to adults 19 through 59, and delay elimination of immigrant dental benefits for two years, until 2027. They also rejected canceling home care for immigrants.

Senate Pro Tem Mike McGuire, a Democrat from Santa Rosa, said earlier this week that the Legislature’s budget reverses the most “draconian” of Newsom’s cuts.

The Legislature’s budget cuts $3.5 billion from overall state spending and borrows or delays $8.8 billion of spending during the 2025-26 budget year. During the next budget year, cuts will grow to $12 billion.

Today’s Assembly vote was 57-19 in favor of the budget plan, including one Democrat, Joaquin Arambula of Fresno, voting against it and three members of the Assembly not casting a vote. The Senate vote was 26 to 8, with one Democrat, María Elena Durazo, opposing it and six senators not casting a vote.

The Legislature and Newsom have two weeks, until June 27, to negotiate a final budget deal. The governor’s office didn't immediately respond to questions about the legislators' Medi-Cal budget.

Lawmakers from both parties, as well as health advocates, have heavily criticized both budget proposals — though for different reasons.

Health equity advocates say the budget reneges on promises lawmakers and Newsom made over the past several years to provide healthcare for all Californians regardless of immigration status.

Kiran Savage-Sangwan, executive director of the group California Pan-Ethnic Health Network, said the Legislature’s budget is “deeply disappointing."

“While the Legislature’s proposal is not as destructive as the devastating reductions proposed in the Governor’s May Revision, it still buys into the flawed premise that immigrant communities are less worthy of care that keeps people healthy,” Savage-Sangwan said in a statement.

Republican lawmakers, who are largely boxed out of budget negotiations, say continuing coverage for non-citizens is fiscally irresponsible because it could come at the cost of services for citizens. Assemblymember James Gallagher, who is the leader of Assembly Republicans, said Medi-Cal is “falling apart,” with inadequate money and providers to serve patients.

Medi-Cal, the state’s health insurance for low-income Californians, covers 15 million people, including 1.6 million immigrants. It has become a flashpoint in national and state debates over rising healthcare costs. California last year spent $8.5 billion on immigrant healthcare alone, and projections indicate that it will cost more than $12 billion in the upcoming year.

Lawmakers earlier this year appropriated additional funds to Medi-Cal to stave off a $6.2 billion shortfall. Growing senior enrollment and pharmaceutical costs accounted for most of the shortfall, but about $2.7 billion came from unanticipated enrollment growth of immigrants.

While the Legislature’s proposal softens some of Newsom’s language to freeze enrollment and implement monthly premiums, it doesn’t eliminate the changes nor does it identify new revenue sources that could sustain its rapidly growing expenses. Instead, Democratic leaders have laid most of the blame for California’s deficit on President Donald Trump’s tariffs, and said they’re banking on a future economic upturn to prevent cuts.

“We have pushed things out for two years, because hopefully there will be a miracle, and we find ourselves at a better point for revenue,” said state Sen. Akilah Weber Pierson, chair of the health budget subcommittee and a Democrat from La Mesa, during a recent news conference.

Sen. Scott Wiener, budget chair and Democrat from San Francisco, pushed back on the idea of a miracle alleviating the state’s financial woes but said the state’s revenues frequently change unexpectedly. In 2020 and 2021, California’s budget swung wildly from a brief recession caused by the COVID-19 pandemic to a historic surplus because of the state’s reliance on capital gains taxes.

Other lawmakers say tax returns from Los Angeles County, which have been delayed until October because of the January wildfires, may also provide some relief.

“You never know. In a year, two years, three years, our revenue could be very different from what we’re projecting,” Wiener said.

Unhappy Democrats

Some Democrats are among the most vocal critics of the budget.

Many members of the Latino Caucus, which pushed for the expansion of Medi-Cal for more than a decade, say the enrollment freeze and the monthly premium create a “two-tiered” healthcare system that makes immigrants second-class residents.

State Sen. Caroline Menjivar, a Democrat from Van Nuys, said in a statement earlier this week that McGuire removed her from the budget health subcommittee because of her opposition to cuts for immigrants. McGuire’s office did not respond to questions about why Menjivar was removed.

On the floor today, Menjivar, who abstained from voting on the budget, said her vote wasn’t needed for the budget to pass, but her constituents needed to know she fought for them.

“Your community is my community, and we’re suffering right now and hurting. I need to be able to stand firm and tall for my constituents and say this is why I dissented,” Menjivar said.

Senate Majority Leader and Latino Caucus Chair Lena Gonzalez, from Long Beach, urged Newsom and other lawmakers to protect “healthcare for all.”

Other Democrats defended their choices.

“We are keeping the promises that we made,” Weber Pierson said on the Senate floor. “No one will be disenrolled from Medi-Cal. That means no one currently covered will automatically lose their healthcare coverage.”

Unhappy Republicans

In a rare showing of bipartisanship, a handful of Republicans opposed another Newsom proposal, which would reduce in-home supportive services that many seniors and people with disabilities rely on. But they criticize the choice to continue offering healthcare for immigrants, especially with a large deficit.

Newsom is “trying to prop up this faulty system, and a big part of it was expanding it to illegal immigrants. It's not fiscally feasible. It’s ballooning the budget out of control,” Gallagher said.

State Sen. Roger Niello, a Republican from Roseville and ranking minority member on the budget committee, said the Democrats’ proposal relies on budget gimmicks, such as delayed spending or fund shifts, and fails to address the structural deficit caused by growing Medi-Cal costs.

Niello pointed out that the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office projects steep deficits for the next three budget years.

“Hoping against hope, that's not a good budget strategy,” Niello said. “What you should do is hope for better, but prepare for the worst, and we're not preparing for the worst. We're not even preparing for the negative, reasonable expectation that we're looking at over the next three or four budget years.”

Unhappy health advocates

In past years, the Medi-Cal expansion to immigrants has been popular, with some Central Valley Republicans supporting it. But recent polls indicate Californians have mixed feelings about providing Medi-Cal to people who are not citizens.

In a new poll commissioned by the California Endowment, 56% of likely voters supported allowing all low-income Californians regardless of immigration status to use Medi-Cal. But a Public Policy Institute of California poll published Thursday shows nearly the opposite, with 58% of adults opposing healthcare for immigrants without legal status. That’s in contrast to 2023 and 2021 polls from the institute showing clear majorities of Californians supported health care for immigrants.

Still, health advocates who have pushed for the expansion said the Legislature is callously sacrificing the healthcare of immigrants.

Amanda McAllister-Wallner, executive director of Health Access California, said lawmakers have not proposed any real solutions to keep health access for immigrants intact. Instead, they accepted Newsom’s framework to scale it back, she said.

That is especially troubling, she said, because deep federal funding cuts likely to be approved before the end of the year will cause California even more financial pain. One cut approved by House Republicans last month in the federal budget bill punishes states that give healthcare to immigrants by reducing their federal reimbursements.

“If they’re not willing to fight now, I’m worried about that,” McAllister-Wallner said.

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.