The Brief

The Anaheim Chamber of Commerce has pulled a U-turn — it isn’t going anywhere.

The backstory

The chamber had been embroiled in a corruption-and-fraud scandal that resulted in former Anaheim Mayor Harry Sidhu being sentenced to two months in prison. And the chamber’s former chief executive, Todd Ament, is awaiting sentencing.

It appeared that the business group might not survive: Earlier this month, the chamber’s president and chief executive emailed staff with the news he was resigning immediately and the organization would shutter by the end of April, a development first reported by the Orange County Register.

What happened next?

But the chamber issued a statement this week saying that the board of directors voted unanimously to stand their ground and take “a new approach and a new direction for the Chamber.”

Who will be in charge?

“For the first time, millennials are now leading the chamber,” according to the press statement.

Local business owner Dara Maleki will take over as president and CEO, while Michael Johnson was installed as head of the Board of Directors. Johnson serves on some boards in the city, including Anaheim Family YMCA.

"Let me be absolutely clear: The Anaheim Chamber of Commerce is not closing. Instead, we are forging ahead to be a leading Chamber of the 21st century," Maleki said in the statement. "We are entering a period of renewal — rebuilding trust, listening to our community, and creating a Chamber that works for all of Anaheim."

Added Johnson: "The Board now takes a new approach and a new direction for the Chamber ... and to bring in a new generation of leadership."

What's on the agenda?

The Chamber of Commerce is looking to “right-size its operations, address outstanding obligations and refocus its programs on the needs of Anaheim’s diverse business community,” according to the news release. (You can see some of their plans for business and community events here.)

City spokesperson Mike Lyster told LAist the city welcomes the “new incarnation” of the business group.

While Lyster said the city is “encouraged” and “optimistic” about the chamber’s future, there is “no immediate plans for funding or formal agreements or anything like that.”

The Chamber of Commerce announced a series of upcoming events, including the Anaheim Chamber Luncheon at Angel Stadium in early June. Lyster said it is likely and typical for the full council to be present at that event.

LAist has reached out to the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce, Maleki, and Johnson for further comment.

How we got here

In 2020, the Anaheim City Council approved selling Angel Stadium to the owners of the baseball team for $320 million.

But the sale fell apart after a federal investigation revealed then-mayor Sidhu was sharing “city-specific information” with the Angels’ owners to use against the city in negotiations. The investigation also revealed an overly friendly relationship between Sidhu and Ament, the former CEO of the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce.

According to prosecutors, Ament was the ringleader of a “cabal” of leaders including politicians and business leaders. He worked behind the scenes to exert influence over the city, according to prosecutors. Ament also pleaded guilty to laundering money meant for the chamber to defraud mortgage lenders to buy a home. He is awaiting sentencing and could face 30 years or more in prison.

Following the federal investigation revelations, a scathing state audit also found the chamber of commerce could not account for how taxpayer dollars it received from the city for promoting local businesses were spent.

The audit also found that millions were used by the chamber to support “resort-friendly candidates through its political action committee” and to campaign for laws favorable to hotels near Disneyland, in violation of the law.

The new Chamber of Commerce leadership said it will cut ties with the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce Political Action Committee, and ask the PAC to remove the chamber’s name from branding.

The chamber promised in this week’s news statement that new leadership would guide the groups through “a transparent transformation process focused on accountability.”

Each year, Congress passes laws which allocate money to the federal government's various programs and agencies. Trump, for the second year in a row, is refusing to send some of that money to the places that Congress says it has to go, setting off a fresh battle with lawmakers over who controls federal spending.

Of the $810 million being withheld, $567 million comes from programs that "provided services to refugees, asylees, and other non-citizens," according to a memo from the White House.

The move, called a pocket rescission, is illegal, according to the Government Accountability Office, an independent, non-partisan watchdog agency charged with providing federal agencies fact-based information.

Article 1 of the Constitution gives Congress the power to levy taxes and decide how federal funds are spent — known as power of the purse. If the president disagrees, he or she can send a request to Congress to cancel the fund, but that is supposed to happen with 45 days notice in order to let Congress agree or disagree.

A pocket rescission happens when the president decides to cancel funds without ample time for Congress to weigh in or reallocate the money. With the end of the fiscal year less than a week away, the announcement means the funds will go unspent and Congress can't respond.

"This is the most recent attempt by this Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to undermine Congress's Constitutional power of the purse," Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who chairs the Senate Appropriations committee, wrote in a statement posted to X. "OMB is an agency of the executive branch. It does not get to decide which programs are worth funding."

The canceled funds are fueling anger from Democrats who say OMB director Russell Vought is violating the separation of powers and undermining Congressional authority.

"This is theft from the American people, plain and simple," wrote Washington Sen. Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee on X. "Every Republican who voted for these bills should be furious, because Vought is saying their votes don't count."

"Donald Trump knows he can't get these cuts through Congress, so he is illegally making them through the back door," Rep. Brendan Boyle, the top Democrat on the House Budget committee, said in a statement. "Trump's actions are a blatant attack on Congress's constitutional power of the purse."

The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

The administration also says it withheld $15 million to a Justice Department team tasked with "preventing and resolving racial and ethnic tensions, incidents, and civil disorders, and in restoring racial stability and harmony," $70 million to "programs provide grants and fellowships to support institutions bringing foreign students and faculty to the United States to study or teach language," and tens of millions to various research and non-profit grant programs that target climate change or racial and gender minority work.

A detailed accounting provided by the administration can be found here.
Copyright 2026 NPR

Gov. Gavin Newsom on Sunday signed two pieces of legislation aimed at increasing accountability and protections for communities in the aftermath of the Lineage warehouse fire.

One bill by Assemblymember Mark González, AB 817, prevents the city and county of Los Angeles from issuing new building permits to cold storage facilities like Lineage unless the company maintains a contingency fund, or insurance, that can support residents in states of emergency.

The other bill by state Sen. María Elena Durazo, SB 716, increases fines for violations of local ordinances when companies pose a risk to health and safety. If the violation results from a state or federal disaster declaration, fines can reach up to $50,000 per violation.

The fire on June 17 blanketed the LA region with thick smoke for days and led to a monthslong cleanup of 88 million pounds of rotting food. Residents dealt with putrid odors, toxins in the air, an infestation of flies and rats.

“Boyle Heights showed us the lasting impact a major facility emergency can have on a community. These laws strengthen the tools, resources and accountability needed to protect residents and help communities respond when emergencies happen,” Newsom said in a statement.

The laws will be in effect locally and will expand statewide until July 1, 2028.

Earlier this month, Lineage Chief Executive Officer Greg Lehmkuhl told Boyle Heights Beat and The LA Local that the company has not decided whether to rebuild its Boyle Heights warehouse.

“We haven’t even come close to making a decision or determination there,” Lehmkuhl said. “We’re still focused on holding the right people accountable here and making sure that we’re continuing to support the community.”

The CEO’s comments about the uncertainty surrounding a rebuild come after permit applications were filed in late July to restore the warehouse in Boyle Heights. Lineage described it as a repair permit that’s typical when a building is significantly damaged, adding it was filed by the building’s owner via a contractor.

The post Newsom signs new safety laws aimed at accountability after the Lineage fire appeared first on LA Local.

California officials say they will not use a federal database pushed by the Trump administration to check voter eligibility. That’s after the U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way last week for states to use it.

The Trump administration wants states to use its controversial data system, Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements — or SAVE — to check citizenship status on voter rolls.

The system has faced criticism for mistakenly flagging some eligible voters as noncitizens.

California says nothing is changing despite the SCOTUS ruling. California Secretary of State Shirley Weber told LAist’s AirTalk that the system has had “a number of errors.”

“We did not find the list valid for us and as a result decided some while ago we would not use it,” Weber said. “And as a result, Californians can feel secure that they're not going to be run through some other list in terms of trying to determine who will vote and who will not.”

Have a gun? You're going to need to take another safety class after Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a package of bills Saturday that are a boon to gun control advocates and anathema to Second Amendment groups.

The law, Senate Bill 948, would apply to current residents with newly purchased guns starting in 2029. The class would need to be at least four hours long. Starting in 2028, people moving to California with guns would need to obtain a firearm safety certificate within 180 days of arrival. Berkeley Democratic Sen. Jesse Arreguín wrote the legislation.

It was one of 10 gun safety laws Newsom signed. They represent his last gun control efforts as governor, and his own record shows that some of the measures will likely face legal challenges from pro-firearm organizations. For instance, the 2016 ballot proposition Newsom carried that demanded background checks for ammunition purchases is awaiting a final determination from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Rebecca Marcus, a lobbyist for the gun control organization the Brady Campaign, told lawmakers in March that more than 69,000 shootings resulted in death or required urgent medical care in California from 2016 to 2021. Roughly a third of those shootings were accidental, she said, and many involved children.

In a press release, Newsom described the cadre of signed pieces of legislation as efforts to “address multiple stages of firearm-violence prevention: identifying and understanding crime guns, preventing prohibited possession, intervening when someone poses a risk, safely storing firearms, improving training and accountability, supporting young survivors and responding to emerging technologies.”

Emma Brown, executive director of the gun safety advocacy group Giffords, commended Newsom for signing the laws. “California leads the nation in gun safety because its leaders work tirelessly to prevent violence and keep communities safe,” she said in a written statement. “The policies enacted today will save lives by closing loopholes and investing real resources in community violence intervention.”

But pro-gun group California Rifle and Pistol Association faults the four-hour exam law as a possible infringement on Second Amendment rights. Its members fear they’ll be on the hook for expensive safety classes, which they view as one more tax on gun ownership in California.

The group is fine with voluntary courses, but not a mandatory one as a prerequisite for acting on a constitutional right, it indicated in an opposition letter.

“Public safety is better served by enforcing existing laws against prohibited persons, prosecuting violent criminals, and supporting voluntary education programs,” the group wrote.

Another law Newsom signed would expand the list of persons barred from owning weapons. Senate Bill 1220 would bar a person from owning a gun for 10 years if they're convicted of stripping a gun of its serial number information that law enforcement officers use to track weapons.

“Imposing a 10-year blanket prohibition on Second Amendment rights for such misdemeanors goes beyond what is necessary for public safety,” the California Rifle and Pistol Association wrote in an opposition letter.

And with Newsom’s signing of Assembly Bill 1743, cities and universities in California can request data from the state Department of Justice on weapons recovered during criminal investigations. A supporter of the legislation, Brady United to End Gun Violence, argued that by allowing academics to look up the serial numbers of the guns, research can be strengthened on how weapons find their way from manufacturers to crime scenes. “Are the guns coming from in state? Are they coming from a specific county? Are they coming from nearby or far away? Are they coming from a specific dealer?” the Brady organization asked.

But this bill too was opposed by guns rights groups, including the rifle and pistol association. It wrote that the legislation “poses significant risks to the privacy and safety of California's law-abiding gun owners and could be weaponized to advance anti-gun agendas.”

That agenda seems to be well signalled by California’s political leaders. After signing the bills, Newsom said he “couldn't be more proud of California's continued bold leadership on gun violence prevention.”

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