People supporting California's proposed billionaire tax hold signs at the 2026 California Democratic Party State Convention in San Francisco on Feb. 21, 2026.
(
Jeff Chiu
/
AP Photo
)
Topline:
The health care union behind the tax measure argues its plan is the only viable fix for federal funding cuts to Medi-Cal. But even some of the most liberal lawmakers and labor unions aren’t convinced yet.
Why it matters: Publicly, prominent labor and progressive players have largely kept quiet, unlike Gov. Gavin Newsom who has aired his disdain loud and clear. Yet in private, some union leaders and their allies in the Legislature rail against the measure. Of the critics who spoke with CalMatters for this story — three union leaders and five members of the Legislative Progressive Caucus — only one lawmaker would criticize the measure openly.
The backstory: The proposed initiative would levy a one-time tax of 5% on any resident of California whose net worth exceeds $1 billion, which applies to around 200 people, according to Forbes. That money would plug an estimated $100 billion hole left by federal cuts to Medi-Cal and other social service programs.
Taxing the rich to backfill Trump-induced federal funding cuts might sound like a no-brainer policy for the party’s left flank, which counts wealth inequality among its top issues.
But despite a strong show of support from prominent national figures, including Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and liberal economist Robert Reich, the “2026 California Billionaire Tax Act” has become a hot potato for labor leaders.
The proposed initiative would levy a one-time tax of 5% on any resident of California whose net worth exceeds $1 billion, which applies to around 200 people, according to Forbes. That money would plug an estimated $100 billion hole left by federal cuts to Medi-Cal and other social service programs.
Publicly, prominent labor and progressive players have largely kept quiet, unlike Gov. Gavin Newsom who has aired his disdain loud and clear. Yet in private, some union leaders and their allies in the Legislature rail against the measure. Of the critics who spoke with CalMatters for this story — three union leaders and five members of the Legislative Progressive Caucus — only one lawmaker would criticize the measure openly.
Critics question its feasibility and whether the state even knows how to accurately appraise a billionaire’s total wealth, a crucial step to evaluating how much tax they would owe. They fear long-term revenue loss by driving wealthy people out of California. And some resent that the union sponsoring the initiative, SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West, designed the measure to predominantly benefit its members rather than boost the state’s general fund, where it could go to all budget needs.
“It's not that taxing billionaires in itself is wrong,” said Keely Martin Bosler, formerly the top state budget officer to Newsom and former Gov. Jerry Brown. She is now a Democratic consultant who has advised several of California’s most powerful labor groups, including the Service Employees International Union of California, the parent union of SEIU-UHW. “The way in which this tax specifically is constructed is problematic.”
Many progressive state lawmakers and Capitol heavyweights, such as Sen. Scott Wiener of San Francisco and the powerful California Labor Federation, have sidestepped the question of whether they’d support it, declining for now to take a position on an initiative that has yet to officially qualify for the ballot.
“The Labor Federation won’t take it up for an endorsement until July,” said Lorena Gonzalez, the organization’s president, in a text message.
Yet if the tax lands on the November ballot, as it appears on track to do, progressive critics will be saddled with the tricky optics of opposing — or at least not supporting — a measure that embodies one of their base’s core tenets: taxing the rich.
Even the mere threat the measure could qualify for the ballot has already spurred a torrent of opposition spending — more than $50 million in total so far — from billionaires such as Google co-founder Sergey Brin and cryptocurrency mogul Chris Larsen. Brin’s group, known as “Building a Better California,” has also spawned three new competing ballot measures designed to undermine the billionaires’ tax.
Critics fear that if billionaires like Brin become even bigger perennial spenders in California politics, they could neuter the progressive agenda by bankrolling more business-friendly candidates and ousting left-leaning, labor-aligned legislators.
But the measure’s proponents say they are undeterred by the secretive detractors and challenge their critics to put their names behind their words.
Dave Regan speaks to the SEIU-UHW Leadership Assembly in 2013.
(
Steve Yeater
/
Courtesy of SEIU-UHW
)
“What we have is a group of so-called leaders who are not reflecting the attitudes of their own constituents,” said Dave Regan, president of SEIU-UHW and the de facto leader of the billionaire tax measure. “That’s why they want to be anonymous.”
Regan said he’s confident the initiative will amass enough signatures to qualify for the ballot before the end of April. Then, he said, “We believe a lot of those people are going to come around and change because this makes sense, because the public is supportive, because their own members are supportive.”
The case for, and against, the billionaires’ tax
So far, polling has shown the billionaire tax is relatively popular with voters. Recent surveys show just over half of Californians surveyed said they’re inclined to vote for it.
Critics point out that California’s existing state tax structure is entirely based on income, rather than net worth. The state would have to appraise each person’s assets, including real estate, art, automobiles and private and public businesses. The billionaires could pay in installments, handing over 1% of their wealth annually for five years.
Bosler said that with income tax filings, the Franchise Tax Board can use data from federal tax returns to verify its own analysis. Since there’s no federal wealth tax, California would be forging uncharted territory with no tax compliance support from any other source or agency — a risky move that could invite legal challenges.
“The state is not a miracle worker, like, they're not going to suddenly be able to do all of this like perfectly,” said Bosler. “I mean they will do their best, but I just think this is expertise that they have built up over 50-plus years. Like, none of this is in their wheelhouse at this point.”
But champions of the tax argue it is the only real solution on the table so far to save hospitals, health care jobs and, ultimately, patient lives they say are at risk due to federal funding cuts to Medi-Cal and food assistance programs.
Supporters note that the tax is not intended to solve California’s structural budget problems.
“It’s one-time funding to fill what we hope is a one-time hole,” said Brian Galle, a tax law professor at UC Berkeley who helped craft the measure. Galle said only around 200 people would be subjected to the tax, so the extra burden on the Franchise Tax Board wouldn’t be too great.
“It's not like FTB is going to get a blizzard of tens of thousands of new returns that they're going to have to figure out a whole new data system for cracking,” said Galle.
Why some progressives aren’t on board
Those who have qualms with the initiative have largely kept their criticisms private.
One liberal state legislator, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the infighting among the unions puts progressive lawmakers in a difficult position. While he empathizes with the urgency that health care workers feel, he and other Democrats are not convinced the policy could withstand legal challenges and worry about the wealthy employing savvy accounting maneuvers to skirt the tax altogether.
Some organizations that are synonymous with progressive politics in California, such as the Working Families Party, also haven’t taken a position, even as other unions such as the Teamsters and AFSCME California support it.
Even the powerhouse labor union SEIU California is choosing not to take a position on the measure, which is spearheaded by one of its local affiliates, SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West.
Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, right, speaks with Assemblymember Chris Ward at the state Capitol in Sacramento on Sept. 12, 2025.
(
Fred Greaves
/
CalMatters
)
Assemblymember Chris Ward, a member of the progressive caucus, called the measure a “well-meaning effort by UHW,” but criticized the proposal for being just a one-time tax primarily benefiting the health care sector rather than boosting the state’s overall revenues. Regan said SEIU-UHW made the tax one-time to nullify the argument that it would push billionaires out of the state.
Ward noted that he and his colleagues are considering “superior” bills, such as one that would close a corporate tax loop to generate $3 billion per year, and another that would create a new tax on corporations that pay workers so little that they qualify for Medi-Cal and nutrition assistance.
Regan argued these measures would only make California more unaffordable, since businesses would pass their increased costs along to consumers.
Ward, the sole state lawmaker who would candidly share his concerns about the initiative with CalMatters, said he and his colleagues have heard pushback from “a number of other labor organizations that don't support that initiative,” primarily because its members would not directly benefit from any of the revenue. Uniting labor, he said, is the key to any successful revenue solution.
“There's a need to look at a wealth tax for a more broad range, including health care workers but other purposes that are state priorities,” Ward said, “and that will be left off of the table if this is the only question we're seeing.”
CalMatters' Nadia Lathan contributed to this story.
Courtney Eileen Fulcher
is the apprentice news clerk for AirTalk and FilmWeek, hosted by Larry Mantle.
Published June 29, 2026 5:32 PM
A 1938 photo of KNX's studios.
(
Herman J Schultheis
/
Los Angeles Public Library
)
Topline:
With KNX's shift last month back to AM radio only, we asked Southern Californians to share their memories of listening to the radio.
Why now: Back in April, broadcast company Audacy announced it was moving KNX News — one of the last-remaining all-news FM stations — off 97.1 FM, but keeping the long-running news format on 1070 AM where it's been for more than 100 years. The move officially happened in May to make way for a new sports talk station.
A radio time capsule: AirTalk, LAist's flagship daily news show which airs on 89.3 FM, asked listeners to share their favorite memories of listening to the radio.
Continue reading... for vintage photos from The Los Angeles Public Library's digital archive collections highlighting Southern California's rich radio history.
Southern California was built on radio.
"I can still hear the jingle KFWB News 98,” wrote Taline in Los Feliz, during a recent conversation on LAist's daily news show, AirTalk, which airs on 89.3 FM. “I grew up hearing that in my dad's minivan on the way to and from school. It has a special place in my heart.”
Back in April, broadcast company Audacy announced KNX News — one of the last-remaining all-news FM stations — was leaving the FM dial where it had simulcast on 97.1 FM since 2021. The station, which is also one of the oldest in L.A., is not budging from 1070 AM where it has been on the air for more than 100 years. The move away from FM officially happened in May to make way for a new sports talk station, which Audacy officials called an area of growth for advertisers in today’s media landscape.
The move is one in a long line of changes for radio and a reminder that before podcasts, playlists and algorithms, many Southern Californians built their days around radio broadcasts.
Radio, a daily ritual
The construction of KNX
(
Herman J. Schultheis
/
Los Angeles Public Library
)
Michael Jackson, a well-known KNX, personality
(
Los Angeles Public Library
)
Larry Mantle, now in his 41st year hosting AirTalk, remembers being a kid and dreaming of what it might be like to be behind the mic at one of these radio stations.
“ I grew up with KNX," he said. “My dream job as a kid was to be an anchor on KNX or KFWB, the two local all-news radio stations, 'cause there was nothing like hosting AirTalk that even existed at that point.”
Mantle opened up the phone lines on a recent show to hear from his fellow SoCal radio lovers about the shows they miss and the memories they have. Here's what they had to say:
A love for radio, then and now
A pilot of KMPC's traffic alert helicopter pictured with his daughter and grandson.
(
Los Angeles Public Library
)
A 1963 picture of Valley State College (now Los Angeles Valley College) preparing to launch KVCM
(
Larry Leach
/
Los Angeles Public Library
)
“When you'd walk down Hollywood Boulevard where the station was, you could hear it playing as you went down the street,” said Olivia in Glendale about KLAC 570 with Al Jarvis.
Larry in Yorba Linda shouted out KBCA Jazz for its 24-hour jazz, saying “When I first moved out here in '68 from Phoenix, which had like an hour a week, it was a real wonder.”
Mark in Glassell Park emailed that he loves KCRW’s Henry Rollins, writing, “I used to bristle at his unique DJ persona, but over time, I came to love him and his crazy eclectic playlists. I find his knowledge in history and punk rock fascinating. He's a gem and a legend."
"I'd like to give a shout-out to all the DJs working at KXLU, the college station at Loyola Marymount University, said Jeremy in Culver City in an email. “That station's been on the air for nearly 60 years. I believe it's one of the best examples of what's possible with radio."
"KFWB and KRLA back in the day when they were rock music stations — Dr. Demento, one of my favorite on-air personalities, also had eclectic music taste," said Carrie in Desert Edge.
“ Dr. Demento was must listening when I was a kid in junior high school at Le Conte Junior High in Hollywood,” Mantle added. “Every Sunday night on KMET, we would make sure we were listening to Dr. Demento and his funny records.”
The question remains…
An 11-year-old winning a car in a KMPC contest in 1963.
(
Los Angeles Public Library
)
Listener support is vital to any radio station, and it’s clear KNX has many lifelong fans. AirTalk listeners highlighted their support for household KNX names over the decades like Bill Keene, Melinda Lee, Mike Roy and Jackie Olden.
As KNX makes changes, many are watching closely and thinking about the future of radio.
Listeners like Tommy in La Quinta are left wondering if the radio dial will be the same…
“I’m a hardcore listener, but I don't know about casual listeners [and] if they'll tune to AM,” he said.
Libby Rainey
has been tracking how L.A. is preparing for the 2028 Olympic Games.
Published June 29, 2026 5:02 PM
LA28 chair Casey Wasserman speaks with L.A. Mayor Karen Bass at the Olympic Games Paris 2024 on August 10, 2024.
(
Luke Hales
/
Getty Images
)
Topline:
After months of hand-wringing, Los Angeles and LA28 have come to a tentative agreement on how Olympics organizers will reimburse the city for its expenses for the 2028 Summer Games.
What's in the deal? The private Olympic organizing committee will pay upfront for the estimated cost of services that are not eligible for federal reimbursement, like trash pick-up and traffic control. Under another proposal, the city would also be able to tap an LA28 contingency fund if it isn't fully repaid by the federal government for policing costs at Olympic venues.
What happens now: The agreement is nearly nine months overdue and still needs approval by Mayor Karen Bass and the city council. The City Council's ad-hoc committee on the 2028 Games will meet Tuesday afternoon to vote on the agreement.
Concerns remain: The contract between the two parties doesn't fully resolve one of the biggest areas of financial risk for the city: the enormous cost of security for an event as extensive and high-profile as the summer Olympics and Paralympics.
Read on...for more on concerns over security costs for 2028.
After months of hand-wringing, Los Angeles and LA28 have come to a tentative agreement on how Olympics organizers will reimburse the city for its expenses for the 2028 Summer Games.
According to the deal, the private Olympic organizing committee will pay upfront for the estimated cost of services that are not eligible for federal reimbursement, like trash pick-up and traffic control. Under another proposal, the city would also be able to tap an LA28 contingency fund if it isn't fully repaid by the federal government for policing costs at Olympic venues.
The agreement is nearly nine months overdue and still needs approval by Mayor Karen Bass and the City Council.
The 2028 Olympics are intended to be privately financed, and an existing city agreement with LA28 states that the Olympics organizers, not L.A., will pay for extra costs for public services in support of the Games. But L.A. is the financial back-stop for the Olympics, meaning if LA28 goes in the red, taxpayers will pick up the bill.
Beyond that, the city services agreement presents another area where L.A. could incur additional unexpected expenses for hosting the Games. L.A. City Councilmember Monica Rodriguez warned LA28 CEO Reynold Hoover earlier this year that a bad deal could "bankrupt" the city.
Jacie Prieto Lopez, an LA28 spokesperson, and Paul Krekorian, who leads the city's office of major events, said in statements that the freshly inked agreement would help deliver a fiscally responsible Games.
"Mayor Bass’ priority is that the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games be fiscally responsible, protect taxpayers, and benefit Angelenos for decades to come. This agreement helps deliver that commitment," Krekorian said.
But the contract between the two parties doesn't fully resolve one of the biggest areas of financial risk for the city: the enormous cost of security for an event as extensive and high-profile as the summer Olympics and Paralympics.
The federal government has so far allocated $1 billion for security costs for the Olympics. Exactly where those federal funds will go has not yet been determined, and there's no guarantee they will cover all of L.A.'s policing costs.
To address this, city officials have also proposed an amendment to a 2021 agreement between the city and LA28. That amendment would establish that if L.A. is not reimbursed by the federal government for all its eligible expenses, it could dip into LA28's contingency fund of $270 million before the private organizing committee could use those funds for any legacy projects.
But that bucket of money will first be used for any costs that Olympics organizers still owe if they run out of revenue — meaning if the Olympics don't turn a profit, the city's access to that money will depend on how much is left for the taking.
Civil rights attorney Connie Rice, who has been tracking the city's negotiations with LA28, told LAist the agreement was a "PR document" not a deal. She pointed out that if the federal government does not pay up for security spending as expected, L.A. could be in trouble.
" It leaves the taxpayers with a GoFundMe strategy," she said.
The city services agreement lays the groundwork for more negotiations between LA28 and the city. Each venue will require its own agreement, to be negotiated by July 1, 2027. Venues in the city of L.A. include Dodger Stadium, the L.A. Convention Center, L.A. Memorial Coliseum and the Venice Beach Boardwalk.
The City Council's ad-hoc committee on the 2028 Games will meet Tuesday afternoon to vote on the agreement.
Keep up with LAist.
If you're enjoying this article, you'll love our daily newsletter, The LA Report. Each weekday, catch up on the 5 most pressing stories to start your morning in 3 minutes or less.
Lucas Brady Woods
covers the weather and disasters, among other climate and science topics.
Published June 29, 2026 4:54 PM
Cleanup is underway now at the Boyle Heights food storage warehouse that spewed smoke around L.A. earlier this month.
(
Alejandra Molina
/
Boyle Heights Beat
)
Topline:
Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass signed a pair of executive orders Monday to ramp up efforts to clean the mess left by the fire that burned for a week at a Boyle Heights warehouse.
Why now: Since the warehouse fire was put out, the 85 million pounds of frozen food stored inside is now rotting, spreading foul smells throughout surrounding neighborhoods and raising concerns about an influx of pests. Residents have also been left with worries about air and water contamination after the fire and possible long-term public health effects.
Spoiled food removal: Bass and city officials said Monday the warehouse owner, Lineage, began moving food debris on Sunday to landfills in Ventura and Riverside counties. The company predicts it will take 5,000 truckloads to remove it all.
Reducing odors: Lineage plans to apply a chemical deodorizer, likely chlorine dioxide, to the food, debris and trucks leaving the warehouse. It’s also installing devices within the warehouse that will spray mist over the food inside until it is moved.
Pest control: Lineage is responsible for pest management inside the warehouse, while the city of Los Angeles is responsible for it outside the warehouse. Both have hired private contractors to manage pest control.
Air and water testing: The South Coast Air Quality Management District is overseeing efforts to measure harmful material in the air and posting data to its online air quality map. Lineage also hired private contractor Onterris to monitor air quality in the community surrounding the warehouse, with South Coast AQMD’s oversight. The Los Angeles Department of Sanitation has been monitoring water flowing from the site since firefighting operations began. It’s using a variety of methods, including containment tanks and catch basins, to divert the runoff into the sewer and prevent it from flowing into the L.A. River.
What’s next: Bass’ two executive orders are intended to accelerate cleanup efforts, protect residents and hold accountable the companies responsible for the facility and its safety. One order directs the Fire Department to report on its investigation into the cause of the fire within 90 days. The orders also include a number of provisions to help Boyle Heights residents and businesses, including free public transit, financial assistance and expanded public health resources.
Why it matters: Officials and advocates have called for transparency around the cleanup, especially because they say the neighborhood has been historically under-resourced and disproportionately subjected to environmental burdens. One of the orders signed Monday directs city officials to compile a report within 45 days on industrial areas across Los Angeles that sit close to homes and schools. The report also must include possible zoning and land use changes that would reduce negative health effects from existing and future industrial facilities.
Aaron Schrank
has been on the ground, reporting on homelessness and other issues in L.A. for more than a decade.
Published June 29, 2026 4:36 PM
Tents in the Skid Row area of downtown Los Angeles on June 11, 2026.
(
Apu Gomes / AFP
/
Getty Images
)
Topline:
L.A.’s lead homelessness agency, LAHSA, filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development on Monday, asking a judge for relief from a federal funding suspension it calls unjustified.
How we got here: On June 11, HUD suspended the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority from federal grant activity pending an investigation into alleged mismanagement. The federal agency said the suspension means LAHSA cannot fulfill its role as collaborative applicant for the entire region’s application for federal homelessness dollars for the upcoming fiscal year. In its lawsuit, LAHSA says the suspension is the Trump administration’s back door attempt to eliminate the Continuum of Care program in L.A., which gives local officials discretion over homelessness projects submitted for federal funding.
LAHSA’s challenge: LAHSA says HUD has failed to identify any public agreement or transaction that LAHSA has violated or cite proper evidence of mismanagement. LAHSA also claims several inaccuracies and misrepresentations in HUD’s original suspension letter, including relying on reviews that LAHSA says were irrelevant to federal funding. “HUD supports its position with an amalgamation of uncorroborated hearsay information apparently cherry-picked from the internet,” the complaint states.
Legal argument: LAHSA's attorneys contend that HUD unlawfully suspended funding, arguing that the action violates the Administrative Procedure Act, the Constitution's separation of powers principle, and the Tenth Amendment. LAHSA is asking for a stay of the HUD suspension pending judicial review and a permanent injunction barring head from suspending LAHSA or blocking the work of the Los Angeles Continuum of Care.
Why it matters: The deadline for the L.A. region to submit its application to HUD for regional homelessness grants is Aug. 26. LAHSA says the suspension jeopardizes $241 million in federal funding that supports more than 11,000 people across L.A. County. LAHSA says the HUD suspension could prevent the agency from other activities, including releasing the findings of its 2026 homeless count conducted in January.
