The Brief

California is officially entering the nationwide redistricting battle.

The California Legislature officially passed a proposal Thursday to redraw the state’s congressional district boundaries in a way that would give Democrats an advantage in the 2026 midterm elections. The move escalates tensions between California Democrats and President Donald Trump, who first urged Texas lawmakers to redraw their state’s maps to favor Republicans.

The measure passed 57 to 20 in the state Assembly and the state Senate passed it hours later 30-8, on a party-line vote.

Four of the districts that would be most heavily impacted under the plan are in Southern California.

Now the measure heads to a statewide ballot. It can’t go into effect unless California voters approve it in a special election on Nov. 4.

What does the proposal say?

The measure, officially titled the “Election Rigging Response Act,” would allow California to use new maps for congressional elections in 2026, 2028 and 2030.

If your district boundaries change under the new maps, you’ll be voting with a different group of people to elect a congressional representative for the next three elections.

Ordinarily, an independent commission — a politically balanced group of citizens who aren’t connected to political office — is in charge of drawing California’s congressional district maps. They do it once every 10 years based on the results of the U.S. Census. The next redistricting process wasn’t set to begin until after the 2030 Census.

This new measure temporarily interrupts that cycle and allows the new maps, designed by elected officials, to take effect for the next three election cycles. After 2030, the independent redistricting commission will take over the job again as usual.

Is my district affected?

Use this tool from our partners at CalMatters to enter your address and see if your new district would change under the proposal.

You can also read more from CalMatters on some of the districts most heavily affected, which include those represented by Ken Calvert in Riverside, Derek Tran in L.A. and Orange County, and Dave Min in Orange County.

Why are we voting on this?

California Gov. Gavin Newsom initiated this effort as a response to Trump’s actions in Texas.

In July, Trump began urging Texas lawmakers to redraw their state’s congressional maps to help retain more Republican representatives in Congress in the 2026 midterm elections. Republicans have a slim 219-212 majority in the U.S. House of Representatives right now, but in midterm elections, the balance of power historically tends to shift to the other party.

Like California, Texas, and other states aren’t supposed to redistrict until after the next census count in 2030. But under pressure from Trump, Republican lawmakers in Texas produced a draft map to take effect before the 2026 midterms and likely give Republicans an additional five seats in Congress. After a two-week standoff, the Texas House approved the new maps, and the state senate is expected to pass it as well.

Newsom, calling Trump’s move in Texas an effort to “rig” congressional elections next year, launched California’s redistricting effort as a way to neutralize the one in Texas.

Several other state leaders have expressed that they may join the redistricting fight, including in Florida, Missouri and Illinois.

Does voting ‘yes’ mean the measure will automatically take effect?

Not necessarily. This measure has explicit language that it would only kick in if another state moves ahead with their own mid-cycle redistricting effort. If Texas' new maps pass the state legislature, then California voters would just need to approve California's measure in November for it to take effect.

One potential disruptor would be the measure faces legal challenges that hold it up in court. This week a group of California Republicans filed a lawsuit against the proposal on technical grounds, but it was rejected by the California Supreme Court. Still, other lawsuits could crop up in the coming weeks.

Additionally, U.S. Rep. Kevin Kiley of California's 3rd Congressional District introduced congressional legislation to prohibit mid-cycle redistricting nationwide. If that passes, it would nullify the newly drawn congressional maps in Texas, California and any other state that tries to do the same.

What do supporters and opponents say?

What supporters say: Newsom has described the plan as a way to neutralize Trump’s redistricting efforts in Texas. “We’re not going to roll over, and we’re going to fight fire with fire,” he said in a press conference earlier this month. Many Democratic members of Congress have expressed public support for the plan, including California Senators Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff.

Sara Sadhwani, an assistant professor of politics at Pomona College and a Democratic member of California’s independent redistricting commission, supports the effort, too.

“These are extraordinary times,” she said in an interview with Politico. “At this moment, I’m not so worried about California’s democracy. We have strong democratic institutions here in the state of California, but I’m also a political scientist, and at the national level, what we’ve seen over the last 10 or even 20 years is a backsliding and a decay of our institutions that should worry all of us.”

What skeptics say: Common Cause, a nonpartisan organization that advocates for democratic reforms including independent redistricting, initially opposed Newsom’s plan. Darius Kemp, the group's executive director, called it a “dangerous move” in a press release, adding: “We can’t afford to put our state’s democracy on the line during a time of national instability.”

However, the group scaled back its opposition shortly afterward. In a statement, the group said it would not oppose Newsom’s plan if state lawmakers adhered to certain “fairness criteria.”

What opponents say: All nine members of California’s Republican congressional delegation oppose Newsom’s plan, arguing in a joint statement that it overrides the will of voters who approved the independent redistricting system.

State Assemblymembers Suzette Valladares and Kate Sanchez, both Republican co-chairs of the California Hispanic Caucus, are against the proposal, describing it in a statement as a “direct attack on millions of Californians’ right to fair representation.”

Several critics have also highlighted the cost of a special election, which State Assembly Republicans estimated could total around $235 million.

What can I do to prepare for the Nov. 4 election?

The special election is scheduled for Nov. 4. Here’s what you can do now to get ready:

• Check your registration. You can check your status at the California Secretary of State website here. 
• Register or update your registration. If you’re not registered or need to change your information, you can do that here. 

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.