The Brief

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

Despite watching one after another of his state’s tech titans head to the White House to seek President Donald Trump’s favor, Gov. Gavin Newsom said Wednesday he doesn’t begrudge the industry’s rightward swing — mostly.

“It’s very situational with a lot of these guys,” he said when asked about tech businessmen going to “the other side.” “They are and they aren’t. … I don’t see it as as big a shift as perhaps others do.”

His comments at a New York Times finance summit underscored the governor’s balancing act with the tech industry, even as his relationship with its major businesses has been strained by Trump this year. Though he has excoriated law firms and universities for “selling out” to Trump administration demands this year — even threatening to pull state funding from California universities that sign certain agreements with the president — Newsom has walked a finer line when it comes to tech.

“I think it’s a little bit more, I don’t want to say the word transactional, but it’s fiduciary,” he said of tech leaders’ decisions to curry favor with Trump.

Newsom, who was San Francisco mayor in the 2000s, has long been close with tech leaders. As governor, he counts on the industry’s outsized gains to keep a massive state budget balanced. As a possible 2028 presidential contender, he could find Silicon Valley’s deep-pocketed donors helpful.

The relationship has made Newsom a reliable politician in the industry’s corner as lawmakers in his own party increasingly push for regulations on social media and its effects on children, data centers’ use of environmental resources and artificial intelligence’s proliferation into workplaces, adolescent relationships and daily life.

While Newsom has signed some of those bills, particularly ones in which advocates negotiated with tech companies, he’s also vetoed several out of concern that overregulating a nascent industry would drive it out of state. And he’s vehemently opposing a proposed wealth tax that would undoubtedly touch tech executives.

Tech titans cozy up to Trump

That’s been the case this year despite Silicon Valley’s increasing coziness with Trump, whom Newsom has criticized for threatening industries with tariffs to extract concessions and demanding loyalty from private business executives. The relationship has affected California in a number of ways, from Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s aggressive pursuit of federal firings and cost-cuttings earlier this year to Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff’s suggestion that Trump send the National Guard to San Francisco, precipitating a nervous few days in October as the president moved to start immigration raids there. Benioff later walked back his statements and Trump said he relented after talking with him and Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang.

Peter Leroe-Muñoz, a senior vice president at the industry group Bay Area Council, praised Newsom for nevertheless understanding “the value of the innovation our member companies produce.”

“While the governor may not always agree with innovation companies and how they choose to operate or conduct themselves, at the end of the day the governor recognizes that we all have a stake in the success of California and so not cutting off ties or undermining those industry players is in the long term success of the Golden State,” Leroe-Muñoz said last month.

Still, Newsom offered some criticism of the industry’s relationship with Trump on Wednesday, calling it “self-dealing” that the president’s AI and crypto czar David Sacks, along with many other investors and chipmakers, have reportedly been in line to profit from Trump’s AI directives.

“There needs to be levels of ethics that are demanded of these leaders,” he said. “That entire ecosystem has benefited from it. California has benefited from it. But I do not think it’s healthy for capitalism.”

And he called Apple CEO Tim Cook’s ability to strike a deal with Trump to get tariff exemptions for critical parts of the iPhone supply chain “by definition, crony capitalism.”

“How about the farmers and ranchers in California, how about all the small businesses that can’t pick up the phone and get an exemption on their tariffs?” Newsom said. “It breaks my heart.”

But he acknowledged Cook was serving his shareholders: “Do I begrudge that? Yes. Do I begrudge him? Not as much.”

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

The fires that tore through urban Los Angeles County in January 2025 didn’t just destroy thousands of homes — they left thousands more filled with toxic ash. Now, a state bill aims to set new standards for post-fire contamination testing and cleaning.

Assemblymember John Harabedian, who represents Altadena, introduced AB 1642 this week. The proposed legislation calls on the state’s Department of Toxic Substances Control to set new standards for removing post-fire contamination from homes, schools and workplaces.

“When it comes to our families' health we trust science, not insurance company guesswork,” Harabedian said in a news release. “Public health will be the standard, not the exception.”

Many cleaned homes are still contaminated

Public health departments have warned residents that smoke from the Eaton and Palisades Fires carried hazardous materials — including lead, asbestos and heavy metals — from burned homes into other nearby properties.

But homeowners and renters living near the burn zones have in many cases had to battle their insurance companies and landlords for testing and remediation.

Resident groups and local scientists have been testing homes before and after professional remediation. One group found that even after cleaning, 63% of tested homes contained lead on their floors at levels far above EPA safety limits.

Nicole Maccalla, director of data science for the group Eaton Fire Residents United, praised the new legislative push. She said last year’s fires were categorically different from fires in more rural areas.

“They weren't just wildfires — they were actually urban fires,” Maccalla said. “We're really at the forefront here in California of trying to identify clear standards so that we can be sure families and residents are safe in their homes and neighborhoods.”

What happens next 

Currently, California law does not set uniform rules for re-occupying contaminated homes after fires based on risks to human health. Lawmakers are treating the bill as an urgency measure, meaning it would take effect immediately if approved.

If passed into law, the bill would instruct the California Department of Toxic Substances Control to establish emergency regulations around testing and removal of contaminants by July 1, 2027.

In response to the L.A. fires, state lawmakers have already clarified that landlords are responsible for cleaning contaminated apartments after disasters. This came in response to some tenants’ inability to get landlords to remediate their homes.

This week, Pasadena officials settled a lawsuit alleging the city failed to protect renters’ right to a habitable home following Eaton Fire contamination.

The settlement will require the city to carry out faster inspections and improve enforcement procedures. The deal is similar to another settlement tenant groups reached with L.A. County last year.

Topline:

The background: The Aquarium of the Pacific in Long Beach isn’t just a major attraction for tourists and locals — it’s also a sea turtle rescue, endangered shark breeder, a frog nursery and more. The aquarium has long supported conservation efforts across the Pacific Ocean.

New sea turtle rescue: A new rehabilitation tank will allow the public to view green sea turtles rescued from L.A. County and beyond. The aquarium is one of two facilities in Southern California with the capacity to do such rehab for these turtles (the other being SeaWorld). Much of this work has been done out of the public’s view. The aquarium has rescued, rehabilitated and released local green sea turtles since 2000 — the most they’ve rehabbed in a year is 16, said lead veterinarian Dr. Lance Adams.

This green sea turtle, nicknamed Porkchop, had to have her flipper amputated after being rescued by aquarium staff from a tangle of fishing line in the San Gabriel River.

(

Erin Stone

/

LAist

)

Porkchop, turtle ambassador: The aquarium’s first ambassador is an endearing three-flippered turtle that staff dubbed Porkchop (for her hefty appetite). She was rescued from the San Gabriel River last March after volunteers spotted her tangled in fishing line and caught on debris. One of her flippers had to be amputated, and a hook was removed from her throat, but she continues to recover well and staff members hope she can be released into the wild soon.

Go deeper: Meet Porkchop, the Aquarium of the Pacific's rescued green sea turtle

L.A. Mayor Karen Bass and county Supervisor Kathryn Barger say President Donald Trump’s executive order on rebuilding in the wake of the Palisades and Eaton fires "political posturing."

Trump also does not have authority to nullify state and local building regulations without an act of congress, according to Justin Levitt, a professor of constitutional law at Loyola Marymount University.

On Wednesday, the three joined AirTalk host Larry Mantle to discuss Trump’s executive order that was signed last Friday. The order calls for federal regulators to step in and preempt state and local construction permitting processes after disasters like the January fires, instead allowing builders to self-certify their compliance with standards. The executive order also requires a federal audit of California’s use of FEMA grant funds.

“ We always see this from the president,” Bass said, “which is posturing and using something in a political manner.”

Bass said she had complimented the Trump administration at the beginning of the disaster response for its “massive” deployment of Army Corps of Engineers, who helped in the debris removal process.

Both Bass and Barger, whose district includes Altadena, said local permitting processes already allow for self-certification. And both encouraged the president to help survivors by providing FEMA money that has not yet been reimbursed. Barger said that's to the tune of $34 billion.

“FEMA has put $170 million into Victims’ pockets via Individual Assistance,” a Trump spokesperson told LAist in an emailed response to Barger’s claim. “While FEMA is still processing California’s applications for cost-share State projects like infrastructure, essentially all FEMA money to individual victims and households has already been paid out.”

Instead of trying to sidestep local government policy, Bass said, Trump could lean on his connections with the insurance and banking industries to have them help fire survivors.

“He should say, ‘You guys need to put together a loan fund for people in the Palisades and Altadena and in Malibu. You guys need to extend forbearance,’” Bass said. “He could do that.”

Is Trump’s plan legal?

Levitt said there's a history of presidential directives preempting local decisions, but that authority was given under existing federal laws. Levitt said he doesn’t see how any of those statutes apply in this case.

“ The big thing the president's focusing on is a purported takeover, declaring that people don't have to listen to state and local regulations when they're getting federal money, and that's just not true,” Levitt said.

He added that Congress could pass a new law that allows the federal government to step in. And he noted that Trump’s executive order did instruct federal agencies to ask Congress for new legislation.

“"Until Congress acts, the president's job here is to disperse the cash that local residents are owed, and that's about it," Levitt said.

At 5 a.m. California time, when it is still dark outside, a member of the state's Department of Public Health gets on a weekly call.

The topic? Health emergencies all over the world.

For years, the U.S. federal government participated in these calls, which are organized by the World Health Organization. Now, as the Trump administration says it has withdrawn from WHO over its handling of COVID, among other things, California is stepping in.

It is the first state to join WHO's Global Outbreak Alert & Response Network, also known as GOARN. Dr. Erica Pan, director of the California Department of Public Health, says she's been in touch with other states hoping to follow suit. Illinois, in a press release, said it's "making preparations" to join.

"The Trump administration's withdrawal from WHO is a reckless decision that will hurt all Californians and Americans," said California Gov. Gavin Newsom in a statement. "California will not bear witness to the chaos this decision will bring."

This move by states to take things into their own hands is part of a broader trend, according to Dr. Gavin Yamey, a professor of global health and public policy at Duke University.

"I think this is a very smart and savvy play," says Yamey. "The federal government has reneged on its public health protection responsibilities, and you're seeing states taking steps so they still are part of the international response to outbreaks and emerging threats."

Not quite a member but still a participant

That doesn't mean California, for example, could become a full-fledged WHO member. Many forums and meetings hosted by WHO are limited to member states — meaning national governments. But some parts of WHO, like GOARN, are open to a broader array of groups, including nonprofit and multinational organizations, academic centers and different levels of governments. Like American states. 

GOARN is made up of over 350 such groups that work together to detect and respond to infectious disease outbreaks and public health emergencies. The network was created in 2000 after leaders realized that a lack of coordination was hindering outbreak response. Since its creation, GOARN has helped organize, analyze and respond to emergencies like SARS, Ebola and mpox.

Members of GOARN participate in weekly calls, get regular outbreak updates and also get access to WHO Epidemic Intelligence from Open Sources platform, which "is continuously scanning global open sources for signals of outbreaks and health events," says Pan. "We're just now getting training and onboarding."

Pan says participating in the network and platform brings better awareness of global health threats — and lets the state respond accordingly. "[It] helps us anticipate threats earlier," says Pan, noting a drop-off in federal health guidance, including the lack of a national flu vaccination campaign this flu season.

Indeed, the U.S. federal government has said it does not plan to continue participating in groups like GOARN. In a statement sent to NPR earlier this month, the U.S. State Department wrote: "The United States will not be participating in regular WHO-led or managed events."

"Charting its own course"

Instead, the U.S. is taking a different approach, pursuing health and aid agreements directly with individual countries. These agreements often include sharing disease outbreak information.

"The United States is charting its own course on global health engagement, grounded in accountability, transparency, and the expertise of America's public health institutions," said a statement from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to NPR. "States do not set U.S. foreign policy."

Not everyone agrees with this stance.

Some conservative voices have urged the U.S. to continue participating in certain WHO forums, particularly those that provide information, data and assessments for emerging infectious disease outbreaks. For example, Brett Schaefer — a senior fellow at the right-leaning thinktank the American Enterprise Institute — said, even as the U.S. withdraws from WHO, the U.S. should continue to participate in initiatives like the Epidemic Intelligence from Open Sources platform "to make sure that you have full, robust access to the information."

This type of international platform would be "a very difficult thing for the U.S. to replicate or to try and build outside of the World Health Organization — also [it'd be] somewhat inefficient," says Schaefer.

However, he said over email that the jury is still out on California's decision to join GOARN. "It's interesting but unclear at this point," he wrote, noting that WHO has not clarified California's status. He added: "It also could just be a PR stunt by Newsom."

WHO did not respond to NPR's requests for comment on California's participation in GOARN or any other parts of WHO as well as on other states that have reached out to join.

This new model does have a potential downside — a split between states that join part of WHO and states that don't, says Yamey: "You could end up having this awful, tragic divide" where some state leaders have access to better, more up-to-date outbreak information for making public health decisions than leaders in other states, he says.

Pan says California is hoping to partner with other states that don't join GOARN. "Our intent is really to — acknowledging that we are the biggest state with the largest state health department — step up and provide some leadership."
Copyright 2026 NPR