The Brief

When an ambitious gondola-transit system was unveiled in Irvine last month, it promised to have residents reaching for the skies and breezily bypassing traffic as it whisked them up and over the 1,300-acre Great Park below.

Even better, city officials said: the company would donate services and equipment worth up to $10 million in the first year.

But LAist has learned that the project has already cost taxpayers around $700,000, doled out via contracts that were signed out of public view — and outside the pathway voters established for Great Park procedures and expenditures.

The project is scheduled to come before the Great Park board on Tuesday, but at least one council member wants to hit the brakes.

Councilmember Kathleen Treseder told LAist she is “very concerned.”

“ It seems like the train has already left the station,” she said. “I'm trying to figure out how to stop it.”

How we got here

For years, Irvine has been looking for a public transit system to best navigate the Great Park, which city officials envision as a rival to NYC’s Central Park. But it’s also a 1,300-acre beast to navigate: any public transit system would have to provide visitors and residents with access to the recreational and entertainment facilities planned for the park without causing traffic headaches for neighbors.

The city hit roadblock after roadblock with proposals for how to best navigate through and around the park’s pedestrian walking paths and roadways via a tram or light rail system.

So city planners looked to the skies.

The company Irvine contracted to study the viability of such an ambitious project turned out to be the very company with interests in building a gondola public transit system, which some critics consider problematic.

The project came in front of the Great Park board — composed of Irvine’s mayor and council members — for the first time in April. At that meeting, City Manager Oliver Chi previously told LAist officials were asking the Great Park Board “whether or not we want to formally start assessing Swyft and engage contract negotiations for what a system could look like in the Great Park.”

But nothing was finalized at the time, and there was no indication that this was to be the public transit system of Great Park. Yet,after that meeting, everything about the project seemed to speed up.

What happened next

Just two weeks later, hundreds of Irvine residents descended on Great Park for the annual State of the Great Park address. There were drummers, a pop up ice hockey rink, bounce houses — and a full-size model gondola. There was also a VR experience that took visitors on a gondola ride through Great Park.

Visitors enjoy a VR experience of the proposed Irvine gondola public transit system.

(

Courtesy City of Irvine

)

The model gondola pods were branded with the city’s crest and Great Park’s distinct orange color. People queued up to sit and take photos inside.

For some, like Treseder, the big question was how could all of this have happened in just the two weeks since the Great Park board gave the go ahead to start taking fledgling steps towards a potential partnership.

She flat out refused to attend. She said she “didn't think it was appropriate for us to be spending the money on the fake gondola for that event.”

Chi, the city manager, has not returned phone calls seeking comment on this issue. (On Friday afternoon, Santa Monica city officials announced that Chi is the new pick for its city manager post.)

Jeral Poskey, the chief executive of Swyft Cities, said Friday, “ I don't know city policies or what the rules are around Great Park spending. Everything I've heard says it's all followed process.”

The company behind the gondola project

Swyft Cities is the company Irvine is negotiating with for the gondola public transit system. Gondolas are used in the United States at ski resorts and tourist attractions. But Irvine’s would be the first to use a gondola as a public transit system in the U.S., proponents say.

Gondolas are used for public transit in other places including Algeria, Colombia and Bolivia. But Swyft Cities has yet to build a gondola transit system anywhere.

The company is offering Irvine a one-year trial period worth around $10 million in equipment and services — for free — in exchange for being recognized as “the mass transit option for the Great Park.” That money will cover eight gondolas operating between two stations connecting the Great Park’s visitor center and balloon ride with a planned retail facility, as well as maintenance and operational costs.

Poskey said at the April meeting that the idea for the gondola public transit system was born at Google when the tech giant was exploring solutions to connect one end of its sprawling campus with another. Poskey was working at Google at the time.

The pandemic upended Google’s plans, but Poskey was so taken with the idea that after he left Google he started Swyft Cities and has been shopping the gondola idea around the world, from Queensland in New Zealand to Sugar Land, outside Houston.

The tech system behind the project, Whoosh, was pioneered by a New Zealand-based company.

Poskey told LAist in an interview that the company had done studies that addressed how the gondola public transit system could fit into the masterplan for Great Park and how it could meet the ridership demands.

Why Great Park is different

Great Park is a nonprofit corporation governed by unique rules.

Voters passed Measure V in 2014 mandating that expenditures or contracts cannot be authorized for Great Park without a recommendation from the Great Park Board of Directors and approval from the City Council.

At an April meeting of the Great Park board, Treseder asked about a gondola contract she had discovered that dated back to December 2024 for about $200,000 — the first time she said she had heard of it.

“ I was not told of it at all by anybody,” she said.

Chi said the contract was to test the viability of a gondola system.

So about those Great Park contracts 

According to the December agreement Treseder discovered, the city is “actively planning a Whoosh system to enhance connectivity within Great Park.” The contract noted the need to reach out to entities like the Orange County Transportation Authority to discuss next steps.

But the project has not even come in front of Great Park’s finance and transportation commissions, an important early step in the process.

The money spent to date, however, suggests this project is well on its way.

LAist has also found four other contracts associated with the project totaling just over $550,000:

• May 21, 2024: A $172,000 contract with Swyft Cities for a feasibility study
• Feb. 3, 2025: A $50,000 contract with HDR (an engineering company) to forecast gondola ridership numbers
• March 26, 2025: A $249,550 contract with Aria Group to build a model gondola pod
• March 28, 2025: A $65,200 contract with Swyft Cities to build a VR experience of the gondola public transit system

Together with the contract from December, around $700,000 has been spent on the project so far.

Those last two contracts are noteworthy because it means Irvine taxpayers had no idea they had footed the bill for the VR experience and the very gondola they were posing with that day in Great Park.

Poskey told LAist Swyft Cities was not involved in the building of the gondola model for the Great Park event: all they did was provide the city with the design.

April’s meeting agenda had no mention of the contracts. After LAist started asking questions and filing public records requests, the contracts are now scheduled to be discussed at the next meeting.

What’s next 

Irvine’s Great Park board will meet at 2 p.m. Tuesday. Staff plan to share with board members how they arrived at the gondola public transit system plan.

How to watchdog local government

One of the best things you can do to hold officials accountable is pay attention.

Your city council, board of supervisors, school board and more all hold public meetings that anybody can attend. These are times you can talk to your elected officials directly and hear about the policies they’re voting on that affect your community.

• Read tips on how to get involved.
• The next scheduled Great Park board meeting is 2 p.m. on Tuesday, May 27. You can find meeting agendas and upcoming dates here. 
• And submit an eComment on the agenda here. 

The Orange County Registrar of Voters is sending teams to emergency shelters to make sure people can still can vote in the June 2 primary even if they are under evacuation orders because of the Garden Grove chemical spill threat.

The backstory

Some 40,000-50,000 people in and around Garden Grove were ordered to evacuate last Friday after a tank holding thousands of gallons of a toxic, highly flammable chemical threatened to explode. The evacuation area was sharply reduced Monday evening after public safety officials discovered pressure in the tank had been relieved.

But many Garden Grove and Stanton residents in the immediate vicinity of the tank, owned by the aerospace company GKN, are still under evacuation orders. Some fled their homes without even the bare essentials, much less their mail-in ballots for next week’s election.

How evacuees can vote

If you left your mail-in ballot at home, you can go to any of Orange County’s 38 vote centers and request a replacement ballot. You can find the locations of those centers here.

The O.C. Registrar on Tuesday also sent two teams to the emergency shelters in nearby Fountain Valley — at Freedom Hall and Los Amigos High School — to print replacement ballots for evacuees who need them. Those ballots can be mailed, dropped off at a vote center or placed in one of the county’s official ballot drop boxes. You can find the locations of those drop boxes here.

The drop box at Chapman Sports Park, which is within the evacuation zone, is unavailable. Registrar Bob Page said ballots were collected from the box when evacuations were first ordered. Page said his office has resumed retrieving ballots from two other drop boxes that were within the initial evacuation zone.

Conductor Daniel Harding will take over as the Los Angeles Philharmonic's music director next year, the organization announced Tuesday.

The appointment follows three years of intense speculation about who would succeed Gustavo Dudamel to oversee the influential orchestra, including concerts at Walt Disney Concert Hall, the Hollywood Bowl, The Ford and with Youth Orchestra Los Angeles.

Harding’s tenure starts in the 2027-28 L.A. Phil season. The Oxford-born conductor is currently music director of the Accademia Nazionale di Santa Cecilia in Italy and is well-known in L.A. as a guest conductor.

“ Daniel is a musician favorite during his last couple of times here during that Hollywood Bowl,” Kim Noltemy, L.A. Phil president and CEO, told LAist’s AirTalk Tuesday. “ He's a brilliant musician. He is absolutely committed to the idea of music education and helping develop the audiences of the future.”

Harding said in a statement Tuesday that making music with LA Phil musicians is a thrill and inspiration.

“So many great artists have found possibilities here that don’t exist anywhere else, and I come to California full of excitement for what we will discover and create together,” Harding said.

Harding will be the creative lead behind a team of acclaimed musicians, according to the L.A. Phil.

“This is gonna be the ultimate dream team,” Noltemy told AirTalk.

Esa-Pekka Salonen introduces Venezuelan conductor Gustavo Dudamel, then 26, back in 2007 as his successor.

(

Al Seib

/

Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

)

That includes Dudamel, who has led the orchestra since 2009 and will make his debut as the director of the New York Philharmonic this year. He was appointed last week as LA Phil’s artistic and cultural laureate.

It also includes LA Phil creative director Esa-Pekka Salonen, who was the Phil's music director for 17 years between 1992 and 2009, conductor-in-residence Anna Handler, creative chair John Adams and others.

“We are taking a non-traditional approach to all of the artistic strategy — essentially by having a team of brilliant people working together to create a season that really inspires people and meets various audiences where they are,” Noltemy said.

Harding will conduct eight weeks of programming in his inaugural 2027-28 season, according to the LA Phil. That will increase to 12 weeks of programming in the seasons to follow.

Listen to the interview

This story was originally published by Grist. Sign up for Grist's weekly newsletter here.

When it comes to California’s climate future, the most important figure in the state’s chaotic governor’s race may not be any of the candidates on the debate stage. It may not even be outgoing Gov. Gavin Newsom, or President Donald Trump.

Instead, it might just be Chevron, the multinational oil company that was founded in the Golden State more than 100 years ago. It is among the largest producers, refiners, and sellers of petroleum products in a state rapidly shifting toward electric vehicles. Depending on which candidate is talking, the company is an example of how Big Oil is strangling consumers or an example of how climate regulations are strangling the state economy.

The behemoth — it reported $12.3 billion in profit last year — took the spotlight last month when an interviewer asked leading Democratic candidate Xavier Becerra about Chevron’s contributions to his campaign. The former state attorney general and Biden-era health secretary gave what seemed to be a candid response:

“Chevron, that’s the problem with politics. They’re not the bad guy. Does everybody here drive an electric vehicle? You need Chevron. I need Chevron. My people of the state of California need Chevron … Chevron wants to give me a check, that’s — that’s their prerogative.”

The phrase “I need Chevron” soon appeared in anti-Becerra videos by the likes of climate hawk Jane Fonda, implying that the candidate was saying he needs Chevron to get elected. Progressive billionaire Tom Steyer, Becerra’s lead Democratic opponent, urged him to return the contribution and said he is “doing [the] bidding” of Big Oil. Representative Katie Porter, another leading Democrat, said in a statement that she “hasn’t made millions off Big Oil or taken their checks.”

Becerra is not entirely wrong. California consumes around 13 billion gallons of gasoline annually, all of it specifically formulated to meet the state’s stringent clean air standards. Most of it comes from just six refineries, and Chevron owns two that account for one-third of the state’s production. That gives the company and its peers tremendous leverage. But California’s gas consumption has declined by about 15% from a peak in 2004 due to improved fuel economy in conventional vehicles and growing adoption of electric vehicles. It could fall by half over the next two decades.

The primary is June 2. The challenge for the next governor will be to continue the energy transition while retaining the infrastructure needed to move and refine oil. This has never been accomplished in a place as large as California, which was the world’s fifth-largest economy in 2025. The risks are tremendous: If the state moves too quickly, it could create shortages and price spikes for drivers already paying the highest prices in the country. If it moves too slowly, it could lock in decades of air pollution and hinder global climate progress.

“It’s messy,” said Emily Grubert. She is a civil engineer and sociologist at Notre Dame who has studied fossil fuel transitions and advised the state government on oil infrastructure. “As soon as you realize that actually transitioning away from fossil fuels means you have to close things, people get really freaked out.”

Newsom spent much of his governorship going after Big Oil, an effort that included a series of executive actions to restrict fracking in Kern County oil fields. When the war in Ukraine sent gas prices surging, Newsom and Democrats in the Legislature passed a series of bills to stop what he called “price gouging.” These laws empowered a new oil-focused watchdog agency, created a tool that could impose refinery price caps, and required refineries to maintain certain storage reserves, all of which cut profit margins for Chevron and others. The new refinery rules added to multiple carbon taxes that make selling gasoline in California more expensive.

However, there is some evidence refiners have overcharged Californians. Even after accounting for state taxes, environmental fees, and production costs, a gap remains between gas prices in the Golden State and everywhere else. This gap appeared in 2015 after a refinery fire in Torrance and has come to be known as the “mystery gasoline surcharge.” It now averages about $1. Last fall, a state regulator concluded that refiners’ monopoly power may be the reason for the price spikes.

Oil companies accused Newsom of trying to regulate them out of existence, and many threatened to leave. Two major refiners, Wilmington and Benicia, announced last year that they would close their operations, forcing a state that already imports about 60 percent of its oil to rely on imports of gasoline refined in Asia. Chevron relocated its corporate headquarters from the San Francisco suburb of San Ramon to Houston in 2024, and it has delivered a series of ominous warnings this year as climate regulators have revised the state’s almost 15-year-old carbon tax.

“The proposed regulation will cripple the survivability of the state’s remaining refineries, which will result in California losing the entire industry,” Andy Walls, the president of Chevron’s refinery business, wrote in an open letter to Newsom in March. The implication was clear: unless you relax your regulations, we will leave the state and strand you without gasoline. That would mean paying Asian refiners to produce more of the state’s specific blend, at significant cost.

The Newsom administration spent much of 2025 trying to work out a grand bargain with the industry. The Legislature eased rules governing drilling in Kern County oil fields, helping maintain a stable supply of crude to refineries, It also delayed implementing a refinery profit cap, and allowed the temporary sale of gasoline with higher concentrations of ethanol. The state’s climate regulator has also suggested giving refineries free allowances under the state’s cap-and-trade system, even if it means less money for big projects like high-speed rail and sustainable housing. The idea is to give investors enough certainty that they’re willing to remain in California even as the state uses less gasoline.

Experts believe it will take a lot more than that to manage inevitable changes.

“You actually can’t have a smooth and safe and effective transition without some form of coordinating function for that decline,” said Grubert. She believes a degree of state ownership of refineries will be necessary to keep facilities open if they stop being profitable. The wrong approach, she says, would be to respond to each potential a refinery closure with ad hoc subsidies and state support, since that would allow refiners to extort the state one by one. 

That point was reinforced this month by a report from the California Energy Commission that has not received much notice. The analysis of the state’s shaky fuel system found that “California cannot sustainably manage this transition through repeated crisis interventions at an asset-by-asset level.” It suggested options that included “legal obligations to operate,” “centralized planning of closures,” and “direct state management or ownership of assets.”

The Iran war will accelerate a decline in both the supply of, and demand for, oil. Gas retailers like Chevron are already struggling to find additional imports of refined fuel, and some experts predict shortages if the Strait of Hormuz does not open within weeks. Meanwhile, electric vehicles continue gaining market share, and Newsom plans to roll out subsidies for them this year. Wider adoption of these vehicles, and hybrids, will further crimp demand, making any remaining refineries more likely to shutter.

Chevron’s Kern River Oil Field near Bakersfield is one of the largest oil fields in California. The state’s climate policies have helped reduce gasoline demand by more than 15 percent over the past decade.

(

Mark Ralston

/

AFP via Getty Images

)

All of this helps explain the showdown between the leading Democrats in the governor’s race, who are each trying to find a lane in a field that at one time included more than 50 candidates.

Becerra has given lip service to clean energy, but many public statements suggest a friendliness toward oil producers. As attorney general, he initiated a few lawsuits against petroleum companies, and supported other state climate lawsuits, but punted on major investigations. He has focused his gubernatorial campaign on vows to fight Donald Trump and protect healthcare, and has made controversial promises to freeze utility and insurance rates. On decarbonization, he has noted that “climate action only succeeds if it is affordable, reliable, and fair.”

After the chaos of the early primary, many oil producers have decided that Becerra is their candidate. Chevron last month contributed the maximum allowable amount of $39,200 to his campaign, the first time in a decade it has backed a gubernatorial candidate. Last week, the company contributed another $500,000 to an independent political committee supporting Becerra. California Resources Corporation, the state’s largest driller, also gave $500,000 to a Becerra committee. And gas companies like Sempra are among the donors to an anti-Steyer political committee that has raised more than $24 million.

Steyer, meanwhile, has made attacking Big Oil the focus of his campaign, as it was during his 2020 presidential run. He says he would lower gas prices by activating the refining profit cap that Newsom has declined to use, investigating what is causing high gas prices (something the state has already done), and taxing private jet fuel. When refineries “inevitably” close, he says he will stockpile an oil reserve and import more refined fuel for as long as California needs it.

Steyer has also had to address his own fossil fuel ties. The hedge fund he founded, Farallon Capital, remains a major player in coal power finance abroad, including in Indonesia and Australia. Steyer still holds a stake in the firm, which he left in 2012, but his campaign says he no longer receives dividends from its fossil fuel investments.

California uses a “jungle primary” in which the top two candidates advance to the general election, regardless of party. The latest poll shows Becerra essentially tied with former Fox News host Steve Hilton, a Republican, with Steyer trailing at around 15 percent. The most likely outcome is that one of Becerra or Steyer will make it to the general election. (The other Democrats, including Porter and San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, trail behind in the double digits.)

Railing against Big Oil has long proven to be good politics in California. But in the wake of Trump’s second election victory, Democrats have sought to downplay climate issues and focus instead on affordability. The question in the governor’s race is how best to achieve that in the long run. Is it better to use a bully pulpit against companies like Chevron in an effort to break their market power, or conciliate them in the hope that they don’t flee?

Mike Madrid, a veteran California political operative, believes Becerra’s approach will resonate more with the young and Latinos, both of whom often decide statewide elections.

“This attack on Chevron, it works for the base Steyer already has,” he said. “Young Latino working-class men are the demographic most affected by gas prices. Do you think they’re saying we need to get rid of Chevron? Of course not.”

Steyer’s campaign may not get him over the line in the primary, but he has at least been consistent. In a 2013 blog post for this very publication, he celebrated the result of the Virginia governor’s race, where a climate-focused Democrat beat a fossil-fuel friendly Republican with help from Steyer’s own war chest.

“A new political dynamic is emerging,” he wrote at the time. “Climate change is a winner, not a loser,” and is “no longer electoral Kryptonite.”

If Chevron has its way, next week’s primary results will prove otherwise.

California foster youth and children who have lost a parent to COVID can now apply for a trust fund to help them begin their adult lives.

The Hope, Opportunity, Perseverance and Empowerment (HOPE) program, created by the state Legislature in 2022, will invest $3,000 per child in a trust fund that they can access when they are 18. About 56,000 children could benefit from this program, according to a state press release.

“For California’s most vulnerable children, early financial support can help counter the long-term impacts of poverty and instability, and create a foundation for long-term financial security,” said California State Treasurer Fiona Ma, who serves as chair of HOPE. “HOPE is designed to provide that equitable access and make a lasting impact.”

Children who have spent at least 18 months in foster care or have had family reunification services terminated, and children who have lost a parent or primary caregiver to COVID can apply for funds at hopeaccount.ca.gov.

For more information, contact HopeForChildren@treasurer.ca.gov.