Sponsored message
Logged in as
Audience-funded nonprofit news
radio tower icon laist logo
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
Subscribe
  • Listen Now Playing Listen
  • Listen Now Playing Listen

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • Does criminal justice reform still have momentum?
    A man with light-tone skin wears a blue tie. He has gray hair and a flag with the L.A. County seal is to his left.
    Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón heads to a runoff this fall.

    Topline:

    Three out of four voters did not back George Gascón in the Los Angeles County district attorney’s race in the March primary, but advocates for criminal justice reform say their candidate — and the movement — remain strong

    Why it matters: District Attorney George Gascón has been forced into a November runoff with former federal prosecutor Nathan Hochman, who has promised to reverse the incumbent’s policies. Gascón won 25% of the vote to Hochman’s 16%.

    Although the race for district attorney is a focus for many reformers, many say they are also encouraged by results in other races, including the reelection of elected leaders sympathetic to their cause. Others are more reserved in their analysis, saying the movement to reduce mass incarceration has a long way to go.

    Why now: In a sign that criminal justice reform has become a part of the political conversation in L.A. County, nearly all of Gascón’s challengers gave a nod to the need for reform, including Hochman.

    “I reject blanket policies on both ends of the pendulum swing, those of ‘mass incarceration’ and ‘Gascon’s de-incarceration’ and instead advocate the 'hard middle,” Hochman said in a statement posted on his campaign website.

    What's next: Many more people will go to the polls in the November general election than did in the March primary, which means the electorate will likely be younger and more progressive, according to experts. This may work in Gascón's favor.

    When L.A. County voters went to the polls earlier this month, three out of four chose a candidate other than George Gascón, the sitting district attorney who came to office amid a wave of calls for criminal justice reform. Those primary results have forced the incumbent into a November runoff with former federal prosecutor, Nathan Hochman, who has promised to reverse Gascón's policies.

    Gascón won 25% of the vote to Hochman’s 16%.

    So why do advocates for reform say their candidate — and the movement — remains strong?

    “A bigger margin of victory would have been more comforting,” said Mark-Anthony Clayton-Johnson, co-executive director of Dignity and Power Now. “But I feel good about Gascón’s chances in November.”

    Although the race for district attorney is a focus for many reformers, many told LAist they are also encouraged by results in other races, including the reelection of several elected leaders sympathetic to their cause.

    Others were more reserved in their analysis, saying the movement to reduce mass incarceration has a long way to go — especially in diverting people with mental illness from jail to treatment, a concept often referred to as Care First, Jails Last.

    The backstory: A national outcry following George Floyd's murder

    Gascón was elected L.A. County district attorney in 2020 in the wake of the murder of George Floyd and amid a national outcry over policing and how the justice system works. Gascón defeated incumbent Jackie Lacey by promising to reduce mass incarceration and racial disparities in the justice system.

    On his first day in office, Gascón instituted a wide range of policy changes aimed at reducing criminal penalties and emphasizing rehabilitation at the nation’s largest local prosecutor’s office. Since then, the one-time Los Angeles Police Department assistant chief and San Francisco district attorney has become a national leader in the reform movement.

    Clayton-Johnson of Dignity and Power Now, an L.A.-based grassroots organization that advocates on behalf of incarcerated people, their families, and communities, noted that Gascón faced withering attacks during his first term in office, including two recall attempts fueled in part by Fox News.

    Still, Gascón finished first in March of this year in a crowded field of 11 challengers.

    "The movement continues,” Gascón told LAist on election night. “The issues that got me and others elected around the country continue to be as important today as they were before.”

    What to expect in the November vote

    With the presidential race on the Nov. 8 ballot, history tells us many more people are expected to go to vote than in the primary. An experts say a larger voting pool means will likely means a younger and more progressive electorate.

    That will probably favor Gascón against the more conservative Hochman, who was the Republican nominee for California Attorney General in 2022 but is running as an independent in the non-partisan race for district attorney.

    “Gascón may see an opportunity to paint him as being unacceptably conservative to voters in a deep blue place like Los Angeles,” said Dan Schnur, a professor at UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies who has worked on numerous gubernatorial and presidential campaigns.

    “This is still going to be a steep uphill fight for Gascón,” he said.

    How other progressives fared in the primary

    Elsewhere on the L.A. County ballot, supporters of the criminal justice reform movement had reason to celebrate.

    Deputy public defenders performed well in Superior Court judge races, with one beating an incumbent judge and three others winning spots in November runoffs. Three of the four were part of a progressive slate called The Defenders of Justice seeking to defeat opponents who were prosecutors.

    Reform advocates have said they want to see more judges on the bench who come from defense backgrounds — either public or private — to provide diverse perspectives and balance out years of tough-on-crime thinking that has led to mass incarceration.

    Additionally, L.A. County Supervisor Holly Mitchell handily won reelection in District 2, which includes El Segundo, Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach, Marina Del Rey and other communities.

    “She has been a champion for alternatives to incarceration, a champion for mental health diversion,” Clayton-Johnson said.

    L.A. City Councilmember Nithya Raman secured a second four-year term in office. She has been an advocate for allocating more funding for unarmed non-police responses to people experiencing mental health crises.

    Her win came despite an independent expenditure campaign against Raman by the labor union that represents rank-and-file Los Angeles Police Department officers. In the days before the election, a mailer was sent to voters in the district that featured a picture of her alongside Gascón and the words: “Nithya Raman and George Gascón broke their promise to keep us safe.”

    Why reformers say real change hasn't yet happened

    Although those results are seen as positive by some, criminal justice advocates also warn that there’s still much to do at both the city and county levels to create real change.

    “There’s been this false narrative that Los Angeles and California underwent some massive criminal justice reforms in the past few years,” said Ivette Alé-Ferlito, who is executive director of La Defensa, a femme-led abolitionist group.

    “The type of structural reform that is needed, we’ve barely started to scratch the surface,” she said.

    For example, five years have passed since the county Board of Supervisors promised to close the aging and dangerous Men’s Central Jail in downtown Los Angeles — a key demand of reformers — but the board has yet to approve a plan to do so.

    A new five-year closure plan presented to the board in January calls for creating thousands of community-based beds for people with mental illness to be diverted from jail.

    “We need the board to take really bold action and say — here’s how many beds we are going to fund every year, here’s what a service-based pre-trial system is going to look like,” Clayton-Johnson said.

    Advocates say the city and county need to expand non-emergency unarmed crisis response teams to take police and sheriff’s personnel out of the business of responding to people in mental health crisis. When law enforcement police and sheriff’s deputies respond to such incidents, the situations are more likely to escalate, which can lead to deadly use of force.

    In the city of L.A., the debate over an anti-camping ordinance and the role of police in enforcing it continues. The law allows police to forcibly remove encampments after outreach workers try to find shelter for the people in the camp, but a recent report found it failed to help the city reach in key goals to keep areas clear of encampments or get people housed.

    “It's taken decades to build the system that we currently have so it's going to take decades for us to build an alternative,” said Tinisch Hollins of the reform group Californians for Safety and Justice.

    And that work often begins with community members and organizations instead of elected officials.

    “By no means do progressive DAs represent the heart of the movement to advance criminal justice reform,” Clayton-Johnson said. “Certainly that is coming from communities' pressuring leaders to act.”

    Why the L.A. DA race may be a national throwdown

    Even so, the question of who will be the county’s next district attorney is the main focus for many reformers now.

    The D.A.’s race will likely be a national throw down over criminal justice reform, attracting large amounts of campaign cash from the left and the right, said Jon Gould, who studies prosecutor policies and is dean of the UC Irvine School of Social Ecology.

    “Strap in," he said. "You’re going to see a lot of campaign advertisements between now and November.”

    Police unions including the Los Angeles Police Protective League and the Association of Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs are expected to be among the biggest spenders against Gascón.


    A look at campaign spending in the primary


    The race could be animated by a battle over Proposition 47, which Gascón co-authored. Police unions and Republican state legislators are collecting signatures to place an initiative on the November ballot that would roll back the landmark 2014 voter-approved measure that reduced certain non-violent drug and property crimes from felonies to misdemeanors.

    “We are at an inflection point yet again in 2024,” said Jody Armour, a law professor at the University of Southern California. He explained that the conflict is between those who want to reimagine public safety in ways that have less reliance on law enforcement and those who want more police and longer prison sentences to satisfy “a retributive urge” in the American psyche.

    “There is a pitched battle going on,” he said.

    It’s complicated by the perception that crime is on the rise. Violent crime rose about 3% last year while property crime fell by about the same percent, according to LAPD data.

    And it's not clear how much of that points to the incumbent D.A.

    “There is no good data that suggests” the movement in either direction is tied to Gascón’s policies, Gould said. “It's too early to tell.”

    Why critics say the movement is losing momentum

    The year 2020, when Gascón was elected, was a banner year for criminal justice reform. Voters also approved Measure J, which required at least 10% of locally generated unrestricted revenue be invested into alternatives to incarceration.

    Gascón's critics maintain that his poor showing in this year’s primary is proof the reform movement is losing momentum.

    Deputy District Attorney Eric Siddall, a regular critic of Gascón who ran against him in the primary, said the results in March were a “vote of no confidence” in the incumbent.

    Like Hochman, Siddall has argued for stiffer penalties than those advocated by Gascón.

    But some political experts say Gascon’s showing in the primary doesn’t mean voters are rejecting reform outright.

    “What we may be seeing now is just a slight adjustment rightward,” said Schnur, the Berkeley professor. “While they wanted to see criminal justice reform, they might not have wanted it as aggressively as Gascón has pursued it.”

    In a a sign that criminal justice reform has become a part of the political conversation in L.A. County, nearly all of Gascón’s challengers gave a nod to the need for reform, including Hochman.

    “I reject blanket policies on both ends of the pendulum swing, those of ‘mass incarceration’ and ‘Gascon’s de-incarceration’ and instead advocate the 'hard middle,” Hochman said in a statement posted on his campaign website.

    Clayton-Johnson said the criminal justice reform movement has changed the conversation.

    “I don’t know if there’s ever been a time folks running for the DA’s office explicitly had to talk about criminal justice reform" to be viable, he said.

    “I don’t think criminal justice reform is at all moving backwards,” he continued.

    “I think it's a fight.”

  • Government said he assaulted immigration agent
    Two people stand behind a portable mic stand, one is clad in a suit and tie, the other has lifted their pant leg to reveal an ankle monitor. Behind them, about a dozen people hold up red, black, and white signs that read: "Drop All Charges Against John"
    Jonathan Caravello and their attorney, Knut Johnson, at a press conference following the arraignment. Behind them, CFA members rally in support.

    Topline:

    A Cal State University lecturer charged with assaulting a federal officer with tear gas was acquitted on Thursday.

    What was the case? Jonathan Caravello, a philosophy lecturer at Cal State Channel Islands, was arrested while protesting a raid at a licensed cannabis farm in Ventura County last summer. The federal government said agents were executing a search warrant at the farm, in search of evidence of unlawful employment. Prosecutors said agents deployed tear gas because protesters obstructed traffic on a two-lane road, and contended that Caravello picked up the canister agents deployed and threw it back at them.

    The defense: Caravello's legal team, led by attorney Knut Johnson, underscored that the lecturer did not hurt anyone and shared a video showing federal vehicles making their way across the road. The defense also said Caravello picked up and threw the canister as far as he could—past the agents—to keep protesters safe from harm.

    A Cal State University lecturer charged with assaulting federal officers with tear gas was acquitted on Thursday.

    Jonathan Caravello, a philosophy lecturer at Cal State Channel Islands, was arrested while protesting a raid at a licensed cannabis farm in Ventura County last summer.

    For three days, Caravello’s colleagues, friends, family and students packed the courtroom at the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

    The jury returned a verdict within about two hours, according to Caravello’s attorney, Knut Johnson.

    “He was never trying to hurt anyone and didn't hurt anyone,” Johnson told LAist Thursday after the verdict was rendered. “He knows that trying to hurt people or hurting them does nothing to help the cause he supports.”

    What was the case about?

    The federal government said agents were executing a search warrant at the farm, in search of evidence of unlawful employment. In his opening statement Wednesday, assistant U.S. attorney Roger Hsieh said agents deployed the tear gas because protesters obstructed traffic on a two-lane road. Hsieh said Caravello picked up the canister agents deployed and threw it back at them.

    Caravello's legal team, led by Johnson, underscored that the lecturer did not hurt anyone and shared a video showing federal vehicles making their way across the road. The defense also said Caravaello picked up and threw the canister as far as he could—past the agents—to keep protesters safe from harm.

    The California Faculty Association, which represents CSU faculty, said in a statement Thursday that they welcomed the jury's decision.

    "After a thorough investigation by the court, John was cleared of any wrongdoing," the statement said. "The jury’s decision underscores John’s right to peacefully protest and speak out against the cruelty and inhumanity this administration has shown toward immigrants and other marginalized communities across the country."

    Senior editor for education Ross Brenneman contributed to this story.

  • Sponsored message
  • Grant helps dozens leave side of 110 Freeway
    Two people shake hands. One is a female presenting person dressed in black. The other is a male presenting person wearing a cap.
    L.A. Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez (right) shakes hands with Thomas Stewart, who used to live in an encampment near the 110 Freeway behind them.

    Topline:

    L.A. City Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez announced today that 59 unhoused people who used to live along the 110 Freeway are now in housing.

    How it happened The effort was funded by a $6.3 million grant from the state that paid social workers and health professionals from various agencies to help those living in the encampments with paperwork, healthcare needs, and other hurdles that would normally slow their access to housing.

    What's next: Hernandez’s office said the goal is to house 11 more people with the grant funds.

    Go deeper: Will recent drops in LA homelessness continue?

    On Thursday morning, L.A. Councilmember Eunisse Hernandez stood at Lacy Street Neighborhood Park in the shadow of the 5 and 110 freeway interchange. Just last year, she said, the Lincoln Heights park and the areas near the freeway were filled with unhoused people. But now, thanks to a $6 million state grant awarded last fall, the park is clear and dozens of people are in temporary and permanent housing.

    “Today we’re here to celebrate that 59 of our neighbors, human beings, finally have a roof over their heads,” she said.

    The funds were secured by Hernandez from California’s Encampment Resolution Funds, which targeted a 4-mile stretch of the 110 Freeway.

    A long to-do list before housing is secured

    The grant helped pay health and social workers from public and private agencies and nonprofits, including employees with USC’s California Street Collaborative.

    These workers helped people straighten things out before they moved into housing, like finding IDs, matching housing with disability needs and space for pets.

    That kind of help requires building trust between the worker and the unhoused person, said Caitlin Schwan, director of the California Street Collaborative.

    “And it takes an investment of resources and a lot of coalitions, a lot of partnerships across street medicine, housing providers, service providers,” she said.

    Los Angeles Global Care has been as the primary interim housing provider. It also provides daily meals to those transitioning to housing, help with pets and case management.

    Male presenting person with a bald head. He is wearing a red, white, and blue sweatshirt that says "Dodgers."
    Rigo Vega was unhoused and lived near the 110 Freeway for four years.
    (
    Adolfo Guzman-Lopez
    /
    LAist
    )

    “I used to live right here under the bridge for like, four years,” said Rigo Vega, who attended the announcement at the park.

    Outreach workers, he said, helped him get food and clothes, and the paperwork needed to get into housing last November. Now that’s settled him enough for him to set a goal for himself, “to work, to get a job,” he said.

    Hernandez’s office said the goal is to house 11 more people with the grant funds.

  • Celebrate Songkran at Wat Thai temple
    A life sized statue in traditional Thai clothes stands outside a Thai temple. In front are festive red and blue umbrellas
    Wat Thai temple in North Hollywood hosts one of the biggest Songkran festivals in the U.S.

    Topline:

    Head to the Songkran festival, the Thai New Year, at Wat Thai in North Hollywood, the largest Buddhist temple in L.A. this weekend, Saturday and Sunday. (It's also one of the biggest Songkran festivals in the U.S.) Expect Thai music, Thai dancing, traditional water blessings, the building of sand pagodas and, of course, delicious food.

    What's on offer: The temple's Thai food court is a must-visit for many during regular weekends, when a large collection of food vendors set up stalls around the temple, similar to what you'd see in Bangkok. Expect this and more at the festival. "Smells and tastes are amazing," say happy visitors on social media. (Try the Thai gelato). The temple itself is also beautiful to experience.

    When and where: The temple is at 8225 Coldwater Canyon Ave., North Hollywood. There's additional parking at the Kaiser Permanente in Panorama City with a free shuttle to the festival. The temple is open from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. each day. The opening ceremony starts at 1 p.m. Saturday.

    Topline:

    Head to the festival of Songkran, Thai New Year, at Wat Thai in North Hollywood this weekend, Saturday and Sunday. It's the largest Buddhist temple in L.A. and also one of the biggest Songkran festivals in the U.S. Expect Thai music, Thai dancing, traditional water blessings, the building of sand pagodas and, of course, delicious food.

    What's on offer: The temple's Thai food court is a must-visit for many during regular weekends, when a large collection of food vendors set up stalls around the temple, similar to what you'd see in Bangkok. Expect this and more at the festival. We're told you should try the Thai gelato. The temple itself is also beautiful.

    When and where: The temple is at 8225 Coldwater Canyon Ave., North Hollywood. There's additional parking at the Kaiser Permanente in Panorama City with a free shuttle to the festival. The temple is open from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. each day. The opening ceremony starts at 1 p.m. Saturday.

  • It's a no-brainer for progressive Dems, right? No
    A group of people in a crowd inside a building hold up signs that read "Keep hospitals and ERs open" and "Billionaire tax NOW."
    People supporting California's proposed billionaire tax hold signs at the 2026 California Democratic Party State Convention in San Francisco on Feb. 21, 2026.

    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.

    Read on... for more on the proposed initiative.

    A union-backed proposal to tax California’s billionaires to fund health care has put some progressive lawmakers — and their labor allies — in a quandary.

    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.

    A man with light skin tone, wearing a tucked in white striped button-down shirt, speaks into a microphone while standing on a stage. Signage in the background, partially out of focus, reads "SEIU-UHW."
    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, a man with medium skin tone, wearing a blue suit and tie, speaks with Assemblymember Chris Ward, a man with light skin tone, wearing glasses and a tan suit, as they sit with other people standing in the background.
    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.

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