The Brief

In December, Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas assigned his members an “urgent” task: Make California cheaper to live in.

“Californians are deeply anxious. They are anxious about our state’s cost of living,” he told his colleagues in the wake of an election where concerns about the economy were top of mind for voters. “We must chart a new path forward and renew the California dream by focusing on affordability.”

Five months later, the state Legislature has little to show for it.

Just last week, Rivas announced four new “select committees” tasked with pitching ideas to lower the cost of housing, fuel, child care and food, but they won’t meet until June, and Rivas did not specify when he expects legislation from the committees. Some of the lawmakers assigned to chair them say they want to develop “practical” solutions but did not articulate what those would be.

Rivas, a Salinas Democrat, has also backed a slate of measures, most of which aim to ease restrictions on housing construction, but few have reached the Assembly floor for a vote.

Similarly, Senate Democrats unveiled just three legislative proposals as their “opening salvo” to affordability last week, focusing on reducing energy costs, increasing housing supplies and boosting job training.

While the Legislature is just starting to zoom in on affordability, prices are rising rapidly as a result of President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariff policies and groceries could get more expensive.

Economic justice advocates argue that Californians need immediate relief. Anya Svanoe, communications director for the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment, said renters are still feeling the pinch.

A customer walks by a display of fresh eggs at a grocery store in the San Anselmo area of Marin County on Sept. 25, 2024. Egg prices surged last year, largely due to avian influenza (HPAI), also known as bird flu.

(

Justin Sullivan

/

Getty Images

)

“Putting together a committee that comes together months from now that won’t even do anything until the following year does not seem to me that [lawmakers] are treating it with real urgency,” she said.

Democratic leaders told CalMatters good policies take time to develop. They noted that lawmakers had to shift their focus earlier this year to Los Angeles wildfire victims and counter Trump’s policies, and it took time to onboard freshman lawmakers.

“I have never been one to simply do something to get clicks or make headlines. I want substance and impact,” Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire said in an interview. “My philosophy is: Do it right, not fast.”

Rivas spokesperson Nick Miller also said the select committees — essentially working groups established to tackle niche policies — will allow lawmakers to gather more public input and drill down on specific issues during the summer recess without feeling swamped by the regular legislative schedule.

Some analysts are skeptical that any proposals could actually make California more affordable, anyway. Garry South, a longtime Democratic strategist, said affordability is a problem “too large for legislative solution,” especially when compounded by Trump’s tariff policies.

“It’s political optics to some degree,” South said. The bills "all sound good on the surface, but I don’t think there’s any predictability that if any of them pass, or all pass, that all of a sudden we are going to be out of the housing crisis in California.”

Tackling the 'biggest cost drivers'

Rivas said that the select committees will tackle the “biggest cost drivers for Californians.”

The committees will focus on four areas: Lowering the cost of child care for babies to 3-year-olds; making food more affordable and enrolling more people in CalFresh, the state’s food stamp program; exploring financing options for affordable housing; and examining the effectiveness of the state’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard, a clean energy incentive program that some argue could raise gas prices.

Assemblymember Lori Wilson, a Northern California Democrat who chairs the Assembly Transportation Committee and will chair the select committee on fuel, said lawmakers have had a packed calendar.

“How could you even fit these types of conversations at the same time we are actively doing committees?” said Wilson, who sits on six committees.

Lawmakers don’t need a new committee to develop solutions, because they are already introducing proposals in the current legislative session, said Mike Gatto, a former Los Angeles Democratic assemblymember who chaired the appropriations committee.

“Every single member of the Legislature has a pretty good understanding of what is causing this affordability problem in the state of California,” he said. “This information is out there.”

Select committees have traditionally been used to “give individual lawmakers who care about an issue … greater portfolio and greater exposure,” Gatto said. But he said they’re rarely effective.

“I don’t think too many veteran Capitol watchers can recall a select committee that produced significant results on an important issue,” he said.

But Miller pointed to last year’s select committee on retail theft, which produced laws to clamp down on organized shoplifting and toughen penalties on property thefts.

Proposals largely focused on housing

Optics or not, state Democrats’ affordability agenda appears clearer than a few months ago.

Led by Rivas, a strong ally of the YIMBY movement, Assembly Democrats are pressing for fewer regulations in exchange for quicker, more abundant new construction they argue would ultimately lower housing costs.

Lawmakers in early April approved a four-bill package to expedite building by streamlining the approval process for new housing and halting most changes to building standards for six years. One proposal would allow renters to take in people at risk of homelessness as long as their landlords agree.

Housing construction in a neighborhood in Elk Grove on July 8, 2022.

(

Rahul Lal

/

CalMatters

)

“These bills will alter the trajectory of the housing crisis,” Rivas said in a statement.

Later that month, Rivas said he supported nine other “affordability” measures on housing, wage theft and broadband. One of them, introduced by Oakland Democrat Buffy Wicks, a major supporter of easing construction restrictions, would exempt most urban housing projects from the California Environmental Quality Act, making it all but impossible for environmentalists to sue to block developments.

Most of the housing proposals Rivas signed off on represent much more technical changes, though, such as making it easier to build farmworker housing, making agencies approve developments more quickly and standardizing the housing project application process.

It’s hard to know if any of those measures will lead to more housing construction, much less if they will make housing cheaper, said Bill Fulton, former director of planning and economic development for the city of San Diego and a fellow at the University of California-Berkeley Terner Center for Housing Innovation.

“In spite of the fact that all those bills have passed (in past years), we have not seen overall housing production increase very much or overall housing affordability go down very much,” Fulton said.

“The Legislature passed lots and lots and lots and lots of laws … without actually doing a careful analysis of what’s working and what’s not, and they continue to pass more laws.”

Fulton said other factors discouraging building in California include the high cost of labor and building materials and high interest rates, which are not addressed by the current raft of housing bills.

Svanoe, who champions tenant protections, said state lawmakers are streamlining housing development while doing little to make rent affordable. She supports Assembly Bill 1157, a progressive proposal to lower the cap on rent increases. Faced with pressure from YIMBY-aligned Democrats, the measure is now delayed until next year.

“There’s no room to give [on] any rent increase at this point,” Svanoe said. “It’d be the difference between someone staying in their home and someone becoming homeless.”

The housing measure included in the Senate Democrats’ affordability package is much more skeptical of new construction. While Sen. Aisha Wahab’s Senate Bill 681 would streamline some development, it would also restrict landlords from charging extra fees and crack down on homeowners association fees.

“We’re reinforcing the state’s housing production goals, but not at the expense of the Californians who are barely hanging on,” Wahab, a Fremont Democrat who chairs the Senate Housing Committee, said in the legislative analysis.

A potential showdown looms between Democrats over housing policy — a clash already underway in the Senate.

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

The Orange County Board of Supervisors “undermined” the public’s trust when they granted themselves a 25% pay increase, according to the latest OC Grand Jury report released on Monday.

Since 2005, supervisors were set to make 80% of a Superior Court judge’s salary. That changed in June, when the board approved a 25% pay hike, increasing their salaries by about $49,000 to at least $244,000.

The pay increase raised eyebrows over the summer, sparking the Grand Jury investigation. A Grand Jury is a panel of citizens who investigate local government and public agencies. Members serve one year and look into several issues during that time.

It came just weeks after former Supervisor Andrew Do was sentenced to five years in federal prison for accepting more than $550,000 in bribes. The county itself is also financially in hot water following the Airport Fire, which has racked up hundreds of millions of dollars in damage claims against the county.

“The timing was especially troubling as the County of Orange (County) has been facing hiring freezes and budget constraints,” the Grand Jury reported. “This decision was not only tone-deaf — it reflected a deeper disconnect from the Board’s duty to serve the public with transparency and fiscal responsibility.”

What does the Grand Jury say? 

The Grand Jury questioned how the item was presented to the public and whether it was purposefully buried within the county budget agenda item.

“The Board added their salary increase into the $10.8 billion 2025-2026 Orange County Annual Budget adoption process. This resulted in a minimal description in the agenda and minimal opportunity for citizen input,” the Grand Jury reported. “Therefore, the Grand Jury investigated: why did they want to conceal their salary increase, was it warranted at this time and who initiated it?”

The board’s vote, the Grand Jury stated, signifies that the board prioritizes personal gain over accountability and public trust.

“Elected officials are entrusted to serve, not to enrich themselves. When this happens, the foundation of representative democracy is undermined,” the Grand Jury said. “The people of Orange County deserve better, and the people must demand it.”

How are officials responding? 

OC Supervisor Katrina Foley — the lone dissenting vote on the raises — said she was not surprised by the Grand Jury’s findings.

“I think most people felt that it was poor form for that to happen at that time, and given our current economic instability due to what's happening at the federal and the state level,” Foley told LAist.

Following the criticism, Supervisors Vicente Sarmiento and Doug Chaffee said they would donate their increased pay to charity.

“I am open to considering the recommendations in the report for changes to the pay ordinance and how future increases are approved, and I have been open to reconsidering the pay increase,” Sarmiento said in a statement.

A county spokesperson and Supervisor Don Wagner declined to comment. Supervisor Doug Chaffee and Janet Nguyen did not respond to LAist’s request for comment.

What’s next? 

The report made a handful of recommendations, including that the board rescind the pay raise and salary changes by next March “to restore institutional trust and demonstrate a genuine commitment to transparency and accountability.”

It also recommends that the board adopt procedures for proposing, reviewing and approving future supervisor salary changes that include public hearings.

The county has 90 days from the release of the report to respond to the Grand Jury, according to a county spokesperson.

The increase of federal immigration sweeps in Southern California this year made one thing clear to street vendors without authorization to be in the U.S. — running a business outside was risky.

In response, L.A. nonprofit Inclusive Action for the City ramped up an existing program that trains street vendors to work in private catering.

“One of the big successes of the year was the growth of our Hire a Vendor program, where our business coaches essentially became brokers for our street vendors and other entrepreneurs so they can get catering jobs,” said Rudy Espinoza, the group’s CEO.

The program was created in 2024 but the group expanded it this year after the increase of immigration sweeps. The group said in its annual report that 34 small businesses were trained for catering this year and more than 350 catering jobs came to those trainees this year.

The training program includes menu design and pricing, electronic sales systems and marketing

(

Courtesy Inclusive Action for the City

)

“Everywhere from the mayor's house to a small backyard party,” Espinoza said.

The group’s effort is part of actions taken by individuals and groups across the region to help people targeted for detention keep sources of income.

That help has included buyouts of daily inventory of fruit and flowers, as well as the awarding of grants to street vendors who lost income because they stayed home.

Advocates said the loss of income through detentions — many carried out through violent means — often affected family members who were U.S. citizens and has created a humanitarian crisis as families have lost the means to pay bills and buy food.

Street vendors in a Hire a Vendor session organized by Inclusive Action for the City.

(

Courtesy Inclusive Action for the City

)

The vendor training program sought to alleviate that.

“Sometimes, challenges force us to think, be creative and think about how to adapt,” Espinoza said. “The Hire a Vendor program is just an example of how some entrepreneurs really dedicated themselves to build out a different line of business for themselves.”

How it works

The Hire a Vendor program is free to people who seek and receive micro-loans from Inclusive Action for the City.

Four of the program’s nine sessions are "office hours" in which a business coach works one-on-one with the business owner.

The trainings cover:

• Catering basics such as delivery, set-up and presentation
• Invoicing and electronic sale systems
• Menu design and pricing
• Marketing through social media

The trained vendors are free to pursue their own catering jobs but also get catering work through a portal created by Inclusive Action for the City.

Espinoza said one full-time employee oversaw the program this year, and he’d like to add another full-time worker to expand the trainings in 2026.

The Trump administration will resume garnishing wages from student loan borrowers in default in early 2026, the U.S. Education Department confirmed to NPR.

The move comes after a years-long pause in wage garnishment due to the pandemic.

"We expect the first notices to be sent to approximately 1,000 defaulted borrowers the week of Jan. 7," a department spokesperson told NPR. The spokesperson said wage-garnishment notices are expected to increase on a monthly basis throughout the year.

A borrower is in default when they have not made loan payments in more than 270 days. Once that happens, the federal government can try to collect on the debt by seizing tax refunds and Social Security benefits and also by ordering an employer to withhold up to 15% of a borrower's pay. Borrowers should receive a 30-day notice from the Education Department before this wage garnishment begins.

Betsy Mayotte, the president and founder of The Institute of Student Loan Advisors, says even though borrowers have expected this, the timing is unfortunate.

"It will coincide with the increase in health care costs for many of these defaulted borrowers," she said, referring to the premium increases for Affordable Care Act health insurance that kick in in 2026. "The two will almost certainly put significant economic strain on low- and middle-income borrowers."

About 5.5 million borrowers currently are in default, according to a recent analysis of the latest federal student loan data published by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a public policy think tank.

Another 3.7 million are more than 270 days late on their payments and 2.7 million are in the early stages of delinquency.

"We've got about 12 million borrowers right now who are either delinquent on their loans or in default," Preston Cooper, who studies student loan policy at AEI, told NPR.

That's more than 1 in 4 federal student loan borrowers.

Cory Turner contributed to this story.

Copyright 2025 NPR