The Brief

A bill to allow insurance companies to monitor California drivers’ behavior in exchange for potential discounts on their premiums would change the state’s longstanding insurance law, drawing opposition from the Insurance Department as well as consumer and privacy advocates.

Assembly Bill 311 would let insurance companies use telematics — technology installed in vehicles that allows them to transmit information such as location, speed, braking force, swerving and more — when setting rates for drivers who choose to allow themselves to be tracked.

California is the only state in the nation that does not allow insurers to use telematics in setting rates. State law requires insurers to prioritize safety record, miles driven and driving experience as the main factors when they set drivers’ premiums. The bill would let drivers choose to use telematics data to establish their driving records in addition to what their Department of Motor Vehicles records show. Telematics data is collected by smartphone app, systems embedded in vehicles or other connected technology.

Supporters say the legislation would make streets and highways safer by encouraging better driving, while opponents worry about privacy, lack of transparency and possible bias in insurance pricing.

Kellie Montalvo, a parent whose son died after a distracted driver hit him, testified before the Senate Standing Committee on Insurance on June 24. She said her son Benjamin, 21, was riding his bike in 2020 when he was hit by a driver who had been texting while driving. She said the driver had a record of “speeding tickets, prior crashes and this was her fourth hit-and-run.”

“I spend many sleepless nights wondering if she had been stopped at any point prior to that horrific night, would my beautiful son be here today,” Montalvo said, her voice breaking. She urged lawmakers to pass the bill, saying it will save lives.

Other witnesses, also clearly emotional, expressed support for the bill as they carried enlarged photos of the loved ones they’ve lost because of crashes.

The bill’s author, Assemblymember Tina McKinnor, a Democrat from Inglewood, said at the committee hearing that she has lost three friends in vehicle crashes in the past several years. She called telematics a tool to help make streets safer, saying her bill would “incentivize safer, good driving behavior.”

Safer Streets for Everyone, a nonprofit organization advocating for road safety, co-sponsored the legislation. The group’s founder and executive director, Damian Kevitt, is a cyclist who was hit by a car and lost his leg. He testified before the committee, citing a couple of studies that show drivers improved their behavior — including reducing their use of mobile phones — while behind the wheel when financial rewards were involved.

Both studies were backed by the insurance industry. None of the proponents who testified recently before two Senate committees advanced the bill mentioned any independent studies around whether telematics has helped improve safety.

Other supporters of the bill include several road-safety coalitions and bicycle associations from around the state.

Insurance department’s concerns

The state’s insurance department is opposed to the bill, saying the legislation is not compatible with California insurance law, Proposition 103. The law came out of a ballot proposition written by Harvey Rosenfield, the founder of consumer advocacy group Consumer Watchdog, in response to rising car and home insurance premiums almost four decades ago. It was approved by 51% of the state’s voters in 1988 and includes a mandate for insurance companies to give “good drivers” 20% discounts. (Some drivers also receive discounts for low mileage — it’s a form of monitoring that’s OK under Prop. 103 because miles driven is an allowed factor in rate-setting.)

“The bill creates broad liability loopholes, dilutes regulator oversight, and allows insurance companies to shift core regulatory responsibilities to unregulated third-party telematics vendors, among other concerns,” wrote Josephine Figueroa, deputy insurance commissioner and legislative director for the department, to Sen. Steve Padilla, chairperson of the Senate insurance committee, on June 20.

Figueroa wrote that the bill contains vague language about how insurance companies are supposed to do “due diligence” around third-party telematics providers, and using telematics data as part of drivers’ records. She said the insurance department has documented cases “where facially neutral criteria produce disparate impacts, such as the use of census-tract voter registration rates as a proxy for race or citizenship.”

In addition, she said “consumer savings also remain generally unproven and varied.” She cited data from the Maryland Insurance Administration, which showed that in 2023, 31% of that state’s drivers enrolled in their insurers’ telematics program saw their rates drop; 24% actually experienced an increase; and 45% saw no change in their premiums.

Maryland’s research also showed that the telematics systems collected a lot of data that included trip route, days driven, G-force, unsafe following, aggressive turning and many more driver behaviors. Most insurers outsourced the collection of that data to third parties.

California’s Senate insurance committee passed the bill four days after Figueroa’s letter.

The insurance department is meeting with McKinnor’s staff about its concerns, according to Michael Soller, spokesperson for the department. McKinnor and her staff would not answer CalMatters’ questions about the bill.

Some of the insurance department’s concerns about the legislation align with those of Consumer Watchdog.

“In California, auto insurance has to be rated in a driver's actual driving history, not the product of an unverified algorithm or (artificial intelligence) system predicting future driving,” said Carmen Balber, executive director of Consumer Watchdog, in testimony before the Senate insurance committee.

In an interview with CalMatters, Balber wondered why the legislation — a “gut-and-amend,” a bill that has been substantially reworked or rewritten, has missed the introduction deadline and is meant to be fast-tracked, often because it’s controversial — is bypassing the typical hearing process. The new language was submitted to the Senate June 10; Balber said her group had less than a week’s notice that it was coming up for discussion.

That worry, too, is in line with that of the insurance department. Figueroa wrote in her letter to Padilla that she was concerned that the bill, as gutted and amended, contains language the department had reviewed and expressed reservations about several months ago.

The list of the bill’s supporters includes insurance industry groups that have long pushed for telematics use in California. One group in particular, the Personal Insurance Federation of California, has given about $1,000 worth of dinner and travel to McKinnor several times over the past few years, according to CalMatters’ Digital Democracy database. She has also received campaign contributions from the group, as well as other insurance industry groups and employees, totaling $38,000 since 2022, state campaign finance records show.

Padilla, a Democrat from the San Diego area who chairs the Senate insurance committee, was unavailable to respond to CalMatters’ questions about the concerns the insurance department raised in the letter it sent him, spokesperson Cameron Sutherland said. Padilla also is on the Senate Standing Committee on Privacy, Digital Technologies and Consumer Protection, which passed the bill a few days after the insurance committee did and referred it to the appropriations committee.

Padilla has received about the same amount of campaign contributions from the insurance industry since 2022, according to campaign finance records.

The insurance department sent the chairperson of the privacy committee, Sen. Christopher Cabaldon, a Democrat from Napa, a similar letter with its concerns about the bill, according to Soller. Cabaldon's office did not immediately respond to CalMatters' request to talk about the letter.

Cabaldon showed strong support for the bill, saying during his committee hearing that consumers should have the choice to use their driving data how they want and that he believed in the technology’s potential. He has also received campaign contributions from the insurance industry — about $27,000 going back to when he ran for the state Assembly in 2008, campaign finance records show.

The numbers, or lack thereof

California has some of the highest rates for full auto insurance coverage in the nation, according to at least one analysis, by MarketWatch, a news publication with an arm that publishes commerce guides. Another analysis, by insurance-comparison site Insurify, says California’s car insurance rates have been rising for the past couple of years and are projected to increase 1% this year.

Maryland’s research on the effects of telematics is the first by a state insurance regulator, according to Consumer Federation of America, a national association of consumer nonprofit organizations. The group is urging other state regulators to follow suit.

“You can’t trust companies to do this without oversight,” Michael DeLong, research and advocacy associate for the group, told CalMatters. He said companies can collect a lot of information about drivers and use it to make money; an example of that is a recent settlement between the California Justice Department and General Motors, penalizing the automaker for selling driver data associated with its OnStar emergency roadside and navigation service.

DeLong said the group plans to write a letter criticizing AB 311.

At least one other independent survey, by Consumer Reports in 2024, has shown that telematics can help reduce drivers’ premiums. The survey found a median annual savings of $120 — including higher savings for Black and Latino drivers than for white and Asian drivers — but also found that some drivers’ insurance costs rose.

Consumer and privacy advocates, including ACLU California Action, Consumer Federation of California and TechEquity Action, worry that some drivers will feel like they have no choice but to give up their privacy in exchange for possibly saving money. In doing so, they could also open themselves up to bias depending on where they live, work and drive.

The bill “would authorize an opaque surveillance pricing infrastructure for a product Californians are legally required to purchase,” Becca Cramer, speaking for Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, told both the Senate insurance committee and privacy committee. “Californians have a constitutional right to privacy and not have to choose between exercising that right and affording a mandatory product.”

Cramer also cited the Consumer Reports survey and said telematics companies score drivers based on “factors that correlate strongly with race and income."

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

Los Angeles County will begin sending mail-in ballots starting this Thursday ahead of the Nov. 3 elections. Counties across the state have until next Monday, Oct. 5, to begin mailing out ballots.

In the June primary, nearly 82% of the total ballots cast in L.A. County were through vote-by-mail ballots.

State and local officials are encouraging people to vote early.

When can I turn in my ballot?

L.A. County elections officials say voters can turn in their ballots by mail as soon as they receive them. No postage is necessary.

They can also turn them in starting this week at official dropboxes across the county, which are often found at parks, community centers or libraries.

Voters can also turn them in or vote in person at the county’s Vote Centers, which L.A. County officials say will start to open on Oct. 24. Officials say all Vote Centers will be open by Halloween.

What about in Orange County?

Orange County officials say U.S. Postal Service officials are scheduled to pick up about 1.9 million ballots from the county elections office on Saturday and start delivering them on Monday, Oct. 5.

The Trump administration has tried to restrict mail-in ballots. Will my ballot be affected?

The California Secretary of State’s office says nothing has currently changed. The U.S. Supreme Court earlier this month issued an injunction on President Trump’s executive order requiring states to turn in lists of voters and ordering the USPS to send mail-in ballots to the people on the approved lists.

"Voters will be able to cast their ballots without uncertainty, without hesitation, and without fear that their voices will be questioned or their ballots rejected," said Secretary of State Shirley Weber.

Los Angeles County is reporting the highest number of rabid bats on record, a to-date total of 69, officials said.

This year’s rabid bat count has already matched 2025’s total, according to the L.A. County Department of Public Health, which released the count Monday, marking World Rabies Day.

Health officials emphasized that rabid bats have been found all over the county "from suburban areas such as the San Fernando Valley to urban areas like downtown Los Angeles, in office buildings, parks, schools, businesses, and residential backyards."

That said, a large share of rabid bats — 68% of the 69 found so far — were in the Santa Clarita Valley, and they were mainly canyon bats, which are common in California.

When to be on high alert

Officials warned that a third of human encounters with rabid bats happened indoors, where the risk of exposure to the virus is higher.

Bat bites are small and can be hard to detect. Rabies can also be spread through scratches or other transfers of saliva.

“If you find a bat indoors or think you may have had contact with one, contact your medical provider or Public Health right away,” Dr. Muntu Davis, a Los Angeles County Health officer, said in a statement. “And remember, never touch a bat or any wild animals. Immediately report any bat found indoors, or outdoors if it appears sick, active during the day, unable to fly, or dead, to your local animal control.”

Who to call

Veterinary Public Health

Phone: 213-288-7060
Email: vet@ph.lacounty.gov
Website: publichealth.lacounty.gov/vet

*Call 211 to find your local animal control

What to know about rabies

Rabies in humans is treatable with a series of vaccines. Rabies is always fatal in animals, the county said in a release, so vaccinate your pets.

Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a law Sunday that tightens building rules for sites that store explosive chemicals, responding to an Orange County chemical incident that forced thousands of residents to evacuate Memorial Day weekend.

The law also adds the chemical methyl methacrylate to a state program that aims to prevent chemical disasters.

In May, CalMatters reported that California’s toughest accidental-release prevention rules do not cover the chemical in the tank at GKN Aerospace, a company that makes cockpits and windshields in Garden Grove. Weeks later Democratic state Sen. Tom Umberg of Santa Ana amended an existing bill with language that addressed that gap. Assembly committee and floor analyses noted CalMatters’ reporting. 

Had the chemical exploded, it “would have been perhaps the greatest catastrophe, certainly in the last several decades in California,” Umberg said at a June Assembly hearing.

Umberg’s original proposal would have set stronger standards for more types of explosive chemicals, but legislators narrowed it significantly in last-minute negotiations.

The final law bars building new facilities near homes and schools and requires backup cooling systems. It also strips an exemption from environmental review that facilities storing methyl methacrylate previously qualified for.

Garden Grove advocates call the bill a good step, but say it offers the community little immediate recourse, especially with GKN Aerospace planning to reopen by the end of September.

The law’s siting requirements apply to new facilities, not to existing ones like GKN’s Garden Grove plant.

Mai Do, research and policy manager for the Orange County advocacy group Harbor Institute for Immigrant and Economic Justice, said she hopes the state will do more to address the threat of toxic chemicals at existing facilities.

“This is a much larger fight than just what's happened in Garden Grove,” Do said. “What we see in terms of the Lineage fire and other industrial crises is that this is a problem that is affecting a lot of different communities”

In an interview with CalMatters, Umberg said the bill reflected a balancing act. “This is a net benefit for the state, a net benefit for the community,” he said.

Stronger rules for new facilities, not existing ones

Over Memorial Day weekend, residents learned of a problem with a tank storing methyl methacrylate at the GKN Aerospace facility. A crack in the tank released pressure and, along with efforts by emergency responders, averted disaster, but questions remained about what went wrong.

CalMatters reported in May that methyl methacrylate and other chemicals that could explode under certain conditions falls outside the California Accidental Release Program, which requires facilities to maintain detailed plans for preventing or responding to chemical leaks or explosions.

Rachel Tochterman, a spokesperson for Sen. Umberg, said the senator took note and initially proposed incorporating a broader category of reactive chemicals into the program.

But industry groups opposed the plan, arguing it was too broad without clearer evidence.

Dawn Koepke, a lobbyist for the California Manufacturers and Technology Association and the California Council for Environmental and Economic Balance, said she does not believe a regulatory gap exists that would justify incorporating more chemicals into the state’s accidental release regimen.

Facilities storing toxic chemicals are already heavily regulated under other federal and state laws, she said, including a requirement for plans to protect people from chemical releases.

Koepke said she worried that "jumping to conclusions and over-regulating" could affect "a wider array of facilities."

Tim Shestek, a lobbyist representing the American Chemistry Council and other groups, said in an email that Umberg’s original proposal would have affected “far more facilities, substances and sectors than were in the original scope.”

After amendments on the next-to-last day of the legislative session, nine industry groups stopped lobbying against the bill.

Most provisions of the law only apply to methyl methacrylate — the chemical involved in the Garden Grove incident. The bill adds it to the state’s accidental release program, requires facilities to maintain prevention and emergency-response plans, and closes the environmental-review exemption for new sites where the chemical is present.

Scrapped from the bill: a requirement to map reactive-chemical sites in CalEnviroScreen, a state program that identifies polluted communities.

GKN Aerospace plans to reopen 

Steve Carlin, senior vice president for GKN Aerospace programs, said the company has been working with regulators and independent experts “to safely reset the remainder of the facility with the appropriate oversight” work that has included inspections, upgrades to safety equipment, and additional monitoring. The company plans to reopen in the next few days.

The company also announced an additional $100 million program to pay residents and businesses that lost money during evacuations.

Lisa Fu, director of the California Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative, a worker-safety group, wants California to regulate hazardous chemicals more broadly.

“It's just unfortunate that it's a piecemeal thing,” said Lisa Fu, director of the California Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative. “Is it worth it to go piece by piece in terms of trying to ban certain chemicals? It makes the work harder for us, and you can see who's benefiting and who's not.”

Newsom also signed a pair of bills in response to the Lineage fire, a June cold storage fire in Los Angeles. The fire briefly prompted a shelter-in-place order over fears that toxic anhydrous ammonia had been released into the air.

The new laws raise the fines agencies can levy on companies that endanger health and safety. They also bar building permits for cold storage facilities that lack contingency funds or insurance to help communities in emergencies.

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

California is now the second state to recognize the two main Muslim holidays as state holidays.

Eid ul Fitr is the festival marking the end of the holy month of Ramadan, and Eid ul Adha is the festival honoring Abraham or Ibrahim’s willingness to sacrifice his son as a mark of his devotion to God. They join a state holiday list that also includes Lunar New Year and Diwali.

Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the change into law Monday. Washington first recognized the holidays in 2025.

Oussama Mokeddem, legislative and government affairs director at the California chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, told LAist the signing day is  “an exciting day for the California Muslim community and a big day for the American Muslim community at large.”

Muslims follow the lunar calendar, so the dates of the two festivals vary each year. Next year, Eid ul Fitr will likely fall on March 10 and Eid ul Adha on May 17.

Why it's important to Californians

The holiday recognition comes at a time when the community is facing “unwarranted and unjustified criticism,” Mokeddem said, which he cited as a reason for a May 2026 attack at the Islamic Center of San Diego. A recent Pew study also found that 42% of Americans believe Muslim Americans have a negative impact on the country.

Adam Khaja, an 11th grader at Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District, said the holiday recognition signals that  "you don't have to give up an important part of your identity to fully participate in Californian society."

" For a long time, immigrant and minority communities have sometimes felt pressure to leave parts of their identity at home in order to fit into American educational or industrial institutions," he said.

What does the holiday recognition mean?

California is home to more than 1 million Muslims, and with this law, state employees can use existing paid time off to celebrate the two holidays.

And for students in K-12 public schools, Mokeddem said the law does not mandate statewide time off, but local school districts can declare a district-wide day off if enough community members bring it up as a need.

He added that students can also cite state law when they are absent from school to celebrate the holiday.

Khaja said he will be advocating for his school district to give a district-wide day off.

"Eid has always been a huge part of our lives, but I think that the school calendar and district policies haven't always reflected that," he said.

He hopes his students will not be put in a situation now "to choose between going to school or fully participating in one of the most important days of their faith."

Muslim Women Professionals, a nonprofit, has templates on how to advocate for time off to celebrate Eid ul Fitr and Eid ul Adha.