The Brief

California will have to build public charging stations at an unprecedented — and some experts say unrealistic — pace to meet the needs of the 7 million electric cars expected on its roads in less than seven years.

The sheer scale of the buildout has alarmed many experts and lawmakers, who fear that the state won’t be prepared as Californians purchase more electric cars.

A million public chargers are needed in California by the end of 2030, according to the state’s projections — almost 10 times more than the number available to drivers in December. To meet that target, 129,000 new stations — more than seven times the current pace — must be built every year for the next seven years. Then the pace would have to accelerate again to reach a target of 2.1 million chargers in 2035.

A robust network of public chargers — akin to the state’s more than 8,000 gas stations — is essential to ensure that drivers will have the confidence to purchase electric vehicles over the next several years.

“It is very unlikely that we will hit our goals, and to be completely frank, the EV goals are a noble aspiration, but unrealistic,” said Stanford professor Bruce Cain, who co-authored a policy briefing detailing California’s electric vehicle charging problems. “This is a wakeup call that we address potential institutional and policy obstacles more seriously before we commit blindly.”

Under California’s landmark electric car mandate, a pillar of Gov. Gavin Newsom’s climate change agenda, 68% of all new 2030 model cars sold in the state must be zero emissions, increasing to 100% for 2035, when 15 million electric cars are expected in California.

“We’re going to look really silly if we are telling people that they can only buy electric vehicles, and we don’t have the charging infrastructure to support that,” said Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel, a Democrat from Encino who introduced a package of unsuccessful bills last year aimed at expanding access to car chargers.

“We are way behind where we need to be,” Gabriel told CalMatters.

Big obstacles stand in the way of amping up the pace of new charging stations in public places. California will need billions of dollars in state, federal and private investments, streamlined city and county permitting processes, major power grid upgrades and accelerated efforts by utilities to connect chargers to the grid.

State officials also are tasked with ensuring that charging stations are available statewide, in rural and less-affluent areas where private companies are reluctant to invest, and that they are reliable and functioning whenever drivers pull up.

In Pacific Gas & Electric’s vast service area, home to 40% of all Californians, electric car purchases are moving twice as fast as the buildout of charging stations, said Lydia Krefta, the utility’s director of clean energy transportation. Californians now own more than 1.5 million battery-powered cars.

Patty Monahan, who’s on the Energy Commission, the state agency responsible for funding and guiding the ramp-up, told CalMatters that she is confident that California can build the chargers its residents need in time.

The agency’s estimate of the current chargers is likely an undercount, she said. In addition, fast-charging stations could play a bigger role than initially projected, meaning hundreds of thousands of fewer chargers might be needed. Also, as the ranges and charging speeds on cars improve, there may be less demand for public chargers.

“California has a history of defying the odds,” Monahan said. “We have a history of advancing clean cars, clean energy, writ-large. We have naysayers left and right saying you can’t do it, and then we do it.”

Barriers to private investments: an uncertain marke

On a September day last year, Monahan spoke behind a podium in the parking lot of a Bay Area grocery store. A row of newly constructed car chargers rose behind her.

“Let’s celebrate for a moment,” she said.

California had met its goal of 10,000 fast electric chargers statewide — two years ahead of a target set in 2018.

California Energy Commissioner Patty Monahan speaks during the launch of an EVgo fast charging station in Union City on Sept. 25, 2023.

(

Loren Elliott

/

CalMatters

)

Fast chargers like the new ones at the grocery store are increasingly seen as critical to meeting the needs of drivers. They can power a car to 80% in 20 minutes to an hour, while the typical charger in use today, a slower Level 2, takes from four to 10 hours.

But installing and operating fast chargers is an expensive business — one that doesn’t easily turn a profit.

Nationwide each fast charger can cost up to $117,000, according to a 2023 study. And in California, it could be even more — between $122,000 and $440,000 each, according to a separate study, although the Energy Commission said the range was $110,000 to $125,000 for one of its programs.

Most of America’s publicly traded charger companies have been forced to seek more financing, lay off workers and slow their network build outs, analysts said. EVgo, for instance, has seen its share price crater, as has ChargePoint, which specializes in selling the slower, Level 2 hardware.

California stands apart from other states — it has by far the most chargers and electric car sales, and more incentives and policies encouraging them.

Tesla, America’s top-selling electric car manufacturer, dominates fast-charging in both California and the U.S. — but the company didn’t get into the business to sell charges to drivers; it got into the charger business to sell its electric cars. Initially Tesla Superchargers were exclusive to its drivers, but starting this year other EV drivers can use them after Tesla provided ports to Ford and other automakers.

Tesla’s manufacturing prowess, supply chain dominance and decade-plus of experience with fast chargers have given it an edge over competitors — a coterie of unprofitable, publicly traded startups, as well as private companies that often benefit from public subsidies, according to analysts.

“All the automakers joined forces with their biggest competitor,” said Loren McDonald, chief executive of the consulting firm EVAdoption. “If that doesn’t tell you how bad fast-charging networks and infrastructure were, I don’t know what else does.”

Tesla vehicles charge at a Supercharger lot in Kettleman City on June 23, 2024.

(

Larry Valenzuela

/

CalMatters/CatchLight Local

)

Now Tesla is showing uncertainty about the future of its charging business amid slumping car sales, and eliminated nearly its entire 500-member Supercharger team in April. Then chief executive Elon Musk said in May that he would spend $500 million to expand the network and hired back some fired workers.

In California, Electrify America, a privately held company, was created by Volkswagen as a settlement for cheating on emissions tests for its gas-powered cars. The company is spending $800 million on California chargers, building a robust network of 260 stations, with more than half in low-income communities, including the state’s worst charging desert, Imperial County.

The problem is Electrify America was ranked dead last in a consumer survey last year, and its chargers have been plagued by reliability problems and customer complaints. The California Air Resources Board in January directed Electrify America to “strive to achieve charger reliability consistent with the state of the industry.” A company spokesperson said the dissatisfaction showed “an industry in its growth trajectory.” There are signs of improvement, based on consumer data from the first three months of this year.

Startups continue to jump into the charging business, with the number of companies offering fast chargers growing from 14 in 2020 to 41 in 2024, EVAdoption said. Seven carmakers formed a $1 billion venture to build a 30,000-charger network in North America. And gas stations such as Circle K are offering more charging because electric car customers spend more time shopping while waiting for their rides to juice up.

But the realization that charging is a costly business has set in on Wall Street, and that doesn’t seem likely to change anytime soon. “Can public EV fast-charging stations be profitable in the United States?” the consultancy McKinsey & Company asked.

“The fervor, the excitement from the investor base, has definitely dwindled quite a bit, given the prospects that EV adoption in the U.S. is going to be slower, revenue growth is really slower, the path to profitability is going to be slower, and they might need more capital than everyone originally expected,” said Christopher Dendrinos, a financial analyst who covers electric car charging companies for the investment bank RBC Capital Markets.

The stakes are high for California when it comes to encouraging investments in expensive fast chargers: If 63,000 additional ones were built, California might need 402,000 fewer slower Level 2 chargers in 2030, according to an alternative forecast by the Energy Commission.

Billions of public dollars: Will it be enough?

Nationwide $53 billion to $127 billion in private investments and public funding is needed by 2030 to build chargers for about 33 million electric cars, according to a federal estimate. Of that, about half would be for public chargers.

Congress and the Biden administration have set aside $5 billion for a national network of fast chargers. So far only 33 in eight locations have been built, but more than 14,000 others are in the works, according to the Federal Highway Administration. California’s share of the federal money totals $384 million; about 500 fast chargers will be built with an initial $40.5 million, said Energy Commission spokesperson Lindsay Buckley.

In addition, the state has spent $584 million to build more than 33,000 electric car chargers through its Clean Transportation Program, funded by fees drivers pay when they register cars. The Legislature extended that program for an additional decade last year.

Newsom has committed to spending $1 billion through 2028 on chargers with his “California Climate Commitment,” Buckley said. But this year Newsom and the Legislature trimmed $167 million from the charger budget as the state faces a record deficit. A lobbyist for the Electric Vehicle Charging Association said “the state pullback sends a very challenging message” to the industry.

California’s commitment to charger funding is “solid,” despite the cuts, Buckley said. They have not yet estimated the total investment needed in California to meet the targets.

But Ted Lamm, a UC Berkeley Law researcher who studies electric car infrastructure, said the magnitude of building what California needs in coming years likely dwarfs the public funding available.

State and federal programs will “only fund a fraction,” and the state needs to spend that money on lower-income communities, he said.

Another possible funding source is California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard, which is expected to be revised in November. The program requires carbon-intensive fuel companies to pay for cleaner-burning transportation. Utilities get credits and use that money to pay for chargers, rebates to car buyers and grid improvements, said Laura Renger, executive director of the California Electric Transportation Coalition, which represents utilities.

“I think with that, we would have enough money,” Renger said. She said the program’s overhaul could help utilities invest “billions” in chargers and other electric car programs over the next two decades.

Backlogged local permits and grid delays 

One of the biggest barriers to more chargers isn’t money. It’s that cities and counties are slow to approve plans for the vast number of stations needed.

State officials only have so much political power to compel local jurisdictions to do what they want — a reality made abundantly clear by the housing crisis, for instance. California relies on grants and persuasion to accomplish its goals, and the slow buildout of chargers shows how those strategies can fall short, said Stanford’s Cain.

“The locals cannot be compelled by regulatory agencies to make land and resources available for what the state wants to achieve,” Cain said.

The same obstacles have marked the state’s broader effort to electrify California and switch to clean energy. Local opposition and environmental reviews sometimes hold up large solar projects and transmission projects for years.

California has created a “culture of regulation that emphasizes the need to be extra careful and extra perfect, but this takes an incredible amount of time,” Steve Bohlen, senior director of government affairs at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, said last month at the inaugural hearing of the state Assembly’s Select Committee on Permitting Reform.

“We’re moving into a period of rapid change, and so perfect can’t be the enemy of the good.”

Workers install a transformer to power electric car chargers in Calexico

(

Adriana Heldiz

/

CalMatters

)

Chargers aren’t as complicated as large-scale solar or offshore wind projects. But most chargers installed in public spaces do need a land-use or encroachment permit, among other approvals. California has passed laws requiring local jurisdictions to streamline permits for chargers. What’s more, the Governor’s Office of Business Development now grades cities and counties using a scorecard and maintains a map displaying who has, or hasn’t, made life easier for car charger builders. But these strategies only go so far.

“It doesn’t matter how many requirements you put on (local governments),” Lamm said. “If they just don’t have the time in the day to do it … it’s going to sit in the backlog, because that’s how it works.”

The delays have consequences. Getting a station permitted in California, on average, takes 26% longer than the national average, Electrify America reported. Designing and constructing a station in California can cost on average 37% more than in other states because of delays in permitting and grid connections. A utility on average takes 17 weeks after work is completed to connect chargers to the grid, Electric America said.

Powering large charging projects often requires grid upgrades, which can take a year or more for approval, said Chanel Parson, a director at Southern California Edison. Supply chain issues also make getting the right equipment a challenge.

Edison, which has a 10-year plan to meet expected demand, has asked the utilities commission for approval to upgrade the grid where it anticipates high charging demand.

“Every EV charging infrastructure project is a major construction project,” Parson said. “There are a number of variables that influence how long it takes to complete the project.”

Impatient with broken chargers, bad service

Inspired to help the nation reduce its dependence on fossil fuels, Zach Schiff-Abrams of Los Angeles bought a Genesis GV60. As a renter, he has relied on public charging, primarily using Electrify America stations — and that’s been his biggest problem about owning an electric car.

Charging speeds have been inconsistent, he said, with half-hour sessions providing only a 15 to 30% charge, and he often encounters broken chargers.

“I believe in electrical, so I’m really actually trying to be a responsible consumer,” Schiff-Abrams said. “I want to report them when they’re down, but the customer service is horrible.”

For years, the reliability of charging networks has been a well-documented problem. Only 73% of fast chargers in the San Francisco Bay Area were functional in a 2022 study. The growth of the EV market has put increasing strain on public charging stations, a consumer survey found.

In January, the California Air Resources Board approved a final $200 million spending plan for Electrify America — but not before board chair Liane Randolph scolded its CEO.

Randolph — arguably one of America’s top climate regulators — told CEO Robert Barrosa about an exchange she had with his company’s customer service line after finding a broken charger at a station along Interstate-5.

“It didn’t work,” Randolph said during the board meeting. “Called the customer service line, waited like 10-ish minutes. …(The charger) was showing operable on the app and the guy goes, ‘oh, my data is showing me that it has not had a successful charge in three days.’”

“These issues are not easy,” Barrosa responded. “Our head is not in the sand,” he told board members earlier. “We are listening to customers.”

But Randolph, addressing journalists at a conference in Philadelphia, pushed back against the idea that because the transition to electric vehicles is happening gradually that it’s a failure. Many people will rely on charging at home or work, and batteries are becoming more efficient.

“The infrastructure is continuing to be rolled out at a rapid pace,” Randolph said. “It doesn’t all have to be perfect instantly. It’s a process. And it’s a process that’s continuing to move.”

Data journalists Erica Yee and Arfa Momin contributed to this report.

Non-tenure-track faculty at USC have voted to unionize after more than a year of opposition from the university.

“ I think it just goes to show that the vast majority of faculty on campus who are non-tenured or non-tenure track are in support of making positive change towards their working conditions,” said Michael Bodie, an associate professor of practice of cinematic arts.

The unit is made up of more than 2,500 educators from various schools across USC, and first filed a petition for an election to unionize in December 2024.

Faculty have said a union is necessary to address “stagnant salaries, increasing workloads, vanishing benefits, threats to job security, and a lack of transparency in administrative policies.”

Bodie said despite his position being full-time, he has taken on side gigs to help pay his bills.

“We just want to be able to keep a roof over our heads, and we want to be able to pay for gas, and we want to be able to feed our families. It's that simple, and right now people aren't feeling that,” he said.

How has USC responded to the faculty union movement?

USC challenged the unionization proposal, saying the faculty that made up the proposed unit were “managerial” because of the university’s shared governance structure.

In March, the National Labor Relations Board disagreed, and allowed the vote to move forward. But a day before the ballot count this week, USC again challenged the effort, asking for a review of that decision.

The voting period for the ballots was also extended by several weeks because the university had given the NLRB incomplete addresses for faculty members, according to the union. USC did not respond to a request for comment.

When CBS fired Scott Pelley on Tuesday night, the new 60 Minutes executive producer, Nick Bilton, told Pelley it was for insubordination at a staff meeting the day before.

The veteran correspondent argues he was defending the DNA of 60 Minutes and the integrity of its journalism.

The battle royale over the network's most prestigious and profitable news program is part of a broader fight over the direction of CBS News.

And given CBS's acquisition by a billionaire family whose business interests have become intertwined with the political interests of President Trump, it reflects a larger war over control of the media in the current moment.

That father and son, Larry and David Ellison, bought CBS' parent company, Paramount, last summer. In January, they became co-owners of TikTok's U.S. operations. Now they're seeking approval from Trump's regulators to buy Warner Bros. Discovery, the parent company of CNN.

A glamorous show shorn, for now, of most its stars

CBS fired Cecilia Vega, a correspondent, and Tanya Simon, the executive producer, from "60 Minutes" last week. They are shown in this photo at the 2026 White House Correspondents' Association Dinner on April 25, 2026 in Washington, D.C.

(

Kristina Bumphrey/Variety via Getty Images

/

Variety

)

But the specifics of this individual episode matter — for 60 Minutes, CBS, its audience of millions, and even the news business itself.

The program has been the most glamorous post in broadcast news. The correspondents are the stars of the show. And now, there are just three of them.

Anderson Cooper left last month, concerned over the direction of the network's coverage. Last week was a virtual bloodbath: correspondents Cecilia Vega and Sharyn Alfonsi were fired. So were a producer and two show executives — including Tanya Simon, a longtime staffer who had stepped up as executive producer when her predecessor resigned in protest before the Ellisons' takeover.

With Pelley's ouster, only correspondents Lesley Stahl, Bill Whitaker, and Jon Wertheim remain. Now they are considering whether to resign, according to two associates with knowledge.

Their brand-new boss, Bilton, was previously a tech reporter for The New York Times and an investigative reporter for Vanity Fair. He executive-produced a documentary for Netflix about a couple accused of laundering Bitcoin and has been a producer on several other films.

Notably, he has no experience in television news.

Neither does Bari Weiss, whom David Ellison installed as the network's editor in chief last October. The Ellisons also bought her center-right views-and-news site, The Free Press.

She has maintained that the network of Walter Cronkite needs a makeover for the digital moment. She has also contended for years that CBS, along with the rest of mainstream media, is too reflexively anti-Trump, anti-Israel, and too woke.

A rejection of CBS News executives' overtures

The new executive producer of "60 Minutes," Nick Bilton, has been a tech journalist and documentary filmmaker, but lacks experience in broadcast news.

(

Matt Winkelmeyer

/

Getty Images

)

Bilton attempted to set a conciliatory tone at Monday's meeting — his first with the show. Pelley, a formidable veteran correspondent and former CBS Evening News anchor, wasn't having it.

Pelley called Bilton unwelcome and unqualified. And Pelley said that Weiss was attempting to "murder" the program.

In firing Pelley on Tuesday, Bilton said the journalist had hijacked the meeting and rejected overtures to work constructively through their differences. (NPR obtained a copy of the firing notice.) Bilton wrote that Pelley's "antipathy to the future of the show came through loud and clear."

In his own statement late Tuesday evening, shared with NPR, Pelly accused CBS's new news leadership of killing 60 Minutes' DNA and pushing him "to inject falsehoods and bias into a politically sensitive story" and "to include assertions that are unverified."

The accusations, to which CBS has not yet responded, echo those made by Alfonsi and Vega, the two correspondents fired last week.

Earlier this year, Alfonsi publicly complained after Weiss held one of her stories at the last minute, and kept it frozen for weeks, demanding an on-camera interview with a Trump White House official that never played out. It ran, unchanged from the intended version, with additional statements from the administration tacked on to the end.

After being fired, Vega said in a statement obtained by NPR that her team had "experienced efforts to insert political bias into our stories."

"Let's call this what it is: censorship, both censorship and self-driven" Vega continued. "It is dangerous for the show and dangerous for democracy."

Weiss previously rejected Alfonsi's and Vega's allegations. (CBS said Vega's claims, for example, were "not based in reality" while expressing appreciation for her work.)

Weiss and Bilton say digital threat requires a 60 Minutes overhaul now

In a meeting this morning, Weiss said that Pelley chose his own path — that is, to be fired rather than to find a way to work through his concerns, according to attendees. The network and Weiss have not yet publicly addressed Pelley's accusations of interference. 

Bilton and Weiss say they respect the show's traditions, its accomplishments and its legacy of enterprise reporting, extended interviews and visual storytelling. It rose in the ratings 9% over the past season under Simon.

The two news leaders say, however, 60 Minutes needs to be overhauled before it becomes increasingly irrelevant in the era of streamers and other sources of news, information and entertainment in the digital age.

Interviews with 12 current and former CBS News staffers, from producers to executives, suggest great reservations and suspicions remain about Weiss' judgment and her ability to handle the prominent and even famous journalists on whom her division relies.

Weiss had initially sought to reinvent the CBS Evening News, dropping a two-anchor format that had sagged in the ratings. Cooper turned down Weiss' overtures to anchor it and left the network altogether, concerned about her approach, according to associates. (They spoke on condition of anonymity because Cooper has not chosen to speak publicly on the matter.)

David Ellison became chairman and CEO of CBS' parent company, Paramount, after buying it last year.

(

Noam Galai/Getty Images for Paramount

/

Getty Images North America

)

The ratings have continued to sag under new anchor Tony Dokoupil. And some CBS journalists, including producers who have left the Evening News, have publicly accused Weiss of making editorial decisions driven by politics. She has rejected those claims.

The decision to take on overhauling two key shows — one listing, one highly profitable, both high profile — carries significant risks for Weiss and the network, even apart from other considerations.

But the Ellisons' presence cannot be ignored.

When Shari Redstone was negotiating the sale of CBS's parent company, Paramount, to the Ellisons' Skydance Media last year, the network announced the end of Stephen Colbert's late night show. He had been one of the president's most biting and acerbic critics.

David Ellison also made a series of concessions directly to Trump's chief broadcast regulator, Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr, gutting CBS's diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives and appointing a conservative ombudsman to field complaints of bias against its news reporting.

Carr and other regulators approved the Paramount deal last summer.

The accommodations echo those made by other media titans.

Amazon and Blue Origin founder Jeff Bezos remade the editorial pages of the Washington Post, which he owns, into a far more hospitable zone for Trump at the outset of his second term. So did Los Angeles Times owner Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, a noted medical device inventor. Amazon and Blue Origin have multi-billion dollar contracts with the federal government. Soon-Shiong's medical research firm routinely has patent applications up for review with federal regulators. One was approved Tuesday.

The Ellisons are hoping to win approval from federal regulators next month for their purchase of Warner Bros. Discovery in a deal valued at more than $110 billion. It would include Warner Bros. Studio, HBO and CNN, among other properties.

As Weiss routs CBS News' old guard, the question of what role she might play at CNN — and what changes that portends at CBS — hangs over journalists at the two networks. The fate of 60 Minutes serves as a high-stakes case study for both.

Copyright 2026 NPR

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

When he thinks back to June 2025, Melchor Moreno remembers the empty streets outside of his restaurant. 

Neighboring businesses closed early or sometimes wouldn’t open at all. One weekday, he made just $500, hundreds short of what he needed to cover his overhead. 

Moreno owns and operates La Chispa de Oro, a traditional Mexican restaurant on Cesar E. Chavez Avenue that’s been a Boyle Heights staple for more than 30 years. When Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations disrupted his and other Eastsiders’ businesses last summer, survey data collected by Boyle Heights Beat showed a sharp drop in sales; Moreno marked losses at around $7,000 per month that summer. But even when the raids slowed, the business never bounced back, Moreno said. 

“People still have it in the back of their mind that ICE may come at any time or any minute and streets are not back to normal like they should be,” Moreno said. “You can see that businesses are not the same, especially for restaurants. Even a year later.”

The economic fallout of the increased immigration enforcement over the last year has hit independently owned restaurants and retail businesses hardest — especially those in communities with Latino immigrants, Spanish speakers and noncitizen workers, according to the L.A. County Economic Development Corporation, or LAEDC, the nonprofit that promotes and studies the region’s economy. 

Street vendors, day laborers, and sellers at popular clothing districts have been forced to adapt to a new cycle: an intense and unexpected immigration operation, then an economic lull as potential customers stay home out of fear. Even just a rumor of ICE activity can start the cycle over again. Business owners selling skateboards, records and supplements have noticed fewer people walking through their doors. And with many businesses still financially recovering from the COVID pandemic or wildfire impacts — and now grappling with tariffs and increased fuel costs — the economic chill that resulted from the raids could alter industries across L.A. for years. 

“Economists love to pretend like they have a crystal ball,” said Shannon Sedgwick, vice president of research at LAEDC, “but I think one of the most damaging things to our economy related to any kind of federal policy shift that has been taking place lately is the degree of uncertainty that surrounds it all.”

A ‘climate of fear’ and depressed economic activity

Soon after the raids began, the L.A. County Board of Supervisors asked researchers with LAEDC to find out the economic impacts of the raids and the weeklong curfew that followed citywide protests. 

It was clear that the operations targeting undocumented immigrants would have an impact: LAEDC estimates undocumented workers are responsible for about 17% of the county’s economic activity. But researchers found an even farther-reaching effect, Sedgwick said, with additional communities and industries becoming collateral damage.

“It creates a broader economic ripple effect that extends beyond direct enforcement actions,” Sedgwick said. 

Of the 178 small businesses interviewed, 82% said they were negatively impacted by the raids, citing reduced daily sales, decreased customer traffic or changes to their workforce. Some of the most vulnerable areas, according to the report, include the L.A. neighborhoods of Westlake, Echo Park and Boyle Heights, as well as southeast L.A. cities such as South Gate, Pico Rivera and Bell. 

According to Sedgwick, small businesses are more vulnerable to shifts in their customer base and feel sharper impacts than their chain or franchised counterparts. Of the businesses interviewed for LAEDC’s impact survey, 15 had closed by December 2025.

It’s not clear when the local economy will return to its normal patterns, Sedgwick said.

“It’s that unsettled climate of fear that’s really impacting people’s activity and, as a result, our economic activity,” she said. “If that uncertainty, unsettled feeling and fear about what’s happening, if that subsides, then this will kind of shift back. But in the interim, we’re already seeing some of the fallout.”

Feeling the financial pinch in Westlake and Pico Union

At Leo’s Tacos near Venice Boulevard and Vermont Avenue in Pico Union, the tacos al pastor that the truck is known for still cost $2.50 each, but they’re not selling like they used to. 

Manager Maria Martinez said that business is still down about 30% after dropping significantly last summer, though the truck has tried to avoid passing down its financial strain to customers. The business is surviving because of tourists and loyal fans stopping by, she said, but there are simply fewer people coming each day. She said some of the people detained this year were longtime customers, while others have told them they’re still afraid to go out — both of which have hurt business.

Maria Martinez works at Leo’s Tacos, which is known for its tacos al pastor.

(

Marina Peña

/

The LA Local

)

“The people who are afraid don’t walk around the same anymore, they don’t circulate the streets like they used to,” she said in Spanish.

Not even the FIFA World Cup, which soccer officials predict will bring more than $892 million in economic activity to L.A., has so far been able to reverse the reduced foot traffic for some small businesses. 

Luis Sanchez, who sells jerseys and sports apparel at a store called Sports in Westlake, said sales have remained flat over the past six months. 

Sanchez, whose business sits near MacArthur Park, said jerseys for Mexico, Argentina, Brazil and the U.S. national team remain popular, but demand still has not risen the way it did during previous tournaments. 

“In other years, you could already see the increase around this time,” he said. “But because of the raids, things haven’t been the same.” 

Sanchez added that many customers appear more focused on politics and economic concerns than soccer. “Politics are overshadowing sports,” he said. “There are people who think the World Cup should even be canceled.”

Along the El Salvador Corridor, street vendors say that ongoing fear — and the lack of foot traffic that comes with it — continues to shape their daily lives and affect how their businesses are doing.

Mirna Lopez has run a stand called Cocteles Acajutla since 2013, where she sells ceviche made with clams, shrimp and octopus. She said the fact that raids are still ongoing has made it difficult for sales to recover.

“I think people are still scared because they keep hearing on the news that raids are still happening,” Lopez said in Spanish. “People don’t know what’s true anymore or what’s going to happen. I hear about many people who say they are returning to their home countries.”

At Cocteles Acajutla, Mirna Lopez said sales are still about half of what they were before the raids began last year.

(

Marina Peña

/

The LA Local

)

Lopez, who works from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. seven days a week, said that before the raids, she would typically make around $400 a day, but nowadays she doesn’t even reach $200.

“I don’t bring as much anymore, just what I think I might sell, and even then I still don’t sell it all,” she said. “I haven’t thought about offering promotions because I don’t want people to get used to that. Everything is expensive right now to do that. It’s hard to invest your money and not make it back.”

Sergio Jimenez, a senior community organizer with Community Power Collective, said the downturn affecting vendors right now cannot be separated from years of economic instability impacting immigrant communities across Los Angeles. 

“It’s been a really tough four years for vendors,” he said, pointing to the pandemic, inflation, rising housing costs and the raids. “It has created ongoing fear and insecurity, and foot traffic has dramatically slowed down, especially among working-class Latino immigrants, who have traditionally been the main customers for street vendors because it’s such a big part of the culture.”

Jimenez said many vendors have adapted by working shorter shifts, taking less merchandise to avoid major losses and relying on community networks to warn each other about immigration enforcement activity. 

In some cases, he said teenagers stepped in to help support their families financially. 

“I saw youth. I saw a second or third generation of street vending families, having to go out and substitute for their parents because of fear and ensuring that they could bring money into their homes,” Jimenez said.

Adjusting to the new normal in LA’s Eastside

At La Chispa de Oro, Moreno was forced to cut hours for his employees at the peak of the raids. He had to help wash dishes and cook meals in the kitchen. Now, he plans to permanently alter his business hours to open up later and close earlier to save.

Sales have slowly increased from their lows, but only once the community stopped hearing rumors of agents being around. But all it takes is one rumor to keep customers away, Moreno said.  

La Chisa de Oro plans to cut its hours to make up for business lost since the raids surged.

(

Andrew Lopez

/

The LA Local

)

In East L.A., Herbs of Mexico, a longstanding herb and supplement shop, saw a 75% reduction in business last summer, according to owner Martin Lopez. Lopez described the impacts of the raids as a “pile-on” that exacerbated the already unsteady business brought upon by tariffs, inflation and the recent hike in fuel prices

“We’re getting squeezed in a lot of different ways,” Lopez said. The owner was forced to make hard decisions over the last year.  He’s laid off staff, ordered fewer products and even spent his own money to buy things like toilet paper and coffee for his employees working out of the office.

“The problem that we are experiencing is the catch-up. It’s hard to catch up. It’s hard to stay ahead because you’re always behind in regard to [the raids],” Lopez said.

Lopez reported a return of some business, but said he’s still making 30% less than he did in the summer of 2024 by comparison. He agreed that mere rumors of ICE agents being nearby can devastate business for short periods of time.

“One person can say one thing, and then it just spreads like wildfire on social media,” Lopez said. “And then we don’t see anyone come in because they said, ‘I saw something here at this corner. I saw ICE.’ And then that entire region just shuts down, and no one comes in. That happened so many times from June on.”

Recommendations to local leaders

Even before the research showed the scale of economic fallout from the raids, Sedgwick said county entities were activating services for impacted business owners. 

Departments within L.A. County moved to produce resource guides for businesses and individuals and put together a business resiliency fund, Sedgwick said. 

Council District 1 representative Eunisses Hernandez launched a program to support vendors and brick-and-mortar businesses with grants up to $10,000 during the raids.

In CD 14, Councilmember Ysabel Jurado worked with the Community Investment for Families Department and the Economic and Workforce Development Department to create the Ysabel Jurado Microenterprise Grant Program. The program is set to provide up to $3,000 in direct relief to impacted small businesses across the district to fund basic operating costs like rent, utilities, payroll, insurance, and inventory.

At the direction of L.A. County Supervisors Hilda Solis and Janice Hahn, the L.A. County Department of Economic Opportunity launched a Small Business Resiliency Fund in September 2025 to offset financial and workforce disruptions brought upon by increased immigration enforcement. 

The program provided up to $5,000 in direct relief to brick-and-mortar restaurants, street vendors, independent contractors and some home-based businesses. Applications ended last fall and, to date, the fund has granted $5.4 million to more than 1,300 businesses countywide. 

It’s unclear how those grants compare to the need. Sedgwick and her colleagues at LAEC are continuing to research the “longer, lasting effects still at play” considering that increased enforcement is still taking place. 

“It hasn’t gone away. Initially, the flashpoint and the severity of it was very in your face. But it doesn’t mean that it’s not happening still,” Sedgwick said. 

The uncertainty of when another ICE raid will come to East L.A. continues to test Lopez and other business owners, and he said he also wonders if some other crisis could be next. 

“If another event surfaces from this administration, it’s going to continue to pile on and put other businesses at risk for failure and bankruptcy … A lot of people cannot pay back their [Small Business Administration] loans that they got from COVID because they just can’t make it. So everyone is struggling,” Lopez said.

Near his shop, a market and a retail store have closed for good.

“It’s tough to see those things,” Lopez said. “It’s a daily struggle, and it does affect us from a mental health perspective because we don’t know where the shoe’s going to drop. We have to maintain our health and sanity just to keep going these days.”

Who’s winning California’s statewide races? Here’s what we know so farBy Kate Wolffe, CalMatters

A voter marks their ballot at the Chico Masonic Family Center in Chico on June 2, 2026. Photo by Salvador Ochoa for CalMatters This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

California's primary election included more than just deciding who voters want to see in the governor's office.

Californians also voted on several statewide offices, ranging from the governor’s second in command to the regulator for the state’s embattled insurance market.

The top two vote-getters will go on the general election ballot, and voters will make the final call in November.

Attorney general

Attorney General Rob Bonta is heading to the general election and will face a challenge from Republican Michael Gates for the role of California’s top cop. Gates is a former trial attorney who served as Huntington Beach city attorney and a deputy United States Attorney. Bonta and his predecessor, Xavier Becerra, used their office to file dozens of lawsuits against the Trump administration.

State superintendent

Veteran Democratic lawmakers Anthony Rendon, Josh Newman and Al Muratsuchi jumped into the race to become California’s next superintendent of public instruction. In a surprise, two of the most influential education organizations in the state — the California Teachers Association and the California Charter Schools Association — bypassed the veteran lawmakers and instead endorsed Democrat Richard Barrera, the president of the San Diego Unified School District. Sonja Shaw, the former Chino Valley Unified School Board President, will advance to the general election in November. Shaw was endorsed by both Republican gubernatorial candidates.

Who’s ahead: With 55% of votes counted as of 11:15 a.m. Wednesday, Shaw is advancing to the runoff with 25% of the vote. Barrera has netted 19% of the vote.

Lieutenant governor

The role of gubernatorial second in command is largely ceremonial, with the largest responsibility involving standing in when the governor is out. The lieutenant governor also sits on several boards and commissions, and has the ability to cast a tie-breaking vote if the state Senate is gridlocked. Three Democrats netted the most money: Josh Fryday, a member of Newsom’s cabinet, followed by state Treasurer Fiona Ma and former Stockton Mayor Michael Tubbs. Republican Gloria Romero, who served 12 years in the state Legislature as a Democrat, ran a close campaign with gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton.

Who’s ahead: With 55% of votes counted as of 11:15 a.m. Wednesday, Romero leads with 20% of the vote, trailed by Ma (19%) and Fryday (14%).

State controller

Democratic incumbent Malia M. Cohen is heading to the general election to defend her seat as the state’s chief accountant. Herb W. Morgan, a Republican who ran on a promise of exposing fraud in government, will be her challenger. Meghann Adams, a school bus driver from San Francisco’s Tenderloin neighborhood also ran for the seat on a progressive platform as a member of the Peace and Freedom Party.

Secretary of state

Democratic incumbent Shirley Weber is heading to the general election in November for the role of the state’s top elections official. Republican Donald P. Wagner, an Orange County supervisor, will be her challenger. Wagner supports requiring voter ID at the polls and criticized Weber for the state’s slow ballot-counting process. Weber was appointed to her role by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021 after eight years in the Assembly, and won a four-year term in 2022. She has overseen the implementation of universal mail-in voting in the state, and has pledged to further expand voter access.

Treasurer

Democratic candidates dwarfed Republicans in fundraising for the role of state treasurer, California’s chief banker. The role requires managing and investing unspent taxpayer money and overseeing the state’s borrowing and debts. Anna Caballero, most recently the chair of the state Senate’s powerful Appropriations Committee, and Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis both raised hundreds of thousands of dollars from large donors, including unions, tribes, and businesses. Kounalakis will advance to the general election.

Who’s ahead: With 57% of votes counted as of 11:15 a.m. Wednesday, Kounalakis is heading to the November ballot with 34% of the vote. Republican candidate Jennifer Hawks, a retired businesswoman, has 27%.

Insurance commissioner

Californians get a chance to weigh in on who should regulate the state’s embattled insurance market, which has been grappling with how to cope with insurers leaving the state amid growing wildfire risks. Current and former state Democratic lawmakers Ben Allen and Steven Bradford are among the candidates, as is Democrat Patrick Wolff, a financial analyst whose campaign is largely self-funded. The Republican Party has endorsed insurance agent Stacy A. Korsgaden.

Who’s ahead: With 57% of votes counted as of 11:30 a.m. Wednesday, former San Francisco Supervisor Jane Kim has the lead with 24% of the vote. Allen is next with 19% of the vote, and Korsgaden has 18%.

Board of Equalization

This five-member group is the nation’s only elected tax board. It advises county assessors, sets the taxable value of property owned by utilities and railroads, and hears some taxpayer appeals. Four districts are up for election this year: District 1, covering much of inland California; District 2, coastal California north of Los Angeles; District 3, representing the Los Angeles area; and District 4, which encompasses the San Diego area.

Who’s ahead in District 1: With 54% of votes counted as of 7:30 a.m. Wednesday, Republican state Sen. Shannon Grove has the lead with 37% of the vote. Democrat Nelson Esparza is in second with 30%.

Who’s ahead in District 2: With 52% of votes counted as of 7:30 a.m. Wednesday, Democratic incumbent Sally J. Lieber will be advancing to the general election with 53% of the vote. Democrat John Pimentel is in second with 15%.

Who’s ahead in District 3: With 71% of votes counted as of 7:30 a.m. Wednesday, Democratic Assemblyman Mike Gipson has the lead with 26% of the vote. Democrat Samuel P. Sukaton is in second with 14%.

Who’s ahead in District 4: With 57% of votes counted as of 7:30 a.m. Wednesday, Republican Denis Bilodeau has 49% of the vote and will advance to the general election. Democratic State Sen. Tom Umberg is in second with 20%.

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

State superintendent

Veteran Democratic lawmakers Anthony Rendon, Josh Newman and Al Muratsuchi jumped into the race to become California’s next superintendent of public instruction. In a surprise, two of the most influential education organizations in the state — the California Teachers Association and the California Charter Schools Association — bypassed the veteran lawmakers and instead endorsed Democrat Richard Barrera, the president of the San Diego Unified School District. Sonja Shaw, the former Chino Valley Unified School Board President, was endorsed by both Republican gubernatorial candidates.

Who’s ahead: With 46% of votes counted as of 9:30 p.m., Shaw is leading with 24.7% of the vote. Barrera has netted 19.7% of the vote.

Lieutenant governor

The role of gubernatorial second in command is largely ceremonial, with the largest responsibility involving standing in when the governor is out. The lieutenant governor also sits on several boards and commissions, and has the ability to cast a tie-breaking vote if the state Senate is gridlocked. Three Democrats netted the most money: Josh Fryday, a member of Newsom’s cabinet, followed by state Treasurer Fiona Ma and former Stockton Mayor Michael Tubbs.

Who’s ahead: With 46% of votes counted as of 9:30 p.m., Ma leads with 20.6% of the vote, trailed by Romero (19.6%) and Fryday (14.3%).

State controller

Democratic incumbent Malia M. Cohen is heading to the general election to defend her seat as the state’s chief accountant. Herb W. Morgan, a Republican who ran on a promise of exposing fraud in government, will be her challenger. Meghann Adams, a school bus driver from San Francisco’s Tenderloin neighborhood also ran for the seat on a progressive platform as a member of the Peace and Freedom Party.

Secretary of state

Democratic incumbent Shirley Weber is heading to the general election in November for the role of the state’s top elections official. Republican Donald P. Wagner, an Orange County supervisor, will be her challenger. Wagner supports requiring voter ID at the polls and criticized Weber for the state’s slow ballot-counting process. Weber was appointed to her role by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021 after eight years in the Assembly, and won a four-year term in 2022. She has overseen the implementation of universal mail-in voting in the state, and has pledged to further expand voter access.

Treasurer

Democratic candidates dwarfed Republicans in fundraising for the role of state treasurer, California’s chief banker. The role requires managing and investing unspent taxpayer money and overseeing the state’s borrowing and debts. Anna Caballero, most recently the chair of the state Senate’s powerful Appropriations Committee, and Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis both raised hundreds of thousands of dollars from large donors, including unions, tribes, and businesses. Kounalakis originally ran for governor, but dropped out at the end of 2025.

Who’s ahead: With 47% of votes counted as of 9:30 p.m., Kounalakis has the lead with 36.3% of the vote. Republican candidate Jennifer Hawks, a retired businesswoman, has 26.6%.

Insurance commissioner

Californians get a chance to weigh in on who should regulate the state’s embattled insurance market, which has been grappling with how to cope with insurers leaving the state amid growing wildfire risks. Current and former state Democratic lawmakers Ben Allen and Steven Bradford are among the candidates, as is Democrat Patrick Wolff, a financial analyst whose campaign is largely self-funded. The Republican Party has endorsed insurance agent Stacy A. Korsgaden.

Who’s ahead: With 47% of votes counted as of 9:30 p.m., former San Francisco Supervisor Jane Kim has the lead with 24.1% of the vote. Allen is next with 20.3% of the vote, and Korsgaden has 17.5%.

Board of Equalization

This five-member group is the nation’s only elected tax board. It advises county assessors, sets the taxable value of property owned by utilities and railroads, and hears some taxpayer appeals. Four districts are up for election this year: District 1, covering much of inland California; District 2, coastal California north of Los Angeles; District 3, representing the Los Angeles area; and District 4, which encompasses the San Diego area.

Who’s ahead in District 1: With 45% of votes counted as of 9:30 p.m. Tuesday night, Republican state Sen. Shannon Grove has the lead with 36.1% of the vote. Democrat Nelson Esparza is in second with 30.5%.

Who’s ahead in District 2: With 45% of votes counted as of 9:30 p.m. Tuesday night, Democratic incumbent Sally J. Lieber has the lead with 53.7% of the vote. Democrat John Pimentel is in second with 14.5%.

Who’s ahead in District 3: With 53% of votes counted as of 9:30 p.m. Tuesday night, Democratic Assemblyman Mike Gipson has the lead with 27% of the vote. Democrat Yvonne Yiu is in second with 13.9%.

Who’s ahead in District 4: With 49% of votes counted as of 9:30 p.m. Tuesday night, Republican Denis Bilodeau has the lead with 47% of the vote. Democratic State Sen. Tom Umberg is in second with 20.8%.

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