Issue #207: California makes backup EV plan
ICI brings you this week's news highlights
Be one of the first people to test-run the second Independent California Poll!
Before we spend thousands of dollars hiring a polling agency, we need your help make sure none of our questions are unclear, ambiguous, or have other problems with them. This poll is special because it asks about several new policies California could adopt, and these kinds of questions are especially tricky to get right.
We also need additional financial support to make the poll happen. It costs $12 to poll one random Californian. Please donate what you can!
Thank you so much to all the people who’ve donated so far!
Condors expand range, thanks to Yurok tribe
Despite high-profile corporate relocations, California drives national economy
California has a lot of people!
Please, please ask anyone you know to subscribe to this newsletter and donate to our next poll. The next four years are going to be tremendously challenging for California, and we need to organize as many Californians as we can to fight back.
Remember… 58% of Californians think we’d be better off as our own country!
NEW LAWS!
Here are 21 new laws that Californians must start following in 2025
Sophia Bollag and Sara Libby, SF Chronicle
The new rules affect:
Crackdowns on retail theft
Legacy college admissions
New parking fines for parking too close to crosswalks
Click to cancel subscriptions
Restrictions on fees for insufficient funds
More treatment for criminals with severe mental illness
Prohibit credit bureaus from including medical debt on credit reports
Third-party food delivery platforms must include driver/rider photo
Ban on forced outing of transgender students
Crackdown on cities that don’t build enough housing
More benefits for California workers
But: War on rooftop solar continues
Caroline Grace, Advanced Energy United
“ SB 1374 would have expanded solar benefits by reversing a prior CPUC decision that prevents schools and apartment buildings from being able to use the solar energy they generate on their properties. This misguided veto will result in unnecessary energy costs for schools and apartment buildings.
This missed opportunity is also another blow to California’s clean energy goals and highlights the ongoing challenges in making distributed energy resources more accessible across the state.”
Read Newsom’s veto message here.
How big is California, really?
California’s population is also, well, really big.
US Map of Areas with Equal Population
We’ll say it again: California is big.
SPEAKING OF BIG
Commentary: Here’s some news for California’s critics: It’s carrying nation
Thomas Elias, Antelope Valley Press
“California, we often hear, is a lousy place to do business. It’s riddled with needless regulations that make it hard for businesses to survive.
California still produces far more than its fair share of goods and services and is therefore hugely responsible for keeping the US economy the world’s strongest.
And all that ignores the fact that most major industrial innovations of the last 50 years originated in California, from electric cars and smart phones to artificial intelligence.
California’s GDP accounts for more than 17% of America’s and makes this the No. 5 economy in the world, behind only the entire USA, China, Japan and Germany. California’s share of national GDP stands far above its 12% share of America’s populace.
Here’s a little-publicized secret behind the ballyhooed corporate defections: Companies like Tesla and Toyota and Chevron, with headquarters now elsewhere, still conduct huge parts of their operations here. For Tesla and Toyota, it’s far more than in any other state including Texas, now home to their head offices.”
Californian energy use compared to the USA and the world
Californians use 35 percent less energy per person than the average American in the other 49 states.
“It is generally true that the more energy a person can use, the more income they’ll have. So what is a realistic target for per capita energy use by, say, 2025, when the world population is estimated to begin leveling off at around 9.4 billion people? For everyone to consume as much energy as Americans consume, total primary inputs of energy worldwide would have to reach 2,689 exajoules, which is 4.5 times what we currently produce. Absent an extraordinary breakthrough in energy technology within the next 20 years, this is probably impossible. But what about California?
Maybe it’s merely attributable to our mild climate, or maybe it’s also thanks to the billions we’ve invested in energy efficiency, but Californians only have a per capita energy consumption of 192 gigajoules per year. This surprised me, but it checks out. Californians use 35 percent less energy per person than the average American in the other 49 states.
We may be thankful that in America we have the best access to energy in the world today, and we may be thankful we live in California, the global epicenter of innovation. If anyone can figure out how to deliver affordable, sustainable, abundant energy to everyone in the world, it is us.”
But: Federal funds drive one-third of California’s state budget
Trump administration cuts could jeopardize services for millions of Californians
Scott Graves and Nishi Nair, California Budget & Policy Center
“A significant share of federal funding for California flows through the state budget. The enacted state budget for 2024-25 — the fiscal year that began on July 1, 2024 — includes $153 billion in federal funds. This is more than one-third (33.9%) of the total state budget.
The outcome of the November 2024 national election portends major cuts to federal funding for key public services. Such cuts would have devastating consequences for Californians. Federal funding for Medi-Cal alone comprises almost two-thirds (64.4%) of all federal funding that flows through the state budget. Republicans have made clear their intention to curtail this spending.
Other services are also at risk, including some that are funded with federal dollars that flow directly to Californians outside of the state budget — such as federal food assistance provided through the state’s CalFresh program and federal Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments for low-income seniors and people with disabilities.”
The rest of the country is starting to have California’s problems. They’re not ready
As wildfires and smoky skies plague the East Coast, are they learning anything from California?
Nuala Bishari, SF Chronicle
“The country often likes to make fun of California for our ineptitude on many fronts. But if they’re smart, they’ll turn to us for guidance, here.
The East Coast has a lot to learn about mitigating wildfire pollution. In June 2023, huge plumes of smoke from fires in Canada blew south over New York City, causing its own orange sky day, reminiscent of Sept. 9, 2020, when thick smoke sat so low across the Bay Area it filtered out the sun.
San Franciscans were already wildfire veterans by then. After years of public education, most residents knew to have air purifiers in their homes, don N95 masks to filter smoke when they ran errands and how look up air quality readings for their neighborhood. In the years since, clean air centers, which provide relief from wildfire smoke, have become the status quo across the state.”
CAN CALIFORNIA AFFORD TO RESIST TRUMP?
Newsom puts a price on resisting Trump
Tyler Katzenberger and Dustin Gardiner, Politico
“Newsom is pitching the fund as a way to preemptively protect California’s investments — both in measurable terms like federal disaster grants and more abstract ones like clean air protections — from being undercut by Trump, who’s signaled he will more aggressively combat those who oppose his conservative agenda in his second term.
“We will work with the incoming administration and we want President Trump to succeed in serving all Americans,” Newsom said in a press release. “But when there is overreach, when lives are threatened, when rights and freedoms are targeted, we will take action.”
Newsom’s requests are spelled out in two bills from Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel introduced this morning. The first would set aside the $25 million for litigation, and the second would immediately allocate $500,000 to fund initial case preparation, according to a press release from his office.”
California’s many lawsuits against Donald Trump saved the state millions, DOJ says
William Melhado, Sacramento Bee
”With state leaders bracing for a new round of legal fights with the president-elect’s administration, the attorney general’s office said it spent nearly $42 million on litigation involving the Trump team from 2017 to 2021. That total included the resources spent defending California laws from federal lawsuits. But the department reported that the federal government reimbursed California nearly $60 million in federal grants over two years during Trump’s tenure after the state successfully challenged the Trump administration’s effort to withhold public safety funding from sanctuary cities.”
ELECTRIC VEHICLES, CALIFORNIA, AND ELON MUSK
California takes action to protect EV market amid federal uncertainty
Evrim Agaci, Pinnacle Gazette
“The proposed initiative seeks to reboot the previous rebate program, which had expired last year after facilitating the purchase of over 594,000 electric cars and helping save about 456 million gallons of fuel. This strategic move aims to sustain California’s leadership role within the U.S. EV market, especially as more than two million zero-emission vehicles currently populate the state's roads.
Details of this revamped Clean Vehicle Rebate Program are still under development, but Newsom's office has emphasized its focus on stimulating innovation and competition within the EV sector. This could lead to incentives directed not just at buyers but also at automakers working to advance electric vehicle technologies, such as faster charging rates and more affordable options.”
Despite Trump’s threats, California doubles down on electric vehicles
Saul Gonzales and Elise Manoukian, KQED
“While Trump cannot unilaterally eliminate the electric vehicle tax credits, his transition team views the consumer EV credit as an easy target, believing that eliminating it would get broad consensus in a Republican-controlled Congress, Reuters reported.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who emerged as a key player in the upcoming Trump administration, effectively endorsed the credit’s elimination on his social media platform X. As the most popular EV maker on the market, Tesla’s competitors are more reliant upon the credits to support sales.
However, other advocates are not as concerned about the industry’s longevity. Sullivan, of the NBEAA, pointed out that some municipalities, including the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, offer their own grants for income-eligible residents to replace their cars with electric vehicles.”
Elon Musk erupts over California plan that could cut Tesla from EV tax credit
Mary Papenfuss, the Independent
“California’s potential plan would likely not include Musk’s cars because the program would be aimed at helping carmakers with smaller market shares, both Bloomberg and The New York Times reported. Tesla accounted for 56 percent of new EV sales in California during this year’s third quarter.
Newsom’s office has not yet confirmed that Tesla would be carved out from the program.”
Bumper stickers roasting Elon Musk are suddenly very popular in California
Amazon storefront shows more than 2,250 purchases of anti-Musk stickers in the month before Nov. 26.
Stephen Council, SFGate
“Hawaii aquarium store manager Matthew Hiller knows how sharply the sentiment has shifted. When he first started selling anti-Musk bumper stickers on his Etsy page in 2023, sales came in at a trickle. Now, they’re at a flood: Musk’s ideological takeover of Twitter and election-year political antics have earned him a new wave of haters.
Some of them own Teslas. Hiller’s most popular sticker reads, “I bought this before we knew Elon was crazy.” He told SFGATE he’s now sold 15,000 anti-Musk stickers — and California is his biggest market.”
We love to hear from readers like you! Please reply to this email with suggestions for the next issue.
DEPORTATION
California Is a Sanctuary State. How Much Will That Protect Immigrants From Trump's Deportation Plans?
Tyche Hendricks, KQED
“At a press conference in late November, Attorney General Bonta affirmed that law enforcement in California would continue to enforce criminal laws. However, he says he would uphold SB 54’s restrictions that prevent state officials from participating in civil immigration enforcement, even if the incoming Trump administration pressures the state.
“The federal administration is welcome to do their job, but they cannot commandeer or conscript law enforcement in California to do their job for them,” he says. “cooperation under SB 54 on civil immigration enforcement will not be forthcoming because it would violate the law if it were.”
State laws restrict what state and local authorities can do. However, ICE is a federal agency with agents based throughout California. In addition to taking custody of immigrants handed over by prisons, they can and do track down people they believe are deportable.
California has been successful before in withstanding legal challenges from the Trump administration against the state’s sanctuary laws. In 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a Trump administration challenge to SB 54, allowing the law to stand.
In addition to limiting what local and state law enforcement can do, SB 54 says public schools, libraries, hospitals, courthouses and other public facilities are supposed to have policies that define how they will limit interaction with ICE. And the state Attorney General’s office is required to offer model policies they can use.
The San Francisco Public Defender’s Angela Chan says now is the time, ahead of a second Trump term, for those local entities to take a look at their policies, clarify them and make sure staff members understand them.”
Deportation of immigrants not an option in California
Phil Pasquini, IndyBay.org
“Billed as the first deportation protest to stand in defiance of Trump’s campaign promise to “take the handcuffs off ICE,” many held signs saying “No ICE in California, Dignity Over Detention, We are Human, MAGA out of California, We are People, Immigrant Justice is Health Justice, Amnesty for Immigrants, Stop Project 2025 and Protect Farmworkers,” while also calling for livable wages and affordable housing for all.
California presently has over one million children who have at least one immigrant parent, many of whom would face family separation and detention because of the plan. At the rally before the march, one speaker addressing the crowd noted that “When one immigrant suffers, we all suffer together” in calling for immigrant justice.
While the protest was taking place outside, inside the Capitol the legislature was in special session called by Governor Gavin Newson to pass a bill to “Protect California values” by allocating $25 million for a legal defense fund to pay for anticipated lawsuits by the federal government. Newsom noted that addition monies will be needed in “Protecting California values” when the state is sued for standing in defiance to the Trump plan.”
California bill would protect schools, child care centers from immigration raids
Daisy Nguyen, KQED
“Experts praised the bill for designating schools and child care centers as safe spaces for immigrant families but say it stops short of addressing the possibility of immigration crackdowns that occur near or just outside of schools when parents pick up or drop off young children.
“Those are vulnerable moments for parents if they are undocumented. I think that’s a real concern,” said John Rogers, an education professor at UCLA who has studied the intersection of politics and K–12 education.
Muratsuchi said he plans to look into the legality of establishing a buffer zone surrounding schools and child care centers that’s off-limits to immigration officers.
ICE has a longstanding policy that discourages immigration enforcement actions in “sensitive locations,” including schools, hospitals and places of worship.
It remains to be seen whether the Trump administration will adhere to that guidance.
Project 2025, a set of policy recommendations written by several former Trump administration officials, calls for rescinding all ICE memos that identify sensitive zones where immigration action should be limited.”
NATURE IN THE NEWS
‘Public is going to be so impacted’: California’s national forests face huge staffing cuts
Kurtis Alexander, SF Chronicle
“The losses will weigh hard on California’s 18 national forests. From the snowy peaks in the Shasta-Trinity National Forest in the state’s far north to the chaparral canyons of the Cleveland National Forest near Mexico, the cutbacks mean trails will see fewer maintenance workers, visitor centers will go without rangers, bathrooms will lose custodians, campgrounds won’t have as many attendants and overgrown forests will see fewer crews doing fire prevention work.
The cuts were ordered in September, but only recently have regional forest managers detailed their extent.
The order, in effect through next summer, freezes the hiring of temporary seasonal employees nationwide. These are the workers who fill short-term jobs yet make up a big part of the workforce, sometimes upward of 20% of staffing at a national forest at peak times. The order does not apply to firefighters.
In 1969,The agency, which resides within the U.S. Department of Agriculture, was allocated less money than expected in the continuing resolution passed by Congress in September. Forest Service Chief Randy Moore acknowledged at the time that, because funding is likely to change and could very well increase, he was acting “conservatively” in rolling back staffing levels.
There’s also the question of what the Trump administration will do when it takes office in January. The president-elect has pledged to downsize federal agencies.”
Opinion: Californians brace for unscientific forest management policies under Donald Trump
Sacramento Bee letter writers
“While it uses controlled burns to decrease undergrowth, Finland doesn’t “rake” its forests to reduce wildfire risk. Its relatively small wildfire problem is because of its proximity to the Arctic Circle and its year-round precipitation. Comparing Finland and California on wildfire response is a typical Donald Trump fairytale.”
How a tribe brought back its sacred California condors
The Yurok Tribe has released 18 condors into the wild so far, over four rounds of releases.
Lucy Sherriff, BBC
“By the time the Yuroks got involved, California had made strides reintroducing the condor, with the first chick hatching in the wild in 2004. In 2008, there were more California condors flying free in the wild than there were in captivity, a first since the state programme began. As of 2022, there were 347 condors in the wild and 214 in captivity. But efforts were primarily focused on central California, northern Mexico and Arizona – a long way from where the Yuroks live in the misty redwoods on the California-Oregon border.
Determined to bring condors back to the landscape, the tribe created the Yurok Tribal Wildlife Programme in 2008, with condor reintroduction as the main focus. Williams began looking at some of the challenges the project would come up against – including educating the community.
The tribe has a release and management facility to monitor the birds for the foreseeable future – many challenges remain before they become a fully self-sustaining population. The birds are brought back into the facility twice a year for check-ups to ensure they are doing well, and to check the transmitters they're fitted with.”
IN OTHER NEWS
California swung right this election. But not because more people voted for Trump
Aseem Shukla, SF Chronicle
“Like the rest of the nation, California swung right in 2024. But unlike some other places, there was little contribution from voters changing their votes from Democratic to Republican.
Instead, it’s mainly because Democratic voters seem to have stayed home.
The declines weren’t proportional by party. Donald Trump earned roughly the same number of votes as he did in 2020 — but Kamala Harris earned more than 1.8 million fewer votes than Joe Biden did four years ago.“
Landlords are using AI to raise rents — and California cities are leading the pushback
Wendy Fry, CalMatters
“According to federal prosecutors, RealPage controls 80% of the market for commercial revenue management software. Its product is called YieldStar, and its successor is AI Revenue Management, which uses much of the same codebase as YieldStar, but has more precise forecasting. RealPage told CalMatters it serves only 10% of the rental markets in both San Francisco and San Diego, across its three revenue management software products.
Here’s how it works:
In order to use YieldStar and AIRM, landlords have historically provided RealPage with their own private data from their rental applications, rent prices, executed new leases, renewal offers and acceptances, and estimates of future occupancy, although a recent change allows landlords to choose to share only public data. This information from all participating landlords in an area is then pooled and run through mathematical forecasting to generate pricing recommendations for the landlords and for their competitors.
The San Diego council president, Sean Elo-Rivera, explained it like this:
“In the simplest terms, what this platform is doing is providing what we think of as that dark, smoky room for big companies to get together and set prices,” he said. “The technology is being used as a way of keeping an arm’s length from one big company to the other. But that’s an illusion’.”
California’s November election stopped another rent control ballot measure
Mark Kreidler, Capital & Main
“Weinstein’s foundation was principally opposed by the California Apartment Association, a powerful landlord lobby with huge corporate backing and money to burn. The association spent almost $90 million to make sure the rent control measure failed, with other realtor and business groups kicking in another $40 million. The apartment association also spent $44 million on the effort to place strict guardrails on how the AIDS Healthcare Foundation can use the money it makes from federal prescription drug discounts.
“The results of Propositions 33 and 34 prove only one thing: If billionaires spend more than $170 million lying and confusing voters, they are virtually guaranteed to win,” Weinstein said in a statement conceding the fates of both measures. But, he added, “The battle for justice for renters marches on.’”
Prominent Texas company deserts Lone Star State for California
The well-known brand plans to relocate to SoCal after more than 100 years in Texas
Karen Palmer, SFGate
“According to the Orange County Register, Dickies, the 102-year-old Texas-founded workwear brand known for its jumpsuits and rugged pants, is planning to leave Fort Worth and call the Orange County city of Costa Mesa home by spring of 2025. Dickies is owned by VF Corp., which also counts lifestyle and apparel brands North Face, Timberland, Kipling and Vans in its portfolio.
Dickies and Vans, the Orange County-founded skateboard apparel company, plan to share a headquarters once the move is complete.
A company moving its headquarters to the Golden State has certainly felt rare in recent years, particularly as more and more companies decamp for Texas, motivated by lower taxes and more affordable real estate, among other perceived benefits.”
Martial law declared in South Korea. What is it, and has California ever declared it?
Dave Mason, Palm Springs Desert Sun
“Martial law isn't mentioned in the U.S. Constitution. But nearly every state has a constitutional provision allowing for martial law.
Governors in the U.S. have declared martial law six times, but no governor has made that proclamation in California, according to an article published by the California Constitution Center and University of California Law Journal. It was written by attorneys Stephen M. Duvernay and Brandon V. Stracener, who are senior research fellows with the constitution center.
Only two instances "potentially qualify" as the practice of martial law in the state's history, Duvernay and Stracener wrote.
The first one was from 1846 to 1850. The U.S. military ruled California after the Mexican-American War during its transition to statehood and had the power to overrule local decisions.
In another instance, California Gov. Frank C. Merriam threatened to impose martial law in 1934. He placed troops on San Francisco’s docks during a labor strike, but martial law wasn’t needed. The unrest ended.”