Paramore, The 1975 and The Black Keys top iHeartRadio’s ALTer Ego lineup

• October 13, 2023

Though on Thursday, ALT 98.7/FM teased it would be sharing the ALTer Ego lineup next week on social media, “The Woody Show” decided that Christmas would come early and dropped the lineup on Friday morning.

The seventh annual event will feature sets by Paramore, The 1975, The Black Keys, Thirty Seconds to Mars, Bush, Sum 41, Yellowcard, lovelytheband and The Last Dinner Party.

ALTer Ego usually takes place at Kia Forum in Inglewood, but will relocate to Honda Center in Anaheim and take place on Saturday, Jan. 13.

“Another year, another dope lineup, and another stunning display of misplaced confidence by the people running this company asking me to host such an event,” Jeff “Woody” Fife of “The Woody Show” said. “My team and I can’t wait to get out there and pretend like we know what we’re doing.”

The iHeartRadio ALTer Ego is partners with Capital One, so there will be a 48-hour cardholder presale that starts at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, Oct. 24 and runs through 10 a.m. Thursday, Oct. 26. There’s also an exclusive event for these cardholders via the Capital One Access Pass to add a ticket to a private preshow by The Black Keys that includes food and drinks. Those will be available at iheartradio.com/capitalone. ALT VIP members will get next crack with a 24-hour sale starting at 10 a.m. Oct. 26 through 10 a.m. Friday, Oct. 27. Any leftovers go to the general public starting at noon on Oct. 27 at Ticketmaster.com.

Related Articles

​ Orange County Register 

Support grows to ask Biden to expand San Gabriel Mountains National Monument

• October 13, 2023

With the House of Representatives leaderless and legislation going nowhere, supporters of a bill to expand the 346,177-acre San Gabriel Mountains National Monument by one-third are looking to the White House.

On Oct. 10, the ninth anniversary of the day the monument was designated by then-President Barack Obama, supporters stepped up their game. The effort to convince President Joe Biden to use his powers to add acreage to the southwestern part of the national monument now includes support from 55 elected officials and the cities of Alhambra, Monterey Park, Santa Clarita, and South Pasadena, which have passed resolutions in support.

Rep. Judy Chu, D-Pasadena and U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla are asking Biden to use the Antiquities Act of 1906 that grants the power of the Executive Branch to preserve national lands through a presidential proclamation. They want the president to add 109,167 of federal forest land to the monument. The act would prevent new roads or mining on the protected land, preserving it for habitat and recreation.

“I hope that President Biden will recognize the importance of these lands by designating the western Angeles National Forest aspart of the National Monument,” wrote Chu in a prepared statement.

Belén Bernal, executive director of Nature for All, one of the groups supporting the expansion and working to improve recreation in the monument, said supporters have backing from the White House Council on Environmental Quality.

“They want to see this happen,” she said on Thursday, Oct. 12. “They are happy to see such strong support at the local level.”

A map of the proposed addition to the San Gabriel Mountains National Monument. (graphic by Jeff Goertzen/SCNG)

Just before Obama came to the San Gabriel Valley to sign the proclamation nine years ago, some of the most historic, and most-used trails in the southwestern part of the Angeles National Forest were removed from the monument map — to the dismay of Chu and others.

Many today say Biden should complete the vision for a monument that protects antiquities in the forest which were excluded from getting monument status.

“With an expanded national monument, we can include critical natural, historical, and cultural sites that were excluded, as well as some of the most exemplary, popular, and — most importantly—accessible sites for outdoor recreation of all kinds,” said Casey Schreiner, founder of Modern Hiker and a board member for Nature for All.

The proposed addition includes forest sections just above the cities of Monrovia, Arcadia and Sierra Madre and up to Santa Clarita. The site of the Mount Lowe Railway in the mountains above Pasadena, and trails leading to Mt. Wilson that were part of the Great Hiking Area of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, would be included as monument historical areas.

“We’ve all seen pictures of women in their petticoats riding up on the Mount Lowe Railway with views of the mountains,” said Daniel Rossman, deputy California director of The Wilderness Society and a Pasadena resident.

Historical areas to be added also include Big Tujunga Canyon, the Upper Arroyo Seco area, Switzer’s Camp, Millard Canyon and Eaton Canyon — trails and historical spots that are part of the region’s hiking lore within the San Gabriel Mountains.

Chantry Flat, the second-most popular access point in the Angeles used by hundreds of thousands of visitors a year for hiking and picnicking also would be added. The area, hit by a severe wildfire and resulting mudslides, has been closed since the start of the pandemic in March 2020. Recently, the closure was extended through May 2024.

Road, trail and campsite repairs are slow due to lack of U.S. Forest Service resources, the agency told this newspaper in July.

“Not only is Chantry a gateway to experience the wonder of the San Gabriels, but for so many, it is the first time they experience the wild. It’s a significant recreational portal for hundreds of thousands of people and it is really critical,” Rossman said.

The addition also would reach into the headwaters of the Los Angeles River, an important watershed and source for drinking water. The San Gabriel Mountains provide one-third of L.A. County’s drinking water. In the far western portion, the addition would include parts of the Angeles National Forest near Sunland and in Placerita Canyon, next to Santa Clarita.

While there’s no money attached to a presidential proclamation, the original monument designation attracted attention from private investors.

Soon after Obama signed the monument into existence during his visit to the San Gabriel Valley, donations of about $3 million flowed to the National Forest Foundation. It also received $500,000 in a combined total from the Annenberg Foundation, the Lucile Packard Foundation for Children’s Health and the California Endowment. A year later, Coca-Cola made a $900,000 donation.

Supporters of an expanded monument say the expansion will help address the climate and biodiversity crises by protecting important habitat and wildlife corridors for black bears, mountain lions, coyotes, bighorn sheep, and mule deer, as well as contribute to state and federal goals to conserve 30% of public lands and waters by 2030.

But pushback came last year from the state of Utah and two Republican-leaning rural counties that sued the Biden administration over the president’s decision to restore two sprawling national monuments on rugged lands sacred to Native Americans that former President Donald Trump had downsized. Trump’s decision opened parts of the monuments up for mining, drilling and other development.

In the Utah lawsuit, plaintiffs argued that the Biden administration interpreted the Antiquities Act in an overly broad manner and disregarded its original intent: protecting particular historical or archaeological sites.

Bernal said she’s pushing for elected leaders to invite Tom Vilsack, secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees the U.S. Forest Service, to tour the proposed monument expansion areas.

Related links

Bill to expand San Gabriel Mountains National Monument could draw in Biden
San Gabriel Mountains National Monument, restored
Angeles National Forest plagued by closures from storms, fires, funding gaps
Pandemic, snowy mountains draw avalanche of visitors to Angeles National Forest
Mount Lowe Railway preservationists want to connect people to rail’s past through artifacts, books

​ Orange County Register 

Advocates horrified over mysterious fate of small animals

• October 13, 2023

One of the small animals transferred to Arizona by the San Diego Humane Society in August (Courtesy SDHS)

There’s a scandal rocking the animal rescue world a wee bit south of here. Seems the San Diego County Humane Society transferred hundreds of small furries to the Humane Society of Southern Arizona in August — which then transferred them to “a single, unaccredited, anonymous organization.”

Oops. Now no one knows what ultimately happened to 250 of those animals, which include guinea pigs, rats, hamsters and rabbits. What they do know is that a relative of the man who runs that “single, unaccredited, anonymous organization” owns a reptile farm that sells frozen and live animals for snake food.

“Our leading theory, and most people’s leading theory, is that these animals ended up as food for reptiles,” said Gary Weitzman, the president of the San Diego Humane Society, on Fox5.  “We hope it’s not the case, but it’s impossible to think otherwise.”

There are lawyers involved. Investigations underway. The Southern Arizona Humane Society’s CEO and its chief programs officer lost their jobs. San Diego officials are demanding a detailed accounting of the names and contact information for everyone who took custody of those animals, along with “an answer to the question we all are asking — how could a ‘small family run’ rescue group do what virtually no other shelter or rescue group would be able to do: adopt out 250 small animals in a matter of weeks?”

There’s a situation in Orange County that’s not exactly parallel, but has similar story elements.

A small herpetology rescue has taken possession of more than 830 animals from Orange County Animal Control since last year. More than 700 of them were rodents, rabbits and fowl, county data shows.

Those animals did not wind up as snake food, the rescue and Orange County Animal Control told us. But once the rescue — Southern California Herpetology Association & Rescue — hands off the animals to schools, programs, re-habbers, etc., it is no longer involved, “as these animals are not our ‘specialty,’” SoCal Herpetology told us.

The lack of detail on what happens down the line makes some local animal activists uncomfortable. They can’t quite figure out how a small group has managed to place so many small animals, especially without an onslaught of social media pleading for adopters.

We were able to find just a couple of online postings of adoptable bunnies, rats, hamsters, etc. from SoCal Herpetology this year. OCAC spokeswoman Jackie Tran found a couple as well.

It was the dearth of online “please adopt!” activity that prompted San Diego officials to look further into the fate of the animals it sent to Arizona, which resulted in the scandal it’s dealing with today. That doesn’t seem to be the case here.

“OC Animal Care takes all reports of animal cruelty seriously and considers using adoptable pets as a feed source to be cruel,” Tran said by email. “If specific allegations are raised against any of the adoption partners affiliated with OC Animal Care, they would undergo an investigation, and if the claims were substantiated, appropriate legal action would be pursued.”

Before forming partnerships with rescue groups, “we thoroughly conduct due diligence, allowing us to be well-informed,” Tran said. “Specifically with SCHA&R, the rescue underwent thorough research, leading us to see their active involvement in the community and their expertise.”

Though there are no specific legal mandates for partners to provide documentation on what happens to animals down the line, “we maintain ongoing conversations with our adoption partners and regularly receive updates on animal placements from many,” Tran said.

Folks are encouraged to immediately report suspected animal cruelty or neglect to 714-935-6848, she said.

We asked the county supervisors, who oversee OCAC, if looking into what happens after a rescue hands off animals to third parties might be worthwhile, but heard a lot of crickets.

Kim Murrell, president of Save SomeBunny rescue, has some ideas.

“Most rescues in OC (including SoCal Herp) are 501(c)(3) non-profits. When we get shelter pull rights, we have to prove to OCAC that we are legit, and the paperwork filed with the state says what our mission is,” she said by email. “In order to prevent misuse of pull rights, and even the appearance of impropriety, the shelter could only allow a rescue to pull (i.e. take without paying a fee) the type of animal they are officially organized to rescue.”

OCAC could allow a rescue to pull another type of animal — if it pays the regular adoption fee, she suggested.

“In my view, the shelter has a responsibility to vet a rescue before releasing animals to them,” Murrell said. “If the herp society is just pulling for other rescues, those rescues should be vetted.”

Related Articles

​ Orange County Register 

Kaiser Permanente reaches a tentative deal with health care worker unions after recent strike

• October 13, 2023

Unions representing 75,000 health care workers who recently held a strike against industry giant Kaiser Permanente over wages and staffing shortages have reached a tentative agreement with the company.

The three-day strike last week involving 75,000 workers in multiple states officially ended last Saturday and workers returned to their jobs in Kaiser’s hospitals and clinics that serve nearly 13 million Americans.

Also see: Kaiser ordered to revamp delivery of behavioral health care services

“The frontline healthcare workers of the Coalition of Kaiser Permanente Unions are excited to have reached a tentative agreement with Kaiser Permanente as of this morning,” the coalition posted Friday morning. “We are thankful for the instrumental support of Acting US Labor Secretary Julie Su.”

Kaiser Permanente, based in Oakland, California, confirmed the deal in a social media post.

Bargaining sessions had been scheduled for this week, the unions said.

Also see: Mary Lou Retton’s lack of insurance raises questions as crowdfunding passes $330,000

The strike for three days in California — where most of Kaiser’s facilities are located — as well as in Colorado, Oregon and Washington was a last resort after Kaiser executives ignored the short-staffing crisis worsened by the coronavirus pandemic, union officials said. The coalition had given the company notice that another strike from Nov. 1 to Nov. 8 was possible and the Oct. 31 expiration of a contract covering the Seattle area would enable another 3,000 workers to join picket lines.

Their goal was to bring the problems to the public’s consciousness for support, according to the Coalition of Kaiser Permanente Unions. Some 180 workers from facilities in Virginia and Washington, D.C., also picketed but only on Wednesday.

Also see: California workers will get five sick days instead of three under new law

The strikers include licensed vocational nurses, home health aides and ultrasound sonographers, as well as technicians in the radiology, X-ray, surgical, pharmacy and emergency departments.

Related Articles

“No health care worker wants to go on strike,” Caroline Lucas, the coalition’s executive director, said Thursday. “I hope that the last few days have helped escalate this issue.”

The company warned the work stoppage could cause delays in people getting appointments and scheduling non-urgent procedures.

Unions representing Kaiser workers in August asked for a $25 hourly minimum wage, as well as increases of 7% each year in the first two years and 6.25% each year in the two years afterward.

Kaiser, which turned a $2.1 billion profit for the quarter, said in a statement last week that it proposed minimum hourly wages between $21 and $23 depending on the location. The company said it also completed hiring 10,000 more people, adding to the 51,000 workers the hospital system has brought on board since 2022.

Union members say understaffing is boosting the hospital system’s profits but hurting patients, and executives have been bargaining in bad faith during negotiations.

The workers’ last contract was negotiated in 2019, before the pandemic.

​ Orange County Register 

Why Disneyland raised ticket prices while Disney World didn’t

• October 13, 2023

There are plenty of reasons why Disneyland hiked ticket prices this week while Disney World held the line, but none of them are going to make visitors to the Happiest Place on Earth very happy.

Disneyland raised admission prices by as much as 25% on Wednesday, Oct. 11 with the most expensive one-day, one-park ticket now $194.

Walt Disney World did not hike daily ticket prices this week — but Disney’s four Florida parks did raise prices on annual passes and parking.

SEE ALSO: Disneyland rolls out new pumpkin-shaped Cinderella carriage for $180,000 fairy tale weddings

Why didn’t Disney World raise ticket prices at the same time as Disneyland?

There are four key reasons.

1) Disney World raised ticket prices twice in 2022. The last time Disneyland raised ticket prices was in October 2022 — exactly a year ago.

2) Disney uses ticket pricing to manage demand — charging less on slow days and more on busy days in hopes of better balancing attendance.

3) Disney plans to double its investment in theme parks to $60 billion over the next decade — and those costs ultimately need to be passed along to visitors.

4) Florida is having a tougher tourism year than California, according to Theme Park Insider.

“In Florida, Disney is looking to boost its attendance numbers and drive more spending,” according to Theme Park Insider.

SEE ALSO: The biggest winners in the Disneyland Magic Key settlement aren’t annual passholders

Disneyland and Disney World have always operated independently despite their shared DNA.

“Disney’s choice to get aggressive on pricing in California while holding the line on prices (for the most part) and loosening restrictions in Florida suggests that Disney is seeing much stronger demand for its theme parks in California than in Florida at the moment,” according to Theme Park Insider.

In addition to Disneyland’s daily ticket price hike, multi-day tickets rose by as much as 15.7% and parkhopper passes climbed by as much as 25%. Parking and Genie+ line-cutting passes also went up at Disneyland.

The lowest-priced $104 one-day, one-park ticket for Disneyland or Disney California Adventure remained the same — unchanged since 2019.

SEE ALSO: What’s the next Star Wars destination for Disneyland’s Star Tours?

Disney World visitors didn’t see a price hike this time around after facing a double-whammy last year.

Disney World increased prices for multi-day tickets in February and December 2022, according to WDW News Today.

Related Articles

Also in December 2022, Disney World introduced park-specific pricing for one-day, one-park admissions with tickets topping out at $159 for Disney’s Animal Kingdom, the least expensive of Disney’s four Florida parks, and $189 for the Magic Kingdom, the most expensive.

Disney World officials said at the time the price increases were due to strong demand and continued theme park investments.

Disneyland can always course correct if the latest ticket price increases prove too aggressive, according to Theme Park Insider.

“If Disney overshot the market in California, expect to see more aggressive locals-focused ticket discounts in the spring and summer, which are slower months for the parks here than the busy Halloween and holiday seasons,” according to Theme Park Insider.

​ Orange County Register 

Mission Viejo ordered to pay more than $715,000 in attorneys’ fees, judge says

• October 13, 2023

Mission Viejo must pay more than $715,000 in attorneys’ fees, a judge said, to a resident who challenged how the city extended three councilmembers’ terms while it worked on implementing a new voting system.

Orange County Superior Court Judge Walter Schwarm last week ordered the city to pay additional fees, bringing the total to $715,137. The city is disputing at least some of those awarded fees, City Attorney Bill Curley said.

City leaders intended to transition to a new cumulative style of voting in Mission Viejo in response to complaints that its election process diluted the voting power of minority residents. It would have required all council members to be elected at the same time, so three seats were elected to two-year terms in 2018 to even things out. The change was ultimately abandoned because of pushback from the state, and the city instead instituted district-based voting last year, which required council terms to be staggered again.

In 2022, Schwarm ruled three councilmembers — Ed Sachs, Greg Raths and Wendy Bucknum — had stayed longer than the two years to which voters elected them in 2018 and would need to vacate their seats. (Bucknum is the only one who is still a councilmember following the elections last year.)

Mission Viejo resident Michael Schlesinger filed legal action in 2021 challenging whether the three councilmembers’ tenure should have been prolonged as city officials worked out the new city-wide voting system, which they said took longer than expected. City officials argued because the city didn’t change its election process, the terms reverted back to their original four years in the city code.

Related links

3 Mission Viejo council members removed from office, court may still consider appeal
Term extensions in Mission Viejo challenged as voting for City Council is changed
Mission Viejo drops cumulative voting idea, moves to district-based elections

Bucknum, Raths and Sachs were removed from office in November 2022, but the ruling did not bar them from running for reelection. Bucknum won her election to her seat. However, due to how the new districts were drawn, Raths and Sachs had to run in the same district. They lost to Councilmember Cynthia Vasquez.

“These attorneys’ fee awards vindicate our efforts to hold the city and the City Council accountable,” said Schlesinger. “What is sad is that all the city and the City Council had to do was simply follow the law.”

Schlesinger also successfully challenged the plan to extend the terms of Councilmembers Trish Kelley and Brian Goodell, who were elected in 2020, by an additional two years. Schwarm ordered that all five seats be on the ballot last year.

“In simple terms, Goodell, Kelley, Sachs, Bucknum and Raths tried to deprive myself and my fellow citizens of the right to vote,” said Schlesinger. “They got caught and are paying the consequences for their despicable and unprecedented actions.”

Neither Bucknum, Goodell, Kelley, Raths or Sachs responded to requests for comment.

Related Articles

While the issue involving the length of councilmembers’ terms has been decided, the city is still in a dispute over the attorneys’ fees, Curley said.

“As to the money that plaintiff’s legal counsel now seek from city taxpayers, the city notes that the total amount sought in court filings by plaintiff’s three law firms was some $1.2 million,” Curley said, pointing out the trial court awarded about half of that.

The city is appealing the award of fees in one case and might in another, he said.

“I do not think any of us expected to spend this much time on the case,” said attorney Aaron Hand, who represents Schlesinger. “Because of the efforts the city went through to delay the process, to push out a resolution and the legal battle they decided to put us in, we all ended up spending more time fighting out attorney fees than we did over the substance of the case.”

​ Orange County Register 

Why do trucks take lanes through former toll-booth areas?

• October 13, 2023

Q. Why is there a separate lane for trucks and vehicles with trailers that goes through the old toll booth areas at the northern part of the 241 Toll Road? Vehicles pulling trailers routinely instead use the regular three left-hand lanes. This is the only point on the 241 tollway that requires this special treatment. Northbound traffic in the afternoon becomes totally grid-locked, so any truck wanting to go westbound on the 91 Freeway has to really fight to get over to the far-left lanes after clearing the former toll areas.

– Mark Speros, San Juan Capistrano

A. Caltrans wanted truck-climbing lanes out there on steep slopes “to allow trucks and other slower vehicles to stay to the right of main traffic,” said Michele Miller, a spokeswoman for the Transportation Corridor Agencies, which manages the 241, 73, 261 and 133 toll roads. These stretches met Caltrans’ criteria for such lanes.

In 2014, when those toll roads stopped collecting cash and went to all-electronic tolling, the toll plazas were reconfigured and the signs changed to direct trucks and cars with trailers through those areas to separate them for a bit from the rest of traffic to improve the flow. The climbing lanes had been there before, but were modified.

The 241 has climbing lanes in both directions at what is called the Windy Ridge Toll Point. On the 73, there is a similar setup at the Catalina View Toll Point.

The California Highway Patrol is to enforce the laws on these tollways, including ensuring that trucks and trailers take their special lanes.

“We do have details who work specifically on the 241,” said Sergio Rivera, a spokesman and officer for the California Highway Patrol.

But, he added, an officer needs to be out there during the violation, and might choose to go after a bigger problem instead – say an excessive speeder.

Now, as to whether there is enough time on the northbound 241 at the Windy Ridge Toll Point for truckers to get into a left lane, Miller said in an email:

“The roadway design allows for sufficient distance of over one mile to access the lanes that merge onto westbound 91. The Transportation Corridor Agencies … installed signage and pavement markings to provide advanced notice to motorists who want to access the westbound or eastbound lanes to the 91.”

Related Articles

Q. Hi Honk: Now that we are seeing gas prices spike and hear refinery problems are part of the problem, do you know why we don’t build more refineries in this country? Sure would alleviate a large part of the problem.

– Bob King, Huntington Beach

A. It seems building a significant one, at least here in the states, would face more hurdles than Edwin Moses ever did, Bob.

A story earlier this year in Barron’s cited such woes as securing the needed permits and the amount of money and time it takes to build one. Forbes, in an article from last year, added other obstacles: climate change concerns and society’s resistance to promote fossil fuels.

Chevron CEO Mike Wirth, Fox Business reported, said last year he didn’t believe the U.S. would produce another new refinery because of the federal government’s stance: “At every level of the system, the policy of our government is to reduce demand, and so it’s very hard in a business where investments have a payout period of a decade or more.”

There are, though, new refineries in Nigeria and Mexico.

HONKIN’ FACT: The 1953 double-decker bus Paul and Linda McCartney bought in 1972 for a Wings tour that year will be on the auction block in mid-November. Painted in psychedelic colors, it offered a playpen, mattresses and beanbags on the top deck for the bandmates and their families while enjoying the sunshine. The bus logged more than 7,500 miles in ’72 for a European tour. It is forecast to be sold for $200,000 to $300,000. (Source: Julien’s Auctions.)

To ask Honk questions, reach him at [email protected]. He only answers those that are published. To see Honk online: ocregister.com/tag/honk. Twitter: @OCRegisterHonk

​ Orange County Register 

Newsom’s aspirations temper his progressive instincts

• October 13, 2023

SACRAMENTO – If you’re like me and simply want the government to leave us alone and tend to its basic tasks – providing public services, building infrastructure, etc. – then you no doubt follow every legislative session with foreboding. Progressive Democrats who control our state are intent on regulating our lives and raising our taxes, which leads to a sense of vulnerability as hundreds of intrusive bills head to the governor’s desk.

This year, however, Gov. Gavin Newsom pulled a few surprises. He insists that he’s not running for president, but his vetoes of the fringiest measures suggest his promises aren’t ironclad. He rejected nearly 20 percent of bills that reached his desk, which is an “unusually large percentage,” per CalMatters. Many veto messages, it noted, include boilerplate language warning that some bills would add to the state’s deficit. He seems to be channeling his predecessor, deficit-weary Jerry Brown.

Here are some of the main examples. Newsom vetoed a measure requiring public schools to provide free, easily available condoms to students. His budgetary argument was a stretch, but any governor with national aspirations wouldn’t want such baggage. Can you see the TV ads from his opponents had he signed it? Likewise, with his veto of Amsterdam-like cannabis cafes and a measure that would have decriminalized some psychedelic drugs.

He also nixed a bill to provide one week of severance to laid-off grocery store workers for every year of work, noting that state law already provides myriad layoff protections. He rejected a cap on insulin co-pays, explaining the state already is working on a plan to lower costs. His veto of a ban on caste discrimination came with the sensible explanation that such discrimination already is illegal.

Newsom rejected a ludicrous bill that would have created a state agency to build and manage government-owned housing. He again raised the cost argument, but anyone who has followed the sordid history of public-housing projects in America would quickly realize that the government can’t fix our state’s housing woes (although it can make them worse) – and would produce terribly managed high-rise slums.

Sure, unions scored expected legislative victories, but Newsom at least vetoed a bill giving striking workers unemployment benefits – something that would have overburdened a system already facing insolvency. The governor rejected cash payments up to $1,900 a month for undocumented seniors – another decision that makes sense in the context of a national political campaign.

Progressives were understandably disappointed, but that should only hearten the rest of us. “While a lot of these bills may not fly in the Deep South, they’re unremarkable in progressive California, and were on Newsom’s desk in the first place because the state Legislature put them there – ostensibly carrying out the will of California voters,” lamentedCNN columnist Jill Filipovic. Yes, legislators put them there, but elected governors have the final say regarding the “will of the people.” That’s how our system works.

Newsom mostly vetoed bills that would have provided immense pushback for little gain. I have nothing against legalizing psychedelics, but critics far outnumbered beneficiaries. Newsom did sign several noxious measures. He OK’d a bill making it harder for landlords to evict troublesome tenants. He required companies to disclose greenhouse-gas emissions. He banned certain food additives. That’s par for the course in progressive California.

Newsom also signed a bill allowing Capitol staffers to join a union beginning in 2026. State workers belong to unions, but legislative workers are unique. Legislators need the flexibility to hire whomever they choose to implement their agenda. These mostly are political positions, with a high churn rate – not career jobs. I chuckle at that one for mischievous reasons, as it might remind union-friendly lawmakers of the burdens they place on other employers. I bet lawmakers will regret this one.

Related Articles

Newsom signed a massive package of 56 housing-related bills. Some involve troublesome tenant protections. But some are good. Most notably, Senate Bill 423 streamlines housing approvals in coastal cities (reducing the power of the anti-growth California Coastal Commission) and loosens regulations for market-rate projects. Senate Bill 4 allows universities and religious groups to build – on a by-right basis – housing on their property.

Newsom touted a term I’ve never heard: YIGBY (Yes In God’s Back Yard). That’s weird, but it probably will result in additional new housing. God bless him for that signing. He even signed legislation that clarifies the California Environmental Quality Act, thus making it harder for local NIMBY governments to abuse CEQA to limit housing approvals.

In his statement, Newsom quoted Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, who is the driving force behind pro-housing reforms: “The era of saying no to housing is coming to an end. We’ve been planting seeds for years to get California to a brighter housing future, and today we’re continuing strongly down that path.” May it be so.

So it’s been a less-bad legislative session than expected. I still feel relief it’s over.

Steven Greenhut is Western region director for the R Street Institute and a member of the Southern California News Group editorial board. Write to him at [email protected].

​ Orange County Register