|
Prepared by Precision Advocacy
Redistricting Activity (Mostly) Concludes in the Legislature
Last week, after much partisan debate, the legislature passed and the governor signed the legislative package - SB 280, AB 604, and ACA 8 - calling for a special election on November 4, 2025, which, if approved by voters, would adjust congressional districts in California to advantage the Democratic party. Proposition 50 materials have now been posted by the Secretary of State for public input until September 4.
One detail of the package that hasn’t quite wrapped up is language that was stripped from ACA 8 stating that the provisions shall only become operative if another state adopts a new congressional district map that takes effect after August 1, 2025, and before January 1, 2031, and such redistricting is not required by a federal court order. The language was removed from ACA 8 the day after the Texas House approved new congressional maps. Instead, AB 40 (Bryan) was amended to state that AB 604 would only become operative if voters approve ACA 8 in November, and another state adopts a new congressional map between August 1, 2025, and January 1, 2031, without a federal court order requiring it. It also includes a clause for Ohio stating that the trigger applies only if Ohio’s map is adopted under its 2018 constitutional reforms. AB 40 is currently pending on the Senate floor.
Republicans have filed a second lawsuit with the California Supreme Court to try to remove the redistricting plan from the ballot, on the basis that the redrawing violates the public's right to fair and independent election maps. The first lawsuit filed led by Senator Tony Strickland (R-Huntington Beach) and several other Republicans to block the consideration of the bills that would facilitate a special election, was rejected by the court.
Assembly Minority Leader James Gallagher introduced AJR 23 on August 27 that would create a new state in response to the Proposition 50 fight. The measure would express the consent of the legislature for specified counties to form a new state from within the current boundaries of the State of California and would urge Congress to accept and embrace that consent. Counties included in the new state would be Alpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras, Colusa, Del Norte, El Dorado, Fresno, Glenn, Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Kings, Lassen, Madera, Mariposa, Merced, Modoc, Mono, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Joaquin, Shasta, Sierra, Siskiyou, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Trinity, Tulare, Tuolumne, Yuba, and any adjacent counties that vote to join the aforementioned counties, to form a new state from within the current boundaries of the State of California.
Attention will now turn to what promises to be an expensive ballot fight with both sides already moving forward with their campaigns. A survey published last week by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies and the Los Angeles Times projected the measure leading 48% to 32% among likely voters.
Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Accountability & Oversight on H.R. 1
On August 20, the Assembly Budget Subcommittee No.7 on Accountability and Oversight met to discuss the full impact and implementation of the passing of H.R. 1: President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Lawmakers received an overview of the impacts of H.R. 1 from the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) and the Department of Finance. It was the first dedicated public opportunity for members of the Assembly Budget Committee to learn about H.R. 1’s impacts on California and comment on the impending changes necessitated by the measure.
LAO Overview. The LAO’s presentation provided a high-level overview of anticipated impacts to the state, a timeline of impacts, and a list of current and budget year issues that could require legislative action. The primary areas of focus in the LAO’s analysis included:
-
Health Care Coverage and Financing
- Limits states’ ability to tax Medicaid services to draw down federal funding - effective July 2025
- This provision may require legislative action this year to restructure California’s managed care organization (MCO) tax or address the funding shortfall should the federal government terminate the MCO tax. The current version of the tax provides $4.2 billion in 2025-26 and $2.8 billion in 2026-27 in General Fund savings.
- Action may also be required to restructure the Hospital Quality Assurance Fee which is primarily an issue for private hospitals.
- Limits Medi-Cal eligibility for noncitizens beginning October 2026.
- Requires many able-bodied adults enrolled in Medi-Cal to work, study, or complete community service, beginning at the end of 2026.
- Increases the frequency of eligibility redeterminations for childless adults, beginning at the end of 2026.
-
Food Assistance
- Eligibility for CalFresh is limited immediately (pending federal guidance).
- The state’s share of cost for CalFresh administration increases October 1, 2026.
- Increases the share of cost for CalFresh benefits based on a state’s error rate beginning October 1, 2027.
- Federal guidance will dictate whether California statute needs to be amended in the current year.
-
Higher Education: As of July 1, 2026, new accountability tests for higher education will be implemented to limit student loans, which must be adopted by 2028 or schools will lose eligibility for federal student loans.
-
Personal and Corporation Taxes
- The State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction will increase in the current year.
- The provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA, 2017) will be extended beginning in 2026, creating several new temporary deductions for seniors, overtime pay, tips, and auto loan interests.
-
Clean Energy and Electric Vehicle Credits: Clean energy and electric vehicle credits will be phased out starting September 30, 2025 and funding for programs including the Inflation Reduction Act will be cut.
Legislative Comments. Chair Assemblymember Gregg Hart (D-Santa Barbara) began the hearing by summarizing the Act’s impacts on California, starting with CalFresh and Medi-Cal cuts that will take effect during the midterm elections, capricious treatment of California under H.R. 1, and the threat of a wave of instability on the horizon for the state. Assemblymember Cory Jackson (D-Moreno Valley) stated that, “H.R. 1 is designed to try to make sure that California fails, we will refuse to do so.” Members of the subcommittee criticized the bill, stating that it is “weakening democracy,” and even claiming that it is an attempt to empower oligarchs and the wealthiest among us. Assemblymember Bennett (D-Ventura) compared the passing of H.R. 1 and President Trump’s agenda to the decline of democracy in Russia, stating that “once the economies of [those] countries start to fail and oligarchs become more empowered, democracy dies. California is throwing a lifeline to an economy, climate, and democracy under siege. We are not powerless, and we will not stand ideally by to watch democracy crumble. Californians must know how vital this lifeline we are throwing; the world is counting on us to stand up to the autocratic power grab by the President.”
Assemblymember Quirk-Silva (D-Fullerton) voiced her candid and unvarnished position on H.R. 1, referring to the bill as “a big, disgusting bill” that attacks our most vulnerable. She bluntly denounced the impacts of the bill on California, with emphasis on the President's attacks on healthcare and education, federal subsidies for housing, and the attempt to cripple California's economy. Quirk-Silva included the recent I.C.E raids on immigrants and educational impacts in her statement, referring to the bipartisan support of the “Head Start” resolution (AJR 12) that urges the federal government to protect the funding for early childhood education. Yet, undocumented children of the “Head Start” program will not be able to attend school as a result of H.R. 1 and the immigration raids, contributing to the “disenfranchising, dehumanizing, and disappearance of people.” According to Quirk-Silva, the President is deliberately trying to hurt California’s economy, including by withholding disaster funds and filing lawsuits against one of our largest public universities (UCLA). Members of the subcommittee expressed frustration that every Republican member of California’s house delegation signed off on H.R. 1, voting yes, even after some of them promised to their constituents that they would vote no; despite impacts to voters in their districts.
Impact on Counties. The passing of H.R. 1 greatly impacts local governments, with reduction of county services programs across the spectrum, increased administrative burdens with loss of federal funding for early education programs, and strains on healthcare. Counties will be responsible for shouldering Medi-Cal and CalFresh capacities on an administration level, face increased expenses with funding shifts, and regulatory federal fiscal uncertainty. However, all of these “human effects” on regular Californian citizens depend on the implementation of the federal laws in the state, especially with Medi-Cal financing and eligibility rules tightened. We will continue to keep you posted on legislative and administrative activity related to H.R. 1 that will impact the county.
Assembly Transportation Hearing on Alternatives to the Fuel Tax
The Assembly Transportation Committee held an informational hearing on alternatives to the fuel tax for transportation funding earlier this week. The hearing was chaired by Assemblymember Lori Wilson (D-Suisun City) and attended by Assemblymembers Tom Lackey (R-Palmdale) and Rhodesia Ransom (D-Stockton).
California lawmakers are facing a fundamental problem - as more Californians drive more fuel efficient and zero emission vehicles, fewer drivers are paying their share of user based fuel taxes that fund transportation improvements for roads, bridges and public transportation projects - meaning that gas tax funding is no longer reliable. This is increasingly a national problem. In 2016, motor fuel taxes accounted for more than 40% of state transportation revenue. By 2024, that figure had slipped to about 36%. Meanwhile, the federal gas tax, untouched since 1993, has lost about 80% of its real value. While dozens of states have raised or indexed their gas taxes in recent years, the consensus is clear: the gas tax can’t keep up with the rapid shift in vehicle technology.
The hearing focused on testimony from transportation officials from Hawaii, Oregon, Utah and Virginia on how they're adapting to evolving technologies and travel behaviors and ensuring that critical transportation repairs and enhancements can be funded.
Doug Shinkle, Transportation Program Director at the National Conference of State Legislatures; Alan Jenn, Associate Professor at the UC Institute for Transportation Studies; and Trish Hendren, Executive Director of the Eastern Transportation Coalition comprised the first panel covering research on transportation funding mechanisms.
Included in the mix of alternative funding mechanisms are mileage-based road use fees (RUC), taxes on electricity used for electric vehicle (EV) charging, annual charges for EVs and various tolling mechanisms such as congestion pricing, all with an eye toward addressing funding shortfalls caused by rising fuel efficiency and electric vehicle adoption.
-
EV and Hybrid Fees: Forty-one states now charge flat annual registration fees on electric vehicles, often in the $50–$200 range. These are simple to implement but don’t reflect actual road use.
-
Kilowatt-Hour Fees: Some states tax electricity used at public EV charging stations. Utah imposes a 12.5% surcharge; Pennsylvania charges 1.7¢ per kWh. However, because most charging happens at home, revenue potential is limited without costly sub-metering.
-
Other Revenue Streams: States have tapped delivery fees (Colorado, Minnesota), ride-share fees (California, Washington, others), even lottery and hotel taxes. Managed lanes—already in place in 11 states including California—both manage congestion and generate new funds.
Mileage-based user fees, or road usage charges, are emerging as a promising approach, charging drivers per mile rather than per gallon of fuel. While implementation challenges exist, such as administration, privacy, and public acceptance, states that combine thoughtful program design with pilot programs and outreach can establish sustainable and equitable alternatives. Collectively, these strategies provide a diversified toolkit for maintaining investment in transportation infrastructure as vehicle fleets evolve.
Hendren testified that surcharges on electricity for electric cars have not been found to disincentivize consumers from purchasing electric vehicles. She discouraged the legislature from charging a flat registration fee, calling it unfair.
Mindy Kimura, from the Hawaii Department of Transportation; Leif Elder, from the Utah Department of Transportation; Scott Boardman, from the Oregon Department of Transportation; and Scott Cummings, from the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles spoke on the second panel, discussing how other states are alternatively funding transportation.
Kimura detailed Hawaii’s road users charge. Beginning July 1, 2025, eligible electric vehicle (EV) owners will have a choice to pay a state per-mile RUC ($8 per 1,000 driven, capped at $50) or a state flat annual RUC of $50. The HiRUC Program replaces the state’s current $50 EV registration surcharge for all RUC-eligible EVs. For the HiRUC Program, the vehicle registration, renewal, and payment processes are as follows:
- Vehicles have their odometers read and recorded as part of the annual vehicle inspection. The odometer reading will inform how many miles were driven, and the RUC amount owed.
- During their registration renewal process, EV owners will choose between the state per-mile RUC or the state flat annual RUC on their annual registration renewal notice.
- The RUC amount owed will be added to the vehicle registration payment and will be due at the time of vehicle registration renewal.
- The vehicle registration payment, including the RUC choice and RUC amount owed, can be processed and paid using any of the existing registration renewal methods.
Panelists from Utah, Oregon and Virginia detailed very similar RUC programs to the committee.
Utah increased their fuel tax and eventually indexed it to inflation. Its RUC program, established in 2020, also offers an annual flat fee alternative to the mileage-based fee. The incentive for participants to enroll in the mileage-based program is that they may save money in comparison to the flat fee payment. They offer an odometer photo option and a telematic option for newer EV vehicles that have such functionality. Elder emphasized the program’s prioritization of data privacy. He also highlighted the need to keep administrative costs low, given that the gas tax is so easy to administer.
Oregon’s program also gives EV owners a choice between a supplemental registration fee system and a RUC fee. Drivers of vehicles that are rated at 20 mpg or better can also enroll. The RUC rate is set at 5% of the fuel tax in law. Currently, Oregon’s per gallon fuel tax is $0.40, which puts the RUC rate at $0.02 per mile. To avoid double taxation, participants receive a credit for any fuel tax paid and only pay the difference between what they owe in RUC versus what they've already paid in fuel tax. Oregon’s GPS program only charges participants the RUC when they are using Oregon roads and not when they drive over state lines. Oregon transportation revenues also include a small payroll tax that is dedicated to transit.
Virginia’s solution to transportation funding shortfalls included a gas tax increase of 10 cents over two years (thereafter indexed to inflation) and a choice between:
- Paying a Highway Use Fee (HUF) (based on comparing fuel tax payments of average vehicle in VA to those for vehicles 25 MPG or greater) in full at the time of registration
- Joining the optional Mileage Choice Program and paying per mile (not to exceed the HUF fee)
Interestingly about 50% of vehicles that participate in the Mileage Choice program are gasoline powered, and 81% of participants choose to re-enroll in the program. The program pre-charges participants in increments of $15, and the charge is renewed when the participant’s balance reaches a certain level. Virginia’s program is an additional fee on top of the gas tax and is meant as an additional revenue stream.
California’s challenge mirrors the national picture: the gas tax is shrinking, and stopgap measures like EV fees cannot cover the gap. RUCs represent the most comprehensive, future-proof approach, but they require thoughtful design. Other states show that success depends on:
- Leveraging existing systems (like DMV registrations or vehicle inspections) to minimize administrative costs.
- Phased implementation, starting with EVs and gradually expanding to the full vehicle fleet.
- Clear, ongoing communication with the public about why the system is changing, how privacy is protected, and how fairness is maintained.
- Diversified interim strategies—delivery fees, TNC fees, managed lanes—to ease the transition.
Discussions of the issue are ongoing and will continue into the fall as well as next year.
Grant Opportunities
Below is a list of the latest grant opportunities released by the state. All opportunities for local jurisdictions may be found here.
Application Deadline: 10/14/25 23:59
Title:2026 Department of Pesticide Regulation Sustainable Pest Management Grants Program
State Agency / Department: Department of Pesticide Regulation
Match Funding? No
Estimated Total Funding:$4,900,000
Funding Method: Advances & Reimbursement(s)
Governor’s Press Releases
Below is a list of the governor’s press releases beginning August 20.
August 27: Governor Newsom calls on Legislature to pass critical power grid proposal: ‘Our best shot at affordability this year’
August 27: Nearly two-dozen new TV projects to bring in $1.1 billion to California’s economy, thanks to the Governor’s newly expanded Film and Television Tax Credit Program
August 26: Governor Newsom announces appointments 8.26.25
- Adam Brezine, of Fairfax, has been appointed Chief Counsel at the California High-Speed Rail Authority
- Charlotte Fadipe, of Sacramento, has been appointed Deputy Commissioner of Public Affairs at the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation
- Jill Hamer, of Tiburon, has been appointed to the California Privacy Protection Agency Board of Directors
- Jeffrey Worthe, of Los Angeles, has been appointed to the California High Speed Rail Authority Board of Directors
August 26: Governor Newsom continues California’s aggressive response to extreme heat and critical fire weather
August 26: Californians strongly support the Governor’s strategy to create more housing
August 26: Governor Newsom proclaims California Farmworker Day
August 25:ICYMI: Voter-approved Prop 1 funding awarded to communities to create new supportive housing to reduce homelessness
August 25:10 ways California is helping families as kids head back to school
August 25: Governor Newsom predeploys more firefighting resources to Trinity County
August 23: Governor Newsom predeploys more firefighting resources to Placer and Calaveras Counties
August 22: Governor Newsom predeploys more firefighting resources, directs aggressive statewide response to fire weather and heat
August 22: Governor Newsom announces appointments 8.22.25
- Daniel Villaseñor, of Sacramento, has been appointed Deputy Secretary for Communications at the California Natural Resources Agency.
- Blake Kaiser-Lack, of Sacramento, has been appointed Assistant Deputy Director for External Affairs and Operations at the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development
- Sushma Bhatia, of Cupertino, has been reappointed to the Board of Environmental Safety, where she has served since 2022
August 22: California and Denmark sign new partnership on climate, technology efforts
August 21: TOMORROW: California and Denmark to ink new partnership on climate and technology
August 21: Governor Newsom signs ‘Election Rigging Response Act’ legislative package; Gives people power to push back on Trump’s attempts to shred democracy
August 21: TODAY: Governor Newsom to sign Election Rigging Response Act, empowering voters to fight Trump’s grab at autocracy
August 21: Governor Newsom predeploys resources to Inyo County, continuing state’s prep for critical fire weather conditions
August 21: Governor Newsom advances Sites Reservoir project to expand California’s water storage
August 20: Governor Newsom predeploys additional resources to Los Angeles and San Diego counties during Red Flag critical fire weather conditions
August 20: NEW REPORT: Community reentry program participants are significantly less likely to reoffend
August 20: With major heat in the forecast, California takes action to protect vulnerable communities – including with new CalHeatScore tool
|
|
Prepared by Townsend Public Affairs
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH ACTIVITY
House Budget Chairman Releases Report on Expired Program Authorizations
House Committee on Budget Chairman Jodey Arrington released a statement regarding a recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report detailing congressional appropriations for programs for which the underlying authorization has expired.
Authorization legislation is the mechanism by which congress creates, defines, and modifies government programs, structures, and offices. Authorizing bills set policy which appropriators can then fund via the appropriations process. Examples include, the Surface Transportation Reauthorization Act, the Water Resources Development Act, the National Defense Authorization Act, and Farm Bill. Authorization bills are cyclical and require new versions be passed every 5 or so years (National Defense is done every year).
The Chairman argues that Congress does not have the authority to continue to fund those programs and accounts, and that Congress needs to conduct the appropriate oversight and undertake reauthorization legislation. The press release also alleges appropriators created new funding accounts without authorizing legislation.
This position, if adopted more widely across the Republican conference, could further complicate the already delayed appropriations process. Congress is likely to face the possibility of a government shutdown or short-term continuing resolution at the end of September. They return from recess next week.
EXECTIVE BRANCH ACTIVITY
President Signs Executive Order on Cashless Bail
On August 25, President Donald Trump signed an executive order (EO) titled, Taking Steps to End Cashless Bail to Protect Americans, and provided a fact sheet to accompany the EO. The EO asks the Attorney General and Department of Justice (DOJ) to create a list of jurisdictions that, “have substantially eliminated cash bail as a potential condition of pretrial release […] for crimes that pose a clear threat to public safety.” The EO mandates this list be provided within 30 days.
The order contains language similar to other EOs seeking to impose funding conditions or withhold federal funding for listed jurisdictions pursuant to the EO, but the language has been modified. The modifications could soften the interpretation and allow for greater legal review before the Administration withholds or prevents a listed jurisdiction from accessing federal funding.
Other EOs seeking to withhold federal funding from certain jurisdictions based on unrelated policy decisions have been legally contentious, and California Attorney General Rob Bonta has been active in suing to prevent the implementation of such measures.
DOT Cancels Additional Rail Projects in California
On August 26, Department of Transportation (DOT) Secretary Sean Duffy announced that the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) will terminate $175 million in funding for rail projects adjacent to California’s high-speed rail project. The Secretary has previously pulled $4 billion in funding directly from the high-speed rail authority.
The terminations include the Le Grand Overcrossing Project on the Merced Extension, Southern San Jose Grade Separations, DTX Final Design under the Transbay Joint Powers Authority, and the Madera High-Speed Rail Station project under CalTrans. The Secretary reiterated his directive that the FRA continue to review previously obligated grant funding in support of the high-speed rail project.
EPA Proposes Further Disapproval of California Clean Air Act Waiver
On August 25, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin announced their intention to propose the disapproval of California’s Heavy-Duty (HD) Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Requirements as it applies to out-of-state and out-of-country vehicles. California receives special exemptions called preemptive waivers under the 1970 Clean Air Act that allow the state to impose higher emissions standards on vehicles, including commercial/heavy-duty vehicles, than the federal government. Other states are allowed to adopt California’s higher standards if they choose.
The Administration previously submitted a number of those waivers to Congress as if they were regulations that Congress could disapprove of under the Congressional Review Act (CRA). Congress passed those disapprovals, and the State of California has sued, as the Government Accountability Office previously found the waivers were not subject to the CRA. That litigation remains ongoing.
Orange County Delegation Press Releases
- Mike Levin – August 27, 2025: Rep. Mike Levin, Solana Beach Mayor Heebner Highlight Risks of Looming Government Shutdown | U.S. Congressman Mike Levin
- Mike Levin – August 25, 2025: NEWS: Rep. Mike Levin Calls on State of California to Fully Eliminate State Taxes on Military Retiree Pensions | U.S. Congressman Mike Levin
- Young Kim – August 22, 2025: Rep. Young Kim Helps Lead Bipartisan Push to Reunite Korean American Divided Families - Congresswoman Young Kim
- Young Kim – August 21, 2025: Rep. Young Kim Leads Historic Site Visit to MP Materials’ Mountain Pass Rare Earth Mine - Congresswoman Young Kim
- Dave Min – August 27, 2025: Rep. Dave Min Introduces the SAFE Act to Protect Seniors’ At Risk Social Security Data | Representative Dave Min
- Alex Padilla – August 26, 2025: Padilla, Schiff, Friedman Push for Answers on DHS Presence During Redistricting Press Event - Senator Alex Padilla
- Alex Padilla – August 25, 2025: Padilla, Schiff Statement on EPA’s Proposal to Undermine California’s Climate Leadership on Heavy-Duty Vehicles - Senator Alex Padilla
- Alex Padilla – August 25, 2025: Padilla, Castro Condemn Trump Administration’s Move to End Hispanic-Serving Institutions Grant Program - Senator Alex Padilla
- Alex Padilla – August 21, 2025: Padilla Applauds California for Standing Up to Trump and Texas Republicans’ Gerrymandering - Senator Alex Padilla
- Alex Padilla – August 21, 2025: Padilla, Schiff Announce Over $158 Million to Bolster California Airport Infrastructure - Senator Alex Padilla
- Adam Schiff – August 25, 2025: NEWS: Sens. Schiff, Padilla Statement on EPA’s Proposal to Undermine California’s Climate Leadership on Heavy-Duty Vehicles
- Adam Schiff – August 24, 2025: WATCH: Sen. Schiff Underscores ‘Stalled’ Ukraine and Russia Peace Talks, Calls Out Trump’s Retribution Campaign on NBC’s Meet the Press
- Adam Schiff – August 22, 2025: ICYMI: Sen. Schiff Tours Health Care Clinic in Los Angeles, Calls Out Impact of Trump Health Care Cuts Projected to Slash Coverage for Thousands of Patients
- Adam Schiff – August 21, 2025: NEWS: Sens. Schiff, Padilla Announce Over $158 Million to Bolster California Airport Infrastructure
Legislation Introduced by the Orange County Delegation
|
Bill Number
|
Bill Title
|
Introduction Date
|
Sponsor
|
Bill Description
|
Latest Major Action
|
|
H.R. 5028
|
SAFE Act of 2025
|
08/08/25
|
Rep. Dave Min (D-CA-47)
|
To amend section 552a of title 5, United States Code, to provide for the liability of Federal personnel for intentional or willful violations of such section, and for other purposes.
|
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform., 08/22/25
|
|
