Gov. Gavin Newsom has built a reputation in Sacramento for pulling off eleventh-hour legislative deals, but that trademark maneuver failed him in the closing days of what will be his final regular legislative session in office.
The termed-out Democratic governor had pushed hard for changes to how much California utilities must pay after their equipment ignites wildfires, seeking to strip insurance companies of their ability to sue utilities to recover costs. But after weeks of resistance from lawmakers and survivors of the devastating Los Angeles-area fires, the state Assembly on Tuesday rejected a compromise version of the bill that Newsom himself had signed off on just days earlier.
The failed measure, Senate Bill 492, was dismissed by Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas as a set of “half measures” that fell short of what Californians deserve. The state Senate, led by Pro Tem Monique Limón, had been ready to approve the deal, but the Assembly’s rejection leaves open whether Newsom will call a special session to try again before leaving office in January.
Even Newsom conceded the effort had come up short. “Simply put, this measure did not meet the gravity of this moment,” he said in a statement. “California cannot settle for half measures.”
A pattern disrupted
Over his tenure, Newsom has become known in the Capitol for what insiders call “jamming” the Legislature — negotiating behind closed doors with interest groups and legislative leaders, then unveiling compromise bills just hours or days before a deadline, leaving little room for amendments, hearings or public pushback. The tactic has previously helped him secure exemptions to California’s environmental review law and fast-track infrastructure projects.
This year, though, the approach largely fizzled. Late last week, a Newsom aide acknowledged in a memo to legislative leaders that the governor’s original wildfire proposals “do not appear to have a path” forward, offering a scaled-back version instead. Even so, the governor’s office insisted Newsom hadn’t caved to pressure from lawmakers or fire survivors, declaring in the memo that “all other outstanding issues are off the table.”
The uncertainty rattled financial markets. Shares of the state’s three major investor-owned utilities dropped sharply last Friday and continued falling Monday, with Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric each losing more than 20% of their value.
Frustration over the rushed process
Several lawmakers voiced irritation over the compressed timeline during a Monday night hearing before the Assembly’s utilities committee. Assemblymember Chris Rogers, a Ukiah Democrat, said most committee members hadn’t even seen the bill’s final language until it was too late to make meaningful changes.
By the time it reached the Assembly floor, the measure had already been stripped of some of Newsom’s original priorities, including provisions that would have limited insurance companies’ ability to recover damages from utilities and capped other liabilities utilities owe to fire victims and local governments.
“I have a sell-by date. I get it,” Newsom told reporters Monday during an unannounced visit to the Capitol. “I’m not going to be here to solve this, but it needs to be solved.”
He argued the bill’s final version failed to address the deeper financial pressures facing utilities — pointing to the stock slide as proof — and urged lawmakers to revisit the issue next year with his successor.
A mixed record of late-session wins
Newsom’s last-minute dealmaking hasn’t always failed. Last year, negotiations over an energy package tied to the state’s cap-and-trade program ran so long that lawmakers extended the legislative session by a day to finish the job.
This year, however, several of his priorities collapsed under lawmaker opposition. A push to expedite a controversial shipyard project in the East Bay backed by tech billionaires stalled after Solano County officials and area legislators showed little enthusiasm. (Newsom said Monday that the county board’s vote effectively killing the plan “made no damn sense.”)
He also abandoned a last-minute attempt to exempt a Santa Monica housing development — tied to a longtime political donor — from standard coastal permitting rules, and dropped a proposal to redirect road funding toward a Phillips 66 refinery in Contra Costa County after backlash from environmental groups, transportation advocates and the oil industry.
Lawmakers push back on the pressure tactics
The string of setbacks has drawn criticism from lawmakers and political observers alike. Assemblymember Alex Lee, a San Jose Democrat, needled the governor by gifting him a jar of “last-minute jam” — a jab at what he called Newsom’s “assertive” style with the Legislature.
“Legislators want a governor who is present and that they can work with,” said Tim Rosales, a Los Angeles-based Republican political strategist. “Newsom has never had that kind of relationship with the Legislature and really has been focused pretty specifically on himself. I think that’s probably rubbed a lot of legislators the wrong way.”
Solano County Supervisor Mitch Mashburn, who voted against the shipyard proposal, said concerns about being steamrolled by the governor’s office — not any real urgency — drove much of the local debate. “I ain’t really that afraid of the governor,” he said. “The governor doesn’t get to make law. The Senate and the Assembly get to make law.”
Not everyone agrees Newsom’s influence is fading. Longtime Capitol lobbyist Chris Micheli said the narrative of a weakened lame-duck governor is “overplayed,” noting Newsom still holds significant power over hundreds of bills awaiting his signature or veto. He said this year’s rejections stemmed more from policy disagreements than personal pushback against the governor.
“They win some, they lose some, every single year,” Micheli said of governors generally. “I don’t see it any more pronounced this year.”
Katelyn Roedner Sutter, a lobbyist for the Environmental Defense Fund, said the wildfire liability issue might have gone differently had Newsom’s office started negotiations earlier in the year rather than waiting until the session’s final stretch. “It’s been a growing issue for years,” she said. “So we really should’ve started on this much sooner.”
A defense of the effort
Sen. Josh Becker, a Menlo Park Democrat who authored the eventual wildfire bill and was deeply involved in the negotiations, said lawmakers simply “ran out of time” to fully hash out such a complicated issue — but he didn’t blame Newsom for trying.
“These are big, complex things that take time,” Becker said. “I’m not going to fault the governor one way or another on this. He could have done nothing.”
Newsom, for his part, suggested some of the resistance stemmed from newer legislators not fully grasping the complicated relationship between utilities and insurers. He left open the possibility of calling a special session to revisit the wildfire liability issue, though that would require cooperation from lawmakers.
“I’m just not going to leave without trying,” he said last week, invoking football coaching legend Vince Lombardi. “I feel like Lombardi or something: ‘Did you lose? No, we just ran out of time.’ I wish I had a few more months here.”
He pushed back firmly on the idea that his influence is diminishing as he heads toward the exit. “They haven’t paid any attention — literally no attention,” Newsom said of critics. “We landed 90 planes on some of the toughest issues, as relates to chatbot bills and child safety — a lot, a lot of issues. I decided to take a last at-bat on the toughest issue that I could,” he added, referring to wildfire liability. “And the good news is we made progress.”
Original source: CalMatters
