The final days before ballot measures can be withdrawn have become a familiar part of California politics. Interest groups often spend heavily to qualify initiatives, then use the threat of an expensive statewide campaign to negotiate policy changes at the Capitol. State leaders, in turn, frequently prefer compromise over leaving controversial questions to voters.

This year’s last-minute bargaining has already produced one major agreement: Uber and California trial lawyers have agreed to stand down from competing ballot measures that could have cost each side tens of millions of dollars. At the same time, lawmakers are moving forward with proposals of their own, including a major affordable housing bond and a plan to let California save more money during strong budget years.

For Inland Empire voters, the November ballot could include measures affecting housing, health care, state finances and the legal rules surrounding ride-hailing crashes.

Uber had qualified a ballot measure that would have limited attorney contingency fees and restricted the amount crash victims could recover for medical costs. The proposal would not have been limited to Uber-related crashes. Trial attorney groups, meanwhile, qualified a competing measure aimed at increasing Uber’s liability in cases involving sexual misconduct against riders and drivers.

Instead of taking those measures to voters, both sides reached a deal through Senate Bill 623. The legislation would limit medical cost recoveries in cases involving medical liens, which are arrangements that allow injured people to receive treatment while their legal cases are pending. The bill would apply only to crashes involving Uber and other ride-hailing services.

The compromise does not include Uber’s proposed limits on contingency fees, a provision critics said could have made it harder for crash victims to obtain legal representation. The bill also would bar attorneys from recommending medical providers with whom they have direct ties.

Uber, under the agreement, would be required to strengthen driver background checks and renew them annually. Drivers convicted of certain violent crimes or driving under the influence within the past seven years would be disqualified.

Consumer Attorneys of California had raised about $77 million for its ballot campaign, compared with about $78 million Uber had set aside for its effort. The attorneys group and Uber declined to comment beyond a joint statement saying the agreement “protects patients from unnecessary treatment or getting overcharged, ensures access to medical care and legal representation, and strengthens safety measures.”

Consumer Watchdog, which had opposed Uber’s measure, said the compromise was reasonable. Jamie Court, the group’s president, told CalMatters the bill “doesn’t do harm to the average Uber rider (who has health insurance).”

If approved by lawmakers and signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, the bill would take effect next year.

Another major measure appears likely to reach voters: an $11.25 billion affordable housing bond. Newsom and legislative leaders have agreed on language for Senate Bill 417, the Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2026.

The measure would ask voters to authorize $10 billion in borrowing for affordable housing construction, rehabilitation, acquisition and preservation. An additional $1.25 billion would be set aside to help veterans purchase homes.

The Newsom administration says the bond could help more than 40,000 people buy homes, create or preserve tens of thousands of affordable units and support construction jobs.

“California’s future depends on whether people can afford to put down roots, raise a family, and build a life here,” Newsom said in a statement.

The issue is especially significant across Southern California, where high rents and home prices continue to strain working families. A recent report found that nearly 40,000 affordable housing units planned across California are ready for construction but remain stalled because of a lack of funding.

The housing bond is not yet officially headed to the ballot. Lawmakers must approve it by Thursday, and Newsom must sign it.

The largest unresolved fight centers on a proposed billionaire wealth tax backed by Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West, the state’s largest health care workers union.

The union’s proposal would place a one-time 5% tax on California’s roughly 200 billionaires. SEIU-UHW estimates it would raise about $100 billion, primarily for health care, with some funding reserved for schools and food programs.

Union leaders say the money is needed to offset federal health care cuts that led California to reduce Medi-Cal, the state health insurance program for low-income residents and people with disabilities.

Newsom has opposed the tax and has increased pressure on the union to drop the proposal. Other labor groups, including the California Teachers Association, and health care organizations such as Planned Parenthood and the California Medical Association have also opposed the measure and run digital ads against it.

Billionaires and Silicon Valley business leaders are also fighting the proposal, arguing it could reduce state revenue over time by prompting wealthy residents to leave California.

SEIU-UHW recently suggested a scaled-back 2% version of the tax, but Newsom rejected it, calling the proposal “poorly designed.”

In an interview with The Lever, SEIU-UHW President Dave Regan said it was still possible Newsom could find a compromise, but he expressed skepticism.

“We’re prepared to go forward, and we will be on the ballot in November,” Regan said.

Lawmakers are also expected to vote this week on a proposed constitutional amendment that would allow California to put more money into reserves when state revenues are strong.

Under current law, deposits into the state’s rainy day fund are capped at 10% of general fund tax revenue. Newsom and legislators have discussed increasing that limit for years.

The proposal comes as California faces a multiyear budget deficit despite rising revenues. State leaders are looking for ways to stabilize finances in a system that depends heavily on income taxes and capital gains from high-income residents, making the budget especially vulnerable when the economy weakens.

Original source: CalMatters

The post California Leaders Race to Reach Deal as Billionaire Tax Ballot Deadline Nears appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The slow pace drew national scrutiny after it took roughly a week for enough ballots to be counted to project the California governor’s race. In the days after the primary, critics including President Donald Trump, election analyst Nate Silver and The New York Times editorial board pointed to the delay as a problem for public confidence in elections.

California leaders in both parties say they want faster results. But Democratic officials, who control state government, have shown little interest in major changes if those changes would make it harder for voters to participate.

The central issue is California’s heavy use of mail voting. Large numbers of ballots arrive on Election Day or shortly before, leaving county election offices with a surge of envelopes to process after polls close. That dynamic affects counties across the state, including Southern California and the Inland Empire, where mail voting has become a routine part of elections.

Assemblymember Gail Pellerin, a Santa Cruz Democrat who chairs the Assembly elections committee and previously served as a county registrar, said faster election-night results would come with tradeoffs. She warned that the state would have to return to more in-person voting, set much earlier mail ballot deadlines or take other steps that could leave some voters out.

Secretary of State Shirley Weber has also emphasized accuracy over speed. In April, she told CalMatters that accuracy is “far more important,” and she dismissed some of the criticism of slow results as a political talking point amplified by Trump.

Mail ballots generally take more time, staffing and money to handle than ballots cast in person. County election offices must manage the workload with limited resources, and the Public Policy Institute of California has reported that counties do not receive enough funding to hire the additional workers that could help speed up processing.

Unlike some other states, California does not provide counties with ongoing state funding dedicated to election administration. That leaves local registrars to balance voter access, accuracy and staffing constraints within their existing budgets.

Eric McGhee, a senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California, said county election officials are doing what they can with the money available to them, but the volume of work is significant.

For now, the debate leaves California with a familiar tension: voters and political observers want quicker answers, but the systems that have expanded access to the ballot — particularly widespread mail voting — are also part of what slows the final count.

Original source: CalMatters

The post California Democrats Seek Faster Election Results but Warn Changes Could Hurt Voters appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Over the past three years, the state has distributed about 30,000 laptops to incarcerated students. Nearly half went to the roughly 13,000 people enrolled in community college courses while in prison. The devices are increasingly replacing the long-used correspondence model, in which students completed paper assignments mailed back and forth between prisons and colleges.

The shift has opened a debate among incarcerated students, former students and faculty: Online classes can expand access and offer more timely feedback, but many say in-person instruction remains the most effective way to build confidence, relationships and academic skills.

For Richard Moye, 44, who has been incarcerated for 16 years and takes both online and in-person classes through Solano Community College at California Medical Facility in Vacaville, technology skills are now essential.

“The more we understand about today’s world, the better we’ll be equipped to get out into the workforce as things continue to change,” Moye said. “We don’t want to get left behind. Tech literacy is of the utmost importance behind prison walls.”

The expansion comes as California Community Colleges continues to grow its prison education program, known as Rising Scholars. In 2024, the state Legislative Analyst’s Office recommended that the program make greater use of online classes to address a persistent problem: limited classroom space inside prisons.

Today, 104 of California’s 116 community colleges work with state prisons to offer classes or degree programs. Community college data show that more than 21,000 courses were offered in prisons during fall 2025. Twenty colleges provide in-person instruction, with faculty traveling to facilities to teach. The rest offer classes online or, less frequently than in the past, through mailed correspondence, according to the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office.

State officials do not have a precise count of how many prison-based college courses are conducted online versus by mail. Colleges can use different data labels for correspondence-style classes, and the reporting is not consistent, the Chancellor’s Office said.

The Legislative Analyst’s Office also recommended that Rising Scholars give priority to students who are still working toward their first degree. In-person prison classes often have tight enrollment limits because of space restrictions, typically ranging from 18 to 40 students. At many colleges, enrollment is first-come, first-served, which can allow students pursuing second or third degrees to take seats from those who have not yet earned one, said Orlando Sanchez Zavala, a policy analyst with the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

Sanchez Zavala said focusing access on first-time degree seekers could have the greatest effect on reducing recidivism.

State data suggest education in prison is closely tied to outcomes after release. Among people who earned an associate degree while incarcerated and were released in the 2018-19 fiscal year, 8.5% were convicted of a new crime within three years, according to the prison system’s recidivism report. That compares with a 41.9% conviction rate among all people released that year.

Expanding online and correspondence options could allow colleges to offer more sections with smaller caps, Sanchez Zavala said, giving more incarcerated people a chance to enroll.

Still, the barriers are substantial. Even where prisons have classrooms, those rooms are often shared with other programs, meetings or services. Classes sometimes must be held in gyms or dining halls.

Joseph Bruno Martinez, 40, said he had difficulty enrolling in college classes while incarcerated at high-security prisons, where lockdowns could disrupt the school schedule.

Garret Eiferman, 56, a formerly incarcerated student who is now a graduate student at Cal State Northridge, said correctional officers were not always willing or able to help students complete degrees. He said he had to build relationships with officers so he could use classrooms after 7 p.m. and, at times, persuade staff to allow classmates to leave their housing units to attend class.

Eiferman also described outdated textbooks — often with hard covers removed for safety reasons — little feedback on mailed coursework, and the challenge of balancing classes with prison jobs and required programs.

Although he did not take fully online classes while incarcerated, Eiferman said he understands why they may help students navigate obstacles that come with in-person instruction.

The laptops are intended to do more than deliver assignments. Students and instructors say they expose incarcerated people to digital tools that are routine in college and the workplace outside prison. Much coursework and grading now happens through Canvas, the online learning platform widely used by California’s higher education systems for assignments, submissions and communication between students and instructors.

Isela Ocegueda, vice president of instruction at Coastline College, teaches an online English course to incarcerated students. She said using Canvas can make the transition smoother for students who continue their education after release. Coastline, where about 80% of instruction is online, moved away from mail-based prison courses in 2023 and now describes its model as “Canvas-supported correspondence.”

Ocegueda said online tools allow instructors to design more engaging assignments and provide more meaningful feedback. In one English class, she opened the semester by asking students to write a journal entry introducing themselves and explaining how she could support them. For the final research paper, students can submit drafts and receive edits much faster than they could through mailed packets.

“Imagine just trying to receive essays in the mail and then make your corrections and then send them back,” Ocegueda said. “That was really hard to do in the mail version of correspondence. Canvas-supported correspondence allows more for that writing process to actually happen.”

But online instruction still runs into prison-specific limits. Wi-Fi access varies by facility, and students may wait up to a week for prison librarians to approve some reading materials.

Students at Pelican Bay State Prison in Del Norte County and the California Institution for Women in San Bernardino County have said they cannot access Canvas from their cells because of limited Wi-Fi. Students at Folsom State Prison and San Quentin Rehabilitation Center, by contrast, have said they can complete coursework from their cells because the signal is strong.

A state prison system spokesperson said incarcerated people have Wi-Fi access in housing units at all but four state prisons. All prisons have Wi-Fi in education areas and classrooms, though the strength of the connection can vary.

Some students pursuing bachelor’s degrees in prison have also reported continuing problems with internet access and research materials, including the inability to conduct basic online searches.

Ben Brookeshire, an English professor at Solano College, said one of his biggest challenges is the delay students face in accessing what he called the “information space.” Some documents students need from digital research libraries must first be approved by prison librarians.

Even with the growth of online education, many students and instructors say face-to-face learning remains vital.

Eiferman completed most of his prison coursework through correspondence classes from Palo Verde and Coastline colleges between 2009 and 2019. While incarcerated, he earned an associate of arts degree, an associate of science degree and a business certificate. He was also pursuing a U.S. history degree when he was paroled in 2020.

“The bulk of my interaction with professors during the degree completion was very minimal,” he said. “It’s distance learning, so that means it’s all done with an envelope and a stamp, and feedback was never a thing.”

That made the transition to university difficult, he said, because he discovered gaps in what he had learned and areas where he needed to relearn material more fully.

Eiferman took his first in-person college course through Bakersfield College at Golden State Community Correctional Facility, a medium-security prison in the southern San Joaquin Valley. The class was math, a subject he had long struggled with. But in the classroom, he said, he experienced breakthroughs and was able to help other students.

Moye said in-person classes help students better understand instructors’ expectations and offer a level of interaction that online courses cannot fully replicate, including peer support, tutoring, group discussion and collaboration.

Community college system data show that in spring 2025, incarcerated students had a 77% success rate in internet-based and correspondence courses, compared with 85% in in-person courses. Success means earning a C or higher, or a passing mark in courses that are not letter-graded. Incarcerated students in in-person classes also had a success rate 10 percentage points higher than community college students overall.

“I’m a fan of in-person learning,” Moye said. “That’s my favorite style of learning, because to me, it resembles most what’s going on in society. If we’re trying to prepare incarcerated men and women for society, we have to have it look as much like society as possible.”

Brookeshire said he understands online courses are likely to keep expanding, but he continues to teach only in person because of the connection it allows him to build with students.

“I really believe there’s magic in a classroom,” he said. “I really believe that face-to-face instruction is irreplaceable.”

Original source: CalMatters

The post California Community Colleges Expand Prison Education Through Student Laptop Program appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The negotiations, unfolding in Sacramento in the final days before ballot measures can be withdrawn, could shape what Californians see when they vote this fall. For Inland Empire voters and residents across Southern California, the outcome could affect issues ranging from housing and health care to state budget reserves and rideshare safety.

The last-minute bargaining is a familiar feature of California politics. Interest groups often spend millions to qualify ballot initiatives, then use the threat of a statewide campaign to press lawmakers for policy concessions. State leaders, meanwhile, frequently prefer negotiated agreements over unpredictable and costly ballot fights.

Top Democrats have already announced one major compromise: a deal between Uber and California trial lawyers that would pull a pair of competing initiatives from the ballot. Lawmakers also appear ready to place an $11.25 billion affordable housing and veterans homeownership bond before voters. Still unresolved is a proposed tax on billionaire wealth, backed by the state’s largest health care workers union, which Gov. Gavin Newsom is trying to keep off the ballot.

Uber and attorneys had been preparing for a costly November showdown before reaching an agreement through the Legislature.

Uber had qualified a measure that would have limited attorney contingency fees and restricted how much crash victims could recover for medical expenses in California — not only in crashes involving Uber rides. Attorney organizations responded with their own initiative, aimed at increasing Uber’s liability in cases involving sexual misconduct against passengers and drivers.

The compromise is contained in Senate Bill 623. Under the bill, recoveries for medical costs would be capped in certain cases involving medical liens, which allow injured people to receive treatment while a legal claim is pending without paying upfront. The measure would apply only to crashes involving Uber or other ride-hailing services. It would not include Uber’s proposed restrictions on contingency fees, which critics said could have made it harder for injured people to find legal representation.

The legislation also would bar attorneys from referring clients to medical providers with whom they have direct financial ties.

Uber, in turn, would be required to strengthen and annually renew driver background checks. Drivers convicted of specified violent crimes or driving under the influence within the previous seven years would be disqualified.

A group of medical providers that had spent money opposing Uber’s initiative did not respond to multiple requests for comment, according to CalMatters. Consumer Attorneys of California, which had raised about $77 million for its campaign, also declined to comment beyond a joint statement with Uber. Uber had committed about $78 million to its effort.

“This agreement protects patients from unnecessary treatment or getting overcharged, ensures access to medical care and legal representation, and strengthens safety measures,” the statement said.

Consumer Watchdog, which had opposed Uber’s measure, described the compromise as a balanced outcome. Jamie Court, the group’s president, told CalMatters the bill “doesn’t do harm to the average Uber rider” who has health insurance.

If approved by lawmakers and signed by the governor, the bill would take effect next year.

At the same time, a major affordable housing bond is moving closer to the November ballot. Newsom, the Assembly and the Senate have agreed on language for Senate Bill 417, the Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2026.

The measure would ask voters to authorize $10 billion in borrowing for affordable housing construction, acquisition, rehabilitation and preservation. An additional $1.25 billion would go toward helping veterans purchase homes.

If voters approve the bond, Newsom’s administration says it could help more than 40,000 people buy homes, support the creation or preservation of tens of thousands of affordable units and generate well-paying construction jobs.

“California’s future depends on whether people can afford to put down roots, raise a family, and build a life here,” Newsom said in a statement.

The proposal comes as California continues to struggle with a severe housing shortage and high costs that have strained families across the state, including in fast-growing Inland Empire communities. A recent report found that nearly 40,000 planned affordable housing units in California are ready to move forward but remain stalled because of funding gaps.

The bond is not yet officially on the ballot. The Legislature must pass the bill by Thursday, and Newsom must sign it.

The biggest unresolved fight centers on a proposed tax targeting California’s wealthiest residents.

Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West is pushing a one-time 5% wealth tax on the state’s roughly 200 billionaires. The union says the measure would raise about $100 billion, with most of the money going to health care and smaller portions set aside for schools and food programs.

SEIU-UHW argues the revenue is needed to offset federal health care cuts that have forced California to reduce spending in Medi-Cal, the state’s health insurance program for low-income residents and people with disabilities.

Newsom has emerged as a strong opponent of the proposal and has intensified pressure on the union in recent days. He has been joined by other influential organizations, including the California Teachers Association, Planned Parenthood and the California Medical Association, which have run digital ads opposing the tax.

Opposition has also come from billionaires and Silicon Valley figures, who argue the measure would backfire by encouraging wealthy residents to leave California and reducing state revenue over time.

Last week, SEIU-UHW suggested a scaled-back version of the tax at 2% instead of 5%. Newsom quickly rejected the idea, calling it “poorly designed.”

In an interview with The Lever, SEIU-UHW President Dave Regan said Newsom might still find a way to negotiate a compromise but expressed skepticism.

“We’re prepared to go forward, and we will be on the ballot in November,” Regan said.

Lawmakers are also expected to vote this week on a proposed constitutional amendment that would let California save more money during strong budget years.

The state currently cannot deposit more than 10% of general fund tax revenue into its rainy day fund. Newsom and legislators have discussed raising that limit for years, and the idea has gained urgency as California faces a multiyear budget deficit despite rising revenues.

California’s finances are especially sensitive to swings in the economy because the state relies heavily on income taxes and capital gains from its highest-earning residents. Supporters of the proposed change say allowing the state to build larger reserves could help cushion future downturns.

As the deadline nears, California leaders are trying to narrow the list of high-stakes measures headed to voters. But unless a late deal emerges, the billionaire tax could remain one of the most closely watched fights on the November ballot.

Original source: CalMatters

The post California Leaders Still Seek Deal to Keep Billionaire Tax Off Ballot as Deadline Nears appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The slow tally drew national scrutiny after it took roughly a week for enough ballots to be counted to project the outcome of the governor’s race. Critics included President Donald Trump, election analyst Nate Silver and The New York Times editorial board, which argued that delayed results can undermine public confidence in government.

State leaders from both parties have said they would prefer faster results. But Democratic officials, who control state government, have shown little interest in major changes if those changes would limit access to ballots — particularly mail voting, now a central part of California elections.

Election officials say the delay is largely tied to the volume of mail ballots that arrive on Election Day or shortly before it. Under California law, those ballots must be verified and processed before they are counted, a procedure that takes more time than tabulating votes cast in person.

Assemblymember Gail Pellerin, a Santa Cruz Democrat who chairs the Assembly elections committee and previously served as a county registrar, said Californians should understand the tradeoff involved.

“If you want results election night, you’re going to have to go back to in-person voting, way earlier deadlines for returning by mail and you’re going to end up disenfranchising voters,” Pellerin told CalMatters.

Secretary of State Shirley Weber has also defended the current system, saying accuracy must come before speed. In April, Weber dismissed some criticism of California’s vote-counting process as a political attack and said the priority should remain ensuring that valid ballots are counted.

“For me, accuracy is far more important,” Weber told CalMatters.

The issue is especially relevant in large Southern California counties, where election offices handle high numbers of mail ballots and must verify signatures, sort envelopes and process ballots under strict security rules. The work is labor-intensive and can extend for days or weeks after an election, depending on turnout and the number of ballots returned late in the voting period.

Mail ballots also cost more to process than in-person votes, requiring additional staff, equipment and time. The Public Policy Institute of California has reported that counties do not receive enough funding to easily expand staffing for faster counting. Unlike some states, California does not provide ongoing state funding to counties specifically for election administration.

Eric McGhee, a senior fellow at the institute, said county registrars are often trying to balance voter access, accuracy and limited budgets.

“They’re kind of managing the best they can with the budget that they have,” McGhee told CalMatters. “But it’s a lot to handle.”

Republicans have repeatedly criticized California’s slow reporting, arguing that a state with the size and resources of California should be able to produce results more quickly. Democrats counter that many of the proposals likely to speed up the count — such as shortening ballot return windows or requiring more voters to cast ballots in person — could reduce participation, especially among voters who rely on mail ballots because of work schedules, disability, transportation barriers or other challenges.

For now, the state appears unlikely to make sweeping changes. The debate is expected to continue as California heads toward future elections, with officials facing pressure to reassure voters that slow results do not mean unreliable results.

Original source: CalMatters

The post California Democrats Seek Faster Election Results but Warn Changes Could Hurt Voters appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Over the past three years, the state prison system has spent $23.2 million to provide 30,000 laptops to incarcerated students. Nearly half of those devices went to about 13,000 people enrolled in California community college courses while in prison.

The effort is helping move prison education away from the long-standing correspondence model, in which students received paper packets, completed assignments by hand and mailed work back to instructors. While some colleges still use mail-based courses, online instruction is becoming more common as laptops reach more students.

Supporters say the technology gives incarcerated students more timely access to assignments, feedback and instructors, while also building computer skills needed for jobs after release. Others caution that online courses cannot fully replace the value of in-person teaching, where students can interact directly with faculty and classmates.

Richard Moye, 44, an incarcerated student who has been in prison for 16 years, said technology skills are essential for people preparing to return to the workforce.

“The more we understand about today’s world, the better we’ll be equipped to get out into the workforce as things continue to change,” Moye said. “We don’t want to get left behind. … Tech literacy is of the utmost importance behind prison walls.”

The expansion of prison-based online learning follows a 2024 recommendation from the state Legislative Analyst’s Office, which urged improvements to Rising Scholars, the California Community Colleges program that serves incarcerated students. The office pointed to limited classroom space in prisons and suggested that more online courses could help colleges reach additional students. It also recommended giving priority to students working toward their first degree, rather than allowing people seeking second or third degrees to take limited seats.

Of California’s 116 community colleges, 104 now partner with prisons to offer courses or degree programs. Community college data show more than 21,000 courses were held in prisons during fall 2025. Twenty colleges offered in-person instruction, with faculty traveling to prisons to teach. The rest provided classes online or through correspondence, though mail-based courses are becoming less common, according to the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office.

The system does not have a precise count of how many incarcerated students are taking online classes compared with traditional correspondence courses. Colleges may use different reporting labels for those courses, making statewide tracking inconsistent, the Chancellor’s Office said.

In-person prison classes face practical limits. Classroom space is often scarce because prison classrooms are also used for other programs and meetings. At times, classes are held in gyms or dining areas. Enrollment in a typical in-person course can range from 18 to 40 students, and many colleges enroll students on a first-come, first-served basis.

Orlando Sanchez Zavala, a policy analyst with the Legislative Analyst’s Office, said that can mean students already holding degrees may take seats from those still pursuing their first college credential. Prioritizing first-degree students, he said, could have the greatest effect on reducing recidivism.

Earning a degree in prison can expand job prospects after release and help people reintegrate. According to a state prison recidivism report, incarcerated people who earned an associate degree during the 2018-19 fiscal year had an 8.5% conviction rate in the three years after release. The overall conviction rate for people released that year was 41.9%.

For students, the path to a degree can be difficult regardless of course format.

Joseph Bruno Martinez, 40, said he had trouble getting into classes while housed at high-security prisons, where lockdowns could interrupt instruction across an entire institution.

Garret Eiferman, 56, who was formerly incarcerated and is now a graduate student at Cal State Northridge, said correctional officers were not always willing or able to support students trying to complete coursework. He said he had to build relationships with officers to gain access to classrooms after 7 p.m. and sometimes had to persuade staff to let classmates leave their housing units to attend class.

Eiferman said he also dealt with outdated textbooks, some with hard covers removed for safety reasons, little feedback on correspondence assignments, and the challenge of balancing school with prison work and other required programs. Although he did not take online-only courses while incarcerated, he said he understands why laptops could help students facing similar obstacles.

For Moye, who takes both online and in-person classes through Solano Community College at California Medical Facility in Vacaville, online coursework is valuable because it brings prison education closer to how colleges operate outside prison walls. Many students and instructors now use Canvas, the learning management system common across California’s higher education systems, to submit assignments, receive grades and communicate.

Isela Ocegueda, vice president of instruction at Coastline College, teaches online English to incarcerated students. She said using Canvas can make it easier for students to continue their education after release because they are already familiar with the same platform used on many campuses. At Coastline, about 80% of instruction is online.

Until 2023, Coastline taught prison courses through mail correspondence. The college now describes its model as “Canvas-supported correspondence.”

Ocegueda said the online format allows for more detailed feedback and more creative assignments. In one English course, she began the semester by asking students to write a journal entry introducing themselves and explaining how she could support them. For the final research paper, students can submit multiple drafts and receive edits much faster than through the mail.

“Imagine just trying to receive essays in the mail and then make your corrections and then send them back,” Ocegueda said. “That was really hard to do in the mail version of correspondence. … Canvas-supported correspondence allows more for that writing process to actually happen.”

Still, online learning in prison remains uneven. Wi-Fi access differs by facility, and incarcerated students may wait days for certain reading materials or research documents to be approved by prison librarians.

Students at Pelican Bay State Prison in Del Norte County and California Institution for Women in San Bernardino County have said they cannot access Canvas from their cells because of limited Wi-Fi. Students at Folsom State Prison and San Quentin Rehabilitation Center have reported stronger connections that allow them to complete coursework from their housing units.

A spokesperson for the state prison system said incarcerated people have Wi-Fi access in housing units at all but four California prisons. All prisons have Wi-Fi in education areas and classrooms, though the quality of the signal may vary.

Some incarcerated students pursuing bachelor’s degrees have also reported difficulty accessing research materials online and said they wished they could conduct basic internet searches for academic work.

Ben Brookeshire, an English professor at Solano College, said one of his biggest challenges is the lag time students face when trying to access digital research materials. Some documents available through research databases must first be reviewed by prison librarians before students can use them.

Despite the rise of online learning, many students and faculty continue to value in-person instruction.

Eiferman completed most of his prison coursework by mail through Palo Verde College and Coastline College between 2009 and 2019. During his incarceration, he earned an associate degree in arts, an associate degree in science and a business certificate. He was also working toward a U.S. history degree when he was paroled in 2020.

He said his interaction with professors during correspondence courses was limited, and detailed feedback was rare. That made the transition to university coursework more difficult after his release.

His first in-person college class came through Bakersfield College at Golden State Community Correctional Facility, a medium-security prison in the southern San Joaquin Valley. The course was math, a subject he had long struggled with, but Eiferman said the classroom setting helped concepts click. He also found himself encouraging and helping other students stay enrolled.

Moye said in-person courses give students a clearer understanding of what instructors expect and allow for peer support, group work, tutoring and discussion.

Community college data show incarcerated students had a 77% success rate in internet-based and correspondence courses in spring 2025, compared with an 85% success rate in in-person classes. Success is defined as earning a C or better, or passing a course graded on a pass-fail basis. In in-person courses, incarcerated students performed 10 percentage points better than community college students overall.

“I’m a fan of in-person learning,” Moye said. “That’s my favorite style of learning, because to me, it resembles most what’s going on in society. If we’re trying to prepare incarcerated men and women for society, we have to have it look as much like society as possible.”

Brookeshire said he recognizes that online prison education will continue to grow, but he chooses to teach in person because he believes it is the best way to connect with students.

“I’m very passionate,” he said. “I really believe there’s magic in a classroom, and I really believe that face-to-face instruction is irreplaceable.”

Original source: CalMatters

The post California Community Colleges Put State-Issued Prison Student Laptops to Work appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The latest debate followed California’s primary election, when it took about a week for enough votes to be counted to project the outcome of the high-profile governor’s race. The slow release of results attracted national attention, renewed accusations from election skeptics and prompted calls for reforms to make California’s vote count faster.

Election analyst Nate Silver called California an extreme outlier in how slowly it counts ballots compared with other states and industrialized democracies. Some online responses to the delays falsely suggested the extended count was evidence of manipulation. The New York Times editorial board also criticized California’s election system, arguing that delayed results can undermine public confidence and create openings for misinformation. Gov. Gavin Newsom has similarly urged counties to report results more quickly, warning that delays can weaken trust in the process.

But many California Democrats, including those who oversee election policy in Sacramento, say faster results cannot come at the expense of voters who rely on mail ballots or late voting options.

Assemblymember Gail Pellerin, a Democrat who chairs the Assembly elections committee and previously served as Santa Cruz County registrar, said same-night results would require major restrictions, such as a return to mostly in-person voting or earlier deadlines for mailed ballots.

“If you want results election night, you’re going to have to go back to in-person voting, way earlier deadlines for returning by mail, and you’re going to end up disenfranchising voters,” Pellerin said.

Pellerin said that despite public frustration, county elections offices are doing their jobs and continuing to process ballots carefully.

“It’s actually going really well, and elections officials are working around the clock, and we’re getting results,” she said.

Other Democratic lawmakers who have worked on election legislation, including Assemblymember Marc Berman of Palo Alto and Sen. Tom Umberg of Santa Ana, have also said they do not support restrictions on voting access as a way to accelerate results. Sen. Scott Wiener, a San Francisco Democrat who chairs the Senate elections committee and is running for Congress, said candidates may want quicker answers, but that cannot be the top priority.

“As a candidate, believe me, I would love for the counting to happen faster,” Wiener said. “I don’t think the right answer is disenfranchising people.”

Secretary of State Shirley Weber has also said accuracy should take precedence over speed. Weber, who is expected to win another term this fall, has previously dismissed some concerns about the slow count as echoing rhetoric used by President Donald Trump and his allies.

“I know the value of being fast for some folks,” Weber told CalMatters in April. “For me, accuracy is far more important.”

Some critics have focused on California’s rule allowing mail ballots to be counted if they arrive up to seven days after Election Day, as long as they are postmarked on time. That policy could face broader legal uncertainty as the U.S. Supreme Court considers whether to invalidate a similar law in Mississippi.

But election officials and researchers say much of California’s delay comes from the large number of mail ballots that arrive on Election Day or shortly before it — not only from ballots that arrive days later.

California adopted universal vote-by-mail during the pandemic, sending every registered voter a ballot. The system has become highly popular. In last year’s statewide special election, nearly 90% of votes were cast by mail. A decade ago, by comparison, fewer than 60% of voters in general elections used mail ballots.

Mail ballots, however, take more work to process than ballots cast in person and scanned at vote centers. Counties must verify registration, ensure voters have not cast multiple ballots and check signatures. That process requires time, staff, equipment and space.

Eric McGhee, a senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California, said counties have not received a consistent stream of state funding to match the demands of the vote-by-mail system.

“They’re kind of managing the best they can with the budget that they have,” McGhee said of county registrars. “But it’s a lot to handle.”

Unlike some states, California does not provide ongoing election administration funding to counties. Colorado, another universal vote-by-mail state, covers 45% of election costs when a statewide issue appears on the ballot. Hawaii shares expenses with counties for statewide and federal elections. Arizona reimburses counties $1.25 per active registered voter for presidential primaries.

In Yolo County, Registrar Jesse Salinas said more than half of the primary ballots that arrived this month were mail ballots returned on Election Day. He said only about 30% of ballots can be matched automatically by scanners, while the remaining 70% require human review.

“When people ask, ‘Well, why aren’t you working harder?’” Salinas said, he tells them that vote center staff work 19 straight days, including early voting periods that can last up to 15 days.

On Election Day, Salinas said, the Yolo County elections office is so packed with boxes of mail ballots that there is no room for additional machines or employees, even if funding were available. Handling more ballots quickly would require a larger facility.

“When you have that large volume hitting you at the 11th hour, there’s no way you can go through all of that in one night,” he said.

Orange County, by contrast, counted ballots more quickly this year after investing $4 million in new mail ballot processing equipment. Registrar Bob Page and his staff processed more than 807,000 ballots in a little over a week, with employees working from 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. on weekdays and also working a Saturday shift.

Salinas said state funding would make a significant difference for counties. California paid for the costs of Newsom’s 2021 recall election and the 2025 statewide special election on redistricting, which allowed Yolo County to upgrade equipment.

But counties are facing other financial pressures, including the loss of federal and state Medi-Cal dollars and structural budget deficits that have forced departments to reduce spending. Even during an election year, Salinas said, his office was told to cut $1.1 million.

Original source: CalMatters

The post California Democrats Resist Stricter Voting Deadlines as Calls Grow for Faster Election Results appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

For residents across Southern California and the Inland Empire, the pressures are familiar: housing, utilities, food and transportation costs have climbed faster than many paychecks. Statewide, California’s cost of living is 11% higher than the national average, according to the federal Bureau of Economic Analysis. Rents are 53% above the U.S. average, while utility costs are 63% higher.

Those expenses are a major reason California also has the nation’s highest poverty rate when cost of living is taken into account, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. They also help explain why many residents have left for less expensive states. Since 2015, California has recorded a net loss of about 900,000 residents to other states, according to the Public Policy Institute of California.

At the same time, California’s job market remains uneven. The state’s unemployment rate is 5.3%, among the highest in the country, with more than 1 million people out of work. A broader labor measure that includes discouraged job seekers and part-time workers who want full-time employment stands at 10.1%, also the highest in the nation.

In response, Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Legislature have pursued a mix of housing reforms, temporary relief programs and wage mandates. State leaders have approved numerous laws intended to speed up housing construction, particularly for lower- and moderate-income residents, with the goal of easing one of the largest drivers of household costs.

But housing production has remained well below what officials have said is needed. California has been building roughly 100,000 housing units a year, and the governor’s latest budget projections show only modest growth, to about 115,000 units annually through 2030.

When state finances have allowed, lawmakers also have funded direct assistance programs, including the California Earned Income Tax Credit and guaranteed income pilot efforts. Increasingly, however, wage policy has become one of the most visible tools used to address affordability.

A new report from the Virginia-based Employment Policies Institute found that California is leading the nation in setting higher minimum wages for specific industries and localities. The report says eight of the 10 largest local minimum wage increases taking effect in July are in California.

The most prominent example remains the state’s $20 minimum wage for fast-food workers, approved after an intense political fight and accompanied by the creation of a state body to oversee employment conditions in the industry. The policy continues to spark disagreement over its consequences.

Supporters point to studies showing that the wage increase did not significantly reduce employment or drive up prices. Opponents cite other research arguing that fast-food operators responded by raising menu prices and reducing staffing.

The state also has approved higher wages for health care workers. Local governments have moved in the same direction, setting wage floors for selected industries, including hotel workers in Los Angeles and amusement park employees in San Diego.

In Los Angeles, the City Council approved a $30 minimum wage for hotel and airport workers, based partly on the idea that visitors would absorb much of the added cost. Implementation was later delayed until after the 2028 Olympics as part of an agreement with business leaders, who in exchange withdrew a ballot measure that would have eliminated the city’s gross receipts tax, a key source of municipal revenue.

The push for sector-specific wage increases is continuing. The Service Employees International Union is backing Senate Bill 1203, which would increase training requirements for private security guards and give the state Industrial Welfare Commission authority to set new minimum wages for those workers.

The central question for California is whether higher mandated wages can keep workers afloat without worsening the affordability problem they are meant to address. If employers pass higher labor costs on to consumers, the result could be another round of price increases, creating more pressure for additional wage hikes and making it harder for middle- and lower-income Californians to remain in the state.

Original source: CalMatters

The post California Looks to Minimum Wage Increases to Ease Living Costs, but Trade-Offs Emerge appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Kaci Patterson, founder and chief architect of Social Good Solutions and the Black Equity Collective, has called for California to embrace what she describes as “Black permanency” — a vision in which Black residents and institutions are not merely surviving, but have the resources, stability and power to thrive across generations.

The idea comes at a time of economic strain, climate-related disasters and political pushback against equity initiatives. Patterson argues that Black communities are facing erasure in classrooms, public language, data and historical narratives, even as Black-led organizations continue to serve as essential support systems in their communities.

Those organizations, she noted, often respond first when families need food, housing assistance or other emergency help, filling gaps left by government programs and shrinking public resources. At the same time, Black women have been pushed out of the workforce at more than three times the rate of other workers over the past 18 months, according to data cited by advocates.

Recent disasters have also underscored longstanding inequities. In Altadena, a community known for its history of Black homeownership, leaders have raised concerns about whether rebuilding from Los Angeles-area wildfires will allow longtime Black families to remain and preserve the community’s identity. The question, Patterson argues, is not simply who recovers, but who gets to stay, belong and pass stability to the next generation.

The philanthropic sector also remains under scrutiny. After the murder of George Floyd, many institutions made major pledges to support racial justice and Black communities. Advocates say many of those commitments have not been sustained. Black-led nonprofits — about two-thirds of which are led by Black women — remain among the most underfunded organizations in the nonprofit world.

That lack of investment has consequences, Patterson argues, visible in housing instability, displacement, the loss of cultural institutions and the pressure on Black-led organizations to continually take on responsibilities beyond their core missions.

Moving from temporary gains to lasting change, she said, will require more than statements of support. It would mean durable investments designed with communities, reparations, endowments for Black institutions, education that affirms Black history and humanity, and access to capital for Black founders, innovators and cultural leaders. It would also require pay equity, including addressing the gap that leaves Black women waiting until mid-July 2026 to earn what white men earned by the end of 2025.

For philanthropy, Patterson called for more multiyear general operating support and shared decision-making with the communities being served. For government, she said nonprofits should be paid market rates for contracted services so they are not forced to subsidize public safety-net work through their own limited budgets.

The issue, she argued, is not only one of racial justice but also of economic development. California’s Black-led organizations employed more than 4,000 people and generated more than $335 million in salaries in fiscal year 2023. When those organizations are properly funded, advocates say, local economies and broader community networks benefit.

Juneteenth marks the day emancipation became a reality for enslaved people in Texas, more than two years after the Emancipation Proclamation. That delay between legal freedom and lived freedom remains central to the Black experience in America.

California is the only state to have established a reparations task force, placing it in a unique position nationally. Patterson and other advocates say the state now faces a choice: celebrate Juneteenth with parades and gatherings, or pair those observances with policies and investments that make long-term Black stability possible.

For communities across Southern California and the Inland Empire, where nonprofits and civic organizations often help meet urgent needs, the question is whether public and private leaders will treat Black permanency as a lasting civic commitment rather than a seasonal message.

Original source: CalMatters

The post On Juneteenth, Californians Reflect on What Black Communities Need to Thrive appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The bill, Senate Bill 125, responds to new federal limits on how states may tax health plans. California’s managed care organization tax, known as the MCO tax, is charged to health plans that coordinate care for their members. Until now, California has taxed Medi-Cal plans at a higher rate than private health plans, allowing the state to generate billions of dollars annually and draw additional federal matching funds for Medi-Cal.

Under the revised plan approved by the Legislature, Medi-Cal plans and private plans would be taxed at the same monthly rate: $8.85 per enrollee. If signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom and approved by the federal government, the change would shift more of the tax burden onto privately insured Californians while producing less revenue overall than the current structure.

The issue matters across Southern California and the Inland Empire, where many families already face rising health care costs and where Medi-Cal covers large numbers of low-income residents, children, seniors and people with disabilities.

Senate President Pro Tem Monique Limón, a Santa Barbara Democrat, acknowledged this week that lawmakers were not choosing from ideal options. She said the Senate still had concerns, but the state needed to act quickly to protect revenue amid changes at the federal level.

“We have as a Senate been very clear that we needed revenue,” Limón told reporters, describing the decision as one lawmakers believed they could manage while federal rules continue to shift.

The federal changes stem from a tax and spending law passed by Congress last summer. Those rules restrict provider taxes, including taxes on health plans. Under the previous structure, California received nearly $8 billion a year from the MCO tax, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office. The new federal limits are expected to reduce that amount by billions of dollars.

The Legislature’s proposal would not directly increase insurance premiums. Instead, it would raise taxes on private health plans, which say they would pass those costs on to customers.

The Legislative Analyst’s Office has estimated that if health plans pass along the full cost, privately insured Californians could see monthly premiums rise by about 1.5%. That would come in addition to routine annual premium increases.

The California Association of Health Plans estimates the added tax could cost consumers roughly $100 more per year in premiums. For a family of four, the increase could amount to about $400 annually.

Charles Bacchi, president of the association, said taxes and fees are factored into the administrative portion of insurance premiums.

“That is just actuarial science,” Bacchi said. “So when you increase taxes on health plans and insurers, that is built into premium rates and the customer pays it.”

The Newsom administration has said the proposal seeks to balance affordability concerns for people with private insurance against the need to maintain funding for Medi-Cal as federal support shrinks.

H.D. Palmer, a spokesperson for the state Department of Finance, said the $8.85 monthly assessment was chosen because it would generate about $2.3 billion a year, similar to the amount California received before 2023 to support Medi-Cal. About $2 billion would go toward existing Medi-Cal services, while roughly $300 million would support previously approved rate increases for providers offering primary care, maternity care and mental health services to Medi-Cal patients, Palmer said.

Some lawmakers voiced reservations even as the bill moved forward. Sen. Akilah Weber Pierson, a San Diego Democrat and physician, called the proposal “extremely problematic” during a Wednesday hearing and said she was uncomfortable with the cost it could impose on families. She ultimately voted for the measure Thursday.

Health plans, physician groups and the California Hospital Association urged lawmakers to reject the proposal in its current form.

After the Assembly approved the bill, the California Association of Health Plans criticized the vote, saying it clashed with state leaders’ stated focus on affordability.

“It is difficult to reconcile those statements with a vote that will increase health insurance premiums on the very people policymakers say they are trying to help,” the group said.

Opponents also argue the proposal conflicts with Proposition 35, the 2024 voter-approved measure that limits taxes on private health plans and requires much of the revenue to be used to expand Medi-Cal services and increase provider rates, rather than backfill general fund spending.

Dr. René Bravo, president of the California Medical Association, said using higher insurance costs to help stabilize the state budget would hurt families.

“Raising health insurance premiums to help balance the state budget is simply robbing Peter to pay Paul,” Bravo said. “It will only make it harder for families to keep coverage and get the care they need.”

California is being forced to redesign the tax because of new federal rules issued under last year’s congressional spending plan. The state’s current approach taxed Medicaid plans more heavily than commercial plans, then used the proceeds to draw down federal matching funds.

Federal officials under the Trump administration have argued that states have used such arrangements to shift Medicaid costs to the federal government. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services issued a final rule earlier this year barring states from taxing Medicaid plans at a higher rate than private plans.

Now that the Legislature has approved the revised tax plan, Newsom must sign it before California can seek federal approval. Budget observers expect him to do so because the proposal closely mirrors the administration’s own plan.

Consumer advocates say preserving MCO tax revenue is essential to keeping Medi-Cal stable. But they also say lawmakers should ensure that any added costs paid by privately insured residents are used to improve health care, not simply to reduce pressure on the state budget.

Kiran Savage-Sangwan, executive director of the California Pan-Ethnic Health Network, said consumers should not be asked to pay higher premiums only to have the money backfill the general fund.

The largest remaining uncertainty is whether the federal government will approve California’s revised tax structure. Without that approval, the state would not be able to continue using the tax to draw down federal matching funds.

Adriana Ramos-Yamamoto, a senior policy fellow at the California Budget and Policy Center, said lawmakers’ task is to craft a plan that complies with the new federal rules. But approval is not assured.

“It’s not a guarantee that the federal government will approve our new MCO tax proposal,” she said.

Original source: CalMatters

The post California Weighs Health Insurance Tax Increase as Consumers Watch Premiums appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.