The trees, known for their twisted limbs and stark silhouettes, are found largely within the Mojave Desert, including areas in and around Joshua Tree National Park. The park remains a powerful economic engine for surrounding communities. In 2024, about 3 million visitors spent $179 million in the region, producing an estimated $214 million in local economic benefits, according to National Park Service data.

But conservation concerns are mounting as new energy and mining proposals move forward across the desert. Several large solar projects and rare earth mineral developments have been proposed in Joshua tree habitat. One approved solar project near Boron is expected to require the removal of 4,200 Joshua trees. Another rare earth mining proposal near Joshua Tree National Park could affect 32 square miles of habitat if it is developed.

Supporters of renewable energy projects point to their role in reducing reliance on fossil fuels, but conservation advocates say those benefits must be weighed against the loss of desert habitat and the long-term survival of Joshua trees.

The threat is not limited to development. Recent severe droughts have strained Joshua trees, despite their adaptation to hot and dry desert conditions. Climate projections point to more intense heat waves and drought in the decades ahead. Because Joshua trees can take at least 30 years to mature, scientists have warned that changing conditions could outpace their ability to adapt. Some research has suggested the species could be pushed toward extinction by the end of the century if current trends continue.

The loss of Joshua trees would affect more than the landscape. Twenty-five bird species depend on them, along with rare wildlife such as the pallid blue dotted butterfly and the desert tortoise. The Mojave Desert may appear sparse, but its ecosystem is highly connected, and Joshua trees provide important habitat in that network.

Their disappearance also could have serious consequences for desert towns that rely on park tourism and outdoor recreation. Communities near Joshua Tree National Park benefit from visitors who come to hike, camp, photograph the landscape and experience the desert environment.

Joshua trees have survived since the late Ice Age, when scientists believe now-extinct giant ground sloths helped disperse their seeds. Today, with those animals long gone and the climate changing rapidly, their future increasingly depends on human decisions about land use, conservation and development.

Conservation groups, including the Mojave Desert Land Trust, have been working to protect desert habitat and promote strategies aimed at preserving Joshua trees and the broader ecosystem. Advocates say local governments, businesses and state leaders should treat Joshua tree protection as a priority when considering new projects in the Mojave.

For many Southern California residents, Joshua trees are more than a backdrop. They are part of the region’s natural identity and a reminder of the fragile desert life that has endured for thousands of years. Without stronger protections, conservationists warn, future generations may not have the chance to see them standing across the Mojave.

Original source: CalMatters

The post Thousands of Joshua Trees Threatened as Mojave Desert Development Expands appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Joshua trees draw visitors from around the world to Joshua Tree National Park and surrounding desert communities, where tourism is a major economic driver. In 2024, about 3 million visitors to the park spent $179 million, producing an estimated $214 million in economic benefits for nearby communities, according to National Park Service data.

But as interest grows in energy and mining projects across the Mojave, conservation advocates and researchers warn that the habitat supporting Joshua trees is increasingly at risk.

Several large-scale solar developments and rare earth mining proposals are under consideration or moving forward in the region. One approved solar project near Boron is expected to remove about 4,200 Joshua trees. Another proposed rare earth mining project outside Joshua Tree National Park could affect roughly 32 square miles of Joshua tree habitat if it proceeds.

Supporters of renewable energy projects point to their role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and expanding clean power. But critics argue that such projects must be planned carefully to avoid sacrificing fragile desert ecosystems in the process.

Joshua trees already face significant environmental stress. Although they are adapted to harsh desert conditions, recent record-breaking droughts and extreme heat have strained the species. Climate projections indicate the Mojave could see more severe droughts and heat waves in the decades ahead.

Because Joshua trees often take at least 30 years to mature, scientists have warned that changing conditions may outpace the trees’ ability to adapt or reproduce successfully. Some research suggests Joshua trees could be pushed toward extinction by the end of the century if current trends continue.

The loss would affect more than the trees themselves. Joshua trees provide important habitat for desert wildlife, including 25 bird species, rare insects such as the pallid blue dotted butterfly, and species including the desert tortoise. The Mojave ecosystem, though often perceived as barren, is highly interconnected, and the decline of Joshua trees could ripple across the landscape.

The potential economic consequences also are significant for communities near Joshua Tree National Park, where local businesses depend heavily on ecotourism and the park’s distinctive scenery.

Joshua trees have survived since the late Ice Age, when now-extinct giant ground sloths helped disperse their seeds. Today, conservationists say human decisions will play a major role in determining whether the species remains a fixture of the Mojave.

Environmental advocates have urged local governments, businesses and developers to treat Joshua tree protection as a priority when considering new projects. They also point to organizations such as the Mojave Desert Land Trust, which works to conserve desert habitat, as part of broader efforts to protect the region.

For many visitors, the appeal of Joshua Tree National Park lies not only in the unusual silhouettes of the trees, but in the larger desert ecosystem they help support. Without stronger protections and more careful planning, advocates warn, future generations may not have the same opportunity to experience them.

Original source: CalMatters

The post As Mojave Development Expands, Thousands of Joshua Trees Face Growing Threats appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

According to Politico, the five offshore wind projects paused by the Trump administration would be able to power nearly 2.7 million homes for up to 30 years using a free, non-polluting fuel: wind. Alternatively, to power those homes with fossil fuels would mean an unending cycle of digging up coal, oil or gas, transporting it, and burning it to generate electricity. In the process, we pollute our air — causing disease and death — and our atmosphere with heat-trapping carbon pollution, furthering global warming and climate change.

Fossil fuel interests have worked for years to discredit offshore wind projects. A 2023 investigation by Brown University’s Climate and Development Lab revealed that, in recent years, six major fossil fuel and dark money donors have funneled more than $72 million to the various organizations fighting offshore wind. The transition to a clean energy future will be significantly affected by the speed with which offshore wind projects are developed. Knowing this, fossil fuel interests will do all they can to slow it down.

Robert Taylor, Santa Barbara

..

To the editor: President Trump’s war against renewable energy sources is hurting Americans while lining the pockets of the oil industry. His latest suspension of major wind projects is keeping cheaper, cleaner and healthier energy sources away from our nation.

His administration has claimed this pause will enable them time to assess national security risks. But wouldn’t those have been assessed by administrations years ago? This looks like just another way of slowing down alternative energy production.

Not allowing all forms of competitive energy production risks our energy independence and thus creates a different national security issue. Electricity needs are growing and AI data centers are adding to this energy drain today.

Trump has proposed that some waters off the U.S. coastline be opened for offshore drilling. He knows our energy needs are growing and oil is his product of choice. But keep in mind that ocean wind farm energy, by most accounts, will lower our energy costs. The Los Angeles Times article on the offshore wind projects even said a partially completed wind project in New England saved residents “$2 million a day during a cold snap this month,” according to the Boston Globe. Additionally, wind farms are less destructive, posing less environmental damage than offshore drilling.

Tell your Congress member that you want cheap, clean energy sources to be allowed to move forward when the permitting process is already agreed upon. No administration should be allowed to interfere with our free markets in the middle of construction.

Jonathan Light, Laguna Niguel

The post Letters to the Editor: In halting offshore wind projects, we hinder our own clean energy potential appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Southern California Edison — the utility that owns the decommissioned power line that may have started the fire — made a sweeping offer on Wednesday to pay families affected by the blaze hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars in compensation.

The Eaton fire ravaged Altadena, an idyllic foothill community northeast of downtown Los Angeles, killing 19 people, destroying thousands of homes and damaging thousands more. Although state fire investigators have not officially determined the cause, evidence suggests that the utility’s equipment played a key role.

The company on Wednesday launched its program to compensate victims for rebuilding costs, lost rental income, physical injuries and other economic damages. Altadena residents are also eligible for other payouts for “non-economic losses,” such as pain and suffering and emotional distress, depending on their circumstances. Each adult resident of a house that burned down, for instance, is eligible to receive $115,000 and each child is eligible for $75,000. A surviving spouse of someone who died in the fire is eligible for $2 million.

Survivors have until Nov. 30, 2026, to decide whether to take the utility up on its offer — and forfeit the right to sue — or to hold out for a legal settlement that could be larger but take years to be resolved.

It is a calculation that more Californians could face in the future, as climate change causes utility-sparked wildfires to burn hotter and more quickly out of control.

For each family, the equation is different.

“There have been a lot of people, like lawyers, who are like, ‘I’m going to help you take Edison for everything you can get, like, let’s drag them through the mud,’” said Lauren Randolph, 40, whose home was destroyed in the blaze. “But there’s just so many things to consider, once this is in its final form: Do we take this to get the money sooner? Or do we wait to try to get more? But how much more, in theory, would we actually get, and is that actually meaningful and worth it?”

Ms. Randolph and her husband bought their house in West Altadena in 2018, while she was pregnant with her older daughter, and they poured some $150,000 and countless hours into renovating it.

Then, on the evening of Jan. 7, they debated for hours whether to leave, although they hadn’t been ordered to evacuate.

They eventually went to Ms. Randolph’s mother’s house. When the couple returned, only their side gate was left standing. They only recognized it because they had painted it in rainbow colors for their daughter’s fifth birthday.

For months, whether to take the utility’s money has been a subject of conversation at coffee shops, in WhatsApp groups and among lawyers and their clients.

Southern California Edison leaders announced in July that they were planning a program to compensate wildfire survivors. They said they had enlisted the help of Kenneth R. Feinberg and Camille S. Biros, who were known for designing compensation programs for people directly affected by the Sept. 11 terror attacks and the Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion. This is, Ms. Biros said later, their first time working on a program for survivors of a wildfire.

Pacific Gas & Electric, the state’s biggest utility, has paid out billions through similar settlements. A fund to compensate victims of wildfires sparked by its equipment, including the 2018 Camp fire, has paid out $13.7 billion so far, according to a website that tracks its progress.

No compensation fund has been set up for the January Palisades fire, which investigators have not linked to any utility.

In late September, Southern California Edison company hosted community meetings online and in Altadena to gather feedback on its plans. On a Monday night, fire survivors who had been scattered across the region packed into a park gymnasium to hear from company representatives and voice their concerns. Many older survivors brought their adult children or other relatives.

Under the plan, victims would be paid according to the level of damage their home had sustained: destroyed, partially destroyed or damaged by smoke. Survivors could pick from two options: A fast pay option, where they would receive an offer within 90 days of submitting their claim, but with a less detailed review, or a slower option, where they would have to wait for a deeper examination of their losses that could take up to nine months. A fast pay offer would not be reduced by insurance claims, but a detailed review offer would be offset by insurance coverage. Every offer for someone represented by a lawyer would include an extra 10 percent to help cover attorney’s fees.

Utility officials emphasized that the program was voluntary: Survivors could file claims and assess their offer, with no obligation to take it.

People attending the meeting peppered company representatives with questions, which were transcribed in marker on giant sheets of paper: What about a collection of sports memorabilia that was lost? Would West Altadena residents be paid more because of the lack of warning about the fire? What if family members disagreed about whether they wanted to accept the settlement or continue with a lawsuit? The company didn’t have immediate answers.

Some of the survivors said later that they were wary about giving too many details of their cases to the utility; their lawyers had warned them that any information they provided at the meetings could be used against them.

On Wednesday, Southern California Edison released the final details of the program and opened the claims process.

Pedro J. Pizarro, the president and chief executive of Southern California Edison’s parent company, Edison International, said that changes to the initial proposal had been made in response to feedback, including expanding the number of people who could apply for the program and eliminating some documentation requirements.

The total number of eligible parties, which includes households and businesses, is about 18,000, he said.

Company executives have said that the compensation program is not an admission of guilt, and they have not been held liable in court for the fire.

Nevertheless, Mr. Pizarro said that the company has recognized there is “concerning circumstantial evidence” that its equipment sparked the fire, and that “there isn’t another probable cause.” He has warned investors that the company is likely to face losses as a result. Already, the utility has been sued many times over the fire.

“Every month that goes by, you might have more displacement for people who have been impacted, more escalation in construction costs — it just keeps adding up for the victims, as well as for the company,” he said. “For most victims, a standardized program can lead to a fair outcome in very short order, and it really is about having a sense of urgency to get that cash flowing into the community.”

Still, some lawyers and advocates for survivors said that they saw the program as a disingenuous attempt by Southern California Edison to reduce its liability. They said the company would rather boost profits for its executives and shareholders than spend money to mitigate the risk of its equipment starting fires in the first place.

And the size of the compensation offers has signaled to some lawyers that the company knows it could be forced to pay much more in court.

“In almost every case, it’s pennies on the dollar of what we likely — though there’s not certainty — we’ll be able to recover otherwise,” said Kipp Mueller, a lawyer who is representing fire victims.

Angela Giacchetti, one of Mr. Mueller’s clients, initially believed her family had been lucky: Their house was one of few in their neighborhood that was left standing after the Eaton fire roared through.

But she said she quickly learned that dealing with smoke damage is its own nightmare. The roof of the house, built in the 1940s, needed to be replaced. Initial attempts to clean the house left behind a lingering stench. Ms. Giacchetti, 37, her husband and her now 18-month-old son have moved every few weeks or months, as insurance payments have slowed.

She said the cost of fixing her home has been multiple times what Southern California Edison would likely offer her through the program. And the fact that the non-economic damage payments for children were less than for adults was an insult, she said.

“It was like a second grief,” she said. “You could see the dollar amounts these corporations put on our health and well-being.”

Zella Knight, whose family left Mississippi for West Altadena in the Jim Crow era, when she was a young child, said she feared that no amount of compensation would preserve a once thriving Black community whose vulnerable elders were displaced by the fire. Many of those people, she said, may not be able to afford to wait for a possible larger payout down the line, unlike wealthier recent arrivals.

Ms. Knight, 62, said her intellectually disabled brother had continued living in their childhood home, after their parents died. The house was destroyed in the fire, disrupting his routines and care. He died in August. Now, she and her other siblings are deciding whether to sell the property.

“We have lost our extended family, we’ve lost our comfort zones, we’ve lost those mechanisms that build upon generational wealth,” she said. “Nothing can really compensate for that.”

But, she said, the settlements could be a start.

The post L.A. Fire Victims Face a Choice: Take a Settlement or Hold Out for More appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The policy brief from UCR’s Inland Empire Labor and Community Center found rising global temperatures pose a particularly high risk for workers in several industries, especially for people of color.

“With projections for more frequent and intense heatwaves, wildfires, droughts, and floods, the region’s workers are facing an unprecedented ‘cocktail’ of occupational hazards,” read the report released this month.

Climate change is the long-term shift in Earth’s temperatures and weather patterns. The planet is in the midst of global warming exacerbated by the use of fossil fuels, deforestation and other human activities that scientists warn will wipe out plant and animal species and make life unbearable for future generations.

For the Inland Empire, climate change makes normally hot summers even more sweltering, creating a double whammy for the public when combined with the region’s notoriously poor air quality.

That toxic air is blamed, at least in part, on diesel emissions from trucks serving the region’s massive logistics industry. And it’s warehouse workers who are especially endangered by climate change, according to the report.

“Warehouse workers in facilities without adequate air conditioning or ventilation are highly vulnerable to heat-related illnesses,” the report states. “They are also exposed to airborne pollutants from the high concentration of diesel vehicles in their work environment.”

Inland farmworkers, construction workers, emergency responders and those employed in transportation also are at high risk of harm from climate change and air pollution, the report added.

These sectors tend to employ higher numbers of people of color, according to the report. More than two-thirds of climate-vulnerable workers in San Bernardino County and roughly one-third of climate-vulnerable workers in Riverside County are Latino, the report read.

“Low-income and non-unionized workers are also highly vulnerable,” the report found.

“Many warehouse workers, for instance, work long hours, earn less than a living wage, and rely on public assistance benefits; they often lack the resources necessary to address health challenges.”

Besides causing heat stroke and other illnesses, high temperatures boosted by climate change can impair workers’ cognitive function and lead to more stress, anxiety, depression and irritability, the report read.

“The psychological toll can be substantial for workers experiencing prolonged heat exposure or climate-related job insecurity, negatively affecting both their mood and ability to make decisions,” according to the report.

About 21% of San Bernardino County workers and roughly 14% of Riverside County workers toil in climate-vulnerable jobs, per the report. Across the Inland Empire, about 18% of workers are in climate-vulnerable occupations, compared to roughly 16% for all of California.

California took steps in 2024 to lower indoor workplace temperatures. Rules passed by the state Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board set temperature thresholds that, if reached, would require employers to take steps to either lower inside temperatures or give workers heat relief.

Once the indoor temperature reaches 82 degrees, employers would have to give workers water and access to cooling areas. Fans or other cooling devices would have to be used once the temperature hits 87 degrees.

While California “is a national leader in worker protection,” the state’s Division of Occupational Safety and Health, also known as Cal/OSHA, is understaffed and there’s a lack of follow-up to ensure employers are keeping workers cool, the report read.

Cal/OSHA did not respond to a request for comment.

“The current patchwork of state regulations, local initiatives, and advocacy efforts provides a foundation” to keep workers safe from climate change, the report concluded.

“But a more comprehensive, proactive, robust, and equitable policy approach is urgently needed to address the full spectrum of these challenges.”

The post Climate change is an on-the-job hazard for these Inland Empire workers, report says appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The release — which includes all of Southern California and marks the end of the agency’s two-month, statewide rollout — sets off a roughly five-month clock for L.A. city and county to receive public input, make adjustments, and begin enforcing heightened fire-safety regulations within the new zones.

The new Cal Fire maps are only for areas where local fire departments, like the Los Angeles Fire Department and Los Angeles County Fire Department, are responsible for responding to blazes. Previously, Cal Fire only mapped the highest severity rating, “very high,” for these local responsibility areas. The new maps include Cal Fire’s “moderate” and “high” zones as well.

New fire hazard zones for Los Angeles and Southern California

Local responsibility areas (proposed)

Cal Fire most recently updated all three zones for the areas where the state responds to fires in September 2023. However, the last time the agency updated its maps for areas where local fire departments are responsible was in 2011.

The city of L.A. saw its acreage in the “very high” zone increase by 7%. The addition of the new “moderate” and “high” zones led to the total acreage in the fire severity hazard zones increasing by 24%.

The unincorporated areas in L.A. County that rely on LACFD, however, saw their acreage in the “very high” zone more than triple. Much of the unincorporated areas — which make up over 65% of the county and include Altadena, the outskirts of Santa Clarita and Palmdale areas and Puente Hills near Whittier — are wildlands or exist at the wildland-urban interface, which are more prone to fire.

“Today’s release of updated hazard assessment maps from Cal Fire … underlines the ongoing wildfire crisis that California is experiencing,” Rep. George Whitesides (D-Agua Dulce) said in a statement. “We must act fast and at scale to protect our communities and make sure insurance markets work for everyone.”

With the rollout complete, California as a whole now has more “very high” hazard zone acres than ever before. Cal Fire mapped a grand total of 6.8 million acres into the local responsibility area hazard zones: “very high” zones grew 35%, from 860,000 acres to nearly 1.2 million; meanwhile, 1.2 million and 4.5 million acres were placed into the new “high” and “moderate” zones, respectively.

The hazard severity zone maps are referenced in more than 50 sections of California law. They require homeowners in “high” and “very high” hazard zones to follow fire-safe building codes for new construction — including installing multi-pane windows that are less likely to break in extreme heat and covering vents and other openings to prevent embers from entering the house. Homeowners in the “very high” zones must maintain defensible space around their properties and disclose the “very high” status when they put their houses up for sale

The legislature has also required local governments in heightened severity zones to routinely review evacuation routes and account for the potential peak stress on water supplies during a disaster. Local governments must also locate essential public facilities like hospitals and emergency command centers outside of heightened fire hazard zones “when feasible,” according to the law.

Cal Fire originally planned to release the maps in mid-January; however the L.A. firestorms that month forced the agency to delay as it moved significant scientific resources to supporting the firefight and relief efforts.

In the new maps, the Pacific Palisades and Malibu remain blanketed under a red “very high” zone, just as they did in Cal Fire’s old maps from 2011. Altadena, on the other hand, remains largely unzoned, indicating a hazard lower than “moderate,” just as it did in the old maps.

An analysis by The Times found that only 21% of the properties within the Eaton fire’s perimeter were designated as having “very high” fire hazard. Yet, an independent assessment by the public-benefit company First Street had identified 94% as having “severe” or “extreme” wildfire risk, meaning they had at least a 1 in 7 chance of experiencing wildfire in a 30-year window.

Cal Fire research manager David Sapsis, who oversees the agency’s mapping efforts, acknowledged that the models Cal Fire uses to create its maps cannot fully predict the dynamic spread of wildfire into urban areas. Cal Fire’s model instead accounts for the vegetation type, topology, climate and weather for wildland areas to calculate the probability of an area burning and the likely intensity of the blaze. From this, it calculates how far a blaze would likely spill over into urban areas.

The team also intentionally chose to leave out what it calls “outlier” events like the 2017 Tubbs fire, because, they said, it would have led to overly conservative zoning. Another outlier event: the Eaton fire, which, like the Tubbs fire, was driven by relentless, powerful winds that drove the blaze deep into a populated area.

First Street approaches it somewhat differently. The company creates a virtual representation of California that includes both vegetation and human infrastructure of the state’s urban areas, and simulates how fires would likely spread, including into areas like Altadena. If Cal Fire’s model is a snapshot of how fire acts, First Street’s is a motion picture.

Sapsis acknowledged he’d like to use newer approaches like First Street’s in the future. For its 2025 maps, Cal Fire made only slight modifications to its model, including the use of more up-to-date climate and extreme weather data. It also used a new model for estimating how far embers can bring fire into developed areas.

Other changes in the real world — such as new housing developments that changed an area’s classification from wildland to urban — also resulted in modifications to the Cal Fire maps.

In the latest release — comprising all of Southern California, including San Diego, San Bernardino, Riverside and Orange counties — the cities of Hesperia and Jurupa Valley saw the most significant percentage increase in acres zoned, with the cities’ total averages in hazard zones increasing more than 35- and 45-fold, respectively. Jurupa Valley saw its “very high” zone expand from 226 acres to 6,195. Hesperia’s grew from 715 to 15,359.

The cities of Chino Hills, Lancaster and Santa Clarita saw significant increases in their “very high” zones; in all three cities, the zones grew by more than 13,000 acres.

The number of acres zoned as “very high” in San Diego decreased by nearly 30%; however, its total acreage in hazard zones still slightly increased thanks to the new “moderate” and “high” zones.

Only a handful of cities across the state saw decreases in the total acreage zoned, including Rancho Palos Verdes in L.A. County and Oakland in the Bay Area.

“I’ll be quite honest with you, before these maps were produced, I thought the very high fire severity zones were really going to reach deep deep down into Altadena, and they haven’t,” said LACFD Deputy Fire Chief Albert Yanagisawa. “I asked Cal Fire, seeing as what happened, is there a reason the maps were not changed, and what they said was, specifically, their model is for wildland fire modeling. It’s not utilized and it shouldn’t be utilized for [urban] conflagration modeling.”

Cal Fire has so far declined to comment on what drove changes in specific counties and cities.

Now, local jurisdictions have 120 days to accept public input on the maps and work with Cal Fire to issue an official ordinance implementing them. Typically, ordinances take effect about 30 days after they’re issued. At that point, the heightened fire safety regulations would apply to the new zones.

Local jurisdictions like L.A. city and county are allowed to increase the severity of a zone and add additional acres to a zone; however, they cannot decrease the severity of zones or remove acres from them.

These maps are a “critical tool for identifying high fire hazard areas and strengthening fire safety policies across our communities,” said County Supervisor Kathryn Barger. “For those working to rebuild after the Eaton fire, I want to emphasize that these maps provide essential information to guide your rebuilding efforts. They reflect the latest fire hazard assessments and will help ensure our homes and infrastructure are rebuilt with safety and resilience in mind.”

Fire safety advocates have attributed the continuing upward trend of acre zones to a litany of factors from development in fire-prone areas, ecosystem changes and climate change.

“Yes, climate change has obviously and absolutely impacted the severity of our wildfires and where they are happening, but way before there were climate impacts, there were land-use decisions,” said Howard Penn, executive director of the Planning and Conservation League, a California-based nonprofit. “We have been sprawling into the wildlands for the last 75-plus years with very little consideration of the impacts.”

The post New fire maps increase hazard zones in L.A. and Southern California by 3.5 million acres appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The Democratic governor, a fierce critic of President-elect Donald Trump, is positioning California to once again be the center of a resistance effort against the conservative agenda. He is asking his Democratic allies in the Legislature, who hold supermajorities in both chambers, to approve additional funding to the attorney general’s office to prepare for a robust legal fight against anticipated federal challenges.

Democratic Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel on Monday introduced legislation to set aside $25 million for legal fees to respond to potential attacks by the Trump administration on state policies regarding civil rights, climate change, immigration and abortion access.

“While we always hope to collaborate with our federal partners, California will be ready to vigorously defend our interests and values from any unlawful action by the incoming Trump Administration,” Gabriel said in a statement.

California sued the first Trump administration more than 120 times to various levels of success.

“We’re not going to be caught flat-footed,” Newsom said at a recent news conference.

Trump often depicts California as representing all he sees wrong in America. Democrats, which hold every statewide office in California and have commanding margins in the Legislature and congressional delegation, outnumber registered Republicans by nearly 2-to-1 statewide.

Trump called the Democratic governor “Newscum” during a campaign stop in Southern California and has relentlessly lambasted the Democratic stronghold over its large number of immigrants in the U.S. illegally, homeless population and thicket of regulations.

Trump also waded into a water rights battle over the endangered delta smelt, a tiny fish that has pitted environmentalists against farmers and threatened to withhold federal aid to a state increasingly under threat from wildfires. He also vowed to follow through with his campaign promise of carrying out the mass deportation of immigrants without legal status and prosecuting his political enemies.

Before the special session began, state lawmakers swore in more than two dozen new members and elect leaders for the 2025 legislative session. Lawmakers voted to convene the special session largely along party lines.

“This special session is about sticking up for Californians and for California values,” said state Sen. Scott Wiener, a Democrat representing San Francisco. “It is about ensuring that the president of the United States and his administration actually follow the law.”

Hundreds of people also demonstrated around the Capitol on Monday to urge the Legislature to try to stop Trump’s mass deportation plans. They carried banners that said “Not one cent for mass deportation” and “MAGA out of California.”

“With the results of the presidential election, we need our state elected officials to use every tool and every resource they have available to them to protect our immigrant Californians,” protester Deborah Lee said.

State Attorney General Rob Bonta said his office will protect the state’s immigration population, while Newsom last week unveiled a proposal to revive a rebate program for electric vehicle purchases if the incoming Trump administration eliminates a federal tax credit for people who buy electric cars. Newsom is also considering creating a backup disaster relief fund for the wildfire-prone state after Trump’s threats.

Bonta announced legislation Monday aimed at bolstering reproductive rights in the state, including by allowing the attorney general to seek monetary penalties against local governments that infringe on those rights. The proposals are part of the state’s efforts to safeguard against threats to abortion access after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.

Republican lawmakers blasted Newsom and his Democratic allies over the special session. State Sen. Kelly Seyarto, a Republican representing Murrieta in Southern California, said the special session proposal would make California have a more adversarial relationship with the federal government.

“What we’re doing today is sending that exact message — that we are going to fight tooth and nail for everything. And you know what? That means they’re going to fight us tooth and nail for everything,” Seyarto said of the incoming Trump administration if the legislation gets approved.

Legislators also are expected to spend the year discussing ways to protect dozens of laws expected to be targeted by the Trump administration, including one that has made the state a sanctuary for people seeking abortions who live in states where such practices have been severely limited.

California, the nation’s most populous state, was the first to mandate that by 2035 all new cars, pickup trucks and SUVs sold in California be electric, hydrogen-powered or plug-in hybrids. The state also extends state-funded health care to all low-income residents regardless of their immigration status.

Newsom hasn’t provided details about what actions the lawmakers will consider but said he wanted funding in place before Trump’s inauguration day, Jan. 20. The state spent roughly $42 million in litigation costs during the first Trump administration, officials said.

California is projected to face a $2 billion budget deficit next year, with bigger shortfalls ahead. Gabriel, who sued the first Trump administration in 2017 when it tried to end a program to shield young immigrants from being deported, said lining up the funding now is “a wise investment.”

California successfully clawed back $57 million between 2017 and 2018 after prevailing in a lawsuit to block the Trump administration from putting immigration enforcement conditions on certain federal law enforcement grants. Another legal victory over the citizenship question in the 2020 census forced the federal government to return $850,000 to the state, according to the attorney general’s office.

During Trump’s first presidency, Democratic attorneys general banded together to file lawsuits over immigration, Trump’s travel ban for residents of Muslim countries, the environment, immigration and other topics. But Trump has one possible advantage this time around: He was aggressive in nominating conservative jurists to federal courts at all levels, including the Supreme Court.

The post California lawmakers begin special session to protect state laws from second Trump presidency appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Gov. Gavin Newsom on Thursday called newly elected state lawmakers to work as soon as they’re sworn in on Dec. 2 for a special session to “safeguard California values” as the state prepares — again — to be a liberal antagonist to the upcoming Trump administration. 

In other words: Gear up for lawsuits. 

In a proclamation declaring the special session, Newsom said he wants the Legislature to approve funding for the Department of Justice and other state agencies to “immediately file affirmative litigation.”

Legislative sources said the special session is intended to be narrowly focused on providing legal resources to the attorney general’s office — perhaps as much as $100 million — to fight the Trump administration. The goal is to appropriate the money before President-elect Donald Trump is sworn in on Jan. 20, though given how many new members are joining the Legislature, they may not be ready to act until early January.

As priorities for California’s opposition, Newsom listed civil and reproductive rights, climate change, Trump’s threats to withhold disaster relief dollars and the potential repeal of deportation protections for immigrants who were brought to the country without authorization as children.

“The freedoms we hold dear in California are under attack — and we won’t sit idle,” Newsom said in a statement. “California has faced this challenge before, and we know how to respond.”

It appears that Trump won’t sit idle either. A day after Newsom’s announcement, the president-elect posted on his Truth Social account that “Governor Gavin Newscum is trying to KILL our Nation’s beautiful California” and “stopping all of the GREAT things that can be done to ‘Make California Great Again.’”

Trump suggested he would go after “INSANE POLICY DECISIONS,” such as how California distributes its water and the higher mileage requirements for vehicles sold here, and demand voter identification in future elections, providing an early map for likely clashes between the state and his administration.

The Democratic leaders and budget committee chairpersons in both houses of the Legislature are on board with the special session, expressing support for Newsom’s proclamation, but no detailed proposal has yet been introduced. The special session would start Dec. 2 when the new Legislature convenes, though lawmakers wouldn’t necessarily pass any bills immediately. 

“We learned a lot about former President Trump in his first term — he’s petty, vindictive, and will do what it takes to get his way no matter how dangerous the policy may be,” Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire, a Santa Rosa Democrat, said in a statement. “California has come too far and accomplished too much to simply surrender and accept his dystopian vision for America.” 

Republican lawmakers quickly denounced the governor’s order as divisive political theater that does nothing to address the real problems facing Californians and merely boosts what many interpret as Newsom’s own future presidential aspirations.

Assembly Republican leader James Gallagher called the session a “shameless political stunt.” “The only ‘problem’ it will solve is Gavin Newsom’s insecurity that not enough people are paying attention to him,” he said in a statement. “There will not be a single policy implemented in this special session that couldn’t be addressed when the Legislature reconvenes in January.”

But Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel, an Encino Democrat who leads the Assembly Budget Committee, said the state needs to move quickly to be ready if the Trump administration follows through on threats to withhold federal funding from California or other policies attacking the state.

“In litigation, speed matters and preparation matters,” he told CalMatters. “This is an important idea.”

Gabriel — an attorney who, before running for office, represented immigrants who sued the Trump administration over its move to end a program shielding them from deportation — said many legislators also feel a personal duty to address the fear and anxiety they are hearing from their constituents about the outcome of the election.

“They can tell you they want you to focus on everyday, kitchen table issues that matter to working families and at the same time, fight back,” he said. “We’re going to have to walk and chew gum at the same time.”

Attorney General Rob Bonta told CalMatters last week that his office is already writing legal briefs in preparation for lawsuits against possible Republican attempts to ban abortion nationwide, overturn California’s commitment to zero-emission vehicles and repeal the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program for immigrants.

During the last Trump administration, California sued the federal government more than 100 times over its regulations. Most of those lawsuits were successful.

“We bring cases when we believe we will win,” Bonta said at a press conference Thursday. “We will be asking for sufficient resources to fight back against the attacks that we expect from the Trump administration.” 

This is the third special session that Newsom has called since October 2022. The two previous ones focused on gas prices and the oil industry, including one that just wrapped up last month.

The post Newsom calls special session to ‘Trump-proof’ California appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

They also expressed concern about the devastation wrought in the Southeast by Hurricane Helene and called for a vigorous response from government to help those affected by the powerful storm. Helene was one of the deadliest storms in U.S. history, with the death toll surpassing 150 across six states. Damage stretched from Florida to Virginia, with some of the worst in western North Carolina, which experienced substantial inland flooding.

Vance, a Republican senator from Ohio and former President Trump’s running mate, called the destruction from Helene an “unbelievable and unspeakable human tragedy.” He said that he and Trump “want as robust and aggressive [of] a federal response as we can get to save as many lives as possible and then of course, afterwards, to help the people in those communities rebuild.”

“I commit that when Donald Trump is president again, the government will put the citizens of this country first when they suffer from a disaster,” he said.

On climate change, Vance said that “a lot of people are justifiably worried about all these crazy weather patterns,” and that he and Trump “support clean air, clean water” and “want the environment to be cleaner and safer.”

Vance did not answer how a Trump administration would address climate change, but said it would support more domestic energy production. He called Democratic concerns about carbon emissions a debate about “weird science.”

If emissions are a concern, Vance said, Democrats are addressing them in the wrong way. He said Democrats should be more interested in making energy cleanly in the United States than allowing energy to be produced in dirtier ways in other countries, such as China.

“If we actually care about getting cleaner air and cleaner water, the best thing to do is to double down and invest in American workers and the American people. And unfortunately, Kamala Harris has done exactly the opposite,” Vance said.

Walz, the Democratic governor of Minnesota and Vice President Harris’ running mate, also called the devastation in the Southeast “a horrific tragedy,” adding that he and other governors have been in contact on how to address the disaster.

Walz said officials are working on helping people, and “we need to make sure that they’re staying there, staying focused.”

On climate change, Walz attacked Trump for calling it a “hoax” in the past and for suggesting that rising ocean levels will provide more beachfront property.

Walz said his constituents in Minnesota, including many farmers, understand that climate change is very real. And they are helping to lead the country on the right path forward, toward truly clean energy.

“They’ve seen 500-year droughts, 500-year floods back to back. But what they’re doing is adapting, and this has allowed them to tell me, ‘Look, I harvest corn, I harvest soybean and I harvest wind.’ ”

He also said the Biden-Harris administration has invested in infrastructure and other programs that are helping communities adapt to climate change and has invested in domestic energy.

“We are producing more natural gas and more oil at any time than we ever have. We’re also producing more clean energy,” Walz said. “So the solution for us is to continue to move forward. That climate change is real. Reducing our impact is absolutely critical.”

Trump has slammed the Biden administration’s response to Helene as inadequate, and alleged with no evidence that the administration and Democratic leaders in North Carolina were “going out of their way to not help people in Republican areas.”

The Biden administration has rejected Trump’s claims. White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre dismissed them as unfounded and said that more than 1,400 people have been supported or rescued in affected areas. Republican leaders have said the White House has been helpful in disaster relief.

President Biden has approved major disaster declarations in Florida, North Carolina and South Carolina, which will ease the path for those states to receive recovery funds.

“It doesn’t matter if it’s a red state or blue state,” Jean-Pierre said Monday. “This is their job — to get food there, to get generators there, to save some lives, to rescue people.”

Trump’s supporters, including those behind Project 2025, have called for federal agencies that warn of weather disasters to be disbanded or face dramatic budget cuts, and Trump as president delayed post-hurricane aid to Puerto Rico. He also diverted money from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which responds to natural disasters, to an initiative aimed at returning undocumented migrants to Mexico.

More than 150,000 households have already registered for assistance from FEMA in the wake of Helene, and that number is expected to rise rapidly in coming days, agency officials have said.

The post Vance and Walz tangle over climate change after Hurricane Helene devastation appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

“I’ve never seen so many people homeless as what I have right now,” said Janalea England, of Steinhatchee, Florida, a small river town along the state’s rural Big Bend, as she turned her commercial fish market into a storm donation site for friends and neighbors, many of whom couldn’t get insurance on their homes.

Helene blew ashore in Florida’s Big Bend region as a Category 4 hurricane late Thursday with winds of 140 mph (225 kph).

From there, it quickly moved through Georgia, where Gov. Brian Kemp said Saturday that it “looks like a bomb went off” after viewing splintered homes and debris-covered highways from the air. Weakened, Helene then soaked the Carolinas and Tennessee with torrential rains, sending creeks and rivers over their banks and straining dams.

Western North Carolina was isolated because of landslides and flooding that forced the closure of Interstate 40 and other roads. All those closures delayed the start of the East Tennessee State University football game against The Citadel because the Buccaneers’ drive to Charleston, South Carolina, took 16 hours.

There have been hundreds of water rescues, none more dramatic than in rural Unicoi County in East Tennessee, where dozens of patients and staff were plucked by helicopter from a hospital rooftop Friday. And the rescues continued into the following day in Buncombe County, North Carolina, where part of Asheville was under water.

“To say this caught us off guard would be an understatement,” said Quentin Miller, the county sheriff.

Asheville resident Mario Moraga said it’s “heartbreaking” to see the damage in the Biltmore Village neighborhood and neighbors have been going house to house to check on each other and offer support.“There’s no cell service here. There’s no electricity,” he said.

While there have been deaths in the county, Emergency Services Director Van Taylor Jones said he wasn’t ready to report specifics, partially because downed cell towers hindered efforts to contact next of kin.

Relatives put out desperate pleas for help on Facebook. Among those waiting for news was Francine Cavanaugh, whose sister told her she was going to check on guests at a vacation cabin as the storm began hitting Asheville. Cavanaugh, who lives in Atlanta, hasn’t been able to reach her since then.

“I think that people are just completely stuck,” she said.

The storm, now a post-tropical cyclone, was expected to hover over the Tennessee Valley on Saturday and Sunday, the National Hurricane Center said.

‘Catastrophic’ flooding

It unleashed the worst flooding in a century in North Carolina, where Gov. Roy Cooper described it as “catastrophic” as search and rescue teams from 19 states and the federal government came to help. One community, Spruce Pine, was doused with over 2 feet (0.6 meters) of rain from Tuesday through Saturday.

And in Atlanta, 11.12 inches (28.24 centimeters) of rain fell over 48 hours, the most the city has seen over two days since record keeping began in 1878.

President Joe Biden said Saturday that Helene’s devastation has been “overwhelming” and pledged to send help. He also approved a disaster declaration for North Carolina, making federal funding available for affected individuals.

With at least 25 killed in South Carolina, Helene is the deadliest tropical cyclone for the state since Hurricane Hugo killed 35 people when it came ashore just north of Charleston in 1989. Deaths also have been reported in Florida, Georgia, North Carolina and Virginia.

Moody’s Analytics said it expects $15 billion to $26 billion in property damage. AccuWeather’s preliminary estimate of the total damage and economic loss from Helene in the U.S. is between $95 billion and $110 billion.

Climate change has exacerbated conditions that allow such storms to thrive, rapidly intensifying in warming waters and turning into powerful cyclones sometimes in a matter of hours.

The storm, now a post-tropical cyclone, was expected to hover over the Tennessee Valley on Saturday and Sunday, the National Hurricane Center said.

Evacuations and overtopped dams

Evacuations began before the storm hit and continued as lakes overtopped dams, including one in North Carolina that forms a lake featured in the movie “Dirty Dancing.” Helicopters were used to rescue some people from flooded homes.

And in Newport, Tennessee, Jonah Wark waited so long to evacuate that a boat had to come to the rescue. “Definitely a scary moment,” Wark said.

After touring the damage by helicopter, a stunned U.S. Rep. Diana Harshbarger said, “Who would have thought a hurricane would do this much damage in East Tennessee?”

Among the 11 confirmed deaths in Florida were nine people who drowned in their homes in a mandatory evacuation area on the Gulf Coast in Pinellas County, where St. Petersburg is located, Sheriff Bob Gualtieri said.

None of the victims were from Taylor County, which is where the storm made landfall. It came ashore near the mouth of the Aucilla River, about 20 miles (30 kilometers) northwest of where Hurricane Idalia hit last year at nearly the same ferocity.

“If you had told me there was going to be 15 feet to 18 feet of storm surge, even with the best efforts, I would have assumed we would have had multiple fatalities,” Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said Saturday.

Taylor County is in Florida’s Big Bend, went years without taking a direct hit from a hurricane. But after Idalia and two other storms in a little over a year, the area is beginning to feel like a hurricane superhighway.

“It’s bringing everybody to reality about what this is now with disasters,” said John Berg, 76, a resident of Steinhatchee, a small fishing town and weekend getaway.

Timmy Futch of Horseshoe Beach stayed put for the hurricane before driving to high ground when the water reached his house. many homes in the town, which his grandfather helped found, were reduced to piles of lumber.

“We watched our town get tore to pieces,” Futch said.

The storm, now a post-tropical cyclone, was expected to hover over the Tennessee Valley on Saturday and Sunday, the National Hurricane Center said.

The aftermath

A Florida resident provided a devastating first-hand look at hard-hit Cedar Key Friday morning after parts of the town were flattened by Hurricane Helene.

About 60 miles (100 kilometers) to the north, cars lined up before sunrise Saturday at a free food distribution site in Perry, Florida, amid widespread power outages.

“We’re making it one day at a time,” said Sierra Land, who lost everything in her fridge, as she arrived at the site with her 5- and 10-year-old sons and her grandmother.

Thousands of utility crew workers descended upon Florida in advance of the hurricane, and by Saturday power was restored to more than 1.9 million homes and businesses. But hundreds of thousands remain without electricity there and in Georgia.

Chris Stallings, director of the Georgia Emergency Management and Homeland Security Agency, said crews were focused on opening routes to hospitals and making sure supplies can be delivered to damaged communities.

Helene was the eighth named storm of the Atlantic hurricane season, which began June 1. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has predicted an above-average season this year because of record-warm ocean temperatures.

The post At least 64 dead and millions without power after Helene’s deadly march across the Southeast appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.