Don't click that link: DMV warns of fake registration discount on social media
(FOX40.COM) — Many California residents have reported seeing scam social media advertisements offering to help them renew vehicle registrations at discounted rates.
According to the Department of Motor Vehicles, the state prohibits DMV from offering discounted vehicle registration renewals. Officials are warning Californians to avoid advertisements that claim to provide discounted DMV services.
Davis PD seeks help in identifying man who tore down Israeli flag
'The DMV does not offer discounts on vehicle registration renewals and will never ask for payment or personal information through unofficial channels,' DMV authorities said.
Officials stated that the recent scam was on a social media post that was offering 50% off vehicle registration renewal fees. The post was requesting payment through an online payment app and asked customers to send their license plate numbers.
'The safest way to renew your vehicle registration is directly through the official DMV website,' said DMV Director Steve Gordon. 'We do not offer discounts, and we never conduct official business through social media or other unofficial channels.'
DMV officials want to remind the public to always use the DMV business online at the official DMV website or through an authorized business that is listed in the official Business Partner Automation program for vehicle registration and title services.
The DMV is offering some steps to reduce the chances of falling victim to online scams:
Avoid offers for discounted DMV services: The DMV does not offer special deals through unauthorized third parties or on social media.
Never respond to unsolicited or suspicious texts: If you receive a message asking for personal or financial information, do not reply.
Verify the source: If you are unsure, always contact the DMV through official channels.
Call the DMV if you have concerns: The DMV customer service team is available to help you at 800-777-0133.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Atlantic
10 hours ago
- Atlantic
The Iran-China-Russia Axis Crumbles When It Matters
As Israel and then the United States battered Iran this month, the reaction from China and Russia was surprisingly muted. For years, shared antagonism toward the U.S. has been pushing China, Russia, and Iran together. All three benefit from embarrassing the West in Ukraine and the Middle East, and widening the gaps between Washington and Europe. So after Israel's first strike, on June 13, China—the strongest partner in the anti-America triad—could have been expected to rush short-range missiles and other air-defense equipment to Iran. Surely, Beijing would use its growing diplomatic muscle to isolate Israel and the U.S., demand an emergency session of the United Nations Security Council, and introduce a resolution deploring the two governments that were attacking China's ally. Instead, recent events in Iran have revealed that anti-Americanism can bind an alliance together only so much. After ritually denouncing Israel's first strike as 'b razen ' and a ' violation of Iran's sovereignty, ' Beijing proceeded cautiously, emphasizing the need for diplomacy instead of further assigning blame. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi refrained from condemning Israel's actions, in a call with his Israeli counterpart on June 14, and President Xi Jinping waited four days before calling for 'd e-escalation ' and declaring that 'China stands ready to work with all parties to play a constructive role in restoring peace and stability in the Middle East.' After Iran's parliament voted to close the Strait of Hormuz, Beijing's foreign-affairs spokesperson stressed—in what looked like a warning to Iran —that the Persian Gulf is a crucial global trade route for goods and energy, and called for partners to 'prevent the regional turmoil from having a greater impact on global economic growth.' In calmer times, China, like Russia, is happy to use Iran as a battering ram against the U.S. and its allies. But when tensions turn into military confrontation and global stability is at risk, backing Iran looks like a far less sensible investment to Beijing than preserving its own economic and diplomatic relations with the West. China's mild reaction isn't just a blow to Iran; it may also suggest that the much ballyhooed 'no limits' partnership between Xi and Russia's President Vladimir Putin might not be as sturdy as Moscow and Beijing advertise. Iran, Russia, and China have different ideologies, political regimes, and strategic aims. Iran's relations with its two larger partners are wildly asymmetric. China, for example, is Iran's lifeline. It buys about 90 percent of Iran's oil and supplies materials and technologies central to Iran's weapons development. Yet the trading relationship matters less to China, which gets only about 10 percent of its oil from Iran. Plus, China has an economy more than 40 times as large, and it does far more business with the U.S. and the European Union. Russia has interests that similarly diverge from Iran's, and it, too, has conspicuously refrained from coming to the Islamic Republic's aid. But China following a similar approach toward Iran likely does not please Moscow. Although Moscow's relations with Beijing are less lopsided than Tehran's are, Russia's economy is still less than one-eighth the size of China's. One-third of Russia's state budget comes from oil sales, and China is the largest customer by far. Russia also depends on Chinese supplies for its war machine. This past March, the G7 foreign ministers called China a ' decisive enabler ' of Russia's war in Ukraine. But should the Kremlin begin to run out of money or soldiers, China's willingness to bail out its ally is very much in doubt. Even among authoritarian regimes, differences in values can limit cooperation. In 2023, Xi called Russia's 1917 October Revolution a 'cannon blast' that 'brought Marxism-Leninism to China, demonstrating the way forward and offering a new choice for the Chinese people who were seeking a way to save China from subjugation.' Putin, despite his formative years in the Soviet-era KGB, now laments the fall of the Russian empire and describes Vladimir Lenin's coup as the deed of 'political adventurists and foreign forces' who 'divided the country and tore it apart for selfish benefit.' The head of China's Communist Party may resent Putin's reduction of its Russian counterpart—the country's second-largest party—to the status of another bit player in Russia's rubber-stamping parliament. Since World War II, leaders of Western democracies have successfully collaborated in part because they have shared a common worldview. Whether Iran's Islamic theocrats can say the same about Xi, the leader of an avowedly atheist state, or Putin, who now positions himself as the champion of Orthodox Christianity, is another question entirely. Beijing's response to Iran's predicament ought to make the West feel cautiously optimistic. If Donald Trump finally learns to distinguish the aggressor from the victim—or at least realizes that Putin has been playing him—the U.S. president could support Ukraine in earnest without worrying much about China expanding its assistance to Russia. As long as both Iran and Russia keep providing cheap oil and antagonizing the West and its allies, they are serving China's purposes. But at least for now, Beijing looks unlikely to back either of its supposed partners if they jeopardize China's interest in stability or its extensive and profitable relations with the West.


San Francisco Chronicle
a day ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
This rich California city is losing its mind over a housing project — and it shows why new rules are needed
Most Californians are intimately familiar with stories of cities going to comically absurd lengths to block new housing. Sausalito tried to argue it could build affordable units on underwater eelgrass. La Cañada Flintridge in Los Angeles County flirted with bankruptcy to fight its first multifamily development in more than a decade. And Woodside attempted to declare itself a mountain lion sanctuary to avoid duplexes. But the affluent city of Menlo Park is bucking the trend. At least it's trying to. This month, the city issued a request for proposals to transform three downtown city-owned parking lots into at least 345 units of affordable housing near public transit and local businesses. Since the city already owns the lots, it won't have to worry about land acquisition costs — making it easier for the projects to pencil out, Mayor Drew Combs told me. But this is California, where no good housing deed goes unpunished. A coalition of residents and small businesses called Save Downtown Menlo is suing to stop the development, alleging that the city lacks legal authority to repurpose the parking lots and that reducing parking would cause 'serious and irreparable harm.' It's also collecting signatures for a ballot measure to require voter approval to repurpose the downtown lots. The group announced this week that it already had 66% of the necessary signatures. 'Hoping to squeeze large apartment buildings into narrow, heavily used downtown parking lots … is not a path to success,' Save Downtown Menlo organizer Alex Beltramo told me in an email. When I pointed out that the Menlo Park City Council has pledged to replace most, if not all, of the 556 parking spaces that would be impacted, Beltramo argued it wouldn't be sufficient for residents and shoppers and replacing surface lots with parking garages would be 'more difficult to navigate and far less convenient.' Making space for workers who otherwise couldn't afford to live nearby is a no-brainer. So, who would actually be inconvenienced? Most likely wealthy shoppers from Portola Valley, Woodside and Atherton who drive to downtown Menlo Park and 'absolutely believe they're entitled to their parking spot in front of their store,' Karen Grove, co-founder of Menlo Together, a group that advocates for affordable housing, sustainability and economic justice, told me. Marlene Santoyo, a part-time Menlo Together organizer, told me she doubts that there would be as many businesses opposed to the project if it weren't affordable housing. 'They don't think low-income people can afford their coffee, can afford their pastries, can afford them as clients, when that is clearly not true,' she said. All this is a clear example of why state lawmakers need to pass more robust housing laws, such as state Sen. Scott Wiener's SB79 to legalize dense housing near major transit stops and other bills to exempt most infill housing and infrastructure from frivolous reviews and lawsuits under the California Environmental Quality Act. (Gov. Gavin Newsom is seeking to accomplish the latter objective via a state budget trailer bill and is haggling with lawmakers over the details ahead of a Monday deadline.) Even though the Menlo Park project would benefit the environment — it's close to transit and would save many residents from soul-draining, climate-polluting commutes — Save Downtown Menlo's lawsuit alleges that it violates CEQA and the city's general plan, which are 'standard fare challenges you'd see in almost any case objecting to new housing,' said Chris Elmendorf, a UC Davis School of Law professor and state housing law expert. Furthermore, most Menlo Park residents have made it obvious time and again that they support increased development. In 2014, a measure to limit downtown development was defeated with about 62% of the vote. In 2022, the same percentage of voters defeated a measure that would have prevented the City Council from rezoning land designated for single-family homes. Even Mayor Combs, the City Council member perhaps most willing to strike a compromise with Save Downtown Menlo, described the situation as 'frustrating.' He's being nice. The effort is unhinged. One of the main allegations in the group's lawsuit, for example, is that Menlo Park doesn't technically own the parking lots because they were paid for by assessments on nearby property owners. Only a majority vote of those property owners, the lawsuit contends, could allow the lots to be repurposed. When I ran this by Darien Shanske, a UC Davis School of Law professor and expert on taxation and local government law, he described the allegations as 'crazy,' noting that California law gives significant leeway to local policymakers to repurpose property paid for by an assessment district. 'I am not sure if this complaint was just drafted to be a nuisance, or by ChatGPT, or both,' Shanske told me in an email. 'For my part, the city should not be intimidated and should proceed.' The irony is that Save Downtown Menlo's efforts — if successful — could lead to the city being forced to approve even bigger, denser projects. If Menlo Park were to backtrack on its plan to redevelop the parking lots, the state could revoke approval for its housing plan — opening it up to the builder's remedy, which permits developers to bypass local zoning rules for projects with affordable units, a spokesperson for the state Department of Housing and Community Development told me. David Lanferman, the attorney who filed the lawsuit on behalf of Save Downtown Menlo, filed a similar lawsuit against Palo Alto, which is also seeking to transform a downtown parking lot into affordable housing. He did not respond to my request for comment. Ultimately, logic may not be the point here. The goal seems to be making it harder to do things that should be simple — like building housing. The state can't act fast enough. It's still far too easy for a vocal minority of people to hold up projects that would benefit the vast majority of a community. Emily Hoeven is a columnist and editorial writer for the Opinion section.


New York Post
a day ago
- New York Post
California closes $12B deficit by cutting back immigrants' access to health care
California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed on Friday a budget that pares back a number of progressive priorities, including a landmark health care expansion for low-income adult illegal immigrants, to close a $12 billion deficit. It's the third year in a row the nation's most populous state has been forced to slash funding or stop some of the programs championed by Democratic leaders. Lawmakers passed the budget earlier in the day following an agreement of a $321 billion spending plan between Newsom and Democratic leaders. 7 California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a budget that pares back a number of progressive priorities, including a health care expansion for low-income adult illegal immigrants. AP But the whole budget will be void if lawmakers don't send him legislation to make it easier to build housing by Monday. The budget avoids some of the most devastating cuts to essential safety net programs, state leaders said. They mostly relied on using state savings, borrowing from special funds and delaying payments to plug the budget hole. 'It's balanced, it maintains substantial reserves, and it's focused on supporting Californians,' Newsom said in a statement about the budget. California also faces potential federal cuts to health care programs and broad economic uncertainty that could force even deeper cuts. Newsom in May estimated that federal policies — including on tariffs and immigration enforcement — could reduce state tax revenue by $16 billion. 7 California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks to reporters in San Francisco, Calif. in June 12, 2025. JOHN G MABANGLO/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock 7 Migrant farm laborers have their temperatures in King City, Calif. on April 28, 2020. Getty Images 'We've had to make some tough decisions,' Senate President Pro Tempore Mike McGuire said Friday. 'I know we're not going to please everyone, but we're doing this without any new taxes on everyday Californians.' Republican lawmakers said they were left out of budget negotiations. They also criticized Democrats for not doing enough to address future deficits, which could range between $17 billion to $24 billion annually. 7 Protesters hold up signs supporting healthcare for illegal immigrants during California's Immigrants Day of Action on May 20, 2019 in Sacramento, Calif. AP 'We're increasing borrowing, we're taking away from the rainy day fund, and we're not reducing our spending,' said Republican state Sen. Tony Strickland prior to the vote. 'And this budget also does nothing about affordability in California.' Here's a look at spending in key areas: Health care Under the budget deal, California will stop enrolling new adult patients without legal status in its state-funded health care program for low-income people starting 2026. The state will also implement a $30 monthly premium July 2027 for immigrants remaining on the program, including some with legal status. The premiums would apply to adults under 60 years old. The changes to the program, known as Medi-Cal, are a scaled-back version of Newsom's proposal in May. Still, it's a major blow to an ambitious program started last year to help the state inch closer to a goal of universal health care. Democratic state Sen. Maria Elena Durazo broke with her party and voted 'no' on the health care changes, calling them a betrayal of immigrant communities. The deal also removes $78 million in funding for mental health phone lines, including a program that served 100,000 people annually. It will eliminate funding that helps pay for dental services for low-income people in 2026 and delay implementation of legislation requiring health insurance to cover fertility services by six months to 2026. But lawmakers also successfully pushed back on several proposed cuts from Newsom that they called 'draconian.' The deal secures funding for a program providing in-home domestic and personal care services for some low-income residents and Californians with disabilities. It also avoids cuts to Planned Parenthood. 7 A family whose parens are illegal immigrants sign up for government assisted health care at the San Mateo Medical Center in San Mateo Calif. on Feb. 22, 2023. AP Environment Lawmakers agreed to let the state tap $1 billion from its cap-and-trade program to fund state firefighting efforts. The cap-and-trade program is a market-based system aimed at reducing carbon emissions. Companies have to buy credits to pollute, and that money goes into a fund lawmakers are supposed to tap for climate-related spending. Newsom wanted to reauthorize the program through 2045, with a guarantee that $1 billion would annually go to the state's long-delayed high-speed rail project. 7 The California State Capitol in Sacramento, Calif. on Aug. 5, 2024. AP The budget doesn't make that commitment, as lawmakers wanted to hash out spending plans outside of the budget process. The rail project currently receives 25% of the cap-and-trade proceeds, which is roughly $1 billion annually depending on the year. Legislative leaders also approved funding to help transition part-time firefighters into full-time positions. Many state firefighters only work nine months each year, which lawmakers said harms the state's ability to prevent and fight wildfires. The deal includes $10 million to increase the daily wage for incarcerated firefighters, who earn $5.80 to $10.24 a day currently. Public safety The budget agreement will provide $80 million to help implement a tough-on-crime initiative voters overwhelmingly approved last year. The measure makes shoplifting a felony for repeat offenders, increases penalties for some drug charges and gives judges the authority to order people with multiple drug charges into treatment. Most of the fund, $50 million, will help counties build more behavioral health beds. Probation officers will get $15 million for pre-trial services and courts will receive $20 million to support increased caseloads. Advocates of the measure — including sheriffs, district attorneys and probation officers — said that's not enough money. Some have estimated it would take around $400 million for the first year of the program. 7 A protester holds an American and Mexican flag outside the Federal Building in Los Angeles during a rally on June 6, 2025. AP Other priorities Newsom and lawmakers agreed to raise the state's film tax credit from $330 million to $750 million annually to boost Hollywood. The program, a priority for Newsom, will start this year and expire in 2030. The budget provides $10 million to help support immigration legal services, including deportation defense. But cities and counties won't see new funding to help them address homelessness next year, which local leaders said could lead to the loss of thousands of shelter beds. The budget also doesn't act on Newsom's proposal to streamline a project to create a massive underground tunnel to reroute a big part of the state's water supply.