Newsom promotes bill to bring interest from fire-related insurance payments to homeowners
The bill, authored by state Assemblymember John Harabedian (D), intends to fix what the governor's office described as 'an inequity in current law,' which has enabled lenders to collect such interest payments held in escrow following a disaster.
'Homeowners rebuilding after a disaster need all the support they can get, including the interest earned on their insurance funds,' Newsom said in a statement.
The governor issued this announcement amid a long list of actions taken with the intent of expediting rebuilding and recovery in the aftermath of the devastating wildfires that struck the Los Angeles region last month.
As far as post-disaster insurance payouts are concerned, after such an event occurs, these funds remain in escrow until rebuilding is complete — a process that can often take months or even years. And during that window, these funds can accrue considerable interest, the announcement noted.
California law requires lenders to pay homeowners interest on funds escrowed for property taxes and insurance but does not apply these same rules to insurance payouts, according to the governor's office.
The newly introduced bill would amend state law to specifically mandate that lenders must pay homeowners interest earned on post-loss insurance payouts — just as they do for other escrowed real estate expenses.
'This is a commonsense solution that ensures that they receive every resource available to help them recover and rebuild,' Newsom said.
Among the goals of the legislation is to provide a much-needed financial boost to wildfire victims who are in the process of rebuilding their communities, the governor's office stressed.
The bill would cause no new burdens on lenders and would instead align insurance payout escrow rules with existing escrow interest law, while protecting the rights of homeowners, the team's announcement added.
'Homeowners, not insurance companies, should receive the interest earned on their insurance payouts,' the bill's author, Harabedian, said in a statement.
'Many Angelenos devastated by these wildfires have lost nearly everything; they are struggling and need every bit of financial support,' Harabedian added. 'This bill puts people over profits, ensuring that rightful insurance payments go to those who need them most.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
3 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Raising a family, doing business in California not easy, In-N-Out boss says
There's something about In-N-Out that strikes a fierce if not irrational sense of pride among many Angelenos and Southern Californians. There are several fan clubs and awards, including Yelp's No. 1 Fast Food chain honor earlier this year and Market Force's 2022 'best burger experience.' For some reason, there isn't the same fervor for Southern California's own McDonald's, one of the top 10 brands in the world, or for Santa Barbara's The Habit, which beat In-N-Out in July 2024 for USA Today's best fast food burger accolade. Times readers even lambasted former food columnist Lucas Kwan Peterson when he placed L.A.'s Fatburger atop his fast food burger rankings in 2022. Maybe that's what made the news that Lynsi Snyder, billionaire owner and chief executive of the iconic Baldwin Park brand, was leaving the Golden State last week all the more jarring. Colleague Piper Heath broke down the announcement Monday, while columnist Lorraine Ali opined on what the decision meant. Snyder made an appearance on the podcast 'Relatable' on July 18, hosted by conservative commentator Allie Beth Stuckey. During the interview, Snyder uttered a statement that created shockwaves locally. 'There's a lot of great things about California, but raising a family is not easy here. Doing business is not easy here,' she said as part of her announcement that her business was continuing its eastward expansion. The move to Tennessee represents a seismic shift for the leader of the brand. Currently operating more than 400 locations across eight states — California, Nevada, Arizona, Utah, Oregon, Colorado, Texas and Idaho — In-N-Out has long thrived on being the burger chain you couldn't find everywhere. Snyder's comments set off a disinformation blitz, launching the Double-Double into the middle of a red-state/blue-state culture war where, clearly, nothing is sacred, Ali wrote. Anti-Cali factions incorrectly crowed about yet another business fleeing the West Coast. More proof that Gov. Gavin Newsom's 'failing' state sucks! It appeared that In-N-Out was following Tesla and Charles Schwab, companies that cited regulatory challenges and operational costs among their reasons for relocating. Chevron also fled. Many in SoCal felt abandoned and disrespected. They, after all, propped up the chain for 76 years, only to be told by its owner that the place that made her family's business — their home — is no longer to her liking. On X, Oracle Park Seagull posted ''Not easy for In N Out to do business in California…' Said the person who became a billionaire doing business almost exclusively in California. So much so, it was a point of pride for the chain. Gotcha.' During the podcast, Snyder discussed elements of California policy that make the state hard to operate in, referencing pandemic-era restrictions as particularly challenging. She told Stuckey 'the bulk of our stores are still going to be here in California.' The relocation of both corporate operations and the CEO signals a fundamental change in the company's center of gravity. 'It will be wonderful having an office out there, growing out there, and being able to have the family and other people's families out there,' Snyder said, though she maintains limits on expansion. Newsom even chimed in, starting his X post with, 'For those interested in the facts, rather than fiction, In-N-Out is expanding East — creating a second HQ in Tennessee.' Snyder responded Monday in an Instagram post: 'Where I raise my family has nothing to do with my love and appreciation for our customers in California.' Immigration and ICE raids Trump Administration policy, actions and pushback Crime, courts and policing Health and medicine Get wrapped up in tantalizing stories about dating, relationships and marriage. Have a great weekend, from the Essential California team Jim Rainey, staff writerDiamy Wang, homepage internIzzy Nunes, audience internKevinisha Walker, multiplatform editorAndrew J. Campa, reporterKarim Doumar, head of newsletters How can we make this newsletter more useful? Send comments to essentialcalifornia@ Check our top stories, topics and the latest articles on
Los Angeles Times
7 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Political ploy or bold move to save democracy? Our columnists debate Newsom redistricting threat
In a brazen move, Republicans in Texas have set out to redraw the state's congressional map — an effort to boost President Trump and the GOP in the 2026 midterm elections. Gov. Gavin Newsom has threatened to respond in kind, gerrymandering blue California to give Democrats a lift and offset the Lone Star lunge for power. That would mean scrapping the political lines drawn by an independent citizens commission, which voters created nearly two decades ago to take line-drawing away from the state's politicians. Our columnists Mark Z. Barabak and Anita Chabria disagree strongly, but amicably, on the wisdom and implications of Newsom's threatened move. Here they hash it out. Barabak: Gavin Newsom — or the 48th president of the United States, as he fancies himself — is perhaps second only to Donald Trump when it comes to surfing a political wave. And so it is with redistricting and retribution. It may set partisan Democratic hearts to racing — which is part of Newsom's intent — but it's a bad move for all sorts of reasons. Not least, ignoring the will of California voters, who resoundingly told the state's self-dealing politicians no mas! I understand the fight-fire-with-fire attitude that animates partisan support for the get-even talk by 48, er, Newsom. But the danger is causing even more widespread damage. Over the years, a lot of zeitgeist-y moves by the headline-hungry Newsom have come to naught. This is another that belongs on the scrap heap. Chabria: I agree that the Vegas odds are on the side of this tit-for-tat being nothing more than a partisan headline-grabber. But. There is a larger and more important question here that boils down to how seriously you believe our democracy is in jeopardy. If, Mark — as I think you are inclined to at least hope — this too shall pass and our next election will be free and fair, however it may land, then the idea of gerrymandering our congressional districts can be nothing but appalling. This is especially true in California, one of the few states in which the people have voted to ensure our electoral maps are drawn with nonpartisan fairness in mind. If, like me, however, you think we are on a knife's edge of losing our democracy to authoritarianism — or at least an oligarchy where hate is wielded for power — then gerrymandering becomes a form of peaceful resistance. Newsom recently said, 'We can act holier-than-thou. We can sit on the sidelines, talk about the way the world should be, or we can recognize the existential nature that is this moment' — which gives you an idea of his thinking, and frankly, mine. I'll dive into that more, but maybe that's where we start. Do you think our democracy is sound and what we're witnessing is just a period of discontent that will pass without lasting harm? Barabak: I sure hope so. I yield to no one in my disgust with Trump and concern about what he's doing. He's authoritarian. Autocratic. Arrogant. Anti-democratic. And that's not even getting past the letter 'A.' But actions like the one Newsom threatens on redistricting don't take place in a vacuum, which is important to bear in mind. Short-term tactical gains can result in long-term pain. For instance: In 2013 Democrats were so upset about Republican blockading of President Obama's judicial and executive branch nominations that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid invoked the 'nuclear option.' At Reid's behest, the Senate narrowly voted to change its rules and disallow the filibustering of presidential nominees. The result is Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and a whole clown car of Trump Cabinet members. And while Democrats explicitly said the rule change would not apply to the Supreme Court, once the door was open Republicans shouldered their way through and eliminated the filibuster for those nominees as well. The result is Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett and the high court's 6-3 Trump-coddling conservative super-majority. Those who fight fire with fire risk getting badly burned. If Democrats want a war over redistricting, Republicans have a lot more ways to gerrymander and potentially gain seats — in places such as Florida, Missouri and Ohio — than Democrats. Chabria: No doubt. But, and this is as low as it gets, I'll pay the price of a Hegseth, maybe even two, if it really does save democracy. Here's the reality: The only hope of a Congress that will curb Trump through the democratic process is shifting at least some power to Democrats in the 2026 election. If Texas Republicans, under pressure from Trump, manage to redraw as many as five new GOP-leaning seats — and it doesn't blow up in their faces, which it could — the move would boost the chances the House remains a Trump entourage and the prospect of authoritarianism goes from brush fire to wildfire. The truth is that gerrymandering is far more common than most realize. Kevin Johnson, an expert with the Election Reformers Network, wrote recently that 'In the 1990s, only 40% of the seats in the House of Representatives were considered a sure thing for one party or the other, now that figure is 83%.' That's because most states gerrymander. Really, the only truly competitive races take place in states such as California that have independent, nonpartisan folks drawing the election maps. So to play devil's advocate, we've already lost to gerrymandering in the U.S. and California just doesn't know it. That's a problem that could be solved if a future president and Congress wanted to do so. But it requires getting to a future president and Congress. I always put this on the record: I care neither about Republicans or Democrats. I care about democracy. If California gerrymandered, helped turn Congress into a real check against authoritarianism and left fixing gerrymandering for later, would it really be so bad? Barabak: Your crystal ball must be less hazy than mine. I'm not all convinced that even a gain of five Texas House seats would guarantee GOP control of the House. (And let me put this on the record: I think what Trump and his Texas handmaidens are doing is thoroughly reprehensible.) Since World War II, the out-party has picked up an average of more than two dozen House seats in midterm elections. Democrats need a gain of three to seize control. There's even, as you suggest, a chance Republicans' political pigginess backfires by spreading their voters too thin, creating districts that Democrats might pick up if there's a big enough blue wave. Speaking of moves backfiring, it's no sure bet Californians would approve Newsom's gerrymander effort if he put it to a vote in a special election to override the commission. Surrendering power to politicians is a pretty big ask in today's environment. And it's not as though Newsom has a deep reservoir of goodwill to draw upon; just look at his poll numbers. He went to South Carolina to, allegedly, campaign for Democratic House candidates, even though the state hasn't a single competitive contest. California has about 10 races that look to be at least somewhat competitive — yet you don't see fellow Democrats clamoring for Newsom to drop by their districts. Chabria: I don't have a crystal ball. What I do have is a deep well of foreboding, but an optimist's hope that your blue wave, power-to-the-people scenario happens. In the meantime, Newsom said Friday that redistricting 'is not a bluff,' and he is exploring multiple ways to do it. On that list is a legal gamble. Our current redistricting laws say maps have to be drawn fairly every 10 years, after the census — but doesn't specifically say we can't gerrymander in between. Newsom is basically suggesting cheating with a sunset clause: Immediate redistricting that benefits Democrats, but that would expire when the regular redistricting happens. It's drastic, and may just wind up tied up in courts indefinitely. But I am frustrated that politicians, pundits and even regular people continue to treat this administration as just politics as usual, and I appreciate that Newsom is not, even if part of it is driven by personal gain for a 2028 presidential bid. Perhaps our democracy has been on the brink before, but that makes this cliff no less dangerous. We the people need to think outside of our regular reactions to Republicans vs. Democrats or cultural wars or partisan divides or any of the far more harmless stressors that have plagued our system in the past. What I like about Newsom's jab is that it forces us to have conversations like this one, and ask ourselves how do we fight differently? Because this fight is different. Barabak: This may sound Pollyannaish, but I think there's nothing about these frightful times that can't be remedied at the ballot box. Texas may have a competitive U.S. Senate race next year. If Texans don't like the ruthlessness of GOP lawmakers and their power grab, they can send a message by electing a Democrat, helping the party overcome the odds and take control of the chamber. That would put a check on Trump, regardless of whether Republicans hang onto the House. It's in the hands of voters. If democracy is going to be protected and preserved, it's up to them. Not scheming politicians.
UPI
21 hours ago
- UPI
Calif., Illinois may fight new Texas congressional maps with their own
1 of 2 | California Gov. Gavin Newsom says he may seek to change his state's congressional maps if Texas redraws its borders. File photo by Jonathan Alcorn/UPI | License Photo July 26 (UPI) -- As the Texas Legislature plans to redraw congressional maps in an effort to increase Republican members in the U.S. House, the governors of California and Illinois may devise their own new borders. Traditionally, the boundaries are changed every 10 years with the latest U.S. Census data but Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has called a special legislative session after pressure from the White House to preserve the GOP majority in the U.S. House. President Donald Trump believes an additional five seats could be created by changing the borders. Of the state's 38 districts, 25 are held by Republicans. Democrats hold seats in big cities of Austin, Dallas, El Paso, Fort Worth, Houston, Laredo, McAllen, San Antonio. Ahead of the 2026 midterm elections, Republicans hold a 219-212 advantage in the House with four vacancies -- three Democrats who died and one Republican who resigned this week. More than a dozen Texas House members flew to Illinois and California -- two blue states -- on Friday for a meeting with California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzkeper, during which they revealed their intentions. "Donald Trump called up Governor Abbott for one simple reason: to rig the 2026 elections. California's moral high ground means nothing if we're powerless because of it," Newsom said after meeting with Democrats from the Texas House. "This moment requires us to be prepared to fight fire with fire. Whether that's a special election, a ballot initiative, a bill, a fight in court. If they proceed in Texas, we will be ready." "This is not a bluff. This is real, and trust me, it's more real after listening to these leaders today, how existential this is," Newsom said. As the most populous state in the nation, California has 43 Democratic members of the house and nine Republican members, while Illinois is represented by 14 Democrats and three Republicans. "Everything is on the table," Pritzer said. The Illinois governor said he doesn't want to redraw the maps but "if they're going to take this drastic action, then we might also take drastic action to respond." "We want the country to understand [that] what's going on in Texas is a national battle," State Rep. Richard Pena Raymond, a Democrat from Laredo, said. Raymond told Pritzner that redistricting is "clearly aimed at affecting the entire country." Responsibility for determining Congressional district maps differs from state to state. In California, an independent commission approved by voters in 2010 works on the maps. Illinois maps, on the other hand, are put together by the state lawmakers have been drawn strongly to favor the Democrat Party in the state. Newsom said he is considering having a referendum to change the rules before the 2026 election, unless the Legislature comes up with another solution, which would take two-thirds of legislators voting in favor of. "We have to fight fire with fire," Newsom said. Other states Two other Democratic governors are considering new maps -- Phil Murphy in New Jersey and Kathy Hochul in New York. "There's other states that are violating the rules," Hochul said during a news conference on Thursday. "I'm going to look at it closely with Hakeem Jeffries," a New York member of the House, as well has House minority leader. In New York, Democrats have a 19-7 advantage as a result of their districting maps. "It's deplorable," Murphy said during an interview at the summer meeting of the bipartisan National Governors Association in Colorado Springs. "If they're going to play these games, we're going to have to be just as aggressive. We can't bring a knife to a gunfight." Democrats hold nine of the 12 seats in New Jersey. In Florida, the state Supreme Court on July 17 upheld its newest congressional map. He said he believes the state had been "malappropriated" and redistricting "would be appropriate" in a few years. Florida's congressional delegation is controlled by Republicans, 20-8. In Ohio, legislators are required to redraw maps before 2026. The GOP has 10 of the 15 seats. Colorado Gov. Jared Polis is against redistricting more frequently. The state's maps are overseen by an independent commission and it's eight U.S. House seats are evenly split 4-4. Texas situation Texas last redrew its borders in mid-cycle in 2003 after the GOP gained control of both chambers for the first time since Reconstruction. In Texas, Abbott noted a July 7 letter from the Justice Department that said majority Black and Hispanic districts in Dallas need to be redrawn based on a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit last year. The DOJ said those districts are "unconstitutional racial gerrymanders," but Abbott argued the opposite in 2021. In federal court in El Paso, he argued race had not been taken into account there. "We are no longer compelled to have coalition districts," Abbott said in an interview with KDFW in Dallas. U.S. Rep. Joaquin Castro, a San Antonio Democrat, appeared at a state House hearing. "That's what's at stake here, whether you all are going to work for the people of Texas, as we used to do, to try to do, or whether you take your commandments from Donald Trump and the White House," Castro said. "I hope that you all will choose to do the business of the people of Texas, as this body has a history of being independent from the federal government."
