Edison disputes ‘executive' label for author of bill to cut solar power benefits
Assemblymember Lisa Calderon (D-Whittier) authored Assembly Bill 942, which would cut credits homeowners receive for installing solar panels on their roofs.
After the Times reported Calderon is a former executive with Edison, the utility 'objected to The Times' identifying Calderon as a former executive for the utility, claiming on its website that the news organization is 'choosing sensationalism over facts,'' LAT wrote.
'But in its official reports to the Federal Election Commission, the political action committee for Edison International — the utility's parent company — listed Calderon's occupation as an executive in more than a dozen filings made before she left the company in 2020 to run for office,' the Times report explains.
When contacted by the Times, an Edison spokesperson said the 'executive' definition relates to a 'broad class of individuals' as described by the Federal Election Commission, but the utility did not consider her an executive.
Calderon's office seconded that belief.
'Due to her professional responsibilities, she was categorized as an executive for FEC filing purposes,' her office told the Times. 'That does not mean that she was an executive at Edison.'
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 This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.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
The Hill
19 minutes ago
- The Hill
Epstein accuser says she asked FBI twice to look into Trump
A woman who accused Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell of sexually assaulting her says she told the FBI twice to look into President Trump, The New York Times reported Sunday. The woman, Maria Farmer, told the Times that she asked the FBI, along with the New York City Police Department, to broadly examine people in Epstein's circles, including Trump, in 1996. She followed up again, she told the newspaper, after the FBI re-interviewed her about Epstein 10 years later. She told the Times she had 'no evidence of criminal wrongdoing' by associates of Epstein but suggested law enforcement broaden their scope because Epstein's activities, while he built a stable of famous friends, disturbed her. White House spokesperson Steven Cheung called the reporting 'recycled, old fake news of the highest order.' The report follows several weeks of political furor over previous promises by Trump officials to release the 'Epstein files,' a body of investigative documents related to the disgraced financier. It's not clear what could be in the files, but many Democrats have hoped that they could shed light on the president's relationship to the convicted sex offender. Farmer told the Times she asked law enforcement to look into Trump because of an interaction she had with him in 1995, which she has previously described publicly. Farmer, 'as she was preparing to work for Epstein,' said she was called into Epstein's office late one night and arrived wearing running shorts, the Times recounted. Trump, Farmer said, stared at her in a manner that made her feel uncomfortable. Epstein then entered the room and told Trump, 'no, no. She's not here for you,' she added, according to the Times's report. The White House disputed Farmer's account. 'The President was never in his office. The fact is that the President kicked him out of his club for being a creep,' Cheung said in a statement to The Hill. Farmer worked for Epstein in 1995-96, the Times reported, 'initially to acquire art on his behalf but then later to oversee the comings and goings of girls, young women and celebrities at the front entrance of his Upper East Side townhouse.' The relationship between Trump and Epstein appears to have been strained ever since a real estate dispute over a Palm Beach mansion in 2004. The New York Times's report follows an article by The Wall Street Journal that Trump had written Epstein a 'bawdy' 50th birthday card. Trump has denied the reporting and sued the Journal last week. Republicans have coalesced behind his criticisms. Trump late last week asked the Department of Justice to unseal the grand jury transcripts in the Epstein case. Additionally, a largely symbolic effort by congressional Republicans to call on the administration to release documents related to Epstein has also been put on hold, Politico reported Monday. Democrats have sought to seize on the political division and are pushing a petition that would force a binding floor vote. That effort has garnered some Republican support.
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
King Charles' Favorite Garden Is a Toxic Workplace: Staff
King Charles' staff should get counselling, report finds King Charles III's famous garden may look nice, but it's a miserable place to work. A new investigation by the London Sunday Times has uncovered extraordinary allegations by the beleaguered royal gardening team at the king's private Gloucestershire home, Highgrove House. The report claims that, of the 12 full-time gardening staff who were employed there in 2022, 11 have since resigned and been replaced—including not one but two head gardeners. The report paints a picture of a toxic workplace culture at the very heart of the king's cherished sanctuary. Highgrove, a nine-bedroom property bought by the then-Prince of Wales 45 years ago, has long been promoted as a symbol of Charles's deep connection to nature and his eco-conscious values. The gardens, designed with organic principles and celebrated for their 'wild' aesthetic, have played a central role in his public image. More than 40,000 members of the public visit Highgrove's gardens each year, drawn by the king's reputation for environmental stewardship and horticultural passion. It now turns out that, behind the scenes, the environment is anything but harmonious. Former staff describe Charles as 'intensely demanding,' prone to sending critical notes written in thick red ink, and involving himself in minute horticultural details, the Times reports. He said of one gardener who made a simple mistake: 'Do not put that man in front of me again.' One memo from His Majesty reportedly instructed staff to remove a single sprouting weed near the perimeter of a swimming pool. Another reprimanded staff for grammatical errors, and yet another chastized staff after a failed delphinium crop. The mean memos have contributed to a steep decline in staff morale. In 2023, one former employee submitted a formal complaint that described a team 'overwhelmed and struggling to fulfil the king's requests.' The same complaint stated: 'There is little management of His Majesty the King's expectations, and I know I would not be allowed to say we are understaffed.' Compounding the problem is low pay (endemic in royal households). Many gardeners at Highgrove are reportedly paid only the minimum wage, a source of frustration for staff working under high pressure with complex expectations from a demanding boss. The King's Foundation, the charity responsible for managing Highgrove and its operations, responded to the high 'churn' of staff by commissioning an external investigation into the matter. Strikingly, the review concluded that the working environment was so poor that it recommended providing 'mental health support and counselling' for staff, a deeply ironic twist given that Highgrove's gardens are supposed to represent serenity, balance, and peace. The investigation also highlighted a particularly tone-deaf suggestion reportedly made by the king in the aftermath of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. According to The Sunday Times, Charles floated the idea of using Ukrainian refugees or elderly people to volunteer in the gardens. The proposal will reinforce the impression of a monarch wildly out of touch. How the royal family treats its staff has become an interesting part of the public discourse around the monarchy, especially following repeated criticisms of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle for high staff turnover and alleged poor treatment of aides. The revelation that the king himself may be presiding over an even more dysfunctional environment could invite unwelcome comparisons and fresh scrutiny. For a monarch who has tried to present himself as a modernizer and a compassionate leader, it's less than ideal. One gardener said staff were treated like 'dirt,' adding: 'There was anger boiling at the surface … very impatient, no politeness at all.' This person said the king's position made it impossible to speak up: 'It was like, you should be thankful that we've given you a job, and you work for the king, the highest person in the country.' Buckingham Palace did not respond to a request for comment from the Daily Beast, but, in a brief statement to The Sunday Times, The King's Foundation maintained that staff satisfaction is high, citing employee surveys, and also noted the implementation of 'changes to improve team working and communications.' However, it did not appear to address the core allegations of micromanagement or the cultural issues that have led to the exodus of gardening staff. Meghan's Netflix show is officially a bomb With Love, Meghan was positioned as a breakout lifestyle series, but its performance has fallen far short of expectations. New data released by Netflix and reported by Deadline shows the series failed to crack the platform's Top 300 most-watched shows in the first half of 2025. It landed at No. 383, with just 5.3 million global views—comparable to a children's cartoon show called Grizzy and the Lemmings. With Love, Meghan had already been renewed for a second season—set to feature an appearance by Chrissy Teigen later this year—and is linked to Meghan's lifestyle brand, As Ever. Prince Harry's solo project, Polo, a documentary offering a behind-the-scenes look at the horseback sport, did unspeakably badly, ranking No. 3,436, with a mere 500,000 views globally. Bridging the gap Make sure you read The Royalist's colleague Tom Latchem's excellent report into the palace's heavy-handed attempt to control coverage of the king's cancer and the plans for his funeral. Reporters have been threatened with being excluded from royal briefings if they cover the story. As Latchem reports, Buckingham Palace aides went into meltdown after plans for the death of King Charles appeared in The Daily Telegraph, including the revelation that Prince Harry and Meghan will be given a prominent role at the eventual funeral. Solve the daily Crossword
Forbes
a day ago
- Forbes
Proper Adoption Of AI Requires A Fundamental Change In Culture
AI arguably represents the most fundamental technological change since the arrival of early ... More mainframe computers. For months now, there has been almost constant coverage of AI and the potentially transformative role it could play in fields as wide-ranging as professional services and healthcare. But in recent weeks that attention seems to have intensified, as even the political classes wake up to the possible impact. On consecutive days last week, for example, the Financial Times carried opinion articles suggesting that, first, politicians must overcome their insecurity over technology matters and make a significant contribution to the debate over future developments, and, second, that they needed to be aware of the ramifications if anything like the predicted numbers of white-collar job losses come to fruition. Now, it is, of course, possible that this is all over-dramatic and that the AI revolution will, like the industrial revolution before it, create all kinds of jobs that we are now only just beginning to imagine. It could even be that the power of AI is being overstated. The cultural commentator Ted Gioia, for one, seems to think so. In a just-published column, he suggests that 'growing AI resistance is forcing companies to reconsider their bot mania.' Moreover, he cites a Gartner report that predicts that 40% of AI agent programs will be cancelled before 2027. Wishful thinking (Gioia is a longstanding critic of what he sees as AI's detrimental effect on culture) or not, it seems that the adoption of the technology could be a less than smooth process. Earlier this year, a study by the networking and security company Cisco found 'a paradox among CEOs.' While 4 in 5 recognized AI's potential benefits and almost all planned to integrate AI into their operations, many feared gaps in their knowledge would hinder decisions in the boardroom (74%) and stifle growth (58%) – risking missed opportunities and falling behind competitors. Another study, by the professional services firm EY, suggested that companies were racing ahead to implement AI while not putting in place sufficient safeguards against the risks involved. What the survey identifies as a gap between senior executives' concerns about adherence to responsible AI principles and those of consumers in general is potentially serious because it will only feed into the sorts of worries outlined by the opinion formers in the FT and elsewhere. Much of this debate centres on whether AI is seen as very much a cost-saving exercise through replacing people with machines or whether — as many proponents increasingly emphasize — it is a complement that enables humans to do better work and so become more productive. With rising levels of unemployment among young graduates causing increasing alarm, there are fears that the former scenario is in the ascendancy. Experts in the field, such as Erica Orange of the futurist consulting firm The Future Hunters and Pascal Bornet, a member of the Forbes Technology Council, are attempting to redress the balance with books like AI and the New Human Frontier and Irreplaceable. But, as David De Cremer, author of The AI-Savvy Leader, points out, many AI projects continue to be what he calls 'tech-driving-tech transformations' with people valuing AI's computational prowess over human understanding. It is possible that these caveats are contributing to some over-valuations of businesses centered on AI and that we may be in the midst of something like the dotcom bubble of earlier this century. But Steve Garnett, a former senior executive with Oracle, Siebel Systems and Salesforce who is now an active investor in technology businesses, believes that, rather than being overhyped, the AI revolution is 'if anything underhyped.' Indeed, he is so convinced that this is something different that he has stopped investing in traditional software businesses and is instead focusing on AI. While acknowledging that there is 'some frothiness in there' and that companies just saying they are adopting AI does not really make them AI-focused, he insists that what came to wider prominence with the launch of ChatGPT by OpenAI in November 2022 represents a significant departure from what has come before. 'We have had four decades of incremental technology,' he said in an interview earlier this month, pointing to customer relationship management, enterprise resource planning and various human resources applications. While introducing fundamental changes to how organizations operated, he argued that they were not sufficiently wide in scope for the board and senior executives other than those closely involved in IT to become involved. On the other hand, the technology seemingly becoming more sophisticated by the week was 'a digital labour revolution,' he said. As such, the board and the senior executive team could not afford not to be involved. As the person responsible for motivating the human workforce, the HR director would obviously need to have a view on how AI agents would be integrated, while the chief executive and the chief financial officer would be concerned with costs and assessing the risks that that EY report indicated were receiving insufficient attention at present. At the very least, both the executive team and the board need training in how this technology works and what it has the potential to do. But — mindful of what has happened in the past to companies that failed to respond to change quickly enough — Garnett is urging them to see the need to redesign their processes and indeed in some cases their products and services if they are not to be left behind. With so many factors — including cyber-security concerns, use of data and how to prevent AI agents going rogue — to be considered, it looks like nothing short of a fundamental cultural change will be required.
