California wants to increase benefits for police and firefighters. Can he afford it?

Three bills that would increase benefits and pay for California police and firefighters are making their way through the Legislature with bipartisan support. But in a limited state budget year, their potentially high price tags could make them a tough sell for Gov. Gavin Newsom, CalMatters’ Adam Ashton reports.

The Senate Appropriations Committee later this month is expected to consider bills that would lower the retirement age for public safety employees from 57 to 55; creating a new deferred retirement program for California Highway Patrol officers and Cal Fire firefighters; and a pay raise for Cal Fire firefighters.

In support of the proposals, lawmakers said increasing incentives to recruit and retain first responders was such a priority that they would cut other programs to offset the additional costs. During a Senate committee hearing in June on the retirement age bill, state Sen. Tony Strickland praised emergency responders for their work and courage during the Orange County chemical spill in May.

• StricklandHuntington Beach Republican: “I still cringe for these firefighters and their families who had to know they were putting their lives (on) on the line to save this explosion from happening, which they actually ended up doing. You can’t put a price on that.”

But the bills could increase the state’s annual costs by hundreds of millions of dollars. The measure, which would lower the retirement age for police officers and firefighters, for example, would require an additional $282 million in annual contributions to the California Public Employees’ Retirement System and increase long-term liabilities by $4.8 billion.

If the measures reach Newsom’s desk, it remains unclear what he will do. California Professional Firefighters and the California Correctional Officers Association were two of the biggest donors to help Newsom defeat a recall campaign in 2021. But the governor last year also rejected a bill that would have increased Cal Fire pay, citing “significant cost pressures.”

Read more.

Kaiser Permanente nurses’ criticism of company’s use of workplace surveillance shines light on AI’s potential adverse effects on patient carewrites Harry Johnson of CalMatters.

Kaiser nurses who respond to advice and triage calls often deal with patients who have complex symptoms, are experiencing mental health episodes, or have received life-changing health-related news. But current and former nurses told CalMatters they felt pressured to wrap up conversations within 15 minutes, and that longer conversations would routinely lead to criticism from Kaiser management or a performance evaluation meeting.

• Charlotte Capulongwho worked in nurse call centers for 22 years: “People can get hurt. … You don’t call Comcast. We’re dealing with life here.”

Kaiser uses software that tries to predict whether nurses are being unproductive or not responding quickly to calls, nurses said. They added that in 2024, the company began testing an AI tool that attempts to assess empathy and tone in nurses’ voices.

Kaiser has defended its use of AI, saying it is deploying the technology with human oversight and with patient safety in mind. He also denied using “average processing time” to measure performance.

Read more.

A majority of state senators on both sides of the aisle supported a bill that would give small businesses time to fix handicap access violations. So why the suggestion die in the assembly?

As CalMatters’ Kate Wolf explains, Sen. Roger Niello’s bill would allow businesses 120 days to correct violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act before they can be sued. The Roseville Republican proposed the measure to address what he sees as predatory law firms and their disabled clients using the ADA to enrich themselves.

But after passing the Senate, the bill essentially died when Assemblyman Ash Kalra, D-San Jose and chairman of the Assembly Judiciary Committee, refused to accept the offer for a hearing.

Calra said the bill “completely undermines the ADA” and that he didn’t schedule it for a hearing because Niello disagreed with the amendments his committee proposed in conversations outside the public process.

Niello said he plans to raise the issue again if he is re-elected in November, but his bill serves as a rare example of lawmakers pushing a measure outside of its home state after closed-door negotiations.

• Chris Micheli_, longtime lobbyist: “Sometimes the Assembly will refuse to hear a bill from its own house, and maybe the Senate can do the same with (a Senate bill). But it’s rare for that to happen for a bill from the other house.”

Read more.

In a victory for immigrant rights groups, the private immigration detention company GEO Group has agreed to pay more than $100,000 over allegations that it failed to ensure the safety of detainees while working at one of its Central Valley detention centers. Read more by Jeanne Kuang of CalMatters.