Welcome to the January 21-24 edition of the NFIB California Main Street Minute from your small-business advocacy team in Sacramento. In honor of the Martin Luther King holiday yesterday, this is coming to you today.

Quiet Week in the Capitol

• For good reason, legislative activity has substantially slowed as everyone’s attention and activity has rightfully turned to the Southern California wildfires. As a reminder, NFIB California has this story on our webpage, Rebuilding Resources for Victims of the Southern California Wildfires.

• That doesn’t mean all politicking has come to a halt, but NFIB Policy Director Tim Taylor is warning of a “big avalanche” of bills ahead, once normal activity resumes. In the meantime, one item of interest that squeaked through before the tragedy struck was Assembly Bill 26, interesting not for how far it will advance but for how long legislators can ignore it even exists.

• One thing is for certain: newly elected Assemblymember Carl DeMaio will not be the man chosen to update Dale Carnegie’s How to Win Friends & Influence People with his Eliminate the Politicians’ Perks Act of 2025, “prohibiting Members of the Legislature from accepting gifts or trading in individual stock, imposing a lifetime lobbying ban, eliminating exemptions for the Legislature from labor, workplace, and public record laws, and eliminating government pensions for local elected officials.”

“It’s Not Climate Change That’s Making Fires Worse. It’s Policy.”

• So argues The Orange County Register’s Susan Shelley, who detailed some big lapses in judgment made by California’s policymakers.

• “The problem in Pacific Palisades is that LADWP [Los Angeles Department of Water and Power] infrastructure couldn’t move enough water to refill three 1-million-gallon water tanks as fast as firefighters were using the water.

• “But there is a problem in California with emergency back-up generators. Air quality regulations limit their use, and some water agencies found that they could not adequately run their generators for testing.

• “So when power utilities began their policy of ‘public safety power shutoffs’ in 2019, water agencies went to the state Legislature pleading for a law that would exempt them from air quality regulations that limited the use of emergency back-up generators. They explained that water pumps run on electricity. They explained that without reliable generators, they would not be able to provide critical water service when the power was turned off due to the risk of fires, or because fires were already raging.”

• “In 2020, Senate Bill 1099 was introduced by Senators Bill Dodd and Steve Glazer, both Democrats, joined by a co-author, Republican Sen. John Moorlach. SB 1099 required air districts to give water agencies an exemption from rules that limited the use of emergency back-up generators to something like 200 hours per year and only allowed their use during actual emergencies. These rules blocked necessary testing of the equipment before an emergency occurred, something the water agencies thought was rather important.

• “SB 1099 was opposed by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. The bill passed in the Senate but quickly died in the Assembly.

• “Air quality regulators have also thrown obstacles in the way of prescribed burns, a fire mitigation practice that once was routinely used to reduce the fuel for wildfires and create defensible spaces for firefighters. In 2000, the California Air Resources Board adopted burdensome smoke regulations that made prescribed burns difficult. Within 10 years, wildfires were breaking records like a homerun hitter on steroids.”

Related

• Newsom suspends landmark environmental laws to ease rebuilding in wildfire zones

• California to provide tax relief to businesses impacted by Los Angeles wildfires

• Los Angeles wildfire survivors can apply for federal aid today, new website launched to help Californians

• California abandons diesel truck ban before Trump is sworn in

NFIB California News Release

• Last Monday (January 13), NFIB California transmitted our legislative agenda to the media.

Did You Ever Think You’d be Called a Subsidy Recipient?

• Maybe their next attempt (legislation, ballot initiative) to destroy Prop. 13 will have a better chance of succeeding if they can first change the terminology. Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, explains why in his column in The Orange County Register.

• “Well, they’re at it again. Progressive journalists at the San Francisco Chronicle – but I repeat myself – have come up with a new label for constitutional limits on tax increases. They’ve declared these limits to be ‘tax subsidies.’

• “Since when is keeping more of your own money a ‘subsidy?’

• “… Is there any homeowner in California who honestly believes that they are getting a ‘subsidy’ from the government when they pay their property tax bill? Let’s set the record straight. The money doesn’t belong to the government. It belongs to the people who earned it.

• “Even with Prop. 13’s protections against uncontrolled tax increases, California is decidedly not a low property tax state. It ranks 18th out of all 50 states in per capita property tax collections.”

• “… The Chronicle’s big bug-a-boo is that, under Proposition 13’s acquisition value method of taxing property, it is possible for long time property owners to pay less than those who own similar homes but purchase at a later point in time. But that is exactly the way Proposition 13 is supposed to work. Every property’s base-year value is set at the time of a transfer of ownership and can go up no more than 2% per year with inflation. Every property owner is protected from sudden and unaffordable tax increases based on the rising market value of their property, a factor they can’t control or predict.

• “Without Prop. 13, California property owners could be taxed out of their own property by inflation. This is precisely what happened to thousands of homeowners in the 1970s, and it would happen again today if Prop. 13’s antagonists ever succeeded in their goal.”

• Note: 73% of NFIB members own the building or property where their business is located, not including primary residence, according to the 2024 NFIB Tax Survey. Of the 75 issues ranked by NFIB’s quadrennial Small Business Problems & Priorities report, the latest of which was released in 2024, property taxes came in at 11th most troubling, nationally, and 19th in California. NFIB vigorously opposed Proposition 15 five years ago, which would have decimated Prop. 13 and will fiercely oppose any other future legislative or ballot attempts to weaken or eliminate it!

National

Highlights from NFIB Federal Government Relations Principal Josselin Castillo’s weekly report

• NFIB released the Small Business Growth Agenda for the 119th Congress. NFIB strongly encourages lawmakers to prioritize the legislative solutions outlined in the Small Business Growth Agenda to fight high inflation, reduce energy and healthcare costs, eliminate red tape, and increase competition – all of which will strengthen the small business economy.

• Testimony: NFIB highlighted NFIB member and small business owner Alison Couch’s testimony before the U.S. House Committee on Ways & Means on Tuesday, January 14th. Alison underscored the need for Congress to act to preserve the 20% Small Business Deduction.

• ICYMI: NFIB released a new explainer video about the 20% Small Business Tax Deduction and how it affects small businesses. Watch here.

• NFIB sent a press release in support of legislation reintroduced today by Sen. Tommy Tuberville (AL) and Rep. Warren Davidson (OH-08) to repeal the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA). Additionally, NFIB led 60 trade associations in sending a letter to U.S. Sen. Tommy Tuberville and U.S. Rep. Warren Davidson in strong support of their legislation to repeal the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA).

Next Main Street Minute January 27.