Business
Here’s who is running in the heated race for insurance commissioner
In a typical election year, the interest in the down-ballot race for California insurance commissioner musters modest interest at best.
That all changed on Jan. 7, 2025, when wildfires swept through L.A. County, damaging or destroying more than 18,000 homes and killing at least 31 people.
The resulting anger directed at the insurance industry over how it has handled claims has helped draw four Democrats into the race, who will be vying this weekend for a critical endorsement at the party’s annual convention in San Francisco ahead of the June 2 primary election.
“We haven’t seen this level of competition and, frankly, choice on the Democratic side since it first became an elected office in 1990,” said Jamie Court, president of Consumer Watchdog, a Los Angeles insurance advocacy group. “They represent wide-ranging views and a broad diversity of candidates.”
Up for endorsement are state Sen. Benjamin Allen (D-Santa Monica), whose district includes the Palisades fire zone; former San Francisco Supervisor Jane Kim; former state Sen. Steven Bradford; and San Francisco businessman Patrick Wolff, who has not held elective office.
Three Republicans have declared their candidacies, but that party’s convention isn’t until April. The filing deadline to file for the race is March 6.
The GOP field includes businessman Robert Howell, who lost by 20 points in the 2022 general election to current Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara. Also running are insurance agent Stacy Korsgaden from Grover Beach, and attorney Merritt Farren, whose Pacific Palisades home burned down.
Peace and Freedom Party candidate Eduardo Vargas, a Los Angeles school teacher, is on the ballot too.
The race also follows Lara’s two troubled terms in office, during which he has been accused of cozying up to and receiving money from the insurance industry for his first campaign and conferences abroad.
Lara has denied any wrongdoing, and all the Democratic candidates have vowed not to accept insurance industry donations.
“For me and maybe for many survivors, it’s not a position that we ever thought much about, but now with many of our lives devastated by our dealings with insurers I think many survivors will be watching much more closely this time around,” said Joy Chen, executive director of the Eaton Fire Survivors Network, a community group that has accused Lara of being soft on insurers and has called for his resignation.
Allen was perceived by some as the leading candidate for the party’s nomination when he announced his candidacy in September. He has held his seat for more than a decade and is the only sitting legislator in the race. He said he would not be running if not for the wildfire that struck his district.
“The fire certainly was a searing experience, helping hundreds of people get their claims paid right, but it kind of begs the question of why should you have to call your state senator to get treated right,” he said.
Allen’s platform includes a number of ideas to ensure policyholders are treated better, including requiring insurers to clearly explain claim denials. But also key to his campaign is stabilizing an insurance market that over the last several years has seen insurers drop policyholders by the hundreds of thousands, especially in fire-prone neighborhoods.
That forced them onto the California FAIR Plan, the insurer of last resort. It’s rolls grew even more since the January fires and the insurer has been sued by fire victims over its claims practices. Allen wants to build insurer confidence in the market by having insurer requests for rate hikes reviewed in months, rather than the year or more they can drag out now.
He also points to his legislative record, especially his authorship of Proposition 4, which was approved by voters in 2024 and set aside $10 billion in general obligation bonds to fund climate resiliency and environmental protection projects — an important part, he said, of lowering insurance risks.
Allen has drawn a key endorsement from California Sen. Adam Schiff and as of Dec. 31 had about $1 million in the bank, more than any other candidate. But the race was shook up last month when progressive politician Kim declared her candidacy. She boasted an endorsement from U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), for whom she worked as his California political director during the 2020 presidential campaign.
She also has drawn attention for a plan to create a state-run disaster insurance policy for Californians.
Residents would continue to buy regular home insurance from the commercial market but would buy coverage for wildfires and other disasters from the state, similar to plans in some other countries.
The idea has come under sharp criticism from Court, who said it will shift the risk of costly disasters to taxpayers while allowing insurers to make profits from the more predictable end of the home insurance market.
“We have to explore some different models, because the current system is not working. It’s too expensive and a market failure,” said Kim, adding that the plan could evolve.
Bradford, who represented communities in south L.A County and the South Bay in the Legislature, has been endorsed by L.A. Mayor Karen Bass. He said he’s running as a pragmatist and unifier.
“What we’ve been doing for far too long has been a whole lot of finger pointing and doing the blame game,” he said.
Bradford wants insurers to open their pricing books and give homeowners “real, guaranteed” premium discounts for upgrading their property.
He also is proposing a public–private partnership that shares the risk for insurers who write policies in fire-prone neighborhoods.
Wolff, a political newcomer, is a Chartered Financial Analyst, real estate investor and former hedge manager who cites his experience building a home and auto insurance brokerage for financial services firm Capital One.
“I spent the first half of 2025 really deeply studying the commissioner’s role and the history, and the race — the politics of everything. And after really doing that deep dive, I decided to step forward,” said Wolff, who wrote his campaign a $500,000 check and loaned it another $100,000.
He also thinks rate hikes sought by insurers need to be reviewed more quickly but wants the insurance department to publish annual reports on how specific companies handled claims.
“The insurance industry has basically lobbied to keep that data anonymous at the company level, and I think it’s really important to make that information public,” Wolff said.
Under California’s open primary system, the top two candidates will move on to the Nov. 3 general election, which means two Democrats could run up against each other if a Republican isn’t able to consolidate the GOP vote.
Steve Maviglio, a longtime political consultant currently working for State Treasure Fiona Ma, who is seeking the office of lieutenant governor, said that the race is wide open.
“This is a statewide election with millions of people with candidates they’ve never heard of,” he said.
With multiple candidates seeking the endorsement, it may be hard for any single one to reach the 60% threshold of delegate votes needed.
“If no one is endorsed, somebody is going to have to be the breakout candidate, and the way you do that is with money or organization,” Maviglio said. “Until I see that happen, it’s totally up in the air.”
Business
Video: Jury Rejects Elon Musk’s Lawsuit Against OpenAI and Microsoft
new video loaded: Jury Rejects Elon Musk’s Lawsuit Against OpenAI and Microsoft
transcript
transcript
Jury Rejects Elon Musk’s Lawsuit Against OpenAI and Microsoft
Elon Musk had accused OpenAI of “stealing a charity” by attaching a commercial company to Open AI, which was founded as a nonprofit. But a jury ruled that the statute of limitations had expired.
-
“The evidence that Mr. Musk’s lawsuit was an after-the-fact contrivance by a competitor was overwhelming.” “This reminds me of key moments in this country’s history. The siege of Charleston, the Battle of Bunker Hill, these were major losses for Americans. But who won the war? And this one is not over. And to sum it up, I can sum it up in one word: appeal.”
By Meg Felling
May 18, 2026
Business
Five Guys to close two L.A.-area locations
Five Guys will close two Los Angeles-area locations later this month.
The burger chain announced in a recent state filing that its locations in City of Industry and Whittier will close in late May. An outlet in Merced will also close its doors in late June, and one in Hanford will shut down in early July, according to state court filings.
The burger giant is the latest fast-food chain to shutter locations as the industry struggles with rising labor and real estate costs in the state.
The company cited “financial hardship” as a reason for the closures, according to a filing.
Employers are legally required to submit a Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification, or WARN notice, to alert employers, state and local officials at least 60 days before major layoffs. The initial notices were submitted in late April and early May.
The chain had steady growth in 2024, but seems to have stumbled in California. It opened 37 new storefronts that year, according to the company’s franchise disclosure document. Yet California stores accounted for eight of the 14 locations that closed that year.
The closures will result in 55 jobs lost across the four locations, according to the WARN notice.
A spokesperson for Five Guys did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Fast food chains have struggled against rising operational costs and increasingly cost-conscious customers.
California’s economic landscape has further complicated business in the state. While aerospace and defense companies have continued to flock to the state, companies in other sectors, including food, have started to bail out.
Five Guys ranked 42 in QSR Magazine’s top 50 U.S. restaurants list for 2026 and the number of locations in the country rose by 2% in 2025.
The chain got its start around 40 years ago in Virginia and now operates over 1,900 locations, according to its website.
The restaurant’s website lists over 85 locations in California, including at least 15 storefronts in the Los Angeles area.
Business
Jury rejects Elon Musk’s lawsuit, sides with OpenAI in bitter feud over AI future
A federal jury sided with OpenAI and its top executives on Monday in a feud with Elon Musk, who accused them of betraying a shared vision for it to guide artificial intelligence’s development as a nonprofit.
The nine-person jury unanimously found that Musk waited too long to file his lawsuit and missed the deadline for the statute of limitations.
Musk, the world’s richest man, was a co-founder of OpenAI, the company that launched in 2015 and went on to create ChatGPT. After investing $38 million in its first years, Musk accused OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and his top deputy of shifting into a moneymaking mode behind his back.
The jury served in an advisory role, but Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers accepted the verdict Monday as the court’s own and dismissed Musk’s claims.
The trial that began on April 27 in Oakland shed light on the bitter falling-out between the two Silicon Valley titans and the origins of OpenAI, now a company valued at $852 billion and poised to become one of the largest initial public offerings in history.
The high-profile high-stakes showdown between two of the most powerful companies and leaders in technology was billed as a battle that could change the trajectory of AI.
There were two weeks of testimony from the dueling entrepreneurs and other key players in OpenAI’s history, providing a rare inside glimpse into the company, which evolved from a startup to one of the world’s most influential companies.
Musk had fallen out with his fellow co-founders, then, after OpenAI became arguably the most important company in AI, he decided he was not happy with how the trailblazer was managed after he left.
Musk claimed Altman, the startup’s chief executive officer, and OpenAI President Greg Brockman “stole a charity” by exploiting his early support for an altruistic research project so that they could later get rich by turning into a regular for-profit company.
OpenAI and its leaders said Musk was suing them to gain a competitive advantage for his own startup, xAI.
Musk was seeking more than $100 billion in damages — to be awarded to OpenAI’s nonprofit arm instead of to himself — as well as the removal of Altman and Brockman.
The case was seen as an existential threat to OpenAI. If the decision had gone the other way, it would have sparked a shakeup that would have destabilized the company just as it is working to ensure the U.S. takes the lead in AI and prepares for a public offering with a valuation approaching $1 trillion.
Associated Press and Bloomberg contributed to this article.
-
Arkansas5 minutes agoOPINION | WALLY HALL: Arkansas among contenders in tough SEC | Arkansas Democrat Gazette
-
California11 minutes agoTom Steyer Wants to Save California From Billionaires. But Also Doesn’t Want Them to Leave
-
Colorado17 minutes agoMeet Ginger, Colorado Springs beaver turned Pixar film influencer
-
Connecticut23 minutes ago‘Changed everything:’ Double knee replacement transforms quality of life for Connecticut woman
-
Delaware29 minutes agoDelaware Lottery Powerball, Play 3 Day winning numbers for May 18, 2026 – AOL
-
Florida35 minutes agoRegistration for 2026 Florida Python Challenge gets underway Tuesday. Here’s what to know.
-
Georgia41 minutes agoElection coverage: The latest on Georgia's primary elections, judicial races
-
Hawaii47 minutes agoReport: Expanding childcare tax credit could boost workforce – Hawaii Tribune-Herald