Will O'Neill, 2618 San Miguel Drive, #173, Newport Beach, CA (2026)

08/31/2026

I give bipartisan kudos to Assembly Member Diane Dixon (R) and a five Democratic Assembly Members for pushing a decade-long effort to ban child marriage in California.

Rather incredibly, there is no age limit to marriage in California. If a person is under 18, the process for marriage requires judicial approval and the consent of one parent. Assembly Bill 1267 will fix this minor-marrying allowance to essentially prohibit anyone under 18 from being married or entering into a domestic partnership.

The LA Times reports that CA was one of three states in the U.S. without a minimum age to get married. Which seems … odd, no?

Now, some of you may wonder how prevalent this is. It turns out that between 2019 and 2025 (when data was collected for this topic), 88 marriage licenses were issued where at least one person in the marriage was a minor. That same LA Times report noted that “those marriages involved weddings between girls as young as 15 and men in their 30s.” Gross.

You may also wonder who would oppose this. The answer? The ACLU. Why? Abortion.

The ACLU’s letter said: “Just as minors have the right to decide to have an abortion or to carry a pregnancy to term (or to seek a restraining order) on their own, they should maintain the right to marry, with robust protections in place to prevent coercion and abuse.”

When abortion politics leads an organization to advocate for child marriage, they may have jumped the shark.

I was surprised to see this garner full support from the State Senate, including especially Sen. Scott Wiener. You remember Wiener, right? He’s the one who this year helped ensure that registered s*x offenders can continue to run for public office.

Why did he do that? Because he’s worried about people having s*x with minors being categorized as s*x offenders and banned from running for public office. This is the guy who famously pushed to ensure that 24-year-olds could have s*x with 14-year-olds without being automatically registered as s*x offenders (SB 145 in 2020).

Weird (perverted?) that he thinks a 14-year-old can consent to s*x with a 24-year-old, but not marriage, no?

(Thank you for today's pic!)

Resources:

• Assembly Bill 1267 - https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/bills/ca_202520260ab1267
• Existing CA Family Code 300-310: https://law.justia.com/codes/california/2005/fam/300-310.html

• LA Times “California moves to outlaw child marriage with bill headed to Newsom’s desk” https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2026-08-26/california-outlaw-child-marriage-bill-ab1267

• LA Times “Bill to ban s*x offenders from running for office fails in California Senate committee” https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2026-07-01/ban-on-s*x-offenders-running-for-office-fails-at-california-senate

• Update about Wiener - https://www.facebook.com/RealWillONeill/posts/pfbid02uY8k9geggzuSri73tVB5E8sESVA7nWB1DKdkgDBMAZvTRVbBuQyAEZdjkFpotu1Yl

08/28/2026

Prop 40 sets the stage for wealth taxes in California. What’s called the “Billionaire’s Tax” is both an “everyone tax” and creates an additional scheme for property confiscation.

The primary backer (SEIU) will be the biggest beneficiary of any proceeds (because of course it is).

It turns out that SEIU is also opposing the Voter ID measure (Prop 39) by creating a committee called “No on 39 – Block Election Rigging.” Which is a helluva thing considering how much SEIU backed the gerrymandering in Prop 50 last year.

In other words, it’s only “election rigging” if it might diminish their power even just a little bit.

Based on what we’ve seen so far, the opposition to voter ID will (1) invoke President Trump’s name a lot, even if he has nothing to do with it and (2) claim that identity verification will make voting too hard.

But let’s talk about that identity verification, because do you know what else requires proof of identity in California? Here’s a short list I compiled yesterday:

1. Marriage License;
2. Certified Copies of Birth, Death, or Marriage Certificates;
3. CA Driver’s License;
4. Professional & Occupational Licenses;
5. A concealed carry weapon;
6. Fi****ms Safety Certificate;
7. CalFresh (Food Stamps);
8. Medi-Cal benefits;
9. Notarized state document;
10. Fictitious business name filing;
11. State job employment/onboarding;
12. Live scan fingerprinting clearance;
13. State property or impounded vehicle release;
14. Inmate visitation access;
15. Commercial fishing or hunting license;
16. Access a secure state capitol/government building;
17. Unclaimed property payouts;
18. REAL ID-Compliant state card;
19. Public Records Act In-Person inspections;
20. A state park pass or disabled discount pass.

I hesitated to post this list because I’m genuinely concerned that Sacramento’s response would be to remove identity verification from those aspects rather than accept that voter ID is a good idea.

And truly, I find it absurd that the state could hold your money as “unclaimed property,” force you to prove who you are to get your property back, and then claim that requiring an ID to vote is “Jim Crow 2.0.”

Vote Yes on 39 and No on 40.

(Thank you for today's pic!)

Resources:

• Reform California “Yes on 39” - https://www.reformcalifornia.org/cavoterid/home

• Politico “California Dems rally the troops against Prop 39” https://www.politico.com/newsletters/california-playbook-pm/2026/08/17/california-dems-rally-the-troops-against-prop-39-01039340

• Heritage Foundation “Left Labeling Election Integrity Reforms As “Jim Crow” Is a Lie and Insulting to Black People” https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/commentary/left-labeling-election-integrity-reforms-jim-crow-lie-and-insulting

• Heritage Foundation “The Left’s “Jim Crow” Rhetoric Is Absurd, Insulting, and Dishonest” https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/commentary/the-lefts-jim-crow-rhetoric-absurd-insulting-and-dishonest

08/26/2026

This post is for Newport Beach residents.

In November, you’re going to choose who you want on your City Council and you will also have a terrible ballot proposition to vote down.

The city’s budget is running surpluses without a single tax increase anywhere to be seen. The increased investment over the past years in basics like infrastructure and safety have consistently increased property tax revenues, which has allowed the current council to re-invest in expanding police and fire operations. The roads are great, the projects are coming in on time, and homelessness is barely an issue for discussion. And debt/liabilities are way down.

In sum, we’re in a good spot as a city with the constant aspiration to improve. Which is exactly where we should expect Newport Beach to be.

I have endorsed Joe Stapleton, Erik Weigand, Lauren Kleiman, and Robyn Grant for re-election.

After everything we have done in local politics to ensure that we’re not bringing LA into OC, I’m shocked specifically by the campaign being run by Andy Gerken against Lauren Kleiman.

Kudos to Gerken on his professional career as a well-liked surgeon. But his political side? It's a train wreck.

On his own campaign site, he’s touting endorsements from Long Beach Congressman Robert Garcia, assassination-celebrating Assembly candidate Chris Kluwe, and failed lefty state senate candidate Chris Duncan.

What about these guys made Gerken decide to seek and advertise their support?

Was it when Garcia supported LA District Attorney George Gascon for re-election after Gascon’s policies led to the murder of a woman in Newport Beach? Was it when Garcia went on CNN and proclaimed that “what the American public want is for us to bring actual weapons to this bar fight”?

Was it when Chris Kluwe celebrated Charlie Kirk’s assassination? Or when Kluwe was arrested at a Huntington Beach City Council meeting? Or when Kluwe told the New York Times that “Democratic socialism has worked in America”? Or when Kluwe made a joke about child molestation while in the NFL?

No LA in OC, and certainly not in NB.

(Thank you for today's pic!)

Resources:

• Yahoo News “ https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/nfl-bad-boy-chris-kluwe-223039920.html

• Update - https://www.facebook.com/RealWillONeill/posts/pfbid0DiLbFqRnEBNqgorBbHzbNHBv3pJVWLpPh74T2upxR2FDH8aKCGaQpCjwzjmvajUgl

• Update - https://www.facebook.com/RealWillONeill/posts/pfbid02fXiardLdWUaTg7HYzvXjefT3kzQYfDkTL4dCQFpH5jB6ezu2js6WyZBuWTDRecTXl

• Update - https://www.facebook.com/RealWillONeill/posts/pfbid0YR1khy6UdfNUdPMxUYQwd9aLmuf27nuvEUR9fgv9zZGBtctb4nn5nQBy2an82Ddol

• Update - https://www.facebook.com/RealWillONeill/posts/pfbid02xEX8HFxFEfKJoHtzCmbZXNCzQQLSg4A5qmp75FvL2XijgJ1gUzNpvEmcUU7Tn87Zl

• Garcia - https://www.facebook.com/RealWillONeill/posts/pfbid035JGzZfieUvjaAWVXfK1fEYZRCivSynsYRAwdHHYXCXQfJXMR7xBkYE4r1HTxwk46l

08/24/2026

There’s a joke that making partner at a large law firm is like winning the pie eating contest and finding out that the prize is more pie.

Not a great joke, but it’s a joke. And I was reminded of that joke this week when Gov. Newsom posted on X that 10 cities “are going above and beyond to build enough housing for everyone will get $11.3M in state funds for more affordable housing.”

The only city in Orange County is Santa Ana. So congratulations Santa Ana! You get more market distortion money!

If you take a look at the cities (and a few counties) on the list, you’ll see pretty quickly a glaring omission: the areas where Newsom owns two homes. There’s not a single city in Newsom’s list in all of Marin County, let alone Kentfield, CA.

These communities, though, also appear to be the only communities Newsom can spotlight on housing production in CA. CalMatters reviewed how cities have been doing on meeting their state-mandated goals (called “Regional Housing Needs Assessment” [RHNA]). SoCal is more than half-way through its 8-year RHNA cycle and … it’s not close to meeting Newsom’s demands.

Those demands, fyi, require cities/counties to plan for housing four income levels, from “above moderate” to “very low.” Less than 30% of jurisdictions are on track to meet their “above moderate” numbers and less than 6% are on track for “very low” targets.

CalMatters notes, for example, that Irvine is on pace for 141% more “above moderate” housing than required, but below 10% of very low, low, or moderate income housing.

(Also FYI, CalMatter’s data from the CA Dept. of Housing and Community Development shows that Newport Beach is on track for 22% of less in any category, Costa Mesa 20%, HB 25%, etc.)

Oh, and while we’re heading into local elections, avoid bad faith zombie arguments that are fake but won’t die. I’m hearing again recently in NB that folks on the troll boards of NextDoor are claiming that council approved more units than required. First, no they didn’t. And second, there’s an entire website devoted to debunking this campaign lie that they hope you won’t read.

But again, congrats Santa Ana?

(Thank you for today’s painting!)

Resources:

• CalMatters “Almost nowhere in California is building enough, according to the state. Here’s why” https://calmatters.org/housing/2026/08/california-rhna-housing-affordable-progress/

• Newsom X post - https://x.com/CAgovernor/status/2091195071815385320

• Newport Beach “Housing Element Implementation FAQ” https://www.newportbeachca.gov/government/departments/community-development/planning-division/general-plan-codes-and-regulations/general-plan-update/housing-element-faq

08/21/2026

A friend of mine sent me a note this week asking if our society has simply lost the concept of liberty. Fair question, especially coming on the heels of celebrating the 250th birthday of the greatest political document ever drafted, which reminded us that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

The easiest way to participate as a citizen is to not participate at all. It creates the boiling frog problem where we slowly give away your liberty for security or cynicism.

Benjamin Franklin famously wrote: “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

(Side note, we see way too many of our fellow CA citizens giving up essential Liberty and not even expecting Safety in return.)

Robert Caro has written a series of books about Lyndon Johnson, and one of my favorite passages was about Johnson’s opponent for U.S. Senate: “Coke Stevenson believed government should do only what the people couldn’t do for themselves. It was always tempting to have government come in and solve problems; but every bit of government help came with strings of bureaucratic regulation attached, and every string was a limitation on the most important thing we possess, and have to leave our children: freedom and individual liberty.”

I love that last line because it’s a reminder that what we are left by our parents’ generation and what we leave our kids shouldn’t be measured in things, but in foundation and principle.

When Sam Rayburn (another Texan, former Speaker of the House) was told that his father had not left him much of an inheritance, Rayburn responded that his father “gave me my untarnished name.”

I write three of these Updates a week and a throughline of them all is trying to wrestle with issues and discuss principles.

What will our legacies be? I hope we can say in equal parts: freedom and individual liberty.

(Thank you for today’s pic!)

08/19/2026

Californians receive annual bills from the DMV requiring them to pay registration renewal fees.

Generally speaking, the fees include a base fee of $74 plus $34 for the CHP plus 0.65% of the vehicle's purchase price or current assessed value plus “transportation improvement fees” that go up substantially based on the vehicle value (a car worth $60k+ pays $245).

This, of course, is in addition to skyrocketing insurance rates (CA ranks in the top four most expensive car insurance states) and fuel (we’re number one! we’re number one!) thanks to CA regulations and taxes.

In other words, driving a car in CA is already onerous and expensive due to Sacramento’s decisions.

And it’s getting a lot more expensive with two looming decisions. First, KCRA (Ashley Zavala) reported yesterday that California regulators at the California Energy Commission “voted to adopt new rules that will phase out the sale of replacement tires that don't meet certain energy efficiency standards.” This means that tire manufacturers will no longer be allowed to sell ~70% of the tires currently sold in CA.

Regulators claimed that restricting choices will *checks notes* reduce costs? The theory is apparently that new rules would reduce gas consumption and therefore reduce costs. But Goodyear tires noted that these new rules will likely increase tire costs by several hundreds of dollars (duh).

As Zavala noted, the CEC has never regulated tires.

Oh, and Newsom’s response was on brand: “SAVING CALIFORNIANS $$$. MAGA HATES TO SEE IT.” We expect nothing less Gavin. (We expect nothing more too.)

The second decision is Assembly Bill 1421, which lays the groundwork for a “road useage charge;” i.e., a tax on every mile you drive. I wrote about this six months ago, when it stalled out. But Assemblyman Phil Chen is warning folks to pay attention in the final weeks of the legislative session because the super-majority party in Sacramento is hoping you won’t.

(Thank you for today’s pic!)

Resources:

• Forbes - https://www.forbes.com/advisor/car-insurance/rates-by-state/

• Jeff Vaughn - https://x.com/JeffVaughn/status/2089767877100621876?s=20

• Zavala - https://x.com/ZavalaA/status/2089523026387968246?s=20

• KCRA “California regulators approve new rules limiting what replacement tires you can buy for your car” https://www.kcra.com/article/california-energy-commission-tire-efficiency-rules/73456508

• February Update - https://www.facebook.com/RealWillONeill/posts/pfbid0Nx1YzoeRKrgZy4oXUKSZ78pJEJvT2QuTVAHNMU1e9BqsWpiTohgAhMfemwXpnWG6l

• So Does It Matter- https://www.sodoesitmatter.com/p/sacramento-is-coming-for-your-tires

08/17/2026

There are exactly 78 days between today (8/17) and election day (11/3). Subtract ~30 days because that’s when ballots hit mailboxes, which means that there are only 48 days between now and Californians start voting.

That’s a blink of an eye with real, long-term consequences for you city, for your county, for your state, and for our nation.

The elections are set. Last week marked the end of filing for local races. There were ~43 seats with only a Republican running unopposed and ~25 seats with only a Democrat running unopposed. But there are now hundreds of contested seats from Congress to Library District (yes, Buena Park and Placentia have elected library districts).

We have a guy running for assembly (Kluwe) to represent Huntington Beach, Newport Beach, and other red cities who has openly said that he believes democratic socialism works. Just south of there is another guy running for assembly (Farias) who ran for office previously as a member of the Party for Socialism and Liberation.

These are candidates who look at Sacramento and think “it would work if they were just more radically left….”

Look, you have just over two months total to contribute positively to the political environment of your community. I am literally begging you to pay attention right now and do something.

Donate to local conservative candidates. Host meet-and-greets. Make some phone calls. Post who you’re voting for on social media. Take advantage of this beautiful weather and knock on some doors. Campaigns will take all the help you can get.

And if you’re looking for strong organization, talk with local Republican clubs or directly with the Republican Party of Orange County (yes, I’m Chairman if you didn’t know). We make it really really easy, we just need some time.

Want advice on particular races? Message me.

It’s game time folks. Don’t stand on the sidelines and wonder later what you could have done to stand tall for your community.

(Thank you Ruth Sanchez Kobayashi for today’s pic!)

Resources:

• OC GOP volunteer - https://ocgop.org/volunteer/

• Local Republican Clubs - https://ocgop.org/clubs/

08/14/2026

In the ongoing discussion about ballot propositions, let’s talk about a billionaire’s desire to use your tax dollars to benefit an institute that he particularly cares about.

Prop 38 will ask California voters to approve $8.4 billion in general obligation bonds to fund immunology and immunotherapy research. Issuing those bonds would obligate CA taxpayers to pay $500-$600 million annually for ~20 years to repay the bond. In other words, CA taxpayers would be on the hook for up to $12 billion to borrow $8.4 billion, which is money that can’t be used for anything else (like roads, law enforcement, water storage, etc.).

If that were all this was, then it would be a typical proposition trying to convince voters to make budgetary decisions without a holistic view toward scare resources. But that’s not what this specific ballot proposition is.

Enter Gary K. Michelson, who co-founded the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy. CalMatters reports that Michelson has given at least $120 million to the Institute, which is commendable. He clearly cares a great deal about bettering society and is using his wealth to do good.

Where the story takes a wrong turn, though, is the way Prop 38 is structured to benefit only his Institute. As CalMatters explained, Prop 38 would send half to one, unnamed institute that has very very specific requirements to qualify.

For example, it must be affiliated with a UC campus with a medical center that serves a minimum number of patients. Only UCLA qualifies. And based on additional qualifications, CalMatters confirmed with a UCLA spokesperson “that among all nonprofit entities affiliated with UCLA, only the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy could satisfy the stipulations of Prop. 38.”

Look, I respect the dedication, passion, and zeal. But I don’t respect the desire to run a ballot proposition that myopically focuses on budgetary decisions about non-core public services at the likely expense of core public services.

I will vote No on 38. (Also, yes, I’ll out a guide closer to election day on all props.)

(Thank you for today’s pic!)

Resources:

• CalMatters “This CA proposition will send $4 billion to a single nonprofit. Who’s behind it?” https://calmatters.org/politics/elections/2026/07/proposition-38-california/

• Legislative Analysts Office “Authorizes Bonds for Immunology Medical Research. Initiative Statute”https://lao.ca.gov/ballot/2026/prop38-110326.pdf

• OC Register “What is Proposition 38 before California voters in the 2026 election?” https://www.ocregister.com/2026/07/02/what-is-proposition-38-before-california-voters-in-the-2026-election/

• Politico “The billionaire on the ballot” https://www.politico.com/newsletters/california-playbook-pm/2026/08/03/the-billionaire-on-the-ballot-01022708

08/12/2026

Los Angeles voters chose to make LA and surrounding counties less safe when they selected George Gascon as LA’s District Attorney. People outside LA literally died because of decisions made by Gascon’s pro-criminal policies.

LA voters fixed that major mistake by rejecting Gascon’s re-election and instead choosing Nathan Hochman. I am confident that Orange County is safer because of that decision. But OC voters are now at risk due to another LA election in November.

And OC Democrat Congressman Derek Tran is firmly behind the anti-law enforcement candidate.

Let’s explain.

LA voters face a similar choice regarding their City Attorney in the Fall. On the one hand, you have socialist-endorsed Marissa Roy. On the other you have a more traditional Democrat named John McKinney (endorsed by Nathan Hochman).

The Los Angeles chapter of the Democratic Socialists have three LA city council members in their group, including Eunisses Hernandez (who said in 2022 during her campaign: “I do not believe that the police should play any role in my community”). The Socialists are plotting to add the LA City Attorney’s position to their ranks by backing Roy.

What would that mean?

Well, the California Post reported in February that Marissa Roy worked on a proposal to create a misdemeanor moratorium for the first 100 days of the (thankfully, failed) candidacy of her preferred LA City Attorney candidate in 2022.

Trespassing? No prosecution. Loitering, public intoxication, minor drug possession, etc., no prosecution. Why? Because, as Roy told the CA Post, “most misdemeanors are rooted in poverty, mental illness or addiction.” The criminals are the victims!

Given how extreme Roy is, I wasn’t surprised to see that the LA teacher’s union backed her. And while Roy has a bunch of far-left activists on her endorsements list, there’s only one Congressman. He’s a Democrat in a purple district and lives in Orange County.

Derek Tran endorsed socialist Marissa Roy.

Did you know that Tran wants less public safety in OC? Now you do. And so will his district.

(Thank you for today’s pic!)

Resources:

• LA Times (2022) “Hire officers? Abolish the police? L.A.’s election reveals deep divisions over the LAPD” https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-11-04/la-election-contests-expose-deep-divide-over-police

• California Post “Anti-police pol Eunisses Hernandez voted against LAPD funding — then charged taxpayers massive sum for her own officers” https://nypost.com/2026/03/21/us-news/lefty-eunisses-hernandez-voted-against-lapd-funding-then-tapped-cops-for-her-own-security/

• LA Democratic Socialists endorsements - https://shakeup-la.com/our-candidates

• Mike Trujillo X post - https://x.com/mikehtrujillo/status/2086544358032203798?s=42

• Marissa Roy endorsements - https://www.marissaroy.com/endorsements

• California Post “Lefty DSA City Attorney candidate Marissa Roy helped craft a 100-day crime freeze” https://nypost.com/2026/02/12/us-news/lefty-dsa-city-attorney-candidate-marissa-roy-helped-craft-a-100-day-crime-freeze/

08/10/2026

Ok, some in-the-weeds political discussion today so that you have a better feel for how politics works.

Federal, state, and county races (and state-wide propositions) will be on the general election ballots for November 3. To qualify to be a candidate in those races, folks had to place in the top two during the June primary.

Local races, though, don’t have primaries. These include races like city council, school board, community college districts, water boards, etc. As many folks who meet the qualifications to run can run.

This means that in some races you could have just one person run (and immediately win) or you could have a dozen people run for one spot. And then there are cities that are at-large and have multiple spots open at once. For example, Laguna Beach has three at-large seats open on its city council and nine people running (including three incumbents).

This past Friday was the traditional filing deadline for those races. Where the incumbent was the only person who is in the race, they’ve won. (Locally, big congrats to NMUSD Trustees Andrea McElroy and Lisa Pearson!)

But there are a number of races where the incumbent (or an incumbent, in at-large races) isn’t running for whatever reason. In those races, the filing deadline extends five extra days, which is this Wednesday (8/12) at 5pm.

Why the extension? To avoid shenanigans. It used to be the case that an incumbent would tell everyone that they’re running, scare everyone off, and then their preferred successor just happened to file documents at 4:55pm alongside the incumbent filing papers to withdraw. CA ensures that doesn’t happen by extending filing the extra 5 days.

For folks in South OC, this surprisingly happened in all three Capistrano Unified School District seats (we have some great Republicans ready to win those seats).

And locally, I’m pleased to announce that NMUSD Trustee Ashley Anderson has wisely decided not to seek re-election after her hit-and-run crime was surfaced by Newport parent Phil Stemler.

The more you know….

(Thank you for today’s pic!)

Will O'Neill

08/31/2026

08/28/2026

08/26/2026

08/24/2026

08/21/2026

08/19/2026

08/17/2026

08/14/2026

08/12/2026

08/10/2026

Address

Telephone

Website

Alerts

Contact The Organization

Shortcuts

Share

Category

Listing takedown request