Huntington Beach to vote on ‘MAGA' plaque for library's 50th anniversary
Huntington Beach city leaders will convene Tuesday to vote on whether to approve a new plaque design to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the city's library.
The plaque, which would be located at the city's Central Library on Talbert Avenue, describes the library system of being a 'beacon of education, a catalyst for dreams, and a sanctuary for children to feel safe, valued, and free to grow.'
Huntington Beach declares itself a 'non-sanctuary city'
It also features an acrostic message in the form of a slogan: Magical, Alluring, Galvanizing, Adventurous — MAGA.
The acronym, synonymous with President Donald Trump and the Republican party, does not appear to be part of the official verbiage or brand identity of Huntington Beach or its public library system. A search for the terms on the city's website yielded no relevant results.
The use of divisive acronym in an official capacity on a government building has garnered mixed reviews from Huntington Beach residents on social media. One Reddit thread in particular features comments from users calling the plaque 'stupid,' 'ugly' and a waste of taxpayer money.
The estimated cost of the plaque, according to the city's website, is $7,000.
Danish citizens organizing to buy California from U.S.
Users have also called out the Huntington Beach City Council's complicated, arguably adversarial, relationship with its library system.
Last year, the City explored the possibility of privatizing library operations and allowing an outside company to run them.
In 2023, former Mayor Gracey Van Der Mark raised concerns about what she called 'sexually explicit' content in books, which led to an edict for library staff to review books from the children's section and move them to another location within the library. Those books, according to LAIst, primarily dealt with the subjects of the human body, health and puberty.
Voters will likely decide whether to repeal that review process in a future election, as well as limit the city's ability to outsource library operations, the Los Angeles Times reports.
The names of the entire current City Council, as well as executive leadership at the city, are listed on the plaque alongside the slogan and an image of an eagle carrying the American flag.
The vote to approve or deny the proposed library plaque will take place during Tuesday's regularly scheduled meeting of the Community and Library Services Commission.
A sizeable contingent of the public was expected to be in attendance for the commission meeting to voice their opposition for the plaque's approval.
KTLA has reached out to the City of Huntington Beach media team for comment.
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
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
This Kansas town doesn't hate immigrants enough. So the Trump administration plots vengeance.
Lawrence and Douglas County appeared on a Department of Homeland Security list of 'sanctuary jurisdictions.' (Clay Wirestone/Kansas Reflector) The Trump administration has put my town — the place my family and I call home — on its hit list for a thought crime. What horrible thing have the people of Lawrence and wider Douglas County done to deserve this fate? Apparently, we don't sufficiently detest immigrants. Put questions of legal status aside. As we all know, it doesn't matter to the hate-bloated buffoons in Washington, D.C., what papers a person has or doesn't have. They will ship you off to a foreign gulag if you're the wrong color or in the wrong place. Because Lawrence had the unmitigated audacity to care about people who look different, it has been threatened with the full wrath of the federal government. It might be shocking, if so little was shocking these days. The Department of Homeland Security posted a list of 500-plus 'sanctuary jurisdictions' on its website May 29, highlighting cities and counties that supposedly run afoul of its anti-immigrant agenda. Three days later, officials took down the page after an outcry from local law enforcement. Thanks to the Internet Archive, you can still browse the list and read the government's inflammatory rhetoric: 'DHS demands that these jurisdictions immediately review and revise their policies to align with Federal immigration laws and renew their obligation to protect American citizens, not dangerous illegal aliens.' There's a lot to unpack there — immigrants commit fewer crimes than those born in the United States, for one thing — but let's press on. The point is that my town and county landed on the list. Let's try to figure out why. Back in 2020, the city passed an ordinance protecting undocumented folks. Two years later, the Kansas Legislature pushed through a bill banning sanctuary cities, and Lawrence subsequently revised its ordinance. You can read the current city code here. What's important to note is that the current language gives wide berth to state and federal law, making clear that the city won't obstruct or hinder federal immigration enforcement. By the same token, that doesn't mean the city has to pursue a brazenly anti-immigration path. Lawrence can and should represent the will of voters, while following applicable law. And those voters, through their elected representatives, chose to make their city a welcoming one. So how did Lawrence end up on the list? Apparently because it didn't spew enough hatred for the White House's liking. A senior DHS official told NPR that 'designation of a sanctuary jurisdiction is based on the evaluation of numerous factors, including self-identification as a sanctuary jurisdiction, noncompliance with federal law enforcement in enforcing immigration laws, restrictions on information sharing, and legal protections for illegal aliens.' Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem pontificated on Fox News: 'Some of the cities have pushed back. They think because they don't have one law or another on the books that they don't qualify, but they do qualify. They are giving sanctuary to criminals.' Note those phrases from the official and Noem: 'Self-identification as a sanctuary jurisdiction.' 'One law or another.' In other words, it doesn't matter what ordinances a city or county has on the books. It doesn't matter what the actual laws may be. It apparently depends on what a city calls itself and how the Trump administration feels about it. No city or county sets out to break the law. They have attorneys on staff or retainer to make sure they don't break myriad legal restrictions. Lawrence followed the law in enacting its original ordinance, and when the law changed, officials followed along. But few want to step out and say such things publicly, given that federal officials have tremendous resources behind them. They could crush any city or county if they wished, through legal bills alone. Thankfully, as mentioned above, sheriffs across the nation pushed back. 'This list was created without any input, criteria of compliance, or a mechanism for how to object to the designation,' said National Sheriffs' Association president Sheriff Kieran Donahue. 'Sheriffs nationwide have no way to know what they must do or not do to avoid this arbitrary label. This decision by DHS could create a vacuum of trust that may take years to overcome.' Douglas County Sheriff Jay Armbrister was similarly outspoken in comments to the Lawrence Journal-World: 'We feel like the goalposts have been moved on us, and this is now merely a subjective process where one person gets to decide our status on this list based on their opinion.' Thanks to the U.S. Constitution and its First Amendment, we are not required to love, like or even respect our government. We are not required to voice support of its goals. We are not required to say anything that we don't want to say about immigration, immigrants or ICE. Republicans understood that full well when Presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama were in office. Both faced torrents of criticism on this very subject. Those presidents took the abuse. It was, and is, part of the job. Now President Donald Trump and his anti-immigration minions have to deal with the fact that a different segment of the public vehemently disagrees with their immigration policies. That's OK. That's protected expression. Within the bounds of law, we are also free to define our towns, cities and counties however we want. Accusing local governments of thought crimes desecrates and defames our Constitution. Clay Wirestone is Kansas Reflector opinion editor. Through its opinion section, Kansas Reflector works to amplify the voices of people who are affected by public policies or excluded from public debate. Find information, including how to submit your own commentary, here.
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senate passes stripped-back version of ‘no-cause' eviction bill, but House likely to oppose it
Senators scaled back the bill to lessen the effect on tenants — raising the likelihood of a clash with the House. (Getty Images) The New Hampshire Senate passed a bill Thursday intended to make it easier for landlords to terminate tenancies. But before passing it, senators scaled back the bill to lessen the effect on tenants — raising the likelihood of a clash with the House. In current law, New Hampshire landlords must cite a specific reason to initiate evictions, including nonpayment of rent, failure to follow the lease, behavior affecting the health or safety of others, or a business reason by the landlord, such as a renovation. As originally passed by the House, House Bill 60 would have allowed for 'no-fault' or 'no-cause' termination of tenancies for leases six months or longer. In those cases, landlords could ask a tenant to leave at the end of the lease period with no reason given. Republicans argue allowing no-cause evictions would let landlords treat leases as fixed-length contracts with tenants, and relieve them of the burden of finding a reason if they no longer wished to rent to someone. But Democrats and legal aid organizations argue it would increase the pace of evictions and could make it easier for landlords to discriminate. On Thursday, the Senate dramatically altered the bill, keeping the 'no-fault' evictions but adding a trigger provision that prevents application of the law unless the state has had a 4% or higher rental vacancy rate for four quarters in one calendar year, as determined by the Federal Reserve. Currently, the Federal Reserve estimates New Hampshire has exactly a 4% vacancy rate, citing U.S. Census data. The Senate's version would also allow landlords to use no-cause evictions only with leases of 12 months or more. And it would exempt tenants who are subject to no-cause evictions from having those evictions added to their record for the purpose of rental applications and tenant screening reports, easing concerns from housing advocates about the effects of the original bill. Those changes earned the support of Senate Democrats; the amended bill was voted through unanimously Thursday. But before the bill can go to Gov. Kelly Ayotte's desk, it must receive final sign-off from the House, and some House Republicans have made it clear they are not happy with the Senate's changes. Rep. Joe Alexander, a Goffstown Republican and the chairman of the Housing Committee, said he will be requesting a Committee of Conference with the Senate to attempt to find a compromise when the House meets on Thursday. The Senate's version of the bill does not fit with the House's position, Alexander said in an interview. And he noted that the full House already voted down two attempted Democratic amendments to add trigger provisions. 'The House position is the lease is a contract,' Alexander said. 'And (in) every other place in contract law, when a contract ends, both parties go their separate ways unless there's conversation about renewing it. So we're just trying to bring it in line with all other contract law in the state.' Elliott Berry, a former attorney for New Hampshire Legal Assistance who has been following the bill, said even with the Senate changes, he and other housing advocates believe HB 60 could harm tenants. 'It's going to make a lot of landlords take the easy way out,' he said. 'And so tenants who for whatever reason feel any kind of antagonism towards them in general, well-based or not, they're going to be in jeopardy.'
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
California to Sue Trump for ‘Illegal' National Guard Mobilization
California Governor Gavin Newsom speaks during a news conference at Gemperle Orchard in Ceres on April 16, 2025. Credit - Justin Sullivan—Getty Images Governor Gavin Newsom of California announced that his state plans to file a lawsuit early Monday against Donald Trump for mobilizing the National Guard over the weekend to quell immigration-related protests in Los Angeles. As news broadcasts and social media have proliferated with scenes of violence and mayhem on the streets of southern California, Newsom alleged in an interview with MSNBC on Sunday evening that it is the U.S. President who 'created the conditions you see on your TV tonight.' Newsom condemned the violence, calling it 'unacceptable' and 'wrong.' He added that there were 'a lot of great people out there, doing the right thing,' but that 'insurgent groups' and 'anarchists' were infiltrating the demonstrations 'to create real problems.' 'They're just playing right into Donald Trump's hand. And they need to be called out and they need to be arrested,' Newsom said of the bad actors. 'They're doing more than damage to buildings and to property. They're potentially damaging the very foundation of our republic. Democracy is in the balance.' When asked if he supports the peaceful protesters, Newsom responded emphatically: 'Of course I support them. Protest is the foundation of this democracy. It's what makes this country great. And that needs to persist. And right now people need to come out. But we need to be mindful of the toxicity of this moment, and then we have to deal with these elements that are coming in that are intentionally trying to take advantage of this in a way that only aids and abets Donald Trump.' Newsom added that his priority is to keep peaceful protesters as well as 'those that are enforcing the laws in a respectful and responsible way' safe. Newsom, whose second and final term as Governor ends in 2027 and who is speculated to be a 2028 Democratic presidential contender, repeatedly focused his blame for the escalation of the situation in California on Trump: 'He's exacerbated the conditions. He's lit the proverbial match. He's putting fuel on this fire,' Newsom said, calling the mobilization of the National Guard 'an illegal act, an immoral act, an unconstitutional act.' 'Donald Trump needs to pull back. He needs to stand down. Donald Trump is inflaming these conditions. This is Donald Trump's problem right now, and if he can't solve it, we will.' Here's what to know. Mass protests and demonstrations have taken place across Los Angeles county since Friday in response to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids targeting undocumented residents and laborers. While local officials, including Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and the city council, sided with peaceful protesters in opposition to the immigration enforcement actions, demonstrations grew increasingly violent, as clashes intensified between some demonstrators and law enforcement officials. Rocks and molotov cocktails have been thrown; police vehicles and self-driving Waymo cars have been vandalized; and authorities have used tear gas, 'flash bang' grenades, and rubber bullets to attempt crowd control, according to reports. 'Everyone has the right to peacefully protest, but let me be clear: violence and destruction are unacceptable, and those responsible will be held accountable,' Bass said in a post on X on Saturday. In a White House memorandum on Saturday, Trump said the anti-ICE protests 'constitute a form of rebellion' against the U.S. and ordered Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to deploy 2,000 National Guard personnel in response. In a post on X, Hegseth said the National Guard would be mobilized 'IMMEDIATELY.' Hegseth added that 'if violence continues, active duty Marines at Camp Pendleton will also be mobilized—they are on high alert.' To mobilize the National Guard, Trump invoked Title 10, Section 12406 of the U.S. Code, which allows for the federalization of the National Guard in cases of an invasion or a rebellion, or if the President is unable to execute the country's laws with 'regular forces.' Section 12406, however, also states that 'Orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States.' Newsom confirmed that he did not request the deployment of the National Guard, making it the first time since 1965 that the National Guard has been activated to a state without a governor's request. In an open letter to Hegseth, Newsom's office called the mobilization 'a serious breach of state sovereignty' and requested that the Pentagon chief 'immediately rescind' the order and 'return the National Guard to its rightful control by the State of California, to be deployed as appropriate when necessary.' The Democratic Governors Association backed Newsom in a statement, saying: 'It's important we respect the executive authority of our country's governors to manage their National Guards.' Moreover, an 1878 law, the Posse Comitatus Act, limits federal military personnel from being used for civilian law enforcement within the U.S., which means in Los Angeles the National Guard forces mobilized by Trump can protect federal agents, such as ICE officials, and federal properties, such as detention centers, but they cannot arrest protesters. The Posse Comitatus Act 'prohibits troops from being used domestically unless the Insurrection Act is invoked,' constitutional scholar and dean of UC Berkeley Law School Erwin Chemerinsky tells TIME, 'and the President has not done that.' According to Reuters, Trump still could invoke the Insurrection Act, but doing so would enter 'riskier legal territory.' The last time the Insurrection Act was invoked was when President George H.W. Bush mobilized the National Guard to quell riots in Los Angeles following the acquittal of the police officers involved in the beating of Rodney King. But a key difference between 1992 and now is that then-Governor of California Pete Wilson had requested federal assistance. Calling in troops to suppress protests has also raised First Amendment concerns. The American Civil Liberties Union said in a statement on Saturday that it also plans to file a lawsuit against the Trump Administration, calling the mobilization of the National Guard an 'abuse of power.' Earlier on Sunday, Trump's 'border czar' Tom Homan, who has previously threatened arrest for anyone who obstructs immigration enforcement, told MSNBC that he would not rule that out even for officials like Newsom and Bass. 'I'll say it about anybody,' Homan said. 'It's a felony to impede law enforcement doing their job.' 'Governor Newsom is an embarrassment to the state,' Homan added. 'Criminal aliens are walking the streets of this state every day because of him and his policies.' In his interview hours later with MSNBC, Newsom responded, saying: 'That kind of bloviating is exhausting.' Newsom challenged Homan to arrest him but to 'lay your hands off' law-abiding, tax-paying undocumented residents. 'He's a tough guy. Why doesn't he do that? He knows where to find me,' he said. 'Come after me. Arrest me. Let's just get it over with, tough guy. I don't give a damn. But I care about my community. I care about this community.' Newsom criticized the Trump Administration for targeting non-criminal undocumented residents for immigration enforcement and pushed back on the accusation that California does not cooperate with the federal government. 'I have no problem with going after criminals. We coordinate and collaborate with ICE,' Newsom said, pointing to the state handing over more than 10,000 inmates to ICE since he took office in 2019. 'When these guys say we don't go after criminals, again, they're lying, and they're knowingly lying.' When asked if Trump could be putting the spotlight on Los Angeles to take attention away from his recent fallout with Elon Musk, Newsom said 'of course,' also citing Trump's struggles to pass the massive tax and spending package known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act in Congress as well as ongoing challenges related to Trump's global trade war. 'He's the master of distraction. He's the commander of chaos. That's what Donald Trump does,' said Newsom. Newsom claimed that Trump used 'the guise of immigration' to create a 'manufactured crisis' in order to challenge the Posse Comitatus Act. 'This is about authoritarian tendencies. This is about command and control. This is about power. This is about ego,' said Newsom. 'This is a consistent pattern of practice of recklessness. This guy has abandoned the great principles of this great democracy. He's threatening to go after judges he disagrees with, cut off funding to institutions of higher learning, he's on a cultural binge, he's rewriting history, censoring historical facts. This is something completely different, and this is part of that ongoing play that is unfolding in front of our eyes.' Contact us at letters@
