For the first time in a long time, I feel something I don’t often associate with the business of running a small newspaper: hope.

That may sound strange coming from someone who has spent the better part of two decades trying to keep an independent newspaper alive in a rapidly changing media landscape. But something is happening in California that feels worth paying attention to.

One part of it is the California Civic Media Program, a $20 million state investment in local and state journalism matched by, of all entities, Google. The program will distribute grants of up to $250,000 to eligible news organizations, with funding intended to support original reporting, strengthen California’s press corps, and increase civic engagement.

This summer, Moonshine Ink applied for a grant. We don’t know if we’ll receive any money or not, but the hope that we might, for an independent newsroom, matters.

Yet what interests me even more than the potential monetary help is what this program represents: a growing recognition by the state that journalism is not simply a struggling business sector but a vital part of the infrastructure for a functioning democracy.

Just a couple of years ago, it didn’t seem like California saw things this way.

In 2023 and 2024, I watched closely as two pieces of legislation made their way through Sacramento: Assemblymember Buffy Wicks’ Assembly Bill 886, the California Journalism Preservation Act, and Senate Bill 1327, introduced by Sen. Steve Glazer. AB 886 sought to require enormous tech companies such as Google and Meta to compensate news organizations for the journalism they regularly accessed and distributed across their platforms. SB 1327 took a different approach, proposing a data-extraction fee on digital advertising revenue.

It was estimated that SB 1327 alone would have generated $500 million annually, and the dollar amount from AB 886 had yet to be established. The two bills would have held technology giants responsible for their drastic impact on journalism and helped level the playing field for news media companies in the state.

But they didn’t pass. In September 2024, I wrote about the last-minute deal that ultimately brought both bills to an end. I called it what I believed it was: a bully act by a tech giant.

The 11th hour deal, negotiated by the state and Google behind closed doors, was set to be a relatively paltry $250 million over five years from a mix of public and private funding — with taxpayers kicking in a higher amount!

The irony was hard to miss. A company that had helped fundamentally disrupt the economic model supporting local newspapers was now sitting at the table, seemingly dictating the terms of journalism’s rescue, and getting taxpayers to foot a larger share of the bill.

And yet, here we are.

Not surprisingly, the current Civic Media Program is smaller than the original 2024 promise — a result of state budget cuts and, in turn, Google reducing its committed dollars. It is also not a permanent solution, but a one-time grant.

Still, I find it deeply heartening to see California moving in this direction.

And now comes something else, AB 2222, passed in the final days of August.

The bill, which moved through the Legislature with bipartisan supermajority support in both chambers, is awaiting Gov. Gavin Newsom’s signature by Sept. 30. It would create refundable tax credits for qualifying local news organizations based on the journalists they employ — a $20,000 credit per full-time journalist for the first five positions and $15,000 for each additional full-time journalist, with incentives for new hires. The state estimates the program could make available more than $40 million annually to California newsrooms. (Compare this to the $500 million annually estimated impact of the failed SB 1327.)

If signed, AB 2222 would be the “largest local news subsidy of its kind in the U.S. to date,” reported Rebuild Local News.

If it becomes law, it will mean the world to this publisher, who has been limping along for years trying to make this all work, every month wondering whether our pages’ revenue will cover everything that needs to get done.

Because a lot is at stake.

At Moonshine, we cover a community spread across multiple counties, two states, and a dizzying collection of special districts, agencies, and jurisdictions. We attend public meetings and sort through mountains of press releases. We read budgets and pore over court documents. We investigate. We ask questions that sometimes make people uncomfortable. We explain complicated issues that affect people’s homes, livelihoods, and futures. We share stories about the people who make our community shine. We give space to people who don’t always have a voice.

And we do this work while trying to build a sustainable business.

So, what would legislative support mean at Moonshine? It would mean some breathing room. It would mean more resources. It would mean a better chance of sticking around.

I don’t know yet whether Moonshine will receive a Civic Media grant. And I don’t know whether AB 2222 will become law, or what it might mean for our little newsroom if it does. But after years of watching local journalism fight for scraps, I am allowing myself a moment of optimism, a little bit of hope.

It’s not something I take lightly.

Because sometimes the patient doesn’t need to be rescued. It just needs someone to recognize that keeping it alive matters.

And maybe, just maybe, California is beginning to understand that saving local journalism isn’t just about saving newspapers.

It’s about prioritizing the civic infrastructure that newspapers — and the journalists who fill their pages — help communities and democracy uphold.

For this journalist, that feels worth celebrating.