Tensions ran high in Sacramento this week after California Governor Gavin Newsom lost his cool during a press conference about the state’s controversial Capitol building expansion — a $1.1 billion project already drawing fierce criticism for its secrecy and staggering price tag.
The confrontation came when a reporter dared to compare Newsom’s lavish new building to Donald Trump’s infamous “big, beautiful ballroom.”
What followed was an exchange that set social media ablaze and reignited debate about government transparency and spending.
The Question That Made Newsom Bristle
It started when reporter Ashley Zavala asked if the Capitol expansion, complete with secret corridors for lawmakers to dodge the media, was any different from Trump’s highly criticized White House ballroom project.
Newsom’s body language said it all — shifting uneasily before joking, “You’re my attorney,” to Attorney General Rob Bonta beside him.
But his tone changed quickly when Zavala pressed about the secrecy surrounding the billion-dollar build.
“By the way, I don’t think it’s appropriate,” Newsom interrupted sharply.
“They should provide you the information. Full stop. Period.”
Then came his fiery defense: “For you to conflate or compare or contrast… with all due respect, I would separate the ballroom and what Donald Trump just did — the desecration and the process — and the fact that he secured $300 million under curious circumstances from the annex.”
He agreed lawmakers needed to be more transparent but bristled at being placed in the same conversation as Trump.
Social Media Doesn’t Hold Back
If Newsom hoped the moment would blow over, he miscalculated.
Within hours, clips of the exchange went viral online — and not in his favor.
Even golf legend Phil Mickelson joined the commentary, writing: “How a politician should duck, dodge, weave, avoid 101.
By the way, why does he say ‘Period. Full stop?’ so often? What does that even mean?”
Critics piled on, accusing Newsom of arrogance and condescension.
One user wrote, “He spoke to Ashley Zavala like she’s a kindergartener when she asked a legitimate question.”
Another added, “So incredibly condescending — treats people like they’re beneath him.”
Some went further, calling him “a compulsive liar” and urging Californians to “vote this guy out before your once-beautiful state loses all hope.”
A Billion-Dollar Project Shrouded in Secrecy
At the heart of the controversy is California’s Capitol Annex Project, a massive rebuild of the state government’s central building.
Initially approved in 2018 with a price tag of about $543 million, the cost has since ballooned to over $1.1 billion, to be covered entirely by taxpayers.
The structure will eventually house 120 lawmakers, including the governor, lieutenant governor, and other senior staff — though Newsom himself will be out of office before it’s completed in 2027.
The project also includes new hearing rooms, a visitor’s center, and a parking garage.
Yet, despite the size and cost, most details have been kept tightly under wraps — even from the legislators themselves.
Secret Corridors and Security Concerns
Perhaps the most controversial feature of all is the inclusion of “private corridors” designed for lawmakers to move through the building away from public view.
State Senator Mike McGuire, who supports the project, defended the hidden hallways, claiming they’re necessary for safety.
“Secure corridors have always been included,” he said. “They help ensure the safety and security of lawmakers — especially after the events of January 6.”
Still, McGuire insisted lawmakers would “continue to be accessible and responsive.”
But critics like Assemblyman Josh Hoover weren’t convinced. “This is the height of hypocrisy,” he said.
“You’re using taxpayer dollars to build a facility that shields lawmakers from the public and from accountability.”
Lawsuits, Palm Trees, and Public Backlash
The Capitol expansion has faced a rocky road from the start.
Former Historic State Capitol Commission chairman Dick Cowan, along with environmental groups, sued to stop construction — arguing the state pushed the project through without enough public input.
Opponents also protested the removal of several historic palm trees and the plan for an all-glass façade.
However, the California Supreme Court cleared the way last fall, ruling the project could be exempt from environmental law under the California Environmental Quality Act, signed by Ronald Reagan back in 1970.
Even now, questions remain over how much of the budget is going toward undisclosed “security features,” with reports suggesting lawmakers signed non-disclosure agreements barring them from discussing the building’s details publicly.
Lawmakers in the Dark
What’s perhaps most stunning is that many California legislators themselves have little to no information about the billion-dollar expansion.
Assemblyman Josh Hoover voiced his frustration, saying, “As a lawmaker who might one day work in that building, we have almost zero information about what’s going on.
Taxpayers deserve transparency — and so do we.”
Meanwhile, Lia Lopez, chief administrative officer for the Joint Rules Committee, insisted the priority is finishing the project, stating, “At this time, our priority is to complete the Annex.
There is no discussion or construction occurring on the West side.”
Still, Cowan remains skeptical, arguing that if the legislature truly avoids West-side expansion, it could save taxpayers around $100 million.
What Comes Next for Newsom and the Capitol Controversy
As the Capitol Annex Project continues to inch forward, Governor Newsom finds himself in an increasingly uncomfortable spotlight — one that’s as much about optics as it is about construction costs.
His sharp response to a reporter’s question may have been meant to draw a line between himself and Trump, but for many Californians, it only highlighted the same transparency problem he’s accused of criticizing in others.
With billions on the line and growing frustration over secrecy, the pressure is now on Newsom’s administration to open up — or risk further alienating a public already weary of government double standards.