Jennifer Siebel Newsom, the governor’s wife and a longtime documentary filmmaker and gender equity advocate, is again in the spotlight as Gov. Gavin Newsom accuses federal investigators of pursuing his family. Her independently run organizations—along with don
WASHINGTON — Jennifer Siebel Newsom has built her public life around two worlds that don’t always share the same oxygen: the political orbit of a governor who sits in the Capitol, and the independent work she says she’s spent more than a decade cultivating on her own.
At 51, she calls herself California’s “first partner,” a title she coined to signal equal footing with Gov. Gavin Newsom and gender inclusivity. But the nickname and the separate institutions she has grown—her own staff. organizations. and salary—are now drawing fresh attention as the governor accuses the Trump administration of turning federal investigations into a personal fight.
In recent days. Newsom wrote on social media that “The American people deserve to know who ordered this abuse of power and how far it goes.” He has accused the Trump administration—specifically the FBI and the Internal Revenue Service—of questioning friends and former employees about him and his wife. The governor said the probes are politically motivated, a “personal vendetta” because he is considering a run for president in 2028.
Newsom said he and his wife have nothing to hide and promised to release all of his recent tax returns, though he has not announced when. In response, the governor demanded that the Department of Justice release all records pertaining to the probe.
Siebel Newsom defended herself in a statement delivered to The Times. “These are dark days in our nation’s history when the leader of the free world spews animus openly and without shame — aiming to silence and destroy not only his political opponents. but their friends. colleagues. and families. ” she said. “My husband and I will continue to push back on this vindictive attack — and I certainly will not let this distract me from the important work ahead to protect the health. wealth. and safety of women and children and give California kids the best start in life. Together, we can set an example of strong leadership that protects people rather than preys on them.”.
The renewed political dispute lands on top of a separate, longer-running question in California governance: how money moves when a governor can solicit “behested payments” and route them to causes tied closely to his agenda.
California law allows officials to solicit donations to specific charitable or governmental causes when the payments are reported within 30 days. But the public donation system came under scrutiny in 2020. when payments made at Newsom’s behest—routed to a variety of organizations. not just the California Partners Project—ballooned to an unprecedented $226 million to help fund the response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
With no limit on how much money can be donated by organizations or individuals at the governor’s behest. millions of dollars flowed into public services during the pandemic and funded the governor’s favored programs. including an effort to address homelessness and a public safety campaign promoting the importance of wearing masks.
In 2020, the top donor of Newsom-behested payments was tech giant Facebook, which gave $27 million for gift cards that went to front-line healthcare workers and for public health ads.
David McCuan, a political science professor at Sonoma State University, said the arrangement “isn’t illegal, but it certainly pushes the bounds of campaign finance law,” adding that “the first couple’s actions, these payments and the operation of the nonprofits a rich target for scrutiny.”
For readers trying to understand what’s at stake, the details trace back to how Siebel Newsom’s companies and nonprofits are structured—and how money moves among them.
Alongside the release of her first documentary, “Miss Representation,” in 2011, Siebel Newsom created her nonprofit, originally sharing the same name as her film. The organization licenses her films and reimburses costs to her production company.
The Representation Project earns revenue from licensing “Miss Representation” for use in classrooms, college campuses, and workplaces. Licensing for film screenings at schools starts at $49, while corporate licensing for her films starts at $995. Purchase of screening rights also comes with curricula to facilitate discussions.
Since 2011. The Representation Project has earned more than $5.2 million in revenue from film screenings. licensing. and speaking fees. according to a review of its tax filings. The Representation Project is not required to disclose its donors. but it has received at least $2.6 million since 2014 from various charitable foundations that disclosed the gifts in their own tax filings.
Among the donors named in those disclosures are Pacific Gas & Electric Co. AT&T. and Kaiser Permanente. along with entrepreneur and progressive donor Susie Thompkins Buell. credited as a producer on several of Siebel Newsom’s documentaries. Other donors include the Marin Community Foundation and Onward Together, the political action organization founded by Hillary Clinton.
Four months after Newsom took office in 2019. the state Department of Education recommended that high schools screen two of his wife’s films: “Miss Representation” and “The Mask You Live In.” The move drew criticism from conservative media outlets. The state said the films “can help facilitate a discussion about the impact of mass media and gender socialization on self-image and relationships with others.”.
The nonprofit’s annual impact reports say the films and curricula have “reached over 2 million students” and “are being used in over 5,000 schools in fifty U.S. states.” Though it does not specify where the films have been licensed, the nonprofit also points to classroom adoption at scale.
Siebel Newsom has received compensation from the nonprofit itself. Since founding the Representation Project in 2011. she has received more than $1.9 million in compensation. according to a review of federal tax records. Separately, her production company, Girls Club Entertainment, has collected about $2.2 million in independent contracts from the nonprofit, records show.
Combined. the two streams add up to about $4.1 million flowing from the charity to Siebel Newsom personally or to entities she controls over a little more than a decade. Her current annual salary is $161,250 for a 40-hour workweek, according to records show. State financial disclosures describe her income as coming from both her production company and her nonprofit.
Jeff Tenenbaum. a nonprofit attorney with 30 years of experience advising nonprofit and tax-exempt organizations. declined to comment on Siebel Newsom’s specific case. But he explained the general legal framework that would apply to an arrangement described in the filings. Under federal tax-exempt organization law. he said. the “private benefit doctrine” governs whether a nonprofit’s overall activities unduly benefit any single individual—including through indirect payments to entities they own. The question is whether too much benefit flows to one person or entity.
That is distinct from the “private inurement” doctrine, which prohibits nonprofits from paying greater-than-fair market value compensation to insiders, including founders, and requires that such arrangements be approved by individuals with no conflicts of interest.
“Theoretically, a situation like this could raise some private benefit concerns,” Tenenbaum said, when the structure of the arrangement was described to him.
The doctrine does not prohibit all private benefit, he said, only what the federal tax code calls “impermissible” private benefit. “There has to be too much benefit compared to the benefit to the public,” he said. Whether that threshold is crossed would require a fuller review of the organization’s finances. contracts. and other considerations. including copyright ownership issues relating to the films produced.
Girls Club Entertainment is built around that same creative and business relationship. Siebel Newsom founded the production company to develop independent films focusing on combating gender stereotypes and empowering girls and women. She serves as the company’s chief creative officer.
Tax records show that the company owns the rights to “Miss Representation” and has licensed the film to the Representation Project for a minimum of seven years for the purpose of distributing and screening the film in public. The Representation Project reimburses costs associated with film production, including writer, director, and producer fees.
Her documentary “Miss Representation,” released in 2011, is widely credited as her signature work. Her latest documentary. “Miss Representation: Rise Up. ” examines “the rising backlash against women’s progress and the hostile landscape of technology designed to harass and. ultimately. silence women.” The film premiered this month at the Tribeca Film Festival.
The third piece of the financial structure comes from the California Partners Project, a nonprofit Siebel Newsom founded in 2020 focused on improving gender equity in the workplace and the safety and well-being of children in online spaces.
She does not collect compensation from the nonprofit or serve on its board. The organization hosts an annual “gender equity summit” and provides resources for parents on issues such as social media safety and child mental health.
In the fall of 2024. Siebel Newsom and the California Partners Project hosted representatives from TikTok. Meta. Pinterest. and other social media platforms for an event about children’s online safety. A day before the panel, state Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta joined with 13 other states in a lawsuit against TikTok accusing the platform of exploiting young app users with its addictive features. In September 2024. the governor signed a bill to prohibit internet services and applications from providing “addictive feeds. ” defined as media curated based on information gathered on or provided by the user. to minors without parental consent.
The California Partners Project does not publicly disclose its donors in its tax filings, but much of its funding appears to come from behested payments. Siebel Newsom does not receive a salary from the organization.
Since its founding, the Newsoms have steered more than $5 million to the nonprofit via behested payments, according to a review of the disclosures.
While many donations to the California Partners Project come from charitable foundations. it also received hundreds of thousands from companies including Silicon Valley Bank. Pinterest. and the charitable arm of Blue Shield of California. Its biggest funder is the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria. a Sonoma County tribe that operates a casino in Rohnert Park and spends heavily in state and federal elections. The tribe has given $2.3 million to the nonprofit since 2022.
In June 2023, Newsom appointed tribal Chairman Greg Sarris to the University of California Board of Regents. Newsom has also supported efforts by the tribe to block a smaller tribe from building a casino in nearby Vallejo.
Blue Shield, which reported giving $100,000 to Siebel Newsom’s nonprofit, also has a relationship with her husband. The nonprofit health insurer was an early donor to Newsom’s 2018 campaign for governor and later received a $15-million no-bid contract to distribute COVID vaccines. State regulators in 2024 signed off on the nonprofit’s request to restructure and establish a new parent corporation out of state—a move that raised alarm among healthcare advocates.
The California Partners Project did not respond to questions about its donors and spending.
The situation now sits in a charged space: federal scrutiny that Newsom calls retaliation. and financial structures that critics say can look like influence even when they stop short of breaking clear prohibitions. Between the governor’s promise to release recent tax returns at an unspecified time and his demand that the Department of Justice release records related to the probe. the public is left with the same stubborn question—what counts as acceptable distance between public power and private gain.
For Siebel Newsom, the fight is framed as survival of an agenda she says protects women and children. Her spokesperson’s work. her organization’s licensing deals. and the donations that flow through the California Partners Project form one connected system. Whether it stays within the lines—or forces regulators and courts to look harder—now depends on what comes next from the federal investigation. the DOJ records. and the tax information she says is coming.
Jennifer Siebel Newsom Gavin Newsom first partner California Partners Project Representation Project Girls Club Entertainment behested payments FBI IRS Department of Justice Facebook $27 million TikTok lawsuit Rob Bonta Greg Sarris