It’s a wonderful and despairing time to be a journalist. The daily wonder lasts — keeping an eye on the government, trying to build understanding of complex issues or marking the hills and valleys of people’s lives.

But many journalists also have a daily wonder if the industry will spiral downward or if they will have a job. The Bulletin’s owners, also owners of many rural papers across Oregon, are looking to sell. Many communities in Oregon and across the country no longer have a reliable source of local news.

California’s recent legislative action may offer a window into Oregon’s journalism future. A bill proposed there, “also known as the ‘California Journalism Preservation Act,’ would require digital advertising giants to pay news outlets a fee when they sell advertising alongside news content. Publishers would have to use 70% of those funds to pay journalists in California,” as The Los Angeles Times wrote.

That idea has been killed and replaced. The new plan is for $250 million to be distributed over five years to a fund for California news outlets and a program to help journalists use artificial intelligence. California taxpayers will pick up about a fourth of the cost and the rest will come from Google and maybe private donors.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom went heavy on the cheers.

“This agreement represents a major breakthrough in ensuring the survival of newsrooms and bolstering local journalism across California — leveraging substantial tech industry resources without imposing new taxes on Californians,” Newsom said in a statement. “The deal not only provides funding to support hundreds of new journalists, but helps rebuild a robust and dynamic California press corps for years to come, reinforcing the vital role of journalism in our democracy.”

It is, though, no fairy tale ending. Many journalists were disappointed that the tech giants got to hammer out the terms in a back-room deal. It’s not a long-term solution and it doesn’t correct the problem of news aggregators earning money off of content they don’t produce. And does it mean that journalists might be more timid in writing about legislators and big tech? We’d also have to see what journalists are going to learn about using AI — and what AI is learning from journalists. If it means robotic programs write what people read, congratulations to our new soulless co-workers. Newsrooms will go through much less coffee.

But as we have heard so many legislators say: Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. The plan is a public recognition that government and big tech value local journalism and are willing to put their money behind that belief. Can the Oregon Legislature do something better?