Advertisement
Live

California politics news feed

Share

Welcome to Essential Politics, our in-the-moment look at California political and government news.

Visit Essential Washington for coverage of the White House and goings on in the nation’s capital.

Sign up for our free newsletter for analysis and more, and subscribe to the California Politics Podcast. Share your feedback here. To support in-depth journalism, subscribe to The Times. And don’t miss our Essential Politics page in Sunday’s California section.

Newsom’s budget proposes $3 million for Alzheimer’s research, brain task force

Gov. Gavin Newsom will call for the creation of a brain health task force and dedicate $3 million annually from the state’s general fund to Alzheimer’s disease research in the budget proposal he will release Thursday, a source close to the administration said.

The money for Alzheimer’s research would target the new grants at understanding why the disease is more prevalent in women and people of color. Former California first lady and Alzheimer’s activist Maria Shriver pushed for the funding to be included in the state budget.

Shriver said in a statement Wednesday that the funding would make California the first state to make “understanding our brains a priority.”

The state’s former first lady, whose late father Sargent Shriver was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s, founded the Women’s Alzheimers Movement, an advocacy group raising awareness about women’s increased risk for developing the disease. In 2011, she wrote a comprehensive assessment on the disease, to which Newsom — then mayor of San Francisco — contributed a portion called “What one city is doing.”

“This is personal to me, just like it is to millions of California families,” Shriver said. “Alzheimer’s is one of the largest medical, social and economic crises in our state, and of our time. I am so proud that, once again, California is leading the way. Wiping out Alzheimer’s is going to require bold thinking, and there is no doubt in my mind that California is home to bold thinkers who can make this happen.”

Share

Gov. Gavin Newsom orders ‘reinvention’ of troubled California DMV

A line of people stretches around the South L.A. location of a California Department of Motor Vehicles Office on Aug. 7.
A line of people stretches around the South L.A. location of a California Department of Motor Vehicles Office on Aug. 7.
(Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times)

Gov. Gavin Newsom on Wednesday ordered an overhaul of the California Department of Motor Vehicles, which has been plagued by hours-long wait times at field offices, computer crashes and voter registration errors involving tens of thousands of customers.

Just a few days after taking office, Newsom appointed a top advisor to a new “DMV Reinvention Strike Team” to revamp the beleaguered agency over the next six months.

“By any metric, California DMV has been chronically mismanaged and failed in its fundamental mission to the state customers it serves and the state workers it employs,” Newsom said in a statement, adding “It’s time for a reinvention.”

The governor appointed state Government Operations Agency Secretary Marybel Batjer to lead the strike team with a goal of modernizing the agency and enacting changes that improve customer satisfaction, employee performance and transparency. Newsom also ordered an accelerated review of initial findings of an ongoing audit ordered last year by Gov. Jerry Brown.

The action was welcomed by lawmakers who have been critical of the DMV, including Assemblyman Vince Fong (R-Bakersfield).

“The egregious management failures of the DMV have been self-evident, which is why I have been calling for new leadership and a comprehensive independent audit of this troubled state agency over and over again as the problems grew significantly worse,” Fong said.

Last summer, Californians seeking new driver licenses complained of wait times of four to six hours at DMV offices, which the agency blamed partly on snafus caused by a rush of people trying to get Real IDs, a new identification card design required for airline passengers starting in late 2020.

Delays were also blamed on computer crashes at DMV offices as the agency struggled to update its aging automation systems.

The DMV also admitted that there were an estimated 23,000 errors as people either were unknowingly registered to vote or mistakes were made in their registration status as part of the state’s new “motor voter” program. The agency registered to vote as many as 1,500 people with legal U.S. residency but no citizenship.

Last month, DMV Director Jean Shiomoto retired from the agency. Legislators were angered earlier this week when the DMV said it needed an additional $40 million to prevent the return of long lines at its field offices.

In addition, the agency has been under fire for issuing driver licenses in the last year that do not comply with the federal Real ID standards requiring two forms of identification by applicants.

Share
Advertisement

California police unions are preparing to battle new transparency law in the courtroom

Just as a landmark police transparency law is going into effect, some California police agencies are shredding internal affairs documents and law enforcement unions are rushing to block the information from being released.

The new law, which begins to unwind California’s strictest-in-the-nation protections over the secrecy of law enforcement records, opens to the public internal investigations of officer shootings and other major uses of force, along with confirmed cases of sexual assault and lying while on duty. But the lawsuits and records destruction, which began even before the law took effect Jan. 1, could tie up the release of information for months or years, and in some instances, prevent it from ever being disclosed.

“The fact that police unions are challenging this law is on some level not surprising,” said Peter Bibring, director of police practices at the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California, one of the principal supporters of the new law. “They have a long history of fighting tooth and nail against transparency.”

Read More

Share

Secretary of State Alex Padilla begins second term with challenge to ensure ‘every Californian is counted’

Secretary of State Alex Padilla takes the oath of office as his family stands by his side on Monday in Sacramento.
(Jazmine Ulloa / Los Angeles Times)

Secretary of State Alex Padilla was sworn in for a second term on Monday, saying he would continue the battle to protect the right to vote at a time when voter suppression efforts, online disinformation campaigns and interference from foreign adversaries have polarized the public and threatened to undermine trust in U.S. elections.

“I am doubling down on our fight here in Sacramento and in Washington, D.C., to defend our democracy,” he said. “Working on the front lines with so many of you, I know that our collective resolve has never been stronger.”

But the loudest applause came when Padilla promised to fight back against the Trump administration’s changes to the U.S. census, saying he will “ensure every Californian gets counted.”

Padilla, a former state senator and Los Angeles City Council member from the San Fernando Valley, led the cause for a new “motor voter” registration law in 2015, and a new system for online business registrations. But the programs have had experienced problems: More than 23,000 Californians were registered to vote incorrectly by the state DMV, the agency reported last year.

On Monday, Padilla said he would continue to push back against false claims of voter fraud in California and pointed to the state’s voter turnout as proof that his office was involving more people in the democratic process, a promise he made when he was first sworn in four years ago.

More than 12.7 million voters cast ballots in the Nov. 6 midterm election, representing roughly 65% of the state’s registered voters, the highest number of any midterm election since 1982, according to state certified results.

“I made that promise based on a shared belief that we are a stronger democracy and a better California when we hear all voices from all corners of California, and when those voices are not just heard but counted,” Padilla said.

Share
Advertisement

Ricardo Lara, California’s first statewide officeholder to come out as gay, sworn in as insurance commissioner

Ricardo Lara on the floor of the state Senate in 2016.
(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

Ricardo Lara took the oath of office as California insurance commissioner on Monday, pledging action to boost healthcare coverage and combat climate change.

Lara, a Democrat from Bell Gardens, is the first elected statewide officeholder in California who has come out as gay. He began his speech in downtown Sacramento by thanking LGBTQ leaders who came before him and celebrated the occasion.

“Today, because of you, we’ve shattered the pink ceiling,” Lara said.

In his inaugural speech, Lara announced the creation of an executive position in his office to address climate change.

“There is no other industry that has the necessary expertise to ensure that California is prepared to mitigate and reduce risk to our communities and our environment,” Lara said. “Our planet can’t wait. I’m ready, and I hope you are too.”

Lara served as a state legislator and in 2017 introduced a bill to create a single-payer healthcare system in the state. He promised to work with new Gov. Gavin Newsom to expand coverage across California.

Lara was sworn in by retired U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, who declared unconstitutional California’s Proposition 8 gay marriage ban. State Sen. President Pro Tem Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) was on hand for the ceremony along with multiple other state lawmakers.

Share

New California Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis says she will help expand access to universities in the state

New Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis, center, is shown in June talking with attendees at the Power to the Polls rally in Sacramento.
New Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis, center, is shown in June talking with attendees at the Power to the Polls rally in Sacramento.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

More Californians should be given access to public universities, Eleni Kounalakis said as she took the oath of office Monday to become the state’s first woman elected lieutenant governor.

Kounalakis was given the oath of office by Gov. Gavin Newsom, her predecessor in the job, who pledged they would work together.

As lieutenant governor, Kounalakis serves on the University of California Board of Regents and the California State University Board of Trustees, she noted in a speech at her swearing-in ceremony at the main Sacramento Library.

In that role, she said, she will be “committed to expanding access to affordable public higher education here in our state. It’s wise, its smart and it is the best way to address our rapidly changing digital economy.”

Kounalakis is former president of a development company founded by her father, Angelo Tsakopoulos, and served during the Obama administration as the U.S. ambassador to Hungary.

In November, she won her first run for statewide office. Also attending the ceremony were House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and former Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm.

Share
Advertisement

California meets Dutch Newsom, who steals the show at his father’s inauguration

Gov. Gavin Newsom gives his inaugural address while holding his youngest son, Dutch.
Gov. Gavin Newsom gives his inaugural address while holding his youngest son, Dutch.
(Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times)

In the California political world, all eyes were on Gov. Gavin Newsom on Monday until his 2-year-old son stole the show.

Dutch, the youngest of four children in the Newsom brood, climbed onstage in the middle of his father’s inaugural address in a tent outside the Capitol on Monday. The unplanned moment saw the 51-year-old governor’s big day interrupted by the toddler, bringing levity to the ceremony.

Newsom was recounting Gov. Jerry Brown’s last inaugural speech and reference to the Sermon on the Mount, a biblical story about two men who built separate homes on sand and rock, when Dutch approached his father, a pacifier in his mouth and blanket in hand.

“Now more than ever we Californians know how much a house matters and children matter,” Newsom said, improvising as he scooped the boy into his arms.

The governor kissed Dutch on the cheek and held him for several minutes as he continued with the speech.

“This is exactly how it was scripted,” Newsom joked.

Newsom eventually put his child down and Dutch walked to the edge of the stage before retreating behind the podium to hide from his mother, First Lady Jennifer Siebel Newsom. The crowd roared.

Siebel Newsom was able to briefly divert her son only for him to return to the stage minutes later. She grabbed him again and this time, the crying toddler did not reemerge.

“When fires strikes, when kids cry and the earth shakes, we’ll be there for each other,” Newsom said.

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, who said the moment humanized Newsom, threw cold water on any theories that Dutch’s cameo was planned.

“No, I know it was not,” Garcetti said with a laugh after Newsom’s speech concluded. “I could see that look of absolute abject terror [on Newsom’s face]. We’ve all been there. Kids always think it’s about themselves and they’ve proved it.”

California Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon (D-Lakewood) agreed.

“I worked in early childhood education for 20 years and there’s no way you can ever get a child to do anything when you want them to do it,” Rendon said.

Share

Fiona Ma takes oath as California’s new treasurer

Fiona Ma took the oath of office in Sacramento on Monday as the state’s 34th treasurer, promising to boost California’s economy.

Ma previously served on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, in the state Assembly and on the California Board of Equalization.

“I want to thank everyone for entrusting me with this important job. I understand my role here as your state treasurer is to build that financial wall around California so that we will remain the fifth-largest economy,” Ma said in brief remarks. “That is my promise to you.”

California Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye administered the oath to Ma.

Following the ceremony, Ma held an ice cream social for guests. On Wednesday, she will host a public event in San Francisco to celebrate her swearing-in.

State Treasurer Fiona Ma takes the oath of office.
(Liam Dillon / Los Angeles Times)
Share
Advertisement

Watch live: Gavin Newsom is sworn in as California’s 40th governor

Share

Expectations are high for newly sworn-in state schools chief Tony Thurmond

Tony Thurmond shakes hands with retired Alameda County Superior Court Judge Gordon Baranco after taking the oath of office.
Tony Thurmond shakes hands with retired Alameda County Superior Court Judge Gordon Baranco after taking the oath of office.
(Melody Gutierrez / Los Angeles Times)

Tony Thurmond took the oath of office as California’s state superintendent of public schools on Monday, promising a labor-friendly agenda before the teachers, students and Democratic officials who filled an auditorium at McClatchy High School in Sacramento to watch him being sworn in.

“We can’t close the achievement gap without a great teacher at the head of every class,” Thurmond said Monday to applause. “We have to make sure we provide quality compensation and support to our teachers and our classified staff and all the educators who support our kids.”

Thurmond, a Bay Area Democrat who served in the state Assembly, won a hotly contested and expensive race with the help of labor leaders against charter school executive Marshall Tuck. The race took several days to sort out after Tuck held an initial lead in early returns on election night before falling behind thereafter.

Thurmond was sworn in Monday by retired Alameda County Superior Court Judge Gordon Baranco. He was joined on stage by labor rights leader Dolores Huerta and Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon (D-Paramount).

Thurmond’s former colleagues in the state Assembly took turns praising him and promising to be an ally in improving schools. Many said they expected Thurmond would be a strong leader focused on improving student outcomes.

“We know we are going to work hard to give you the money you need and the budget you need to fully fund education and our schools so we can put our money where our mouth is and make sure our children have everything they need,” Assemblywoman Connie Leyva (D-Chino Hills) said.

As state superintendent, Thurmond will oversee the education of 6.2 million students at 10,000 schools. Thurmond was a member of the West Contra Costa County School Board and a Richmond city councilman before he was elected to the state Assembly.

“Tony is the right man at the right time to fight the federal, Donald Trump, Betsy DeVos anti-child, anti-education, anti-civil and -human rights agenda,” U.S. Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) said. “Tony is going to do that for us.”

Share
Advertisement

State Controller Betty Yee takes oath of office with call for more affordable housing and healthcare

California Controller Betty Yee took the oath of office Monday for a second term, saying she still has work to do addressing problems that include a lack of affordability in housing, healthcare and higher education.

A San Francisco native, Yee is the chief financial officer of California — the fifth-largest economy in the world — having first won election to the post in 2014 before winning reelection in November.

“No region is spared from the widening inequality and increased poverty that plague our state, fueled by the lack of affordable, stable housing, the cost of healthcare and transportation, limited educational opportunities, student loan debt, displacement caused by disasters and more,” she said.

Yee was administered the oath of office by California Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye at the Crocker Art Museum in Sacramento before an overflow crowd that included state Senate leader Toni Atkins (D-San Diego), state Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra and San Francisco Mayor London Breed.

“As a public official it is about governance that delivers results and stays accountable while upholding the underlying value of dignity for all,” Yee said.

Share

California Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra begins new term promising to fight Trump policies

California Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra
( (Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press))

California Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra on Monday took the oath of office for a new term, saying he would continue his role as a leading challenger to Trump administration actions that he believes are counter to the state’s interests.

Becerra, a former 12-term congressman, has become a national opposition figure to Trump, having sued the federal government 45 times since he was appointed as the state’s first Latino attorney general in 2017.

“We’ve been a little busy stopping the dysfunction and insanity in Washington, D.C., from infecting California,” Becerra told an audience during a swearing-in ceremony at the California Museum in Sacramento.

“Whether it’s the criminals on our streets or the conman in the boardrooms or highest office of the land,” Becerra said, “the California Department of Justice, well, we’ve got your back.”

Becerra won his first statewide election as the state’s top cop in November, two years after he filled the post vacated when predecessor Kamala Harris was elected to the U.S. Senate.

He has peppered the Trump administration with lawsuits challenging federal policies on healthcare, the U.S. census, the environment and immigration.

“Our state builds dreams, not walls,” he said in a direct criticism of Trump’s proposal to build a wall at the U.S.-Mexico border.

Just last week, Becerra led a coalition of 17 Democratic attorneys general in announcing an appeal of a federal judge in Texas that ruled the Affordable Care Act unconstitutional.

“The ACA has been the law for nearly a decade and is the backbone of our healthcare system,” Becerra said last week. “This case impacts nearly every American — workers covered by employers, families, women, children, young adults and seniors — so we will lead the ACA’s defense as long and far as it takes.”

Share
Advertisement

California Democratic Party Vice Chairman Daraka Larimore-Hall announces bid to lead group

Daraka Larimore-Hall, a top official at the California Democratic Party, said Monday he’s running to replace former chairman Eric Bauman, who resigned abruptly in November after being confronted with allegations of sexual misconduct.

Larimore-Hall, a longtime state party activist and former chairman of the Democratic Party of Santa Barbara County, was one of the party leaders who urged Bauman to resign following the allegations.

In an email to supporters announcing his bid, he urged “both structural and cultural change at every level of our Party.” He also repeated his call for a “top-to-bottom investigation” of the allegations, the party and its culture.

In a Times investigation, 10 party activists and staff members said Bauman made crude sexual comments and engaged in unwanted touching and physical intimidation in professional settings.

“In order to be where we need to be for 2020, we have to confront the culture of abuse and fear that allowed someone to behave in such a vile way for so long,” Larimore-Hall said in an interview. “We can’t brush it aside or think that our activists or our candidates or our donors are going to forget about this overnight.”

Larimore-Hall said his first priority would be to fully investigate the allegations and restore rank-and-file confidence in the party’s leadership.

The second would be to refocus the party on political priorities as the 2020 presidential election nears. The Bauman episode, Larimore-Hall said, threatens to derail the Democrats’ plans to help defeat President Trump and keep the seven congressional seats gained in the midterm elections.

“It’s definitely a crisis,” Larimore-Hall said. “But the component parts — the energy, the enthusiasm, the volunteers, the infrastructure — it’s still there. We just need to direct it toward something.”

Larimore-Hall was elected vice chairman of the state party in February following Bauman’s razor-thin victory over Bay Area activist Kimberly Ellis.

Ellis has announced another bid for the chairmanship and former state Senate leader Kevin de León is also mulling a run. The vote will take place at the party’s May convention in San Francisco.

Share

Newsom will vow to ‘seize this moment,’ and swipe at Trump in Monday inaugural address

Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom and his family attend an Inauguration Family Event at the California Railroad Museum in Sacramento on Jan. 6.
(Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times)

Building on the theme of California exceptionalism that defined his campaign, Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom will depict the state as a guardian of progressive values and a counterweight to President Trump in his inaugural address Monday, according to excerpts of his prepared remarks.

“What we do today is even more consequential, because of what’s happening in our country,” read the excerpts obtained by The Times. “People’s lives, freedom, security, the water we drink, the air we breathe — they all hang in the balance. The country is watching us. The world is waiting on us. The future depends on us. And we will seize this moment.”

The speech casts California’s political stakes in a decidedly national scope, promising an agenda that will unify and be an example to the rest of the country. It contrasts the governing goals of Newsom, a Democrat, with that of Trump, the incoming governor’s perennial foil.

“We will offer an alternative to the corruption and incompetence in the White House,” the excerpts say. “Our government will be progressive, principled, and always on the side of the people.”

Newsom campaigned on an ambitious and wide-ranging platform, promising sweeping solutions on housing, healthcare, education and other issues that rank among Californians’ top concerns. In the weeks after his election, he struck a more muted tone, taking pains to emphasize his fiscal caution and need for patience in achieving those goals.

The inaugural excerpts indicate a return to lofty pledges. While Newsom will vow to “prepare for uncertain times ahead” by building budgetary reserves and paying down debt, the prepared remarks quickly turn to a vow to be “bold.”

Newsom has already floated several proposals for his first budget that carry significant price tags, including a nearly $2-billion plan to boost early childhood development for low-income families and a dramatic expansion of paid family leave from six weeks to six months.

When asked for a preview of his inauguration speech during a news conference Sunday evening, Newsom predicted pundits would criticize his address as “short on specifics.”

“Well, of course, I’m at an inaugural,” Newsom said. “But I’ll be very detailed in the budget, a few days later. And then we will architect, in much more nuance and detail, in state of the state. I really see this as three opportunities … to communicate over the next few weeks our agenda, our vision for the state.”

Times staff writer Taryn Luna contributed to this report.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Newsom-hosted benefit concert raises nearly $5 million for wildfire victims

Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom speaks at a concert to benefit wildfire victims at the Golden 1 Arena in Sacramento on Jan. 6.
(Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times)

On the eve of the gubernatorial inauguration, California’s political class rubbed elbows in Sacramento for a benefit concert hosted by Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom and headlined by the rapper Pitbull.

Newsom told the crowd gathered at the Golden 1 Center on Sunday evening that the fundraiser brought in nearly $5 million for the California Wildfire Foundation, a 501(c)(3) that supports the families of fallen firefighters and communities affected by wildfires.

“You know, a lot of folks feel anxious about not just politics, but government,” Newsom said on stage before introducing the rapper and activist Common. “But those firefighters, they are the antidote to the fear and cynicism; they are the manifestation of why government matters and why you should care.”

Top sponsors, including Salesforce, Kaiser Permanente and other interest groups, paid up to $1 million each to support the cause and curry favor with the new administration. Nathan Click, a spokesman for Newsom, said organizers sold more than 7,000 tickets.

Several state lawmakers attended the concert alongside Capitol staff, lobbyists and business types, who mingled on the floor of the arena and offstage in private VIP areas.

The rock band X Ambassadors and a duo called the Cold Weather Sons from the town of Paradise, which was destroyed by fire in November, were among several performers who entertained the crowd during the four-hour event.

The “California Rises” concert is the final in a series of festivities held Sunday to celebrate the inauguration of California’s 40th governor. Earlier in the day, Newsom attended a private brunch at Sacramento’s Crocker Art Museum and his inaugural committee hosted a free party for families at the California State Railroad Museum at the Old Sacramento Waterfront.

Newsom’s inauguration is set to begin at 11 a.m. Monday on the steps of the Capitol.

Share

Inauguration fever hits Sacramento as Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom prepares to take office

Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom holds his son, Dutch, as he and his family attend an inaugural event at the at the state Railroad Museum Sunday.
(Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times)

Incoming Gov. Gavin Newsom doesn’t officially take the oath of office until Monday, but the parties celebrating his inauguration were in full swing all day Sunday.

Newsom and his family were mobbed by well-wishers at the California State Railroad Museum at the Old Sacramento Waterfront in the afternoon, where his inaugural committee hosted a free party for families.

“He just has charisma. He’s able to really connect with people,” said Rosielyn Pulmano, an attorney from Elk Grove who came to see Newsom with her husband, two sons and her niece. “I think he cares about working Californians and a lot of their issues.”

Newsom arrived with his wife, documentary filmmaker Jennifer Siebel Newsom, and their four young children, and the governor-elect spent a good deal of his time wading through crowds, taking selfies with supporters and signing autographs as music boomed in the background.

As the family toured the inside of the museum’s locomotives and the bevy of exhibits, Newsom’s two-year-old son, Dutch, was wide-eyed, impressed by all the train cars and seemingly a little overwhelmed by the crowd.

Newsom said that for his son, all that was missing from the museum was Thomas the Train, popular fictional locomotive in children’s books and cartoons .

“If there’s one thing I can contribute to Sacramento maybe it’s getting a Thomas the Train exhibit for the two years olds,” Newsom joked when talking with reporters afterward.

Newsom said he wanted to include such an event in his inaugural festivities to highlight families and children, whose wellbeing will be among the top priorities of his administration.

“You’ll see that not only as a preamble to the inaugural and the budget that we’ll be submitting next week, but I think it’ll be a big part of the administration,” Newsom said.

The museum event followed a private, high-dollar brunch at Sacramento’s Crocker Art Museum. A steady rain failed to dissuade as many as 200 guests who sipped wine and dined on chicken and salmon while waiting for a photo with California’s new first couple.

Seen at the event were representatives of some of the state’s most powerful political interests, among them organized labor, healthcare companies and tribal gaming interests. A few other high-profile guests attended, too, including Larry Baer, CEO of the San Francisco Giants, and Erika Jayne, a singer and cast member of the reality TV show “The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills.”

“I’m excited to see someone like Gavin — young, vibrant — taking over the state and leading us into the future,” Jayne said after attending the brunch with her husband, attorney Tom Girardi. “He’s got a lot of great plans.”

Attendees said the event, which was closed to reporters and held under a tent in the museum’s outdoor atrium, did not include prepared remarks by Newsom. Among those seen leaving the event were representatives of AT&T, the California Medical Assn., Uber, Kaiser Permanente and the State Building and Construction Trades Council.

A fundraising invitation obtained by The Times offered bundled tickets to all of the inauguration events, including those on Sunday and the Monday ceremony, ranging in price from $25,000 to $200,000. The money will be collected by a committee specifically organized to pay for Newsom’s inaugural weekend.

Sunday’s festivities are scheduled to end with a benefit concert headlined by Pitbull at the Golden 1 Center, home of the NBA’s Sacramento Kings, to raise money for the victims of California’s recent deadly wildfires.

Share
Advertisement

As Newsom inaugural events begin, he unveils more state budget promises on education and paid family leave

Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom, seen here last April, will propose new state budget efforts on paid family leave and education subsidies.
(Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)

California’s incoming governor, who must send his first state budget plan to the Legislature this week, has already signaled a significant new focus on programs to help families and children from infancy to college.

Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom campaigned on a platform that included a number of child-focused efforts specifically aimed at helping lower-income families. The price tag for the initial efforts is expected to approach $2 billion — a cost paid out of an unrestricted tax revenue windfall that could be one of the largest in state history.

Newsom may also seek help for families through new subsidies paid by California employers. The governor-elect is expected to propose a dramatic expansion of paid parental leave — from six weeks to six months — according to an internal document provided by a source close to the Newsom transition team, first reported on Sunday by the New York Times.

The document doesn’t offer a full explanation for how the program will be funded, saying instead that the budget will set “a goal of ensuring that all newborns and newly adopted babies can be cared for by a parent or a close family member for the first six months.” Employers across the state are currently assessed a payroll tax that helps offer a subsidy to parents who temporarily leave their job to care for a newborn.

Newsom’s plan, according to the document, would pay for some of the new costs by shrinking the mandated cash reserve of the state fund that administers the program, allowing more of the money to be paid in benefits. The increase in paid leave would not all happen at once but instead be phased in over a multi-year period.

A task force to help implement the expanded care plan is also envisioned, according to the document. It would determine whether two parents could split the six months of paid leave and whether an extended family member could be enlisted to help care for the child of a single parent over the six-month period.

The incoming administration’s focus on young children will also include $1.8 billion in new spending on early childhood education programs, with a particular focus on training childcare workers and pushing for more California schools to offer full-day kindergarten. Those costs, according to an overview memo obtained by the Los Angeles Times, are considered to be a one-time expense while leaving the long-term costs of the effort to be determined later.

More community college students would get free tuition under a third initiative expected in the new governor’s budget plan. Newsom will propose spending $40 million to offer a second year of tuition-free college to California students, according to an outline provided by a transition official, first reported by Politico. Students are already eligible for a single year of paid tuition under a plan agreed to by Gov. Jerry Brown and lawmakers in 2017.

The incoming governor embraced the idea of free community college during the 2018 campaign as part of a broader focus on additional investments in higher education.

“Education is an economic development strategy,” Newsom said at a higher education forum last spring. “We need to significantly increase the investment from the general fund of this state on higher education. There’s no greater higher return on investment.”

Whether the proposal would be targeted to students based on a family’s financial need is unclear. Many low-income students are already eligible for fee waivers at community colleges. The new governor must submit his full state budget plan to lawmakers no later than Thursday.

Share

Gavin Newsom and his family decide Sacramento is the place to be

The Old Governor's Mansion State Historic Park in Sacramento. Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom will move his family into the mansion.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom and his family will give up the Marin County life and move to the Victorian-style governor’s mansion in Sacramento after he takes the oath of office Monday.

Newsom and his wife, documentary filmmaker Jennifer Siebel Newsom, had debated whether or when to relocate to the state capital since his election in November.

The couple have four young children and expressed reservations about moving in the middle of a school year.

“To best serve the people of California while also maximizing family time together, the Newsoms have therefore decided to move to Sacramento,” said Newsom’s spokesman, Nathan Click. “On Monday, they will move into the Governor’s Mansion – along with their four children, their two family dogs, and their family bunny rabbit — and reside there for the immediate future.’’

The Newsoms currently live in Marin County.

Gov. Jerry Brown and his wife, Ann Gust Brown, moved into the grand house in 2015 after it underwent $4.1 million in renovations to update electrical and plumbing systems, as well as to remove lead-based paint and install a fire sprinkler system and other security features.

The mansion was built in 1877 and has been home to 14 governors, but before Brown it had not housed a California governor for nearly half a century.

The state bought the mansion from a wealthy Sacramento hardware merchant, Albert Gallatin, in 1903 for $32,500. It was one of the few California homes at that time to have indoor plumbing.

Share
Advertisement

Newsom announces top labor, business liaisons as he prepares to take office

Julie Su will be secretary of the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency for Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom.
(Katie Falkenberg / Los Angeles Times)

Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom on Friday named two advisors on issues related to the California economy, each recognized for their expertise on business and labor.

The incoming governor will appoint Julie Su as secretary of the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency and Lenny Mendonca as chief economic and business advisor and director of the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development.

Su, 49, has served as state labor commissioner under Gov. Jerry Brown since 2011 and has led an office tasked with the enforcement of California’s labor laws. She won a MacArthur Foundation “genius grant” in 2001 and previously worked as a civil rights attorney representing low-wage workers. In her new position, Su will be tasked with coordinating the work of several workforce departments in state government, including those that administer unemployment benefits and oversee the relationship between agriculture workers and employers.

Mendonca, 57, has been a longtime advocate for rethinking government operations as co-chairman of the nonprofit organization California Forward. Previously, he was partner at McKinsey & Co., a global management consulting firm. While he will be a key advisor to Newsom on the state’s economy, Mendonca will also lead the office often referred to as “Go-Biz,” designated as a high-level way to encourage job growth and economic development.

“In his new role, Mendonca will help ensure that California is rolling out the welcome mat to current and future California businesses and growing a sustainable economy for every Californian,” said a statement from the Newsom transition team.

Newsom will take the oath of office as governor Monday. He has previously selected key advisors on the state budget, legislative affairs and the executive branch’s wide array of agencies and departments.

Share

Joshua Groban, aide to Gov. Jerry Brown, sworn in to California Supreme Court

California Supreme Court Justice Joshua Groban, a lawyer and longtime aide to Gov. Jerry Brown, was sworn into the state’s highest court Thursday in Sacramento.

The ceremony marked Brown’s fourth appointment to the state Supreme Court and gave the seven-member bench a Democratic majority.

“We live in a highly chaotic, ever-changing and ever-confusing world,” Groban said in prepared remarks at the Stanley Mosk Library and Courts Building. “But I’m happy to report that I’m joining an institution whose fundamental purpose, at core, is to provide stability and consistency amidst this chaotic place we live. I look forward to doing that with a sense of reflection, respect, fidelity to the law and compassion.”

None of Brown’s appointees, Groban included, have judicial experience. Groban served as legal counsel to Brown’s 2010 gubernatorial campaign and joined the administration as a senior advisor to the governor, overseeing the appointments of some 600 judges over the last eight years. Prior to working with Brown, Groban, 45, practiced law for more than a decade.

In perhaps his final public appearance before his successor, Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom, takes office next week, Brown pushed back on notions that he stacked the court.

“I don’t want this to be known as a ‘Brown court,’” the governor said before administering the judicial oath of office. “First of all, the so-called ‘Brown appointments’ do not agree with themselves and nor should they. They are individuals. They will differ. It’s not anybody’s court.”

The governor called the court a “high calling” and said Groban possesses the values for the job.

“Probably, next to my wife, I’ve talked to no person as much as I’ve talked to Josh Groban,” Brown said.

“I think you’ve talked to him more,” California’s First Lady Anne Gust Brown interjected.

“I can’t tell you what the hell he’s going to do,” Brown later quipped. “I warned him, don’t screw up, at least not at first.”

Share
Advertisement

California campaign watchdog agency seeks law barring use of campaign funds to fight harassment claims

Former state Sen. Tony Mendoza (D-Artesia).
( (Steve Yeater / Associated Press))

Elected officials accused of harassment or discrimination would be barred from using political contributions to cover their legal defense costs under legislation proposed by California’s campaign watchdog agency.

The state Fair Political Practices Commission has agreed to pursue a law change to clear up confusion after an attorney for one former state lawmaker argued political funds could be used in such legal defenses.

Commission Chairwoman Alice Germond said putting a prohibition into the law would “provide some much needed clarity.”

“As chair, I would like to show the public their lawmakers are held to a standard that is above reproach,” Germond said in a statement. “People don’t give money to campaigns for lawmakers to use it to defend their own bad behavior, so lawmakers shouldn’t be able to use it in that manner.”

The issue came up a year ago when an attorney for former Sen. Tony Mendoza (D-Artesia) sought a formal opinion from the FPPC after the Senate launched an investigation that later concluded Mendoza likely engaged in a pattern of harassment against female aides.

Mendoza resigned in February under threat of expulsion by the Senate.

In a Jan. 10, 2018, letter, Cassandra Ferrannini, an attorney for Mendoza, wrote to the FPPC that she believed Mendoza “should be allowed to establish a legal defense fund able to defray his legal expenses” in defending himself against the allegations.

“The use of campaign funds for attorney’s fees under these circumstances would fall squarely within the scope of legislative matters, since it involves the alleged conduct of a legislator with regard to legislative staff that he supervised,” Ferrannini wrote.

The commission staff originally issued an advice letter that said Mendoza may use campaign and legal defense funds to defend himself from claims of sexual harassment that arose directly out of his activities or status as a candidate or elected officer.

But the panel later rescinded the letter after some members questioned using campaign funds to fight sexual harassment claims. That left uncertainty about what was allowed, which Germond said could be cleared up by a new law. The FPPC is still looking for a legislator to carry the bill, a spokesman said.

Share

California’s landmark police transparency law takes effect after court denies police union effort to block it

California Supreme Court building
(Eric Risberg / Associated Press)

A new state law allowing the public disclosure of internal police shooting investigations has gone into effect after the California Supreme Court on Wednesday denied a bid by a police union to block it.

The law opens to the public for the first time internal investigations of officer shootings and other major uses of force, along with confirmed cases of sexual assault and lying while on duty.

The San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Employees’ Benefit Assn. challenged the law last month, asking state Supreme Court justices to decide that the law only apply to incidents that occur in 2019 or later. The court rejected that request Wednesday, allowing members of the public to seek all applicable records held by police departments. Union president Grant Ward said in a statement that his organization was disappointed with the decision and is now seeking other legal options.

“We feel this is a statewide issue and should be considered accordingly,” Ward said.

Last month, the city of Inglewood authorized the destruction of more than 100 police shooting investigations and other records in advance of Jan. 1, when the disclosure law was scheduled to take effect. California law requires police departments to keep such records for five years, and Inglewood City Council voted to destroy records older than that. Mayor James T. Butts has said the decision had nothing to do with the new law.

In Los Angeles, Police Chief Michel Moore has said that complying with the new disclosure rules could take hundreds of thousands of hours of work.

State Sen. Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley), the author of the transparency law, has said she has no immediate plans to propose changes to it.

Share
Advertisement

Few complaints of racial profiling are sustained by police agencies in California, state panel finds

CHP Officer J. Nelson stands outside the office of Gov. Jerry Brown as activists in 2015 support requiring the tracking of police stops.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

Law enforcement agencies in California sustain few citizen complaints of racial or identity profiling, according to a report Wednesday by a state panel set up to help reduce bias in policing.

The state’s Racial and Identity Profiling Advisory Board recommended in its annual report that law enforcement agencies improve training and adopt clear guidelines for tracking and reporting data on who is stopped by officers.

The panel said that 453 law enforcement agencies in the state received 9,459 civilian complaints in 2017, including 865 complaints alleging racial or identity profiling.

Of the racial and identity complaints that reached a disposition that year, 1.5% were sustained, 14.6% resulted in officers being exonerated and 83.9% of complaints were not sustained or were determined to be unfounded, the report said.

A clearer picture of the issue is expected from a 2015 law that requires police agencies to report demographic data on all detentions and searches. The first reports by the eight largest agencies, including the Los Angeles Police Department and the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, are due to be submitted in April.

California Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra, whose office oversees the board, said tracking of all detentions and searches will be helpful to understand the scope of the issue.

“The Board’s recommendations will help make our law enforcement agencies more transparent and promote critical steps to enhance, and in some cases, repair the public trust,” Becerra said in a statement Wednesday.

Share

California housing crisis podcast: What Minneapolis’ decision to end single-family zoning might mean for California

A view of downtown Minneapolis in 2014
(Stephen Maturen / Getty Images)

There’s a national movement brewing to roll back zoning rules in cities that only allow one house on a plot of land. The epicenter of that movement is Minneapolis, which passed a plan last month to eliminate single-family zoning citywide and let landowners build duplexes and triplexes on residential property.

On this episode of “Gimme Shelter: The California Housing Crisis Podcast,” we talk about the reasons why Minneapolis leaders took this action, including their desire to combat a history of racial exclusion and spur more housing density to fight climate change. We also debate how Minneapolis’ decision might affect housing politics in California.

Our guest is Minneapolis City Council President Lisa Bender, who helped shepherd the new zoning rules to passage and a former San Francisco city planner.

The episode also crowns 2018’s Avocado of the Year — the most ridiculous story exemplifying California’s housing woes — and includes our predictions for the most under-the-radar important themes in housing politics in 2019.

Gimme Shelter,” a biweekly podcast that looks at why it’s so expensive to live in California and what the state can do about it, features Liam Dillon, who covers housing affordability issues for the Los Angeles Times’ Sacramento bureau, and Matt Levin, data and housing reporter for CALmatters.

You can subscribe to “Gimme Shelter” on iTunes, Stitcher, Soundcloud, Google Play and Overcast.

Share
Advertisement

How young immigrant ‘Dreamers’ made flipping control of the House a personal quest

Gabriela Cruz, who was brought to the U.S. illegally when she was 1, couldn’t vote, but in the final hours before the Nov. 6 election, she was making one last run to get people to the polls.

The sun was setting in Modesto when she found Ronald Silva, 41, smoking a cigarette on a tattered old couch behind a group home. He politely tried to wave her off until she reminded him he had a right that she as an immigrant without citizenship didn’t have.

“It could really make a change for us,” said Cruz, 29.

Read More

Share

Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom will propose almost $2 billion for early childhood programs

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

Seeking to frame his new administration as one with a firm focus on closing the gap between children from affluent and poor families, Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom will propose spending some $1.8 billion on an array of programs designed to boost California’s enrollment in early education and child-care programs.

Newsom’s plan, which he hinted at in a Fresno event last month, will be a key element in the state budget proposal he will submit to the Legislature shortly after taking office Monday, a source close to the governor-elect’s transition team said.

The spending would boost programs designed to ensure children enter kindergarten prepared to learn, closing what some researchers have called the “readiness gap” that exists based on a family’s income. It would also phase in an expansion of prekindergarten and offer money to help school districts that don’t have facilities for full-day kindergarten.

“The fact that he’s making significant investments with his opening budget is really exciting,” Ted Lempert, president of the Bay Area-based nonprofit Children Now, said Tuesday. “What’s exciting is the comprehensiveness of it, because it’s saying we’re going to focus on prenatal through age 5.”

A broad overview document reviewed by The Times on Tuesday shows that most of the outlay under the plan — $1.5 billion — would be a one-time expense in the budget year that begins July 1. Those dollars would be a single infusion of cash, an approach favored by Gov. Jerry Brown in recent years.

Most of the money would be spent on efforts to expand child-care services and kindergarten classes. By law, a governor must submit a full budget to the Legislature no later than Jan. 10. Lawmakers will spend the winter and spring reviewing the proposal and must send a final budget plan to Newsom by June 15.

Though legislative Democrats have pushed for additional early childhood funding in recent years — a key demand of the Legislative Women’s Caucus — those actions have typically come late in the budget-writing season in Sacramento.

“Quite frankly, to start out with a January proposal that includes that investment in California’s children reflects a new day,” state Sen. Holly J. Mitchell (D-Los Angeles) said.

The governor-elect will propose a $750-million boost to kindergarten funding, aimed at expanding facilities to allow full-day programs. A number of school districts offer only partial-day programs, leaving many low-income families to skip enrolling their children because kindergarten classes end in the middle of the workday. Because the money would not count toward meeting California’s three-decades-old education spending guarantee under Proposition 98, which sets a minimum annual funding level for K-12 schools and community colleges, it will not reduce planned spending on other education services.

Close behind in total cost is a budget proposal by Newsom to help train child-care workers and expand local facilities already subsidized by the state, as well as those serving parents who attend state colleges and universities. Together, those efforts could cost $747 million, according to the budget overview document.

An expansion of prekindergarten programs would be phased in over three years at a cost of $125 million in the first year. The multiyear rollout would, according to the budget overview, “ensure the system can plan for the increase in capacity.”

Lempert said the Newsom proposal is notable for trying to avoid the kinds of battles that in recent years pitted prekindergarten and expanded child care against each other for additional taxpayer dollars.

“The reality is we need to expand both simultaneously,” he said.

Another $200 million of the proposal would be earmarked for programs that provide home visits to expectant parents from limited-income families and programs that provide healthcare screenings for young children. Some of the money would come from the state’s Medi-Cal program, and other money from federal matching dollars. Funding for the home visits program was provided in the budget Brown signed last summer; the Newsom effort would build on that.

Emphasizing a policy area with broad appeal in his first state budget could reflect Newsom’s political sensibility about the challenges ahead. Democratic lawmakers and interest groups will be especially eager to see how Newsom addresses the demand for an overhaul of healthcare coverage in California — especially after a 2017 effort to create a single-payer, universal system fizzled. The path forward on healthcare is complex and costly, making early childhood education a more achievable goal in the governor-elect’s early tenure.

Newsom is likely to face considerable demands for other additional spending. In November, the Legislature’s independent analysts projected that continued strength in tax revenues could produce a cash reserve of some $29 billion over the next 18 months. Almost $15 billion of that could be in unrestricted reserves, the kind that can be spent on any number of government programs.

Kim Belshé, executive director of the child advocacy organization First 5 LA and a former state health and human services secretary, said the initial Newsom budget proposal suggests the next governor will focus on a comprehensive approach to improving outcomes for children from low-income families.

“School-ready kids deserve quality early learning, strong and well-supported families, and access to early screening services,” Belshé said. Newsom “understands the ‘whole child,’ multifaceted needs of our kids and is clearly ready to lead.”

Mitchell, the chair of the Senate budget committee, said she’s eager to see the details of the governor-elect’s proposal to determine whether it might signal the beginning of an even broader expansion of early education efforts. Similar efforts have been hindered by a lack of money and ongoing debate over which services to help children 5 and younger need state funding the most. Universal preschool, in particular, has been debated for more than a decade. California voters rejected a ballot measure to fund a full prekindergarten system in 2006.

“It’s clear there’s a new movement afoot trying to engage on investment for universal preschool,” Mitchell said. “How we invest, and how we prioritize that investment, is going to be a great conversation for the coming months.”

Share
Advertisement

California Politics Podcast: A final conversation with Gov. Jerry Brown

No Californian has served longer as governor, signed more laws, granted clemency to more felons or waged more high-profile campaigns than Gov. Jerry Brown.

Brown will leave behind a unique legacy when he packs his last belongings for the trip from the governor’s mansion in Sacramento to his Northern California ranch. His final two terms in office could be his most consequential.

The governor reviewed some of the more notable moments from the past eight years in a far-reaching interview with The Times on Dec. 22. This week’s podcast episode includes extended portions of that conversation.

Share

After turning back efforts to ban tackling in youth football, the sport’s enthusiasts try something new

Youth football players leave the field during halftime of an NFL preseason football game in Orchard Park, N.Y.
Youth football players leave the field during halftime of an NFL preseason football game in Orchard Park, N.Y.
(Bill Wippert / Associated Press)

California youth football supporters who defended their sport against a proposal this year that would have barred tackling have taken a new approach: going on the offensive.

Under a bill supported by a coalition of youth football groups, California, beginning in 2021, would limit children to two 60-minute practices of full contact, while barring tackling in the sport’s offseason.

The proposal introduced this month by Assemblyman Jim Cooper (D-Elk Grove) models the limitations on restrictions already in place for high school football in California, which caps full-contact practices to 90 minutes twice a week.

The restrictions come amid growing concern from medical professionals who say repetitive collisions from hitting and blocking can cause long-term brain damage.

“We want to improve the safety standards for youth tackle football across the state,” said Joe Rafter, president of Southern Marin Youth Football in the San Francisco Bay Area, who is working with Cooper’s office on the bill. “It’s the right thing to do.”

But Rafter said their efforts would also block any new attempts by lawmakers to bar youth tackle football. A bill to set a minimum age of 12 to play organized tackle football died in April, but the authors of the legislation, AB 2108, promised to try again in 2019.

Assembly members Kevin McCarty (D-Sacramento) and Lorena Gonzalez (D-San Diego) cited research showing youths who began playing tackle football before age 12 developed cognitive, behavioral and mood problems earlier than those who began full-contact sports later.

McCarty’s office said he plans to introduce another bill banning tackling in youth football.

“I played organized football as a child and I love the sport to this day,” McCarty said after the bill was pulled from the Arts, Entertainment, Sports, Tourism and Internet Media Committee in April when it became apparent it did not have the votes to pass. “But love for football doesn’t mean that we should ignore science.”

Cooper said he wants to ensure that kids can still play tackle football, but in a safer environment. Banning tackling outright goes too far, he said.

“Americans love football and kids love playing football,” Cooper said. “However, we must ensure our children are safe while participating in contact sports.”

Share
Advertisement

Gavin Newsom announces lineup for concert to benefit California wildfire victims

Share

A sagging economy could doom a 2020 ballot measure to raise commercial property taxes, Gov. Jerry Brown says

Gov. Jerry Brown, at his Colusa County home on Saturday, said a ballot measure to raise commercial property taxes could struggle in 2020.
(Randall Benton/For The Times)

An effort to remove commercial property in California from the tax limits imposed by the landmark Proposition 13 could be felled by an economic slowdown, Gov. Jerry Brown said.

In a Saturday interview with The Times at his Northern California ranch, Brown said liberal activist groups that have successfully placed the proposal on the November 2020 statewide ballot shouldn’t read too much into early poll numbers showing support for the plan.

“That isn’t as easy as you think,” Brown said. “Because you’re going to be in a downturn of the business cycle. And you’re talking many kinds of business. And the cost of doing business in California is already high.”

The ballot measure would allow counties to more frequently assess the market value of commercial property in California than allowed under Proposition 13, a 1978 ballot initiative that amended the state constitution to place strict limits on assessing property values and taxation for both homeowners and businesses. An analysis of the new measure, which qualified in October for the 2020 ballot, estimates it could bring in some $10.5 billion a year in new tax revenue.

“The business community will fight it,” Brown said. “And the minimum wage, the family leave, the environmental rules … business[es] have left California, that’s going to be the big argument. And I think that’s something you really have to think a lot about.”

The governor, who leaves office early next month due to term limits, declined to either endorse or oppose the ballot measure. He said California’s economic health in two years’ time could be a key factor in how voters weigh the proposal.

“We’ll be in a recession by then,” Brown said. “So it’s anybody’s guess.”

Share
Advertisement

Inglewood to destroy more than 100 police shooting records that could otherwise become public under new California law

Inglewood Mayor James T. Butts
(Maria Alejandra Cardona / Los Angeles Times)

The city of Inglewood has authorized the shredding of more than 100 police shooting and other internal investigation records weeks before a new state law could allow the public to access them for the first time.

The decision, made at a City Council meeting earlier this month, has troubled civil liberties advocates who were behind the state legislation, Senate Bill 1421, which takes effect Jan. 1. The law opens to the public internal investigations of officer shootings and other major uses of force, along with confirmed cases of sexual assault and lying while on duty.

“The legislature passed SB 1421 because communities demanded an end to the secrecy cloaking police misconduct and use of force,” Marcus Benigno, a spokesman for the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California, said in a statement. “Inglewood PD’s decision to purge records undermines police accountability and transparency against the will of Californians.”

California law says police departments must retain records of officer shootings and internal misconduct investigations for five years. The city of Inglewood, however, had kept records longer than that, including case files of police shootings dating to 1991. State Sen. Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley), the author of SB 1421, intended for her bill to allow public access to all qualifying records held by a department, no matter the date of the incident.

Inglewood City Council approved the destruction of records that have been in the police department’s possession — more than 100 cases — longer than required by law. The city staff report and council resolution describing the action makes no mention of the new police transparency law. Instead it says the affected records are “obsolete, occupy valuable space, and are of no further use to the police department.” It added the traditional method of destroying such records is to shred them.

It is unclear whether the records have since been destroyed.

A spokesman for the Inglewood Police Department along with Inglewood’s city manager, attorney, clerk, four council members and Mayor James T. Butts, a former Santa Monica police chief, did not respond to requests for comment. Inglewood’s City Hall is closed the last two weeks of December.

The Inglewood Police Department has a reputation for secrecy and using excessive force. In 2008, the department’s officers fatally shot four men in as many months, three of whom turned out to be unarmed. The U.S. Department of Justice launched a civil rights probe and found significant flaws in the way the department oversaw use-of-force cases and investigated complaints against officers.

Civil rights advocates still question why Inglewood police opened fire on a couple found sleeping in a car in 2016, killing them both.

California police have a long history of shredding records to avoid scrutiny of their actions. In the 1970s, the LAPD famously destroyed more than four tons of personnel records after defense attorneys began requesting them as part of criminal cases against their clients. The move resulted in the dismissal of more than a hundred criminal complaints.

In response, the Legislature demanded that records be preserved but then took other measures, supported by police unions, to ensure the public had very little access to them, making California the most secretive state in the nation when it comes to police misconduct.

Skinner’s legislation begins to unwind those laws, which have been on the books since 1978.

No video or audio of the Dec. 11 council action is available on the city’s website and neither are meeting minutes or any record of the decision. A city spokeswoman, Courtney Torres, confirmed that the council had voted in favor of the police records purge, and said all the relevant reasons for the decision were included in the city staff report.

The Jan. 1 implementation for SB 1421 has prompted other police officials to act. A police union in San Bernardino is asking the state Supreme Court to determine that Skinner’s bill only applies to incidents that occur in 2019 or later. Los Angeles Police Department Chief Michel Moore sent a letter to Skinner earlier this month warning that complying with the law in regard to older records in the department’s possession could take hundreds of thousands of work hours.

Share

Federal officials question California DMV’s process for issuing Real IDs

(Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times)

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has notified the California Department of Motor Vehicles that its process for providing residents with federally recognized identification cards is not adequate.

DMV spokesman Armando Botello said Friday that 2.3 million residents who received Real IDs under the current process will have to submit additional documentation when their cards are renewed in five years but will be able to use them in the meantime.

The DMV is developing a way for residents to submit more documentation online or via email to comply with the stricter federal requirement, he said.

But some state legislators are upset about delays in notifying them of the problem and say Homeland Security could eventually require additional documentation provided by current holders.

“The DMV has known for a month that millions of Real IDs they’ve been dolling out are potentially invalid,” Assemblyman Jim Patterson (R-Fresno) said. “The DMV’s only hope is that the Department of Homeland Security takes pity on California and gives the DMV more time to fix this mess.”

Real IDs are a new kind of driver license and identification card that federal law will require legal residents to present when boarding domestic flights or visiting military bases and other federal facilities starting Oct. 1, 2020.

The DMV has only been requiring one form of documentation, including a current lease or utility bill, to verify the residence of a card applicant.

But the federal government said in a Nov. 21 letter to the agency that two such documents are needed.

On Friday, DMV Director Jean Shiomoto released a letter defending the current process but said her agency will start requiring a second document to prove residency in April.

“In order to minimize confusion among our customers, the CADMV will work to inform individuals who have been issued a Real ID under the current process that their card will be accepted for official federal purposes, even if their renewal occurs after the October 1, 2020, final enforcement date for Real ID,” Shiomoto wrote to the federal agency.

Legislative officials worry there is still a possibility that those issued Real IDs in the past might be required to present a second document to have their cards designated as compliant.

The more complex process for obtaining Real IDs has led to hours-long waits for customers at DMV field offices this year, although wait times have been reduced recently by an increase in staffing.

Shiomoto last month announced that she is retiring amid problems with the “motor voter” registration system and after the governor ordered an audit of her agency in response to the long wait times.

On Friday, Assembly Republican Leader Marie Waldron of Escondido blasted the DMV for waiting a month to tell legislators of the problem.

“This is unacceptable and flies in the face of security for our citizens, which is what Real ID was created for in the first place,” she said in a statement.

Share
Advertisement

Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom taps Keely Bosler to be his finance director

Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom on Friday appointed Keely Martin Bosler as director of the California Department of Finance, continuing the role she has served under Gov. Jerry Brown since August.

Bosler will become Newsom’s chief fiscal advisor, and will play a pivotal role in shaping Newsom’s spending plan for the state that will lay the foundation for his top policy priorities. Newsom must roll out his first budget plan within days of taking office on Jan. 7.

“California’s brighter future depends on a strong, stable fiscal foundation,” Newsom said in a statement released Friday afternoon. “Keely is an accomplished public servant of sound fiscal judgment. She understands that state budgets are more than numbers on a page – they are value statements affecting the fate and future of millions of families reaching for the California Dream. We are fortunate to have her on our team.”

Prior to being appointed finance director, Bosler served as Brown’s cabinet secretary for two years and, before that, as the chief deputy director for budget in the Finance Department for three years.

Earlier this year, Brown picked Bosler to lead an audit of the Department of Motor Vehicles, which had come under fire for long wait times at DMV field offices and numerous computer problems, including errors in the new “motor voter” program that registered Californians to vote.

“As we have discussed, long wait times at the Department of Motor Vehicles do not reflect the high standards of service that Californians expect from their state government,” Bosler wrote in a letter in September to DMV Director Jean Shiomoto.

The audit is still ongoing, but Shiomoto has since announced she will retire at the end of the year.

Share

California’s legislative analyst, after decades of nonpartisan research for lawmakers, calls it a career

Legislative Analyst Mac Taylor, who has led the state research unit since 2008, will retire on Dec. 31.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

Only five people have led the independent research office of the California Legislature since its creation in 1941. And each of them has had a pretty simple mantra to live by in reviewing public policy proposals and government programs: Call it like you see it.

“The job of any analyst, to me, is you maintain that nonpartisanship,” Legislative Analyst Mac Taylor said.

Taylor, 65, will retire from the post at the end of December after a four-decade career with the research team that began, as he likes to tell it, just after the passage of the landmark property tax rollback, Proposition 13, in 1978. He became the leader of the office, with the title of legislative analyst, in October 2008.

Two months later, state government found itself in arguably the worst fiscal crisis in its history — a projected shortfall that ultimately grew to $42 billion by the following winter.

“There were forces beyond our control,” Taylor said of that time. “But don’t underestimate the policy changes that were made afterward.”

Those changes, most notably a boost in taxes paid by high-income earners and a robust state budget cash reserve fund, have helped lead to successive years of fully funded government services. The state is projected to have some $24 billion in reserves by the end of the current fiscal year.

Taylor announced his intention earlier to step down this year. Leaders from both houses of the Legislature select the analyst, who leads a staff of almost five dozen researchers. The office provides in-depth reports on pending legislation, as well as on broader policy topics like education and healthcare, and produces an independent analysis for every proposed ballot measure.

A succession of lawmakers and governors alike have praised or panned the work of the Legislative Analyst’s Office based on their own political worldview. Taylor said his staff is mindful that they work for legislators, but try to ignore the rhetoric that follows the release of a major report.

“People are going to do what they’re going to do with our information,” he said. “They don’t always like it, but they appreciate that we give them our best advice.”

Taylor oversaw a transformation in the way the Legislative Analyst’s Office distributes its information, embracing the release of research reports through social media instead of relying on traditional printed copies and journalist roundtable events. But he said the work of the researchers has remained largely unchanged through the decades.

“Having an independent take on things, I think, is good for the Legislature,” he said.

No replacement for Taylor has been announced, which means a short transition for his eventual successor before Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom sends his first budget proposal to lawmakers in early January. Taylor, who lives in the Sacramento suburbs, said he will honor the tradition of his predecessors in stepping away from public policy debates in order to give the new analyst space to lead the team as he or she sees fit. He said he hopes to travel in the coming years and spend time with his children who have moved to the East Coast.

“Forty years in state government,” Taylor said in why he was stepping aside now. “Isn’t that enough?”

Share
Advertisement

Gov. Jerry Brown sues to save California sentencing laws

(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

Outgoing Gov. Jerry Brown sued Thursday to protect one of his signature actions in office, a voter-approved measure that allows most prison inmates to seek earlier release and participate in rehabilitation programs.

His administration filed a lawsuit challenging a pending 2020 initiative that seeks to toughen criminal penalties as part of an effort to roll back reforms adopted by voters within the last decade.

Brown’s lawsuit in Sacramento County Superior Court contends the measure lacked enough valid signatures to overturn a previously approved constitutional amendment.

County officials and California Secretary of State Alex Padilla certified the signatures in July but said they were submitted too late to qualify for last month’s election. The lawsuit names Padilla and the ballot measure’s official proponent, Nina Salarno Besselman, president of the advocacy group Crime Victims United.

Padilla said the measure exceeded the required roughly 366,000 valid signatures, equal to 5% of votes cast for governor in 2014. Brown’s lawsuit says he used the wrong threshold. It says changing the state Constitution requires 8%, or more than 585,400 signatures.

That makes the pending initiative more than 150,000 signatures short, the lawsuit says.

“He’s wrong,” said Jeff Flint, a spokesman for the campaign backing the measure. He predicted a judge will be reluctant to reject a measure that already has qualified for the ballot.

“The secretary of state told us how many signatures are required, and that’s how many we collected,” Flint said.

Padilla’s office did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The measure would reverse reforms adopted by voters through Proposition 47 in 2014 and Proposition 57 in 2016.

Proposition 57 allows most inmates to seek earlier paroles, and Proposition 47 reduced some drug and property crimes from felonies to misdemeanors. The combination has helped keep California’s inmate population below a population cap set by federal judges.

Corrections department spokeswoman Vicky Waters said the measure gives corrections and parole officials broad discretion “to protect our communities and fashion a rational system of rehabilitation and punishment. This new initiative unlawfully seeks to supplant the department’s constitutional authority to implement these critical reforms to our criminal justice system.”

The pending initiative would shorten the list of crimes that qualify for earlier parole and change some theft crimes from misdemeanors back to felonies. It would also increase the number of crimes for which DNA is collected, a list that was limited when some crimes went from felonies to misdemeanors.

Those supporting the tougher penalties say easing criminal penalties has increased the number of dangerous criminals on the streets, but those backing the changes say they have helped reduce mass incarceration and rehabilitate convicted criminals.

Share

California Supreme Court orders records unsealed in pardon of ex-state Sen. Roderick Wright

Former state Sen. Roderick Wright
(Anne Cusack / Los Angeles Times)

The California Supreme Court has granted a request to unseal court records involving Gov. Jerry Brown’s decision last month to pardon former state Sen. Roderick Wright for felony convictions involving lying about living in his legislative district, officials said Thursday.

The court order was in response to a request by the nonpartisan First Amendment Coalition, which argued that the public has a right to know what information went into the governor’s decision to grant clemency to Wright.

“This is an important victory for public access to court files involving the exercise of executive clemency,” said coalition spokesman Glen A. Smith. “We are gratified the court has recognized that these decisions should be subject to the same public access rules that apply to other judicial records under California law.”

The court gave Brown’s office until Jan. 2 to redact confidential material before giving the court documents that can be released to the public. The court files submitted by the governor’s office include letters of support for a pardon and an internal review of Wright’s case.

The court denied a motion to unseal the records of all clemency cases but left open consideration of requests on other individual cases.

Brown’s office is “currently evaluating the court’s decision,” said spokesman Brian Ferguson. The governor argued against unsealing records in a recent court filing that said confidentiality is consistent with historical practice and is supported by state law.

In pardoning Wright on Nov. 22, the governor wrote: “He has shown that since his release from custody, he has lived an honest and upright life, exhibited good moral character, and conducted himself as a law abiding citizen.”

Share
Advertisement

California political watchdog agency fines BART, urges prosecution over using public funds for campaign

A Bay Area Rapid Transit train leaves the station in Oakland in this 2013 file photo.
A Bay Area Rapid Transit train leaves the station in Oakland in this 2013 file photo.
(Ben Margot / AP)

California’s state political watchdog agency on Thursday imposed a $7,500 fine against the Bay Area Rapid Transit District and called for a possible criminal or civil prosecution over allegations the district used public resources to campaign for a 2016 bond measure.

The state Fair Political Practices Commission levied an administrative fine against BART for its failure to disclose spending on YouTube videos, social media posts and text messages to promote Measure RR, which authorized $3.5 billion in general obligation bonds.

Though the panel lacks authority to seek criminal charges over the misuse of public funds, it also urged county district attorneys in the BART service area and the state attorney general to pursue possible criminal or civil charges over the spending of taxpayer dollars for campaign purposes, Commission Chairwoman Alice Germond said.

“It is the concept of misusing public funds that I think we all here are very disturbed about, and we want to send a warning and not create a precedent that is a minor, little slap on the wrist,” Germond said, adding that the referral to criminal prosecutors “would further send a message that this is wrong.”

Commissioner Brian Hatch also called for the state Legislature to consider granting the FPPC power to go after public agencies that spend taxpayer money on campaigns.

Sen. Steve Glazer (D-Orinda) called on the agency to increase the fine to the maximum level of $33,375. The proposed $7,500 fine “represents a slap on the wrist for a very serious violation of the law and the public’s trust,” Glazer said in a letter to the panel.

In supporting the fine recommended by the staff, Germond said BART has agreed to pay the penalty.

“Somebody did something wrong and they have admitted it,” she said.

A staff report said there were factors in favor of a fine below the maximum.

“Although the Commission considers BART’s violations to be serious, the absence of any evidence of an intention to conceal, deceive, or mislead; the voluntary filing of the delinquent campaign statement; and the absence of a prior record are mitigating,” the report said.

Share

Activist Kimberly Ellis announces bid for chair of the California Democratic Party amid leadership turmoil

Kimberly Ellis speaks to supporters in downtown Sacramento in 2017, after her loss to Eric Bauman for California Democratic Party chairman.
(Jay L. Clendenin / Los Angeles Times)

Bay Area progressive activist Kimberly Ellis is making another run at leading the state’s Democratic Party, she announced Thursday.

Ellis burst onto the state political scene in 2017 when she narrowly lost the chairmanship to then-Los Angeles Democratic Party Chairman Eric Bauman.

Last month, Bauman was forced to resign after he was accused of misconduct, throwing the party into turmoil over its leadership. In an investigation by The Times, 10 party staffers and political activists alleged that Bauman made inappropriate sexual comments in professional settings and engaged in unwanted touching.

“Right now, who we are as a Party has come starkly into question,” Ellis wrote in an email to supporters. “We - elected leaders, the labor community, delegates and activists, have to find an answer, and find it quickly.”

“After deep consideration and long conversations with delegates, elected officials, labor leaders, social justice advocates and Party activists who urged me to consider taking up the mantle, I’ve decided to answer the call and run for Chair of the California Democratic Party.”

Citing what she called a “collapse” in state party leadership, Ellis said she’s hoping to help “reform the tone, tenor and culture of the California Democratic Party and rebuild the trust that has been broken.”

Ellis is the first Democrat to announce a campaign for the chair’s race, which is expected to be settled at a May state party convention in San Francisco.

Her bid comes as interim chair Alexandra Gallardo-Rooker is facing criticism from some in the party during her first three weeks in the post. Last week, she fired seven top staffers and closed the party’s Los Angeles office.

The moves riled some state party delegates, who said they were troubled the decisions were made during an ongoing investigation into Bauman’s conduct. Several activists began circulating open letters this week, at least one of which called forthe interim chair’s removal ahead of the May vote. No official petitions to launch that process had been filed with state party officials as of Thursday morning, according to Roger Salazar, a spokesman for the party.

Rooker has said she will not run for the position in May.

Share
Advertisement

California police union seeks state Supreme Court review of new law disclosing internal investigation records

Los Angeles Police Department officers.
(Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)

A police union is asking the California Supreme Court to block the release of internal officer investigations before a new state law takes effect next year.

The San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Employees’ Benefit Assn. filed a petition Tuesday asking justices to rule that only investigations of incidents that occur after Jan. 1 would be available under the law — and not those the department has on file from years prior.

The litigation comes after this year’s passage of Senate Bill 1421, which opens to the public for the first time internal investigations of officer shootings and other major uses of force, along with confirmed cases of sexual assault and lying while on duty. The law goes into effect Jan. 1, and the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department has told the union it intends to make available in response to public records requests all the information it has.

The union “is very concerned about any plans to retroactively apply Senate Bill 1421,” Grant Ward, the union’s president, said in a statement. “We believe retroactive application violates our members’ rights and we hope the California Supreme Court will consider the serious issues raised by our legal challenge.”

The bill’s author, Sen. Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley), does not agree with the union’s interpretation. She has said her legislation should apply to all the records in a police department’s possession because the law simply declared that affected records were no longer confidential.

“If the record exists, it’s disclosable,” Skinner said.

A decision on what records will be available under the law is key to how far-reaching it will be. If the court restricts access to incidents that occurred prior to 2019, those cases will not be subject to public scrutiny.

The police union in San Bernardino County is not the only one raising concerns about the law. Earlier this month, Los Angeles Police Department Chief Michel Moore sent a letter to Skinner expressing concern that his agency would be overwhelmed if the law required the department to disclose older incidents.

Even if the law only applied to the previous five years, Moore wrote, it could take nearly 300,000 hours of work to comply with its provisions.

“The LAPD operates with a guiding principle of Reverence for the Law; as such, we will diligently comply with SB 1421,” Moore wrote. “We maintain, however, that a retroactive implementation of SB 1421 will be exceptionally burdensome and would require significant reallocation of front-line investigative personnel.”

Skinner said if complying with the law becomes untenable for law enforcement agencies that maintain records for a long time, she would consider modifications. But she said agencies did not raise this concern during discussion over the bill.

SB 1421 “went through multiple committee hearings, multiple floor debates, extensive opportunity for all parties to weigh in on concerns with its structure,” she said. “That was not an issue that was raised by law enforcement at the time.”

Share

Gov. Brown warns of ‘backlash’ for Republicans in 2020 if Obamacare repeal is upheld

Gov. Jerry Brown at the National Press Club in April.
Gov. Jerry Brown at the National Press Club in April.
(Alex Wong / Getty Images)

Gov. Jerry Brown warned Republicans on Tuesday that repeal of the Affordable Care Act would devastate the party’s political chances in the 2020 election.

Brown, speaking at a Sacramento Press Club event moderated by Los Angeles Times columnist George Skelton and Brown family historian Miriam Pawel, said a federal judge’s ruling last week to strike down the 2010 law — if upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court — “will build such a backlash that the Democrats will not only take over the Senate, they’ll win the presidency and will win with the kind of momentum, particularly on the issue of healthcare, that [the law] will be replaced probably with something even better.”

The governor, who leaves office in less than three weeks, said he did not believe the ruling by a Texas judge would ultimately prevail.

“I think the decision will probably be overturned,” Brown said.

Few states have embraced the law championed by former President Obama more than California, both through its healthcare exchange, Covered California, and by expanding access to government-funded services under Medi-Cal. Some 12 million Californians now receive healthcare through Medi-Cal, and Brown said a final ruling affecting the federal dollars that subsidize that care would be a serious blow.

“California would not be able to afford it” without the subsidy, the governor said.

Share
Advertisement

Bars in Los Angeles, San Francisco could stay open until 4 a.m. under new bill

For the third year in a row, a California lawmaker is trying to keep bars open until 4 a.m.

State Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) is reintroducing legislation that would allow Los Angeles, San Francisco and seven other cities to extend the sales of alcohol in bars, clubs and restaurants by an additional two hours.

“Nightlife brings people together, fosters creativity and innovation, supports small businesses, and creates middle-class jobs,” Wiener said in a statement. “It’s time to embrace our nighttime economy and give our cities the tools they need to foster the best nightlife possible.”

Last year, Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed a similar bill by Wiener, writing: “I believe we have enough mischief from midnight to 2 without adding two more hours of mayhem.”

Should this year’s measure, Senate Bill 58, advance through the Legislature, Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom would decide whether to sign it into law.

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti has endorsed SB 58, saying the city should have more flexibility than it does now.

“Every community has its own needs, and cities should be able to make informed decisions about what nightlife hours make sense for residents, visitors, and neighborhoods,” Garcetti said in a statement.

The bill would create a five-year pilot program where Los Angeles, San Francisco, Oakland, Sacramento, West Hollywood, Long Beach, Coachella, Cathedral City and Palm Springs could decide to allow restaurants and bars within their cities to serve alcohol until 4 a.m. with the approval of the state Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control.

Share

Bars in Los Angeles and San Francisco could stay open until 4 a.m. under new bill

For the third year in a row, a California lawmaker is trying to keep bars open until 4 a.m.

State Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) is reintroducing legislation that would allow Los Angeles, San Francisco and seven other cities to extend the sales of alcohol in bars, clubs and restaurants by an additional two hours.

“Nightlife brings people together, fosters creativity and innovation, supports small businesses and creates middle-class jobs,” Wiener said in a statement. “It’s time to embrace our nighttime economy and give our cities the tools they need to foster the best nightlife possible.”

Last year, Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed a similar bill by Wiener, writing: “I believe we have enough mischief from midnight to 2 without adding two more hours of mayhem.”

Should this year’s measure, Senate Bill 58, advance through the Legislature, Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom would decide whether to sign it into law.

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti has endorsed SB 58, saying the city should have more flexibility than it does now.

“Every community has its own needs, and cities should be able to make informed decisions about what nightlife hours make sense for residents, visitors and neighborhoods,” Garcetti said in a statement.

The bill would create a five-year pilot program where Los Angeles, San Francisco, Oakland, Sacramento, West Hollywood, Long Beach, Coachella, Cathedral City and Palm Springs could decide to allow restaurants and bars within their cities to serve alcohol until 4 a.m. with the approval of the state Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control.

Share
Advertisement

GOP lawmaker pitches plan to kill California’s new DMV voter registration system

A sign advertises a touch-screen voter registration process at the Department of Motor Vehicles in Santa Ana.
A sign advertises a touch-screen voter registration process at the Department of Motor Vehicles in Santa Ana.
(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

Less than eight months after California’s new voter registration system went online at the Department of Motor Vehicle offices, a leading Republican lawmaker said the beleaguered project should be canceled.

“Enough is enough,” state Senate Minority Leader Patricia Bates (R-Laguna Niguel) said in a statement on Monday. “I’ve been deeply troubled reading the media reports highlighting the failed motor voter program.”

Bates introduced Senate Bill 57, which would return voter registration at DMV offices to a voluntary, “opt-in” process. In April, state officials formally launched the system designed to automatically register those eligible to vote unless they specifically declined.

But the new “motor voter” program has produced a series of errors — including duplicate registration forms, incorrect political party affiliation and the registration of as many as 1,500 people with legal U.S. residency but no citizenship. DMV officials have insisted the errors were limited in scope and have been corrected, though Secretary of State Alex Padilla said last week that he lost “confidence and trust” in DMV Director Jean Shiomoto.

Shiomoto, who has run the department since 2013, has announced she will retire from state government at the end of the month.

SB 57 would cancel the program established by a 2015 law that increased the volume of voter registrations at DMV offices and through online appointments. If successful, it would return California to a voluntary system in place since passage of a federal law in 1993.

Bates said in a written statement Monday that her bill was prompted not only by news coverage of the voter registration mistakes but also by what she saw at a DMV office last month.

“The information presented to DMV customers is unclear,” she said. “I’m concerned as all Californians should be.”

Share

California’s DMV director announces retirement amid problems with ‘motor voter’ program

(Kent Nishamura/Los Angeles Times)

The director of the California Department of Motor Vehicles will retire at year’s end with a number of questions unanswered about the implementation of a major voter registration system and long wait times experienced by customers for much of the past summer.

Jean Shiomoto will not continue in her current role as Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom takes office, and “announced to staff several weeks ago her intent to retire at the end of the year after 38 years in state service,” spokesman Armando Botello said in an email to The Times on Friday.

Newsom’s transition team did not immediately respond to a request for comment on who might lead the department in 2019.

Shiomoto was appointed DMV director by Gov. Jerry Brown in the fall of 2013, having served in prior leadership roles with the department. DMV officials have been sharply criticized by lawmakers in recent months for delays in serving customers at its field offices across the state.

Last week, DMV officials revealed errors in registering California voters for the November election — mistakes that followed a series of problems in the rollout of the state’s new “motor voter” registration system. Secretary of State Alex Padilla last week said he had lost confidence in Shiomoto’s leadership as a result of the voting registration problems.

Share
Advertisement

New law could break the stalemate over housing on the site of a near-vacant Cupertino mall

For more than a decade, developers have tried to build new housing on the site of an all-but-empty mall in Cupertino, a city in the heart of Silicon Valley and home to Apple headquarters. A well-organized group of neighbors, upset about traffic, building heights and the potential loss of the community’s suburban lifestyle, turned away every plan.

Now, for the first time, the stalemate might be broken — thanks to a decision made in the state Capitol.

In an effort to address California’s housing affordability problem, legislators passed a law last year that requires cities and counties to approve housing projects if they comply with local zoning rules and other standards, forcing some resistant communities to agree to new homebuilding. In September, the city of Cupertino, citing the state law, approved developer Sand Hill Property Co.’s proposal to build an office park and more than 2,400 homes where the Vallco Shopping Mall sits.

Read More

Share

Local government was a last bastion for struggling California Republicans. Not anymore

There’s no shortage of watery metaphors to describe the disaster that befell California Republicans this midterm election.

A blue wave. A Democratic tsunami. But the most apt may be a flood, with the casualties steadily rising as the vote count climbed in the days and weeks following Nov. 6. Eventually half the GOP congressional delegation was washed away, along with the entire slate of statewide Republican candidates.

In Sacramento, Democrats claimed 29 of 40 state Senate seats and seized three-quarters of the 80-member Assembly — the largest number since 1883, when Chester A. Arthur was serving in the White House.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

For the Republicans left in California’s Legislature, fewer lawmakers will have to do more work

From January to late summer every year, the California Legislature is a perpetual motion machine. And in the new year, the people most likely to struggle in keeping up will be Republicans, vastly outnumbered but still responsible for representing millions of the state’s residents.

There are 22 standing committees in the state Senate, plus at least a dozen more subcommittees or special committees. And after November’s election, only 11 Republican senators will be left to divvy up the work.

To the victors go the spoils. To the vanquished go the extra assignments.

Read More

Share

Gavin Newsom sends out inaugural save the dates — and hefty fundraising requests

(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

Mark your calendars: Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom has a full slate of events planned around his inauguration, according to save-the-date announcements sent to California politicos this week.

The festivities include a “leadership circle” luncheon and “family celebration” at the California State Railroad Museum in Sacramento on Jan. 6 in addition to a previously announced concert called California Rises that Sunday evening to benefit those affected by recent wildfires.

The swearing-in ceremony itself will be the next day, Jan. 7, at 11 a.m.

Those who want to fete the incoming governor will have ample opportunities to do so, but it won’t come cheap. The announcement lists a number of fundraising tiers — ranging from $25,000 to $200,000 — that package together tickets to the inauguration and assorted parties.

The price tags are even higher for those who want a “sponsorship” role for the Sunday night benefit concert, featuring as-yet unannounced “special guests.” Event organizers advertised packages that top out at $1 million, which include prominent logo placement on stage screens, tickets to VIP receptions and floor seats for the show.

Newsom’s inaugural fundraising committee is set up as a nonprofit 501(c)(4) group, which can accept unlimited donations and is not subject to disclosure requirements about its donors. Nathan Click, a spokesman for Newsom, said all fundraising for the inaugural events and the benefit concert will be reported to the state campaign finance agency as behested payments and will be disclosed within 30 days of receipt of the funds.

Share
Advertisement

California housing crisis podcast: The nation’s most discussed housing bill returns

Apartments above the 110 Freeway in Los Angeles.
(Mel Melcon / Los Angeles Times)

Last year, legislation that would have allowed for increased apartment construction near transit across California became a national flashpoint for a debate over the future of cities in an era of high housing costs and pressures to address climate change. The bill suffered a quick death in the Legislature.

Now, Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) has brought a version of the legislation back as Senate Bill 50, which would allow four- to five-story buildings near rail lines and loosen local zoning rules near other mass transit and in wealthy neighborhoods.

On this episode of “Gimme Shelter: The California Housing Crisis Podcast,” we talk with Wiener about what he learned from last year’s failures, how he has tried to mollify concerns from low-income tenant groups and the expectations for SB 50.

We also go through other new housing legislation, including measures that would increase state spending on low-income development.

Gimme Shelter,” a biweekly podcast that looks at why it’s so expensive to live in California and what the state can do about it, features Liam Dillon, who covers housing affordability issues for the Los Angeles Times’ Sacramento bureau, and Matt Levin, data and housing reporter for CALmatters.

You can subscribe to “Gimme Shelter” on iTunes, Stitcher, Soundcloud, Google Play and Overcast.

Share

California’s DMV failed to finish registering 329 new voters before November election

Officials at the California Department of Motor Vehicles said Friday that the agency failed to send information for 329 new voters to state elections officers in time for the November election, the latest revelation in a string of mishaps regarding voter registration.

Secretary of State Alex Padilla responded with a blistering letter, calling on Gov. Jerry Brown or Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom to replace Jean Shiomoto, the DMV director.

“The Director of DMV has lost my confidence and trust,” Padilla wrote.

In all, the agency revealed that 589 mailed voter registration records that should have been processed under election deadlines weren’t sent to California’s secretary of state until late November, including forms from 260 drivers who had intended to update their address on existing voter registration records.

The DMV had been instructed to not send registration forms that came in after Oct. 22, but the voters in question had forms that were postmarked before the deadline. In some cases, when the postmark wasn’t legible, the agency said, documents inside indicated the voter had intended to finish their registration in time for the Nov. 6 election.

“The DMV recognizes the pause in transmittals was an error and affected the timing of the registration of the 589 individuals referenced above relative to the November election,” Shiomoto wrote in a letter to Padilla on Friday. “The pause was due to a misunderstanding on the part of the department, for which we take responsibility.”

Those who were trying to update their address for voter registration would not have been blocked from casting ballots. But officials said it’s unclear whether any of the 329 new voters were able to participate in the election. Shiomoto said in her letter that DMV will work with elections officials.

The errors were not related to previous DMV mistakes about registering voters, problems associated with the rollout of the state’s new “motor voter” law. In those cases, multiple registration forms were sent to local elections offices for some voters, some people were assigned the wrong political party preference and others who are noncitizens were incorrectly placed on the list of registered voters. DMV officials have yet to respond to questions posed by The Times over the last several weeks about who knew of those mistakes and when.

Share
Advertisement

Newsom appoints a labor advocate and a former staffer as his chief deputy Cabinet secretaries

A labor advocate and a San Francisco political operative have accepted positions in Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom’s new administration.

Angie Wei, a Capitol insider with deep ties to organized labor in California, will serve as a chief deputy Cabinet secretary with a focus on policy development.

As a legislative director and chief of staff at the California Labor Federation, Wei has represented more than 1,200 unions and 2.1 million workers in Capitol fights over a host of policy issues, including drug-pricing transparency and paid family leave.

The governor-elect also tapped Jason Elliott, a policy advisor to Newsom during his time as mayor of San Francisco and a chief of staff to San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee, as another chief deputy Cabinet secretary overseeing executive branch operations.

Elliott and Wei will serve under Ana Matosantos, Newsom’s previously announced Cabinet secretary.

Share

California had highest midterm election turnout since 1982

Piles of mail-in ballots are readied to be counted Nov. 7 in Santa Ana.
(Nick Agro / For The Times)

California voters turned out for the November election at a higher rate than any similar election since 1982, according to final statewide results certified Friday.

More than 12.7 million voters cast ballots in the Nov. 6 election, representing 64.5% of the state’s registered voters. That represents the highest percentage of voter turnout in a gubernatorial election since Nov. 2, 1982, when 69.7% of voters participated.

It was a dramatic change from 2014, which saw the lowest turnout — 42.2% of registered voters — of any gubernatorial election since 1942.

“What an election it was,” Secretary of State Alex Padilla said in a video posted online by his office.

In all, 41 counties reported turnout above the statewide average. Fifty-seven percent of registered voters in Los Angeles County cast ballots, a marked increase from the 31% of voters who showed up in the fall election four years ago.

Orange County, which saw fierce competition for four of the six congressional seats all or partially inside its borders, had almost 71% of its voters cast ballots. That’s the highest turnout for the county since at least 1990, according to statewide statistics.

Elections in presidential years routinely see strong voter turnout. In 2016, 75% of California’s registered voters cast ballots. But gubernatorial elections — which come at the midpoint of a presidential term in office — have generally been less popular with voters. Last month’s election, though, featured a number of campaigns that drew heavily on the record of President Trump and a host of national issues including healthcare, immigration and the environment.

An analysis by The Times shows that 43% of the votes — 5.2 million in all — were counted in the weeks after election night. California has a number of laws that have led to a longer vote counting process. The state, for example, allows any ballot postmarked by election day to be counted as long as it arrives at a county election office by the following Friday.

In the race for governor, Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom defeated Republican businessman John Cox by almost 3 million votes. Cox, who came in second in a June primary that saw 27 candidates, garnered a smaller percentage of November votes than any GOP candidate since 1998 — and even came up slightly short of the low vote total won that year by former state Atty. Gen. Dan Lungren. The official results show Cox won just 38.1% of the vote, compared with Newsom’s 61.9% of ballots cast.

Historically, Republican candidates for governor have hovered no lower than about 40% of the votes cast in a general election, and Cox’s total share of the ballots continued to fall as the tallies were updated through late November.

This year also marked a milestone in the way elections are conducted in communities across California. Five counties enacted a new voting system that swapped neighborhood polling places for ballots mailed to every voter and a limited number of all-purpose “vote centers” for registration or voting assistance prior to election day. In each of those counties, voter turnout was higher than the statewide average. It was also the first year for “conditional voter registration,” the state’s version of same-day registration.

“Clearly [it was] a big success, and I look forward to working with many more counties” in implementing the new vote centers in 2020, Padilla said in Friday’s online video.

As of last month, some 19.7 million Californians were registered to vote, the largest number of voters in state history. Elections officials expect strong turnout in 2020 and are already preparing for the statewide primary in late winter of that year — moved up by California lawmakers in hopes of giving the state a more prominent role in the presidential race.

Share
Advertisement

Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom fills top communications and external affairs posts

Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom on Thursday picked a veteran Capitol staff member to lead his communications shop when he takes office.

Daniel Zingale, who previously served as Cabinet secretary to Gov. Gray Davis, senior advisor to former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and chief of staff to Maria Shriver, will serve as Newsom’s senior advisor on strategy and communications.

In addition to Zingale, Newsom filled several other positions in the latest round of hires for his new administration.

Nathan Click, the communications director for Newsom’s gubernatorial campaign, will stay on as chief spokesperson and director of public affairs.

Priscilla Cheng, former chief of staff at the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor and senior political advisor to the Newsom campaign, will be Newsom’s director of external affairs.

Maricela Rodríguez, now with the California Endowment, will become director of civic engagement and strategic partnerships.

Newsom takes the oath of office on Jan. 7.

Share

California Assemblyman Joaquin Arambula says he was arrested after spanking his daughter

(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

California Assemblyman Joaquin Arambula (D-Fresno), who was arrested Monday on suspicion of misdemeanor willful cruelty to a child, said he was taken into custody by police after he spanked his 7-year-old daughter.

“Like most parents know, kids at times can act out. We had an incident on Sunday night of that. I did discipline my daughter and I spanked her on her bottom,” Arambula said Wednesday, adding that he spanked the child with his hand.

Fresno Police Chief Jerry Dyer said Tuesday that Fresno’s Dailey Elementary Charter School contacted child protective services Monday after a student walked into the office with an injury from the night before. Officers responded to the school and interviewed the child. Dyer declined to offer any identifying details about the child or to describe the nature of the injury.

“My daughter was pretty upset, to be fair, and angry,” Arambula said Wednesday. “The next day she woke up still angry and went to school angry.”

Arambula said he spanks his children “once a year at most” and called it a “tool of last resort.” He said he did not see any injuries on the child Sunday evening and does not know what happened at the school that led officials to call child protective services.

Spanking a child is generally not illegal under California law, unless the act is considered excessive or unjustified.

“I thought the discipline that we did was appropriate,” Arambula said. “And we have to feel as parents as if there are times we have to help to correct, and sadly we’re at where we are now.”

Arambula’s three daughters, ages 7, 6 and 3, were placed in the custody of his parents Monday. The assemblyman said child protective services and the Department of Social Services interviewed him, his wife and his daughters separately and will allow the children to return home Wednesday evening.

He thanked the teachers at his daughter’s school and police officers “for doing their job.”

When asked how he thought the arrest may affect his political career, Arambula said he felt confident that his constituents knew his character.

“My priorities have been focused on getting my family back together,” Arambula said. “I believe the community that elected me knows me. They have seen me and my family and my daughters, and they trust and believe that I am a great father. I will continue to put my trust in them.”

No formal charges have been filed against Arambula.

Share
Advertisement

Retired appeals court justice William Newsom, father of California Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom, dies at 84

Gavin Newsom, right, was sworn in as lieutenant governor in 2011 by his father, William Newsom.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

William Newsom III, a retired appellate court justice and father of Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom, died Wednesday at age 84, the governor-elect’s office announced.

“Justice Newsom was a proud, lifelong Californian, a public servant of profound accomplishment and a powerful voice for individual rights and environmental protection,” Nathan Click, a spokesman for the governor-elect, said in a statement.

The elder Newsom was a lifelong resident of San Francisco and was well-connected in the city’s political circles. He was appointed to the Superior Court by Gov. Jerry Brown in 1975, and later was appointed to the Court of Appeal.

William Newsom was a longtime friend of Gordon Getty, son of oil magnate J. Paul Getty, and managed the Getty family trust on behalf of Gordon Getty.

Brown said in a statement Wednesday that the Capitol flags would be flown at half-staff in honor of William Newsom.

“Anne and I extend our deepest condolences to the entire Newsom family. Bill was a longtime friend, a champion of the environment and someone whom I was proud to appoint to the superior court and court of appeal,” Brown said.

Read More

Share

California lawmakers to consider ban on guns for those convicted of serious alcohol-related crimes

State Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara), left, with then-Assemblyman Tony Thurmond in 2016.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

Californians convicted of serious alcohol-related crimes would lose their firearms for 10 years under legislation proposed Wednesday by state Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara).

Jackson’s bill is the latest of a string of gun-control measures proposed after last month’s mass shooting at a Thousand Oaks bar in which 12 people were killed.

Jackson said her bill is based on the findings of a 2017 UC Davis study that found prior convictions for crimes involving alcohol were associated with up to a fivefold increase in the likelihood of arrest for serious offenses including those involving guns.

“The research demonstrates that people with certain alcohol-related convictions are at increased risk of committing a violent or firearm-related crime,” Jackson said.

State law already bars people convicted of certain violent crimes from possessing firearms for 10 years or more.

Jackson’s Senate Bill 55 would expand the list of crimes resulting in firearm bans to include serious alcohol-related offenses, including vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated. People would also be prohibited from possessing guns if they have multiple convictions for driving under the influence.

Share
Advertisement

California’s chief justice says bail overhaul will continue with or without the new law

California Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye on Tuesday defended a landmark new state law abolishing money bail, saying it was crafted to ensure courts “do not judge a person based on the size of their wallet or what they have access to in someone else’s wallet.”

In an annual meeting with reporters in San Francisco, the chief justice said the state’s top court officials would continue to improve how judges determine whether criminal defendants are fit for release ahead of trial, even if the new law is suspended amid an effort from the bail industry to block it through a voter referendum.

“We are seeking to make it as a fair and transparent as possible,” she said of the pretrial detention process. “We as a branch supported [Senate Bill] 10 because we believed it was a fairer way to assess a person charged with a crime.”

Read More

Share

Democrat’s win stands in Orange County state Senate race after supporters of Republican incumbent conduct partial recount

Former state Sen. Janet Nguyen (R-Garden Grove) had asked for a partial review of election results that had her losing to Tom Umberg.
(Marc Martin / Los Angeles Times)

Democrat Tom Umberg’s election victory will stand in the 34th state Senate District after supporters of losing Republican incumbent Janet Nguyen completed their examination of provisional ballot envelopes, according to Neal Kelley, the Orange County registrar of voters.

Kelley said Tuesday that Nguyen’s supporters did not pursue a recount of any votes after they spent two days examining the envelopes from 13 precincts where Umberg won.

“The vote result will not change,” Kelley said, adding the results, as certified on Nov. 30, stand as official and Nguyen’s camp cannot request further recounts.

Last week, Nguyen’s supporters requested a partial recount. The more limited review they performed cost them $9,400, Kelley said.

Umberg, a former state assemblyman from Santa Ana, won the election by 3,088 votes over Nguyen of Garden Grove.

Share
Advertisement

Fresno Assemblyman Joaquin Arambula is arrested on child cruelty charge

Fresno police arrested California Assemblyman Joaquin Arambula (D-Fresno) on Monday on a misdemeanor charge of willful cruelty to a child.

The arrest was made after police were contacted by Child Protective Services, which reported that a student at Fresno’s Dailey Elementary Charter School walked into the campus’ administrative office with an injury that occurred the night before, according to Fresno Police Chief Jerry Dyer.

“The victim provided the officers with the circumstances around how the injury occurred and who was responsible for that injury,” Dyer said. “The person responsible for that injury was determined to be Joaquin Arambula.”

Dyer declined to provide identifying information about the child, including age, gender or relationship to Arambula, and details about the injury.

Arambula, 41, lives in Fresno with his wife, Elizabeth, and three daughters, according to his Assembly website.

Felicia Cousart Matlosz, a spokeswoman for Arambula, did not provide details of the arrest, but said in a statement on Tuesday that “Joaquin is a committed father who wants what is best for his children.”

“He is fully supportive of the process, which will show he is a loving and nurturing father,” she said.

Police arrived at the school shortly after 2 p.m. on Monday and spoke with the child. Officers called Arambula and his wife, Dyer said, adding that Arambula followed the advice of his attorney and declined to speak with officers about the incident.

Arambula was arrested at the school later that day and was taken to police headquarters, processed and released with a citation, Dyer said.

“The child is no longer in a position to have contact with Joaquin and is not in danger at this time,” Dyer said.

Dyer said police were working closely with the district attorney’s office with the intent of prosecuting the case.

“Joaquin is a very reputable person in our community and well-liked,” Dyer said. “It is unfortunate that this incident occurred and we have been put in a position where we had to make an arrest. Any time there is a child involved as the victim, we take those cases very serious.”

A spokesman for Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon (D-Lakewood) declined to comment.

Arambula, a medical doctor, won a special election in 2016 to fill a seat left vacant by former Assemblyman Henry Perea in the 31st Assembly District. His father, Juan Arambula, also served in the Assembly and on the Fresno County Board of Supervisors.

The younger Arambula has focused much of his attention in the Legislature on healthcare and introduced a bill last week to extend Medi-Cal coverage to all California residents without legal immigration status.

Share

Judge denies California Senate’s request to dismiss retaliation lawsuit

A Superior Court judge has denied the California Senate’s request to dismiss a retaliation and defamation lawsuit filed by an employee of former Sen. Tony Mendoza (D-Artesia).

In a ruling issued Friday, the court rejected the state Senate’s arguments that a signed severance agreement bars the staff member, Adriana Ruelas, from filing a lawsuit and that the institution is immune to defamation claims under government tort law.

Ruelas filed the lawsuit in April alleging the Senate fired her in September 2017 after she blew the whistle on Mendoza for allegedly harassing a young woman assigned to work in his office as part of a fellowship program. The ruling allows Ruelas to move forward with her case against the upper house.

“This ruing is extraordinarily significant because for years the Legislature and the Senate, in particular, have taken the position that they are above the law and the normal employment rules do no apply to them,” said Micha Liberty, Ruelas’ lawyer. “This court has confirmed what many have been suggesting for years, which is legislative workers do have rights and cannot be misled or misguided in an effort by the Senate to intimidate whistleblowers and victims from coming forward.”

The Senate declined to comment on the litigation.

Mendoza resigned in February after an internal Senate investigation substantiated claims that he made unwanted advances on several staff members during his tenure in the Legislature. The Senate investigation did not confirm Ruelas’ retaliation claim.

In the lawsuit, Ruelas alleged that Mendoza publicly defamed her and said she was fired for performance, despite no record of any issues with her work.

Ruelas also alleges that staff members for the California Senate Rules Committee led her to believe that Mendoza would be barred from speaking about the situation if she signed the severance agreement giving away her right to pursue litigation. Liberty has argued that the terms of the severance agreement are invalid because Ruelas signed it under false pretenses.

Sacramento Superior Court Judge Steven P. Shaw rejected the Senate’s request to throw out Ruelas’ claims of retaliation and failure to prevent discrimination. In an order issued Friday, Shaw says Ruelas “has adequately alleged facts to support rescission of the severance agreement.”

Liberty said she expected to begin issuing deposition orders this week to Mendoza, Secretary of the Senate Danny Alvarez and other top Senate officials at the time of Ruelas’ termination.

Share
Advertisement

California’s outdated election scoreboard fuels baseless suspicion as vote count ends

California Secretary of State Alex Padilla.
(Dylan Stewart / HS Insider)

The morning after the Nov. 6 congressional midterm election in California, state, county and media websites reported that 100% of precincts had turned in their results.

It was highly misleading: The final tally, released Friday, showed that a staggering 5.2 million of the 12.1 million ballots cast — 43% — remained uncounted that morning. Most of the outstanding votes were from mail ballots.

The website charts listing results from “100 percent” of the precincts feed public mistrust in the counting despite California’s stringent protections of ballot integrity, said Mindy Romero, the director of USC’s California Civic Engagement Project, a nonpartisan research center in Sacramento.

Precinct results are just for ballots cast in person on election day — a shrinking share of California’s vote.

“It doesn’t really match the reality,” Romero said.

Alex Padilla, a Democrat just reelected as secretary of state, acknowledged that the description of the early results might lead the public to wonder why the vote count continues for weeks, with a gaggle of second-place candidates then pulling into the lead.

“Can the terminology be modernized a little bit there? Yeah, I’m open to that,” he said.

Read More

Share

Former California GOP officials call on state Republicans to renounce Trump’s rhetoric and ‘nationalism metastasizing in the party’

(Jim Watson / AFP/Getty Images)

Five former political directors of the California Republican Party have called on state GOP leadership to renounce nationalist speech used by President Trump as well as candidates who embrace “messages of hatred, division and rhetoric that divides us by race.”

A letter sent Friday to the party’s board of directors blamed Trump for the GOP’s stinging losses on election day in California. It said the California GOP must return to its conservative roots to have any hope of reviving the Republican Party in the state.

“This election proved that choosing Nationalism over Conservatism is a losing proposition. President Trump’s nationalist rhetoric has alienated far more than the diverse electorate that turned out to oppose him on election night — Republicans abandoned Republicans in historic numbers as well,” the letter said. “It is our hope that you will publicly renounce the nationalism metastasizing in the party, advance the cause of conservatism and return the greatness to our Grand Old Party.”

The letter was signed by Mike Madrid, Debbie McCall, Jimmy Camp, Jarryd Gonzales and Matt Robbins, all of whom served stints as party political director since the late 1990s.

A spokesman for the California Republican Party on Saturday declined to comment on the letter.

Share
Advertisement

November’s election results will make it harder and more costly to put propositions on the California ballot

(Christina House/For The Times)

Groups seeking a change in the law or California’s Constitution will find it significantly harder — and more costly — to qualify ballot measures beginning next year, following high voter turnout for the Nov. 6 statewide election.

State law links the number of voter signatures required on an initiative or referendum to the total number of votes cast in the most recent election of a governor. The threshold for qualifying a measure was at its lowest point in decades for elections in 2016 and 2018, after record low turnout in 2014 for the reelection of Gov. Jerry Brown.

Last month’s election, however, saw more than 12.4 million votes cast in the race between Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom and Republican businessman John Cox. By law, proponents of an initiative must gather signatures equal to either 5% or 8% of the total votes cast in the gubernatorial contest — depending on whether the initiative seeks to create a statute or a constitutional amendment. A ballot referendum, which asks voters to overturn a law passed by the Legislature, requires signatures equal to 5% of the governor’s race votes.

Unofficial election tallies show initiative campaigns will need to collect 620,439 valid signatures for statutory measures appearing on the November 2020 ballot — compared to just 365,880 signatures the past two election cycles. Constitutional amendments will go from needing 585,407 valid signatures to requiring at least 992,702 signatures.

Political professionals who specialize in ballot measure campaigns may not have known exactly where the numbers would fall, but were certain that the bar would be raised and costs would go up after this election cycle. One closely watched campaign — an effort to revise the property tax rules under the 1978’s landmark Proposition 13 — intentionally sped up its ballot measure circulation campaign, collecting signatures this year under the lower threshold and thus finding an easier and cheaper path to the November 2020 ballot.

Last month’s election totals will also raise the bar for legislative review of proposed ballot measures. A 2014 state law gives the proponents of an initiative a chance for formal hearings on the proposal once they’ve gathered at least 25% of the signatures needed for final certification. Those hearings, however, do not have to be convened prior to the initiative earning a spot on the next scheduled statewide general election ballot.

Share

Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom drops hints about budget, vows not to ignore the Central Valley

Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom talks to Fresno residents Friday after holding a town hall at the Teamsters Local 431 union hall.
(Phil Willon / Los Angeles Times)

Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom spent Friday in Fresno reassuring business, agricultural and labor leaders of his commitment to the Central Valley, and dropped a few hints that his first budget will set aside more money for young children and to address contaminated drinking water in the region.

Newsom, who will take the oath of office on Jan. 7, also told a packed union hall at the Teamsters Local 431 that under his administration, California will become an assertive and aggressive voice in the nationwide debate over immigration.

Last week, Newsom visited a immigrant detention facility near the U.S.-Mexico border and accused federal officials of treating immigrants seeking asylum “like trash.”

He noted that former Republican governors, including Rick Perry of Texas and Jan Brewer of Arizona, used their political platforms to bend the national conversation on immigration toward more conservative policies. Newsom promised to be similarly vocal on immigration, but in a way that instead reflects California’s pro-immigrant values.

“I think this state has been missing in action a little bit,” Newsom told the crowd. Conservative governors “were vocal and they shaped the conversation. California was pretty silent in those conversations. We need to assert ourselves.’’

Newsom spent most of his time Friday focused on issues crucial to the Central Valley. He made no promises about the fate of the state’s high-speed rail system, but promised to conduct a detailed assessment of the management and cost of the project. But he praised the Central Valley-to-Silicon Valley leg of the rail line, saying it could prove to be a major economic benefit to both areas.

Shantay Davies-Balch, director of maternal health for the March of Dimes in the Central Valley, pressed Newsom on what he planned to do to address the heightened infant and maternal mortality rates in the region, which she said were comparable to a “third-world country.”

“I’m deep in this space and deeply committed and you will see that demonstrably reflected in my first budget that I will submit in January,” Newsom responded.

Newsom said expanding early childhood education and development, including prenatal care, will be one of the top priorities in his administration. He reminded the crowd that, during his successful gubernatorial campaign, he spent $9 million on television ads explaining why he considered it such a crucial issue.

Peter Nunez, president of the Teamsters Local 431 in Fresno, said it’s common to see state politicians in the Central Valley during campaigns, but rare for them to drop by after they win.

“We have a lot to talk about,” he said.

Share
Advertisement

California advances plan to allow home deliveries of cannabis in cities that ban pot shops

Cities and law enforcement leaders say a state proposal to allow pot delivery to homes would increase crime.
Cities and law enforcement leaders say a state proposal to allow pot delivery to homes would increase crime.
(Mathew Sumner / Associated Press)

State officials on Friday moved ahead with a plan to allow marijuana deliveries to homes throughout California, including in cities that have outlawed pot shops.

The state Bureau of Cannabis Control said it sent the proposed rules to the state’s Office of Administrative Law, which has 30 days to conduct a routine review of their legality before the regulations become final in January.

The proposed rule has been vigorously opposed by the California Police Chiefs Assn. and the League of California Cities.

“The delivery provisions contained in these regulations seek to subvert the intent of the voters who approved Proposition 64,” league Executive Director Carolyn Coleman said in a recent statement to the group’s members. “By removing local governments’ reasonable regulatory authority on cannabis deliveries, the BCC is imposing a ‘one size fits all’ form of cannabis regulation.”

In a statement in response to the criticism, the bureau said that cities can still adopt regulations on how deliveries are made, but that existing state law “provides that a local jurisdiction shall not prevent delivery of cannabis goods on public roads.”

Police chiefs have voiced concern that marijuana delivery people could become the target of robberies. The new rules prohibit delivery vehicles from carrying more than $5,000 worth of cannabis products and bans the vehicles from having any markings that indicate cannabis is being carried.

“This new restriction is intended to reduce the risk of the delivery vehicle becoming a target of theft or other crime,” the bureau said in a statement.

Share

Recount requested in Orange County state Senate district after Democrat ousts Republican

Former State Sen. Janet Nguyen (R-Garden Grove) wants a recount after her election loss.
(Marc Martin / Los Angeles Times)

Days after Democrat Tom Umberg took the oath of office as the winner of the state’s 34th Senate District seat, Orange County elections officials said Friday that Republican incumbent Janet Nguyen’s camp has asked for a partial recount of the tally in their portion of the district.

Districtwide, Umberg has 3,088 votes more than Nguyen, a Garden Grove resident, but Nguyen received two more votes than the challenger in Orange County — 118,125 for Nguyen to 118,123 for Umberg.

The district also includes part of Long Beach in Los Angeles County, which put Umberg, a former state assemblyman from Santa Ana, over the top in the Nov. 6 election.

A Westminster voter acting on behalf of Nguyen asked for a recount of 13 precincts in Santa Ana, where Umberg won roughly 80% of the vote, according to Neal Kelley, the Orange County registrar of voters.

“She is targeting precincts where she did not do well,” Kelley said.

Those requesting the recount have been asked to provide a $9,000 deposit by Sunday to cover the possible cost of a limited, machine recount of approximately 17,000 ballots, which Kelley said would take a few days to complete. If a request is made to eventually recount all votes in Orange County, the cost could be about $400,000, Kelley said.

He did not know who was paying for the recount. Representatives said neither the California Republican Party nor the Senate Republican Caucus was paying for it. Nguyen could not be reached for comment Friday.

Umberg’s victory gives Democrats a 29-vote supermajority in the 40-member Senate.

Umberg said in an interview after taking the oath of office Monday that the Democrats’ supermajority carries with it added pressure for members to achieve results in the legislative session that resumes in January.

“When you have a 29-member majority here in the Senate that brings along a great deal of responsibility, there are no excuses for not dealing with some of California’s great challenges, whether its dealing with natural disasters, whether its dealing with infrastructure, whether its dealing with public safety. It’s our responsibility now,” Umberg said.

Share
Advertisement

Gavin Newsom to mark inauguration with fundraiser for wildfire victims, ceremony outside Capitol

Gavin Newsom will be sworn in as California’s next governor in an outdoor ceremony on the steps of the Capitol next month.

New details on the Jan. 7 inauguration were released Thursday and suggest a wider range of festivities than the last, no-frills gubernatorial induction.

The day before the inauguration, Newsom and his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, will hold a children’s event at the California State Railroad Museum.

Later that evening, Newsom plans to host a fundraising concert at the Golden 1 Center in Sacramento and donate the proceeds to the California Fire Foundation, a nonprofit dedicated to the families of fallen firefighters and communities affected by the 2017 and 2018 wildfires.

The inauguration ceremony is scheduled for 11 a.m. Jan. 7 on the West Steps of the Capitol. Former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger held the last outdoor inauguration outside the Capitol in 2003.

“It will be the honor of a lifetime to take the oath of office as California governor,” said Gov.-elect Newsom. “But it seems appropriate to use this moment to unite as a state — stronger and more resilient than ever — to do whatever we can to ensure all of our fellow Californians, especially those impacted by tragic wildfire, have the opportunity to build a brighter future and pursue their dreams.”

In a much more subdued affair in 2015, Gov. Jerry Brown marked his inauguration by giving a speech in the Assembly chamber and celebrated afterward at a union-sponsored event where he ate a hot dog on the lawn. Brown attended a private reception at the Capitol and a series of parties after his swearing-in ceremony at the Sacramento Memorial Auditorium in 2011.

The inauguration will mark the start of the Newsom era in California political history. The 51-year-old governor-elect is expected to follow his predecessors and use the induction ceremony as an opportunity to lay out his progressive agenda.

Share

Civil rights attorney to join Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom’s administration

Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom has hired a civil rights attorney to head legal affairs as he continues to shape the starting roster of his new administration.

Catherine E. Lhamon currently serves as the chair of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, a position former President Obama appointed her to in 2016.

As Newsom’s in-house lawyer, a legal affairs secretary traditionally advises the governor on legislation and judicial appointments, crafts guidance for the executive branch and oversees pardons and paroles, among other duties.

Lhamon, a 47-year-old Democrat and native Californian, worked for the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California for a decade.

Newsom also confirmed Thursday that he chose Anthony Williams, a longtime Capitol staff member, to be his legislative secretary and top liaison with lawmakers.

“I pledged that my administration would reflect not only the best and brightest but the diverse talents of our state and a passion for public service and giving voice to the voiceless – and that’s exactly what Catherine and Anthony represent,” Newsom said in a statement.

The announcement provides a clearer picture of the decision-makers who will lead the Newsom administration.

Newsom previously tapped Ann O’Leary, a longtime policy advisor to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, as his chief of staff, and Ana Matosantos, a Sacramento policy and budget consultant, as Cabinet secretary.

Share
Advertisement

Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom to hire veteran Capitol staffer as legislative secretary

California Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom is expected to hire a seasoned legislative staffer as his top liaison with the Legislature.

Anthony Williams will serve as Newsom’s legislative secretary, according to sources close to the transition. The move brings Williams, a director of government relations for Boeing Co., back on the state payroll.

Williams was previously policy director and special counsel to former California Senate Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg before going to work for Boeing. He also served as principal consultant to former Senate Pro Tem John Burton.

Legislative secretaries are responsible for working with lawmakers to impose the governor’s will on legislation. Many expected Newsom to hire a veteran Capitol insider like Williams for the job.

Jennifer Wada, Williams’ former partner at a lobbying firm they started in 2007, called him a “perfect fit” to carry out Newsom’s agenda.

“His policy smarts combined with his political savvy will be of great value to the administration, especially at this critical time in California and the nation’s history,” Wada said.

Williams studied political science at UC Davis, received a master’s degree in public policy from Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government and later attended law school at the University of the Pacific’s McGeorge School of Law.

He holds an ownership stake in the Diplomat Steakhouse, a restaurant that opened next to the Capitol in April.

Williams did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

A spokesman for Newsom declined to comment.

Share

How Northern California’s destructive wildfires could exacerbate the state’s housing crisis

Northern California’s recent wildfires have burned homes at a greater pace than developers are building them, deepening a housing shortage that already has left millions struggling to find affordable places to live.

Five large wildfires over the past 14 months, with November’s Camp fire the most devastating, have destroyed nearly 21,000 homes across six counties. That total is equivalent to more than 85% of all the new housing built in those counties over the past decade, according to Construction Industry Research Board building permit statistics.

“We had a housing crisis prior to the fires,” said Bob Raymer, a senior engineer with the California Building Industry Assn. “This only exacerbated the crisis. I can’t even put a measure on it. Just wow.”

Read More

Share
Advertisement

New proposal would allow California to issue bonds for wildfire prevention efforts

A new bill would allow the state to issue bonds and borrow money from investors to finance projects that reduce wildfire risks in California.

State Sen. Benjamin Allen (D-Santa Monica) introduced the Wildfire, Drought and Flood Protection Bond Act of 2020 as another tool the state can use to offset a pattern of increasingly destructive and deadly blazes.

“This year’s deadly wildfires, on the heels of last year’s catastrophic events and a devastating multi-year drought, clearly demonstrate that the impacts of climate change are here now and we need to be prepared,” Allen said in a statement. “This legislation sets a course to reduce the impacts of rising global temperatures and invest in necessary measures to protect communities.”

Senate Bill 45 gives the state’s director of finance, treasurer and controller the ability to authorize the sale of general obligation bonds to pay for a wide range of projects to retrofit buildings, improve the 911 emergency alert system and restore and protect habitats affected by climate change and wildfires, among other tasks outlined in the bill.

If approved by two-thirds of the California Legislature, the proposal would require voter approval and appear on the 2020 ballot.

Under the bond structure, the state borrows money from investors and pays it back with interest. The total dollar amount of the bond has not yet been determined and is subject to negotiation between the Senate, Assembly and incoming governor’s office.

Voters approved a $4-billion parks bond on the June ballot and another $7.5 billion split across three bond measures to fund housing projects, homelessness prevention and children’s hospitals in November.

Share

Sales taxes on diapers and tampons would be eliminated under revived proposals from California lawmakers

After years of trying, two California lawmakers are once again attempting to eliminate sales taxes on diapers and tampons.

Democratic Assemblywomen Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher of San Diego and Cristina Garcia of Bell Gardens have reintroduced bills to exempt purchasers from paying sales tax on the products.

“Every baby needs diapers,” Gonzalez Fletcher said in a statement about Assembly Bill 66. “The fact that we tax diapers is unfair and it’s a burdensome tax that hurts working class and middle class families.”

In 2016, Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed similar efforts from both lawmakers, citing their costs to state and local governments, which were estimated at the time to total around $55 million annually. The pair tried again by pitching tax increases on candy or alcohol to pay for the diaper and tampon sales tax exemptions, but those proposals also failed.

The new measures call for straight repeals of sales taxes on both products without increasing revenue. Garcia said in a statement she’s already spoken with Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom about her proposal, Assembly Bill 31.

“I’m hopeful that Gov.-elect Newsom’s sense of equality will prevail over his predecessor’s,” Garcia said.

Share
Advertisement

Legislators will consider abolishing California’s scandal-plagued tax agency

The Capitol building in Sacramento.
The Capitol building in Sacramento.
(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)

California’s elected tax collection board was troubled by allegations of botched handling of funds, excessive spending on furniture and nepotism before it was stripped of many of its duties last year by Gov. Jerry Brown and the Legislature.

Now, one lawmaker wants to abolish the state Board of Equalization, and shift its remaining duties to an agency of civil service employees.

Assemblyman Adrin Nazarian (D-North Hollywood) introduced legislation on Monday that would ask California voters in 2020 to amend the state Constitution to eliminate the elected board, which was created in 1879.

“The Board of Equalization is a redundant, scandal-plagued office that can be eliminated to save taxpayer’s money and re-direct resources to strengthen the middle class,” Nazarian said Tuesday.

The board is made up of four members elected by districts and who are each paid $151,260 annually, with the state controller serving as a fifth member.

As the only elected tax board in the country, the panel was, until last year, responsible for collecting $60 billion in taxes annually for the state.

But state investigators criticized the board for putting $350 million in sales taxes in the wrong accounts and improperly interfering with decisions to open field offices and transfer staff, some of whom were assigned to duties that promoted the elected officials.

An investigation by the state Personnel Board found the agency suffered from widespread nepotism, with 835 employees, or 17.5% of the office’s workforce, related by blood, adoption or marriage, with several instances of employees living together.

Former Board Chairman Jerome Horton faced criticism in 2016 after the Sacramento Bee reported $118,000 was spent on designer furniture for his office.

Amid various controversies, the governor signed a bill in June 2017 that reduced the state board from 4,800 workers to just 400 employees, transferring most employees to a new California Department of Tax and Fee Administration that collects sales and excise taxes.

The change removed the board’s role of hearing taxpayer appeals and provided it with the narrower job of setting rates for gas taxes and pipeline levies; making sure counties fairly assess property taxes and helping taxpayers with problems.

This year, the board has a budget of $29 million and a staff of 195 people.

Share

California lawmakers pitch substantial new spending on low-income housing

A bicyclist passes by construction in downtown Los Angeles.
(Christina House / For The Times)

Low-income housing developments in California could receive a continued infusion of public subsidies under proposals unveiled this week by state lawmakers.

Multiple new bills call for new funding for low-income housing through a revival of an urban redevelopment program and by increasing tax credits to fund new projects. Legislators have failed to pass versions of the same measures in years past, but have new hopes because Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom campaigned on spending more money on housing. They also point out the state budget’s bottom line remains strong.

“Our housing crisis is dire and persistent, and our state must be just as aggressive and persistent in order to solve it,” Assemblyman David Chiu (D-San Francisco) said in a statement. “With a new governor and an extraordinary budget surplus, now is the time to make significant, ongoing investments in affordable housing.”

Chiu’s Assembly Bill 10 would increase the state’s allocation of low-income housing tax credits by $500 million — a fivefold increase over the current limit and the figure that Newsom proposed during his gubernatorial campaign. The system allows housing developers to apply to the state for credits that investors buy to lower their own tax payments. Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed an attempt to boost the tax credit in 2015, citing costs to the state budget.

Assembly Bill 11, also from Chiu, would reinstitute a system that allowed cities and counties to sequester property tax dollars generated from growth in designated neighborhoods to use for economic development and affordable housing. Brown spearheaded the elimination of the prior program, known as redevelopment, amid the depths of the state budget crisis in 2011. Chiu’s new bill would require 30% of the money to be set aside for low-income housing projects.

Similar legislation from state Sen. James Beall Jr. (D-San Jose) would set aside up to $200 million a year in property tax dollars for low-income housing.

“Today, we have an opportunity to establish a renewed partnership between the state and cities, with strict accountability measures, to ensure more affordable housing gets built,” Beall said in a statement announcing Senate Bill 5.

Newsom also campaigned on resurrecting a housing financing program similar to redevelopment.

The proposals come after the Legislature and California voters recently approved significant new housing funding. In 2017, lawmakers created a $75 fee on mortgage refinancing and other real estate transactions to generate about $250 million a year to finance housing developments. Last month, voters approved $6 billion in bond funding to help build low-income and homeless housing.

Share
Advertisement

Proposed ballot measure would cut California’s inherited property tax breaks

California law gives children who inherit their parents’ homes a tax break that keeps their property taxes low — even if the heirs don’t live there.

The provision, as detailed in an August Los Angeles Times investigation, has allowed celebrities, out-of-state professionals and other wealthy heirs to collect large sums in rental income from their parents’ homes while paying small property tax bills. But under a new plan from a Bay Area lawmaker, that benefit would come to an end.

Sen. Jerry Hill (D-San Mateo) is introducing a ballot measure to require children who receive the state’s property inheritance tax break to live in their parents’ homes. Doing so would rein in what Hill called “abuses” of a policy established more than three decades ago designed to help children retain ownership of family property.

Read More

Share

California legislator revives bill to boost apartment complexes near transit

A California state senator has revived a major effort to boost homebuilding near transit, a proposal he says is necessary to address the state’s housing affordability and climate change challenges that have only deepened since his initial bill failed earlier this year.

Under the new proposal from Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), developers would be allowed to build four- to five-story apartment complexes in neighborhoods surrounding Los Angeles Metro stations, Bay Area Rapid Transit and other rail stops around the state. The legislation would also ease some local restrictions on building homes near frequently used bus stops.

Wiener’s bill follows a similar attempt in the last legislative session that sparked fierce debate over how far the state should impinge on local authority to shape community development amid a housing shortage that’s been estimated in the millions. The previous attempt died in a legislative committee after outcry from local governments, labor groups and advocates for low-income residents.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Proposal to require abortion pills at college health centers returns to California Legislature

A California state legislator is reviving an effort to require public universities to provide abortion pills on college campuses after Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed a similar measure earlier this year.

Sen. Connie Leyva (D-Chino) said she believes the proposal has a better shot at becoming law next year under Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom, who publicly supported the idea on the campaign trail.

“I would have reintroduced it even if we still had Gov. Brown [in office] because I think the issue is that important,” Leyva said. “Women should always have access to abortion. That’s their constitutional protected right and it’s woman’s choice.”

Leyva’s Senate Bill 24 requires campus health centers to provide students with abortion pills, a method of terminating a pregnancy up to 10 weeks after conception, beginning in 2023. The Democratic lawmaker has argued since 2017 that some campuses are long distances from Planned Parenthood clinics or other healthcare facilities that provide abortion medication.

Brown vetoed a similar iteration of the proposal last year, calling it unnecessary.

“According to a study sponsored by supporters of this legislation, the average distance to abortion providers in campus communities varies from five to seven miles, not an unreasonable distance,” the governor wrote in his veto message.

Leyva said Monday that Brown got it wrong.

“There are so many campuses where the pill is not close by and even within a mile or two or three, women don’t always have transportation,” she said.

“He’s a guy,” Levya added. “He doesn’t know what it’s like to be pregnant and make that decision.”

Share

With bail overhaul in limbo, California lawmaker wants to prevent ‘machine bias’ in deciding which defendants are released

State Sen. Bob Hertzberg (D-Van Nuys), right, and Assemblyman Rob Bonta (D-Oakland) co-wrote legislation to end money bail.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

With California’s move to end the cash bail system in limbo, Sen. Bob Hertzberg (D-Van Nuys) says he is looking for other ways to ensure courts are fair in determining whether criminal defendants are fit for release before trial.

On the first day of the 2019 legislative session, Hertzberg introduced a bill that would require the state to collect data and evaluate any so-called “risk assessment tools” already employed by as many as 49 counties across the state. The tools, or tech analyses, are used to evaluate people who have been arrested to determine whether, and under what conditions, they should be released.

But judges and court officials can insert data into the systems that can lead the software to draw improper, biased conclusions if not properly monitored, advocates say. Hertzberg’s new proposal, Senate Bill 36, would require counties to report how they use the systems in an attempt to prevent that from happening.

It comes after the historic bail overhaul legislation he co-wrote with Assemblyman Rob Bonta (D-Oakland) could be put on hold, as the bail industry has submitted more than enough signatures required for a statewide referendum on the law in 2020.

The new law signed by Gov. Jerry Brown in August would require all counties to establish their own pretrial services agencies and use risk assessment tools. But criminal justice and civil rights groups argued the legislation provided little oversight to guard against “machine bias.” It was to go into effect in 2019.

Share
Advertisement

California lawmakers denounce Trump administration proposal to restrict green cards

Assemblyman David Chiu (D-San Francisco) condemns a federal proposal to restrict green cards for immigrants in need of public services.
(Jazmine Ulloa/Los Angeles Times)

California lawmakers on Monday denounced a federal proposal that would restrict green cards for those likely to receive public assistance, calling it a “xenophobic,” “classist” and “racist” plan to target the state’s most vulnerable immigrant families.

Immigrants who rely on public benefits for food, housing and medical care could be denied green cards under the new rules put forth this fall by the Trump administration in an attempt to limit family-based “chain migration.” The proposal was part of wider efforts by the Trump administration to further restrict legal immigration.

“Trump’s latest anti-immigrant move shows again how heartless and un-American this administration has been; a move that forces immigrant families to make impossible choices,” said Assemblyman David Chiu (D-San Francisco), chairman of the Asian Pacific Islander Legislative Caucus.

It’s unclear how many people the proposal could affect in California, a state that is home to roughly 2.3 million people in the country illegally. But news of the so-called “public charge rule” has already led immigrants to leave Medi-Cal; the state’s food stamp program, CalFresh; and the Women, Infants and Children nutrition assistance program, advocates said.

Roughly 1.4 million Asian Pacific Islander immigrants alone are among the families that use Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, according to state officials.

Members of the Asian Pacific Islander, Latino and Jewish legislative caucuses on Monday planned to introduce a resolution to condemn the federal rule and are urging residents to oppose it during the public comment period through Dec. 10.

Share

State senator wants to eliminate California Constitution obstacle to low-income housing

State Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica)
(Kirk McKoy / Los Angeles Times)

A Los Angeles-area lawmaker is proposing a 2020 ballot measure that would remove from the California Constitution a provision that makes it harder to build low-income housing.

Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica) wants to eliminate Article 34 of the state Constitution, which requires a citywide public vote before new low-income housing projects that receive public funding are built. The provision was added to the Constitution through a ballot initiative in 1950, and Allen said it was a relic in need of repeal.

“The fact that this particular type of housing was subject to this additional requirement really does look pretty nefarious,” Allen said. “I think it’s reflective of old-school values that we’ve moved past.”

Over the years, legal interpretations of Article 34 and court rulings have allowed some cities and counties to work around its provisions, including seeking voter approval for a specific number of low-income housing units without immediately identifying their location. For instance, the city of Los Angeles passed its most recent Article 34-compliant ballot measure in 2008 to ease the public financing of 52,000 low-income homes.

Despite these workarounds, complying with Article 34 can add between $10,000 and $80,000 to the cost of building a low-income home, according to the California Department of Housing and Community Development.

The city of Los Angeles is one of the principal supporters of Allen’s ballot measure. Mayor Eric Garcetti said the repeal of Article 34 would help eliminate housing discrimination from the state Constitution.

“L.A. fought for — and won — billions of new affordable housing dollars in the last three years, but Article 34 inflicts unnecessary and costly burdens on cities, delaying the construction of housing in the communities we need it most,” he said in a statement.

Allen’s bill requires the approval of two-thirds of both houses of the Legislature for it to be placed on the March or November 2020 ballot.

For the record, 5:46 p.m.: An earlier version of this post said the governor must sign a constitutional amendment for it to appear on the ballot. He does not.

Share
Advertisement

California’s new Legislature will look a lot like the old one — and that’s just what voters ordered

A political transformation of the California Legislature takes an important leap forward this week, one that feels a little like a blast from the past: The era of long-tenured lawmakers is back.

When 120 legislators take the oath of office on Monday for a new two-year session, there will be fewer incoming members among their ranks than after any election since 1988. The change is most obvious in the Assembly, where only eight new lawmakers will be sworn in — compared with 26 newcomers in 2016. And it’s just what voters ordered when they loosened legislative term limits six years ago.

The original term limits were enacted in 1990 as backers of Proposition 140 accused “career politicians” in their statewide ballot argument of having “cozy relationships with special interests.” What voters created that November was, at the time, one of the nation’s strictest policies on legislative service. A lawmaker could serve no more than six years in the Assembly or eight in the Senate — 14 years of total time in elected office if choosing to switch from one chamber to the other.

Read More

Share

Capitol veteran Erika Contreras to become top executive in California Senate

The new state Legislative session will see a change in the upper house’s top executive position, with Capitol veteran Erika Contreras nominated Friday to become secretary of the state Senate.

Contreras has been the chief of staff for Sen. Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens) since 2010 and fills a post being vacated at the end of December by Daniel Alvarez, who is retiring after more than 32 years in state government.

“Erika is deeply familiar with the inner workings of the Senate and has a profound appreciation for our traditions,” said Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins (D-San Diego), who introduced a resolution expected to be approved next week by the Senate. “I’m confident she has the skills and temperament to guide this chamber into the future.”

The secretary of the Senate is the chief parliamentarian and keeper of legislative records, overseeing the drafting of bills and their presentation to the governor. The post is also the top executive officer of the Senate, in charge of a staff of 150 people and the day-to-day administration of the house.

Contreras, who graduated from UC Santa Barbara, was born in Aguascalientes, Mexico, and raised in the San Fernando Valley, according to Atkins’ office. Her family was granted legal residency following the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, and she later earned her citizenship.

Share
Advertisement

California housing crisis podcast: what mayors can do about homelessness

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti
(Marcus Yam / Los Angeles Times)

In the past few years, homeless populations across California have risen dramatically and nowhere more so than in the state’s largest cities.

On this episode of “Gimme Shelter: The California Housing Crisis Podcast,” we play excerpts from a forum held earlier this month with big city mayors talking about how they’re addressing the issue and what else needs to be done. On the panel, which was moderated by CALMatters’ Laurel Rosenhall, was Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer, Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf and Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg.

We also talk to former Houston Mayor Annise Parker about her widely praised efforts to reduce homelessness in her city during her tenure and how Houston’s different laws for home building — the city has no zoning rules — affects housing affordability there.

Gimme Shelter,” a biweekly podcast that looks at why it’s so expensive to live in California and what the state can do about it, features Liam Dillon, who covers housing affordability issues for the Los Angeles Times’ Sacramento bureau, and Matt Levin, data and housing reporter for CALmatters.

You can subscribe to “Gimme Shelter” on iTunes, Stitcher, Soundcloud, Google Play and Overcast.

Share

California paves way for possible petition drive for initiative that would cancel bullet train

The group behind the failed gas-tax repeal effort was given state approval Thursday to begin collecting signatures for a new initiative to cancel the high-speed rail project and revamp state transportation funding.

The initiative was proposed by former San Diego City Council member and radio host Carl DeMaio before the November election as an answer to opponents of Proposition 6, which would have repealed an increase in the state gas tax but was rejected by voters.

The new initiative would shift about $10 billion in state revenues from state and local non-transportation programs to local transportation funds, resulting in potential deep cuts to general fund revenue used for other state services, according to an analysis released Thursday by state Legislative Analyst Mac Taylor.

The initiative would also end funding for the bullet train project, cutting off tens of billions of dollars needed to complete the high-speed rail system, Taylor said.

DeMaio said his coalition was still discussing options, including a petition drive to qualify the proposal for the 2020 ballot.

The title and summary for the initiative were issued Thursday by the state attorney general’s office, drawing a complaint from DeMaio that the title is “misleading.”

The title that would be on petitions if they are circulated would be “Removes responsibility and funding for state highway construction and maintenance from state. Transfers such responsibility and funding to individual, local governments. Ends state high speed rail project.”

“The primary purpose of our initiative is to lockbox 100% of the gas tax to road repairs, but that has been explicitly removed from the title,” DeMaio said.

DeMaio previously said the title for Proposition 6 was misleading

Share
Advertisement

California lawmakers propose ban on sale of flavored tobacco products, including those used in e-cigarettes

California lawmakers are proposing to ban the sale of flavored tobacco products including those used in electronic cigarettes.
(Nam Y. Huh / Associated Press)

Six California legislators proposed Thursday to ban the sale of flavored tobacco products — including those used in electronic cigarettes — in retail stores and vending machines in the state, citing concern over a steep increase in nicotine use among youths.

The lawmakers said they would introduce such a measure when the Legislature convenes next week, and that it would also impose age verification requirements for online sales of tobacco products.

“We must stop the appalling epidemic of e-cigarette use by youths,” said Sen. Jerry Hill (D-San Mateo), who is co-authoring the bill with others including Democratic Sens. Anthony Portantino of La Cañada Flintridge and Connie Leyva of Chino.

“Enticed by fruit, candy and other appealing flavors, high school and middle school students throughout the U.S. are vaping in record numbers,” Hill added.

The measure would also ban retail sales of menthol cigarettes.

The proposal comes a few days after the e-cigarette company Juul announced it would phase out some of its flavors and put in place tougher age restrictions. Juul was under pressure from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which had directed it to provide evidence that its products were not being marketed to underage consumers.

The California lawmakers voiced alarm about a large increase in e-cigarette use by minors as detailed in a report this month by the FDA and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The report said some 3.6 million middle and high school students are using e-cigarettes, a 78% increase from the year before among high school students and a 48% jump by middle school students.

The proposal drew concerns Thursday from Gregory Conley, president of the American Vaping Assn., a nonprofit group that advocates for what it calls sensible regulation.

“While decreasing youth usage of all nicotine products is a sound goal, such measures should not come at the expense of the health and lives of adult smokers,” Conley said. “Multiple studies have shown that flavors in smoke-free nicotine products are critical to helping smokers quit.”

The proposed legislation is supported by groups including the American Heart Assn., the American Lung Assn. in California and the American Cancer Society Action Network.

“Menthol, candy and fruit flavored tobacco products are a key part of the tobacco industry’s strategy to bait youth into becoming tomorrow’s addicts,” said Tim Gibbs, a leader of the action network.

Share

Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom calls for California Democratic Party chairman to resign over sexual misconduct allegations

Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom
Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom is calling for the chairman of the California Democratic Party to resign in light of “very serious” sexual harassment allegations against him.

Newsom requested that Eric Bauman step down one day after The Times reported that 10 party staff members and political activists said the chairman made crude sexual comments and engaged in unwanted touching or physical intimidation. In response to the story, Bauman said he planned to seek treatment for health issues and alcohol use.

“Sexual harassment shouldn’t be tolerated — no person or party, no matter how powerful, is above accountability,” Nathan Click, a spokesman for Newsom, said on Thursday. “The governor-elect believes the investigation should move forward and the victims should be heard. But given the numerous detailed, severe and corroborated allegations reported by The Times, he believes the best course of action for the party is for the chair to resign.”

State Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) also called for Bauman to step down.

“In light of the volume and severity of the allegations, it is in the best interest of the Democratic Party for Eric Bauman to resign,” Atkins said in a statement. “The most important thing right now is that the victims receive the support and counseling that they need.”

A spokesman for Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon (D-Lakewood) said he would call for Bauman to resign if an investigation by the state party confirms the allegations.

“While the speaker is very concerned about the allegations against Mr. Bauman, he believes that due process is an important part of any investigation,” said John Casey, a spokesman for Rendon.

Daraka Larimore-Hall, a vice chairman of the state party, initially called for Bauman to resign last week after speaking with those who had allegations against the party leader. Bauman took a leave of absence Monday as the party investigates the claims. Alexandra “Alex” Gallardo Rooker, one of the state party’s co-chairs, temporarily took over Bauman’s duties.

Share
Advertisement

As California Republicans confront a congressional wipeout, GOP leader Kevin McCarthy faces a reckoning

When the House voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act, Kevin McCarthy trooped with other Republican lawmakers to a splashy Rose Garden celebration, smiling alongside President Trump as they celebrated the moment.

As majority leader, McCarthy had helped round up the votes to narrowly pass the hard-fought legislation, convincing 13 other California Republicans to go along, even though several faced tough reelection fights.

Fewer than half will be returning in January.

Read More

Share

Assemblywoman Cristina Garcia faces ‘remedial action’ for violating sexual harassment policy, officials say

(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

Assemblywoman Cristina Garcia (D-Bell Gardens) was “overly familiar” with a state employee during a 2014 legislative softball game, in violation of the Assembly’s sexual harassment policy, according to an investigative report made public Wednesday.

Other allegations made by Assembly aide Daniel Fierro, including accusations that Garcia touched his genitals and that she retaliated against him after he sought a consultant contract with a school district, were not substantiated by the investigation.

Investigators found “the preponderance of the evidence supported a finding that Assemblymember Cristina Garcia, while in a state of inebriation, encountered Mr. Fierro in the dugout of the 2014 legislative softball game, grabbed his arm for support, put her hand on his back, and was overly familiar with him in a way that she would not have been had she been sober,” said a letter from John T. Kennedy, a private attorney whose law firm represented the Assembly during the investigation.

The investigation was conducted by private attorney Amy Oppenheimer.

“However, a preponderance of the evidence did not support findings that Assemblymember Cristina Garcia touched Mr. Fierro on his buttock or genitals, or that this was a sexual encounter,” Kennedy added.

As a result of the findings, he added, “appropriate remedial action designed to prevent future similar conduct by Assemblymember Cristina Garcia will be imposed.”

Earlier this month, the state rejected a $1-million legal claim for damages by Fierro that alleged Garcia retaliated against him for accusing her of harassment. A legal claim is required to be submitted before a lawsuit can be filed against the state.

“It’s appalling that the Assembly would take it upon itself to substantiate the substance of the complaint and then decide for itself what is sexual in nature and what is not,” Fierro said Wednesday. “This is a blow to victims’ rights.”

The latest findings are a follow-up to an initial investigation that concluded Garcia had “commonly and pervasively” used vulgar language. The original investigation also found Garcia asked staff to run personal errands and that she had “disparaged other elected officials.”

The new report was issued after additional witnesses were interviewed.

Garcia, who before Fierro’s allegations was a leader of the #MeToo movement in Sacramento against sexual harassment, issued a statement Wednesday that said she is “pleased” that the investigation has concluded, though she disagrees with the previous findings that led to her being removed from legislative committees.

“I again apologize if language I used in the past made anyone feel uncomfortable,” Garcia said. “I look forward to continuing to serve my constituents as an advocate for good government, environmental justice, and on women’s issues.”

Garcia was reelected Nov. 6 to her fourth, two-year term, receiving 70% of the vote after a challenge from Republican Mike Simpfenderfer.

She is one of several state officials to be caught up in allegations of sexual misconduct in the last year, with resignations submitted by Democratic Assemblymen Raul Bocanegra and Matt Dababneh and state Sen. Tony Mendoza.

With the Legislature set to begin the new session Monday, it remains unclear whether Garcia will be able to resume her membership in Assembly committees from which she was temporarily removed by Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon earlier this year.

“It has not yet been determined what action will be taken in regard to her committee assignments,” Kevin Liao, a spokesman for Rendon, said on Friday.

Members who are removed from committees are relegated to voting on bills when they come to the floor.

As for the “remedial action” ordered this week in a letter from Rendon, Liao noted that when an initial investigation was concluded in May, the Speaker required Garcia to complete sensitivity training conducted by an outside expert, participate in sessions with an employee assistance program counselor and receive individual training on the Assembly’s existing sexual harassment and violence prevention policy.

“The letter this week says additional remedial action may be taken; those exact actions have not been determined,” Liao added.

Nov. 29, 2:59 p.m.: This article was updated with information about a claim for damages by Oscar Fierro.

This article was originally published Nov. 28 at 9:17 p.m. It was updated on Nov. 30 at 4 pm to provide more information on Garcia’s future following her re-election.

-------

FOR THE RECORD

Nov. 29, 2:39 p.m.: A previous version of this article said that the investigation was conducted by John T. Kennedy’s law firm. That firm represented the Assembly in the case, but the investigation was conducted by private attorney Amy Oppenheimer.

-------

Share
Advertisement

New California gun tax proposed following Borderline Bar and Grill rampage

The night of the mass shooting at Borderline Bar and Grill in Thousand Oaks.
(Mike Baker / For The Times)

Three weeks after a mass shooting killed 12 people at a Thousand Oaks bar, a state lawmaker on Wednesday proposed a new gun tax to fund violence prevention programs in California.

Assemblyman Marc Levine (D-San Rafael) said he would introduce a bill to tax the sale of semiautomatic firearms, such as the .45-caliber Glock handgun used Nov. 7 in the deadly shooting at the Borderline Bar and Grill.

Levine cited the Thousand Oaks shooting this month and another last month that killed 11 people at a Pittsburgh synagogue as recent examples of gun violence that require more action, but said he had been trying to reduce shootings for years.

“The goal is fewer gun deaths,” Levine said. “The gun tax will support the kind of interventions that make gun violence less likely in the first place, which is exactly what we need to do.”

The proposal was criticized by Craig J. DeLuz, a spokesman for the Firearms Policy Coalition, which often opposes gun control laws.

“Taxing firearms is akin to a poll tax,” DeLuz said. “It’s fundamentally wrong to tax civil rights just because they are disfavored.”

Levine has not decided how large a tax to seek, but if California charges $25 in tax on each purchase as other jurisdictions have done, it could raise more than $5 million annually for the California Violence Intervention and Prevention Program.

About 900,000 firearms were purchased in California annually in recent years and the vast majority would be subject to the tax. Levine would exclude hunting rifles.

Last year, the program awarded about $8 million in grants to communities hit by gun violence for prevention programs.

California already has some of the toughest gun control laws in the country, including a Levine measure approved in 2016 that expanded a ban on assault rifles to include semiautomatic guns that have “bullet buttons” that allow quick removal and replacement of ammunition magazines.

Share

PG&E offers state little explanation about why it didn’t shut off power before Paradise wildfire

A Pacific Gas & Electric worker replaces a power pole after a 2017 wildfire in Glen Ellen, Calif.
A Pacific Gas & Electric worker replaces a power pole after a 2017 wildfire in Glen Ellen, Calif.
(Ben Margot / Associated Press)

In a report filed with state regulators Tuesday, Pacific Gas & Electric Co. offered little explanation about why it failed to shut off power in Butte County before the deadliest wildfire in California history.

The utility giant, under pressure to stop its power lines from sparking wildfires, adopted a plan this fall to turn off power during high-risk weather conditions. Days before the Camp fire killed at least 88 people, PG&E warned customers that it might cut electricity in Paradise and other fire-prone areas of the Sierra foothills on Nov. 8. But the company ultimately canceled plans for the shut-off.

“The forecasted conditions didn’t meet the criteria to initiate a public safety power shutoff,” said James Noonan, a spokesman for PG&E.

The California Public Utilities Commission requires utilities to file reports 10 days after customers are warned about or experience planned shut-offs. But a resolution adopted by the agency suggests a utility is only required to provide an explanation if it cuts power.

The commission did not respond to questions about the policy Tuesday.

The cause of the fire remains under investigation and it’s unclear whether a planned outage would have prevented the devastation. PG&E reported problems with a high-voltage transmission line and a less-powerful circuit shortly before and after the fire started.

PG&E’s 14-page report says it began sending shut-off warnings on Nov. 6 to 70,000 customers located in nine counties, including Butte, “where the forecasted weather and wildfire potential indicated a high likelihood of impacts to the company’s equipment and facilities.”

The company said it adjusted the warning to about 63,000 customers in eight counties on Nov. 7 because weather conditions “were nearing but not reaching forecasted levels that would warrant temporarily turning off power for customer safety.”

PG&E did not offer any further explanation in the report for its lack of action overnight on Nov. 7 or early Nov. 8. A weather station near Paradise clocked wind gusts of 52 mph hours before the fire was reported at 6:29 a.m.

Hours after the fire began, winds decreased and conditions no longer met the company’s criteria for a shut-off by 1 p.m. on Nov. 8, PG&E said in the report.

“Based on the forecasted information, PG&E no longer anticipated a possible need to de-energize,” the report states. “PG&E immediately informed all stakeholders of the change in conditions and that no lines would be proactively de-energized.”

The commission is expected to review the report and determine whether an investigation is warranted.

In other questions about PG&E’s actions, a federal judge on Tuesday asked the company to explain its role in the Camp fire and whether the utility may have violated the terms of its criminal probation from the San Bruno, Calif., pipeline blast.

Nearly two years ago, a U.S. District Court judge sentenced PG&E to probation and ordered the company to pay a $3-million fine after an underground pipeline burst in the San Francisco Bay Area city and killed eight residents. As part of the probation, PG&E was barred from committing any local, state or federal crimes.

A judge issued a new order Tuesday giving PG&E and an independent monitor until the end of the year to explain its involvement in the Camp fire and other California wildfires since early 2017.

Share
Advertisement

Gov. Jerry Brown asks California Supreme Court to keep pardon records sealed

Gov. Jerry Brown has asked the Supreme Court to keep a seal on records involving the pardon of former state Sen. Roderick Wright.
( (Steve Yeater / Associated Press))

Gov. Jerry Brown has asked the California Supreme Court to keep records sealed that involve his pardon of former state Sen. Roderick Wright, arguing confidentiality is consistent with historic practice and is supported by state law.

A court filing was submitted late Monday by Peter A. Krause, the governor’s legal secretary, after the nonpartisan First Amendment Coalition last week petitioned the court to unseal records filed by the governor’s office, including a review of the pardon application and letters that supported clemency for Wright.

“Courts have repeatedly recognized an executive privilege that protects the governor’s decision-making process from public scrutiny,” the filing says.

Krause said confidentiality is particularly important for clemency application records “which contain highly sensitive, and potentially embarrassing materials” about the applicant as well as candid views of victims and prosecutors.

Making records public would have a “chilling effect” on the willingness of witnesses to participate, Krause said in the filing.

The coalition’s executive director, David Snyder, asked the court last week to unseal the Wright records and those for all pardon cases considered by the governor.

“We believe the state and federal constitution prohibit this practice — and there is an intense public interest in seeing these records, in particular as they pertain to an elected official convicted of serious felonies,” Snyder said.

On Wednesday, Brown pardoned Wright, who resigned in 2014 after being convicted of felony charges including perjury and voter fraud for lying about living in his legislative district.

In his pardon of Wright, Brown wrote: “He has shown that since his release from custody, he has lived an honest and upright life, exhibited good moral character, and conducted himself as a law abiding citizen.”

Brown’s office released a letter to the court giving the rationale for a pardon, but declined to make available investigative reports on Wright’s application or letters of support from the public.

The court responded to the coalition’s formal request with a letter to Krause asking him to identify which records the governor wanted to keep sealed and “all authorities relied upon for any claim of confidentiality, with an explanation of how these authorities justify withholding public access.”

The letter to Krause was signed by Jorge E. Navarrete, the court clerk.

Share

California falling short on climate change goals because driving is increasing, report finds

A mixed-use project on Wilshire Boulevard.
A mixed-use project on Wilshire Boulevard.
(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

California is failing to meet its goals to reduce vehicle travel, imperiling efforts to achieve ambitious greenhouse gas reduction targets, according to a state report released Monday.

The report by the California Air Resources Board, the state’s climate change regulator, found that carbon emissions per capita from vehicle travel in California were increasing. That’s despite a decade-old law that required regions across the state to plan for housing growth so that people could live closer to where they work or public transit and reduce their time on the state’s roadways.

“California — at the state, regional and local levels — has not yet gone far enough in making the systemic and structural changes to how we build and invest in communities that are needed to meet state climate goals,” the report said.

The state’s inability to curb the amount of driving puts it at risk of failing to meet overall climate change goals. The state hit its 2020 goal for reducing emissions below 1990 levels four years in advance largely because of major improvements to the electricity grid. But climate regulators warned that the state’s goal to cut emissions 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 won’t be met without a major turnaround in the transportation sector.

Dramatically increasing the amount of electric vehicles on the road will not solve the problem, the report said. Even if new car sales of zero-emission vehicles increase nearly tenfold from today, the state would still need to reduce vehicle miles traveled per capita by 25% to meet the 2030 goal.

“California will not achieve the necessary greenhouse gas emissions reductions to meet mandates for 2030 and beyond without significant changes to how communities and transportation systems are planned, funded and built,” the report said.

Such changes will not be simple. This year, state lawmakers rejected a bill that would have allowed for the construction of more apartment complexes and other higher-density housing near transit stops across the state. The bill sparked a fierce debate over the state taking a bigger role in development decisions that have largely been controlled by cities and counties.

Climate regulators recommended in the report that the state create a new inter-agency body made up of state, regional and local elected officials to determine how to plan communities in ways that would help meet emission reduction targets.

Share
Advertisement

California Democratic Party chairman takes leave of absence following sexual misconduct allegations

California Democratic Party Chairman Eric Bauman.
(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

The California Democratic Party announced on Monday that its chairman, Eric Bauman, would take a leave of absence while he is investigated for unspecified allegations of sexual misconduct.

The leave begins immediately and will continue until the conclusion of an inquiry by an outside counsel, party spokesman Mike Roth said in a statement released Monday evening.

“Chair Bauman believes this decision is the best way to ensure the independence and integrity of the process,” Roth said of the party’s leader, who is from Los Angeles. “The party is confident that the procedures in place will allow for all parties to come forward freely and provide for a thorough and complete review.”

Last week, Daraka Larimore-Hall, a vice chairman of the state party, sent a letter to California Democratic Party leadership calling for Bauman’s removal. Larimore-Hall said he did so after speaking to two alleged victims and that their stories “illustrate a clear and escalating pattern of Chairman Bauman’s horrific and dehumanizing behavior.”

Alexandra “Alex” Gallardo Rooker, one of the state party’s co-chairs, will assume Bauman’s duties in his absence, Roth said.

Share

‘Epidemic’ of car break-ins prompts California bill to assist prosecutions

A wave of car break-ins in California has one lawmaker wanting to crack down.
A wave of car break-ins in California has one lawmaker wanting to crack down.
(Al Seib / Los Angeles Times))

Following reports of increased car break-ins in California, Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) said Monday that he will seek to close a loophole in state law that hinders prosecution.

Wiener said car burglaries have reached an “epidemic” level in his hometown. He will introduce a measure, modeled on another, unsuccessful bill he carried earlier this year, that would eliminate a requirement that prosecutors prove that a car’s doors were locked to get a conviction for automobile burglary.

He cited a 26% increase in thefts from vehicles last year in San Francisco, and said thieves are avoiding convictions in cases where they unlock the car, or the car owner leaves the car unlocked.

“The explosion in auto break-ins we’re experiencing is unacceptable, and we need to ensure our police and district attorneys have all the tools they need to address it,” Wiener said.

The Public Policy Institute of California issued a report in June that said there is evidence that some property crimes have increased in the state since voters in 2014 approved Proposition 47, which reduced the penalties for such offenses.

The study said larceny thefts increased by roughly 9% by 2016 to about 135 more thefts per 100,000 residents compared to other states. The report said thefts from motor vehicles accounted for about three-quarters of the increase.

The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department last month reported a “significant rise” in auto burglaries in the West Hollywood area suspected to be the work of gang members from the Bay Area. The department said that an investigation resulted in the arrest of two people and the recovery of more than 50 pieces of stolen property, including laptop computers.

Share
Advertisement

California Democratic Party chairman under investigation over allegations of sexual misconduct

California Democratic Party Chairman Eric Bauman.
(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

The California Democratic Party has launched an investigation into unspecified allegations of sexual misconduct against Chairman Eric Bauman involving party staff members.

In a statement released Saturday evening, Bauman confirmed an investigation was underway but did not address the allegations against him. He said that independent counsel has been hired to investigate the matter.

“I look forward to putting these allegations behind us and moving forward as unified Democrats,” Bauman said in the statement.

Last week, Daraka Larimore-Hall, a vice chairman of the state party, sent a letter to state Democratic Party leadership calling for Bauman’s removal.

In the letter sent on Tuesday, Larimore-Hall said he learned of the allegations during a recent party executive board meeting a week ago. He said he had spoken to two of the alleged victims and that their stories “illustrate a clear and escalating pattern of Chairman Bauman’s horrific and dehumanizing behavior.”

Larimore-Hall declined to provide details of the specific allegations and said in a public statement on Saturday that he was withholding the names of those involved to protect their privacy.

Bauman was elected chairman of the party in 2017, after a closely contested election against progressive activist Kimberly Ellis. A former nurse and organizer, he led the Los Angeles County Democrats for 17 years and also served as vice chairman for the statewide party for eight years.

According to state Democratic Party sources, the outside counsel hired to investigate the allegations is Debra Henshaw Vierra, an employment law attorney at the Sacramento law firm Churchwell White.

Bauman has been under investigation for at least one harassment complaint involving employees prior to the Nov. 6 election, according to sources familiar with the investigation.

“These allegations are very troubling and deserve a full and thorough investigation,” Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom said in a statement on Sunday. “Sexual harassment has no place in the California Democratic Party, and people who are victims deserve to have their voices heard, free from intimidation and judgement.”

4:08 p.m.: This article was updated with additional background on Bauman and a statement from Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom.

This article was originally published at 10:32 a.m.

Share

Jennifer Siebel Newsom will be California’s ‘first partner.’ Her agenda is cultural change

It was Gavin’s big moment. But first it was Jennifer’s.

An hour after her husband was elected California’s next governor, Jennifer Siebel Newsom took the stage alone at his Los Angeles victory party to extol his win, and welcome — in English and Spanish — all Californians to their extended family.

It’s not uncommon for a political spouse to play election-night emcee. Less common was the message staring back at her on the electric-pink T-shirts of a cluster of audience members: WE LOVE GAVIN + JEN.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Bail bond industry moves to block sweeping California law, submitting signatures for a 2020 ballot referendum

A coalition of bail bond industry groups took a major step Tuesday toward blocking California’s historic overhaul of the bail system, submitting more than enough signatures required for a statewide referendum on the law in 2020.

If the signatures are verified by elections officials, the law signed by Gov. Jerry Brown in August would be suspended until voters decide whether to overturn it, allowing bail agents to continue doing business before the industry’s future in California is decided.

The effort to end cash bail has picked up critics on both sides of the issue.

Read More

Share

California Supreme Court recommends Gov. Jerry Brown pardon former state Sen. Roderick Wright

California state Sen. Roderick Wright in court in 2014 while on trial on charges he lied about living in his district.
( (Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times))

The California Supreme Court on Tuesday paved the way for Gov. Jerry Brown to consider a pardon for former state Sen. Roderick Wright, who resigned after he was convicted in 2014 on felony charges of lying about living in his district.

The court recommended that the governor grant a pardon, according to Jorge E. Navarrete, the clerk of the court. Brown’s office has signaled he is likely to grant clemency in the case before he leaves office in January.

“As the Board of Parole Hearings has found, Sen. Wright’s application presents a favorable case for a pardon,” Peter A. Krause, the governor’s legal affairs secretary, said in a letter to the court last month.

The court does not provide the reasoning for its recommendation, which it made based on the record that includes a recommendation by the parole board in September.

Wright, 66, said he believed he complied with state law.

“I’m certainly sorry for the challenges I brought forth in terms of questions about my house, and I take full responsibility,” Wright said in a recent interview. “I thought I was correct, but the jury didn’t agree with me.”

Wright, a Democrat, resigned from the Senate and was barred for life from holding public office as a result of the conviction on eight felony charges that included perjury and voting fraud. He was sentenced to three months in jail but served less than a day because of jail overcrowding.

During the criminal trial, prosecutors said Wright had made it appear that he lived in a rental complex he owns in Inglewood to run for the Senate seat in 2008, but that his true residence was a house in Baldwin Hills, outside the district.

Wright told a Los Angeles County jury that he believed he had taken the necessary steps to establish the Inglewood property as his domicile and had not intended to deceive voters when he arranged to rent a bedroom in the unit.

Wright, who has been teaching at UC Davis, said the law on residency was ambiguous.

“The problem is there is nothing in the election code that says how many days you have to sleep in your domicile,” Wright said. “People commonly say you have to live in your district, but that is not in the elections code.”

Brown’s office gave the court a review of the pardon request and letters from people who support a pardon, but the governor’s staff refused to make those documents public.

Wright’s application also requests a pardon for a 1972 conviction, when Wright was 19, for taking a motor vehicle without the owner’s consent. He served three years’ probation for the older conviction.

“The crimes for which Sen. Wright was convicted — vehicle theft, perjury, false declaration of candidacy, and fraudulent voting — were nonviolent in nature,” Krause wrote to the court. “Moreover, Sen. Wright has devoted much of his life to public service, including serving six years in the California State Senate and six years in the California Assembly. Since his conviction, Sen. Wright has been employed as a consultant on government affairs and is an adjunct professor.”

The law requires four Supreme Court judges to concur in the recommendation of the parole board before it can go to Brown for consideration.

Krause noted that after Wright’s conviction, the Legislature enacted a new law that clarifies the requirements regarding where legislators live, writing that the Board of Parole Hearings found that “establishing a domicile in the manner Mr. Wright did during the period of 2007 to 2009 would be permissible under the bill.”

Share
Advertisement

California’s tab to fight Camp and Woolsey fires tops $118 million

Los Angeles County fire Capt. Victor Correa helps put out a Woolsey fire hotspot in Malibu.
(Marcus Yam / Los Angeles Times)

California’s costs to fight two deadly wildfires that ignited less than two weeks ago have already topped $118 million — a sizable financial hit to a program that needed an unexpected cash infusion just two months ago.

Cal Fire officials said Tuesday that $589.7 million has been paid out by the state’s fire emergency, or “e-fund,” account since July 1. Officials are poised to free up additional dollars before lawmakers consider a new state budget early next year.

Cal Fire officials said battling the Camp fire, which has killed 79 people and burned more than 151,000 acres across Butte County, has cost more than $68 million. The state’s response to the Woolsey fire, which has burned almost 97,000 acres in Ventura and Los Angeles counties and killed at least three people, has cost more than $50 million.

Those costs will rise, perhaps sharply, in the coming weeks. Both fires were sparked on Nov. 8, and crews continue to make progress toward containment.

State officials are quick to point out that firefighting costs are fully paid, no matter the final tally. Lawmakers initially budgeted $442.8 million in e-fund spending for the fiscal year that runs through early summer 2019. In September, they added another $234 million to the program. That decision is similar to those made in recent years as the number and size of California fires have increased.

Even so, the magnitude of firefighting expenses in just the first five months of the state’s fiscal year is sobering. By the end of July, just weeks after Gov. Jerry Brown signed a new state budget into law, the price tag of fires had already hit almost $115 million — before the massive Carr fire outside Redding erupted at the end of the month, burning close to 230,000 acres and killing eight people.

For most of the past decade, state government e-fund costs have outpaced budgeted expenses. The money is used for whatever items or services firefighters and emergency crews need to respond to an incident. State finance officials have the flexibility to dip into other cash reserves as needed to cover those costs.

Cal Fire officials on Tuesday said that approximately 7,000 firefighters were working to bring the Camp and Woolsey fires under control.

Share

California should spend $1.6 billion more next year to combat its child poverty crisis, new task force finds

California must significantly increase the money it spends on child care, food assistance and other social services — by as much as $1.6 billion in the first year alone — to narrow an income divide that has left almost 2 million children living below the poverty line, a new state task force said Monday.

The group, assembled by state government last year to address the child poverty crisis, is calling on Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom to earmark money in next year’s state budget for expansion of antipoverty programs. It has crafted a plan to phase in nearly $14 billion for the efforts over the next decade, saying the savings to the state will balance out the costs in the long term.

Task force members say the recommendations in their first report are meant to strengthen the social safety net for low-income families and could help create better living conditions for as many as 450,000 of the most impoverished children in the state over the next four years alone. The group hopes to find an ally in Newsom, who has vowed to combat homelessness and closed out his winning campaign with a focus on the needs of the youngest Californians.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Religious groups ask Gov. Jerry Brown to commute the sentences of all California death row inmates

Three prisoners in the north segregation unit of death row at San Quentin State Prison.
Three prisoners in the north segregation unit of death row at San Quentin State Prison.
(Eric Risberg/AP)

Members of Catholic organizations and other anti-death penalty groups on Monday urged Gov. Jerry Brown to place a moratorium on the death penalty or commute the sentences of all California death row inmates, saying he should take a moral stand on a practice that costs the state money without making people safer.

Their request was echoed in more than 6,000 letters and petitions collected from residents and wheeled to the state Capitol in plain, white cardboard boxes. It comes more than a year after the California Supreme Court kept in place a 2016 measure passed by voters to speed up executions.

Standing outside the governor’s office, Marciano Avilla said Brown had a bold chance to move the state into the future, as he had on so many other issues, before leaving his post in January.

“It is the old saying, ‘How can you say that killing is wrong by killing other people,’” said Avilla, director of the Office of Restorative Justice under the Catholic Diocese of San Bernardino. “The state should not be involved in sanctioned murder.”

California has some 740 inmates awaiting execution, almost double the number in Florida, the state with the second highest death row population in the country. But California hasn’t executed a prisoner in a decade because of delays and legal challenges.

Proposition 66, which passed in November 2016 with 51% of the vote, is an attempt to speed up the system by limiting appeals and expanding the pool of lawyers who can take on death penalty cases. Voters narrowly turned down another initiative to end capital punishment in the state.

But Brown’s administration must first finalize an execution protocol to resolve a federal court case that has blocked lethal injection in the state for nearly 12 years — a process expected to be resolved by January. Death penalty proponents have predicted executions would resume in months unless he moves slowly on the protocol or decides to commute the death sentences.

Share

California Supreme Court won’t consider complaint over missing absentee ballot signatures

(Patrick T. Fallon / For The Times)

The California Supreme Court refused on Monday to block counties from accepting late absentee ballot signatures, a practice election officials have said isn’t explicitly banned under a new state law.

The court denied the petition filed by Brian Harrington, a San Diego resident and campaign consultant to a Republican running for an Orange County Assembly seat. Harrington challenged a Nov. 13 legal advisory from the California secretary of state’s chief counsel that extended the length of time for voters to submit their signature if failing to sign the absentee ballot envelope.

In his filing with the court, Harrington said the 2015 law allowing a voter to fix the unsigned envelope — which otherwise would cause the ballot to be rejected — doesn’t allow signatures to be collected after the close of business on the eighth day after the election. Counties were told in the advisory from Steven Reyes, chief counsel for Secretary of State Alex Padilla, that they could accept ballot signature statements “up to the point in time where it would interfere with the duties of completing the county’s official canvass” of votes cast.

“This creates a situation ripe for inconsistent results,” Harrington said in the legal challenge, “because the secretary’s opinion does not provide a definitive deadline for voters to submit their statements.”

The court’s refusal to consider the challenge ensures county election officials will be able to keep accepting the late signature requests through the end of the month. Padilla must certify the election results by Dec. 14.

“We are pleased with the outcome and California’s commitment to ensuring that voters and voting rights are the central focus of our elections,” Padilla said in a statement following the court’s decision.

Share
Advertisement

California housing crisis podcast: What election day meant for the state’s affordability problems

Vote by mail ballots are sorted by staff to be counted at the L.A. County Registrar-Recorder's office on Nov. 7 in Norwalk.
Vote by mail ballots are sorted by staff to be counted at the L.A. County Registrar-Recorder’s office on Nov. 7 in Norwalk.
(Patrick T. Fallon / For the Los Angeles Times)

Earlier this month, Californians voted to support $6 billion in new bonds to help build low-income and homeless housing across the state and provide home loans to veterans. Voters also rejected efforts to expand rent control and add property tax breaks for homeowners 55 or older.

On this episode of “Gimme Shelter: The California Housing Crisis Podcast,” we break down how the election results affect the state’s answers to housing affordability and debate the future of rent control at the Capitol.

Our guest is Angela Hart of Politico California, who talks with us about incoming Gov. Gavin Newsom’s ambitious housing plan.

Gimme Shelter,” a biweekly podcast that looks at why it’s so expensive to live in California and what the state can do about it, features Liam Dillon, who covers housing affordability issues for the Los Angeles Times’ Sacramento bureau, and Matt Levin, data and housing reporter for CALmatters.

You can subscribe to “Gimme Shelter” on iTunes, Stitcher, Soundcloud, Google Play and Overcast.

Share

Orange County goes blue, as Democrats complete historic sweep of its seven congressional seats

Gil Cisneros defeated Republican Young Kim on Saturday in the last of Orange County’s undecided House races, giving Democrats a clean sweep of the state’s six most fiercely fought congressional contests and marking an epochal shift in a region long synonymous with political conservatism.

With Cisneros’ victory, Democrats will constitute the entirety of Orange County’s seven-member congressional delegation, the first time since the 1930s that the birthplace of Richard Nixon, home of John Wayne and spiritual center of the Republican Party will have no GOP representative in the House.

“Sitting back in the 1960s, I would never have believed this would happen,” said Stuart K. Spencer, a party strategist who spent more than half a century ushering Republicans, including President Reagan, into office.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

California’s expensive race for schools chief is over as Tony Thurmond defeats Marshall Tuck

Tony Thurmond, a Bay Area Democrat who served in the state Assembly and as a local school board member, declared victory on Saturday in the bitterly contested and expensive race for California superintendent of public instruction.

Thurmond’s opponent, charter school executive Marshall Tuck, conceded the race after several days of late vote counting continued to widen the gap between the two candidates. Tuck had been ahead in early returns on election night but lost the lead last weekend.

“I want to thank the voters of California for electing me to serve the 6 million students of California,” Thurmond said in a written statement. “I intend to be a champion of public schools and a Superintendent for all California students.”

The race was easily the most expensive in history for the relatively obscure post of schools superintendent, who shares oversight of education policy with the State Board of Education. Independent political action committees spent some $53.8 million on the race, the lion’s share of which came from pro-charter school groups that supported Tuck.

Thurmond, the first African American elected to statewide office in four decades, was strongly backed by the California Teachers Assn. The race was largely a proxy war between supporters and critics of the state’s charter schools, with Thurmond advocating for additional scrutiny of the schools and their track record.

Tuck ran unsuccessfully for the job in 2014 and said that he conceded defeat before the vote tally was completed to allow Thurmond to begin preparing for the job.

“As you can imagine, the disappointment has crept in there in a pretty big way more recently as it was becoming clear to me that I wasn’t going to get a job that I wanted and that I thought I would be really good at,” Tuck wrote in an email to supporters.

Share

Going, going ... with midterm wipeout, California Republican Party drifts closer to irrelevance

For a party in freefall the last two decades, California Republicans learned that it’s possible to plunge even further.

The GOP not only lost every statewide office in the midterm election — again, in blowout fashion — but Democrats reestablished their supermajority in Sacramento, allowing them to legislate however they see fit

After major defeats in Orange County and the Central Valley, two longtime strongholds, Republicans will have a significantly smaller footprint on Capitol Hill. (Democrats hold both Senate seats.) When the vote-counting is finished, the GOP may not even have enough lawmakers in California’s 53-member House delegation to field a nine-person softball team.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Assemblyman Travis Allen announces bid for chairman of the California GOP

Travis Allen, a Huntington Beach assemblyman who unsuccessfully ran for California governor, announced Thursday he is running for chairman of the state Republican Party.

Allen is a strong supporter of President Trump and a favorite of tea party Republicans. He blamed the wave of GOP losses in last week’s midterm election on a party establishment that failed to embrace core conservative ideals.

Four incumbent Republicans in California’s congressional delegation lost in the Nov. 6 election, with two more in Orange County possibly facing a similar fate as late ballots are counted. Democrats also captured a supermajority in the California Legislature, and no Republican has won a statewide political office since 2006.

“For too long, the California Republican establishment has told us that we must look more like Democrats in order to be elected in the state of California. This sort of backwards thinking has lost seats and races across the state to where, today, the Republican Party is at the lowest point it’s been since the 1880s,” Allen said in a video announcement of his campaign he sent out via Twitter. “It is time that we rebuild the Republican Party from the ground up.”

Allen finished a distant fourth place in the June gubernatorial primary.

Former Manhattan Beach Assemblyman David Hadley, who in July was appointed vice chairman of the California Republican Party, appears to be the favorite to be the party’s next leader once current Chairman Jim Brulte’s term ends in February.

Share

Democrat Katie Porter now nearly 3,800 votes ahead of GOP Rep. Mimi Walters in Orange County

Rep. Mimi Walters thanks all of her supporters as she watches election results in Irvine, Calif., Wednesday, Nov. 7, 2018.
(Alex Gallardo / AP Photo)

Democrat Katie Porter opened a 3,797-vote lead Wednesday over Republican Rep. Mimi Walters in Orange County’s 45th Congressional District.

In the neighboring 39th, Democrat Gil Cisneros has nearly tied the race against Republican Young Kim. Cisneros now trails Kim by a razor-thin margin of 122 votes.

The 39th District straddles Los Angeles, Orange and San Bernardino counties; Wednesday’s updated ballot counts came from the latter two.

There are more than 202,000 ballots left to count in Orange County, which includes parts of seven congressional districts. The 45th is entirely in inland Orange County.

In California, the ballots counted first tend to lean Republican and those tallied later skew Democratic.

In the Central Valley’s 21st Congressional District, Democratic challenger TJ Cox has pulled within 2 percentage points of Rep. David Valadao, who is serving his third term. The Associated Press had projected a win for Valadao on election night, but his 4,839-vote advantage has shrunk to 2,090.

A spokesman for Valadao told the Fresno Bee that the changes were expected and that “[s]tatistically, David Valadao has won this race.”

Democrats in California have already flipped four House seats, defeating three Republican incumbents and claiming an open seat previously held by the GOP.

Reps. Steve Knight of Palmdale, Dana Rohrabacher of Costa Mesa and Jeff Denham of Turlock have already lost their races, and retiring Rep. Darrell Issa’s San Diego County seat was claimed by Democrat Mike Levin.

Share
Advertisement

California pot tax revenue improves but is still short of projections

(Mathew Sumner / Associated Press)

The amount of money collected by the state from taxes on cannabis grown and sold legally in California continues to increase but is still falling short of budget estimates, according to figures released Wednesday.

Tax revenue reported from the cannabis industry totaled $93.1 million for the three months ending Sept. 30, according to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration. That is an increase from the $80.2 million collected during the second quarter of the year.

If revenue continues to grow by the same 16% per quarter, pot taxes will bring in $471 million during the fiscal year that began July 1, while the budget approved by the governor and Legislature estimates the taxes would bring in $630 million during the fiscal year.

Budget officials said Wednesday they expected growth in revenue each quarter, but the budget approved in June warned that revenue might be short.

“While the forecast assumes revenue will be phased in over time, preliminary data indicates revenue receipts are slower than expected,” the budget’s summertime summary said. “Cannabis revenue projections are subject to great uncertainty.”

Californians legalized the growing and sale of marijuana for recreational purposes in approving Proposition 64 in 2016, and the state began licensing pot businesses on Jan. 1.

Cannabis sales continue to be affected by over-regulation, high taxes and the fact that most cities in California still do not permit marijuana sales, according to Dale Gieringer, director of California NORML, or the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.

“So far, only a minority of Californians live in jurisdictions where sales are legal,” he said Wednesday.

Josh Drayton of the California Cannabis Industry Assn. welcomed the increase in tax revenue as a sign of a stabilization in legal cannabis available in the supply chain.

“Although the tax revenues have still not reached their projections, we are cautiously optimistic that 2019 will bring regulations to more municipalities and legislation will further streamline business operations for the industry, further increasing tax revenue collected by the state,” Drayton said.

Share

California’s budget could be on its way to a $29-billion cash reserve, legislative analyst says

(Francine Orr / Los Angeles Times)

California’s six-year run of growing tax revenue to pay for government services is expected to continue through at least the summer of 2020, according to an analysis released Wednesday, with enough cash to fund a budget reserve of $29.5 billion.

The report by the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office is perhaps the most emphatic sign so far of how much the state’s near-term financial condition has improved since the end of the last recession. Where there were once repeated predictions of operating deficits, analysts now expect a $14.8-billion surplus over the next 20 months — on top of a $14.5-billion rainy-day fund and a $200-million contingency fund for social services programs.

“It is difficult to overstate how good the budget’s condition is today,” analysts wrote in Wednesday’s annual fiscal outlook. “By historical standards, this surplus is extraordinary.”

The forecast comes just weeks before Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom, in coordination with outgoing Gov. Jerry Brown’s advisors, craft a budget proposal that Newsom will present to the Legislature just days after he takes office in early January. While the governor uses his own analysis of economic data and trends, the legislative analyst’s report will serve as a key starting point for legislators as they craft a spending plan for final passage in June.

The report largely attributes the tax revenue growth, a 41% increase over the last six years, to higher wages for upper-income workers and a strong stock market. By comparison, analysts see state budget expenses growing less rapidly — higher spending on schools, health and human services and state worker salaries should be offset, they expect, by one-time expenses in the fiscal year that began in July.

“Not only have we pulled the state from the depths of the Great Recession and made significant improvements in critical programs, we are also well prepared to withstand the next recession without major cuts or middle-class tax increases,” Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) said in a written statement.

The analysts cautioned, however, that the $14.8 billion in unrestricted surplus revenue is contingent on lawmakers not adding to ongoing spending through new or expanded programs. The analyst’s report cautioned that a likely economic slowdown could require spending cuts unless the projected surplus is used to weather any cooling of the economy.

And the report offered a cautionary tale from the past: In the November 2000 analysis, researchers predicted a $10.3-billion surplus, only to see the dot-com industry’s collapse result in a $12.4-billion deficit. “These fortunes can change quickly,” analysts wrote.

Share
Advertisement

Gov. Jerry Brown is still calling the shots, Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom says

Gov. Jerry Brown, left, and Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom talk with reporters after their meeting at the state Capitol on Tuesday.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

With all eyes on California’s next leader, Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom took a moment Tuesday to remind everyone that Gov. Jerry Brown is still calling the shots.

“There’s only one governor at a time and I think that’s important to reinforce particularly at this moment with so much anxiety around these fires,” Newsom said, standing next to Brown outside the governor’s office. “I want to reinforce that and I want to be respectful of the governor.”

The two men spoke to reporters about wildfires ravaging the state and the transition to a new administration after meeting privately at the state Capitol.

Brown and Newsom thanked firefighters and first responders battling the Camp and Woolsey fires and briefly addressed questions about state actions to prevent future blazes, which have killed more than 44 people in less than a week.

Newsom called Senate Bill 901, a wide-ranging law approved this year to address wildfire liability and forest management, a good first step and work in progress, suggesting the possibility of additional proposals under his watch.

“Some things only God can do and we’re doing everything we can,” Brown said. “The winds are faster, the temperature are hotter, the soil and vegetation is drier. This is unprecedented and it’s a tragedy and we as human beings have to be humble in the face of it but also resolute and determined.”

Share

Democrats win back a supermajority in California’s Legislature

California Democrats cemented supermajorities in both houses of the Legislature on Monday, giving Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom more partisan allies in the state Senate and Assembly when he takes office in January.

Election results announced on Monday showed Democrats winning two Central Valley Senate seats previously held by Republicans, allowing the party to regain the two-thirds majority they held in the chamber before former state Sen. Josh Newman of Fullerton was recalled from office in June over his vote last year to raise the gas tax.

The party also is expected to pad its existing supermajority in the state Assembly.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Former L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa joins national public affairs firm Mercury

Former Los Angeles mayor and California gubernatorial candidate Antonio Villaraigosa is joining the firm Mercury, an influential national public affairs firm.

Villaraigosa said he will be based in the firm’s Los Angeles office but will be traveling the country and the globe advising companies and other Mercury clients. He will not work as a lobbyist, he said.

“It’s an opportunity to stay involved in public policy but also an opportunity for me to grow,” Villaraigosa told The Times on Monday.

Mercury has offices around the country, including in Washington and New York, and its roster is filled with former politicians, top officials from presidential administrations and Congress as well as former political operatives.

Former California Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, one of Villaraigosa’s closest friends, runs Mercury’s office in Sacramento.

Villaraigosa said, as of Monday, he did not know which Mercury clients he will be advising. But the Democrat expects to be active in Central and South America, as well as China.

“Obviously, L.A. is a place to hang my shingle as well,” he said.

Villaraigosa served as mayor of Los Angeles from 2005 to 2013. After a three-year hiatus from politics, he jumped into the 2018 campaign for California governor only to finish in a disappointing third place in the June primary. Before he was mayor, Villaraigosa served as the speaker of the California Assembly.

Villaraigosa said he has no plans to jump back into politics, but didn’t dismiss the notion outright.

“I’m focused on my family first and foremost,” he said. “I’m not thinking of running for anything right now.”

In August, Villaraigosa joined the board of the publicly traded company Medmen, a Culver City company that operates high-end cannabis shops in California, Nevada and New York.

After he left the mayor’s office, Villaraigosa worked as an advisor to the Los Angeles-based supplement company Herbalife, which had faced long-running allegations that its multilevel marketing strategy hurt the poor and people of color. During the governor’s race, now Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom criticized him for working for the company.

Villaraigosa has also worked for other firms, including Santa Ana lender Banc of California.

On Monday, Villaraigosa said working for Mercury will be his focus, but added that it’s possible he might join boards of directors for other firms sometime in the future.

Share

Democrat unseats Rep. Dana Rohrabacher in Orange County House district

Harley Rouda
(Mario Tama / Getty Images)

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher has lost the congressional seat he held for 30 years, a stunning defeat for Republicans in what had long been the deepest red parts of the county.

Real estate entrepreneur Harley Rouda’s win comes after two decades of erosion in the Republican base and at a time when Rohrabacher’s friendliness to people with links to Russia has become more controversial.

Rohrabacher, 71, has represented the region since 1988, when he left a job in the Reagan White House to run for Congress. Rouda, 56, a former Republican, said he left the party as it became stridently partisan in the mid-1990s.

6:10 p.m.: This article was updated with staff reporting.

This article was originally published at 5:53 p.m.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

California’s not goofy, it’s really big. That’s why counting the vote takes so long

An eager nation waits breathlessly as California counts its election ballots.

Well, not an entire nation. Just a bunch of political obsessives and some candidates in limbo, anxious to find out if they’re headed to Washington as lawmakers or have a little extra time on their hands to draw up that perfect Thanksgiving menu.

Nearly 5 million ballots remain to be counted statewide, leaving four congressional contests, in the Central Valley and Orange County, still to be decided.

Read More

Share

In response to mass shooting in Thousand Oaks, California legislator proposes making it easier to confiscate guns

Journalists wait outside the home of shooter Ian David Long in Thousand Oaks.
Journalists wait outside the home of shooter Ian David Long in Thousand Oaks.
(APU GOMES / AFP/Getty Images)

Alarmed by the troubled history of a gunman who killed 12 people in Thousand Oaks this week, state Assemblyman Phil Ting said Friday he will reintroduce a bill that would make it easier to confiscate firearms from people deemed a public danger.

Ian David Long, who police say is behind the mass shooting at the Borderline Bar and Grill on Wednesday night, had been evaluated in April by mental health specialists who were called out by the Ventura County Sheriff’s Department after a disturbance call.

Law enforcement officials determined Long did not qualify for an involuntary psychiatric hold and did not pursue a court order allowed by state law that would temporarily remove guns from a person considered dangerous.

“People had concerns about this individual,” Ting said. “I don’t know why his guns weren’t taken away. It doesn’t make any sense. And 12 people have now paid with their lives.”

State law currently allows family members and law enforcement officers to petition the courts for a gun-violence restraining order that would allow the temporary removal of guns from people judged a danger to themselves or others. But Ting said many law enforcement agencies are not using that law.

The lawmaker said Friday that he will reintroduce a bill when the Legislature reconvenes next month that would extend the ability to petition for court orders to teachers, employers and co-workers of those considered a public risk. The Times reported that a former high school teacher of Long’s said he assaulted her a decade ago.

“It’s really important to expand the universe of people who are seeing things, interacting with dangerous people, making sure that we get guns out of the hands of the wrong people,” Ting said.

In September, Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed a similar bill that Ting introduced in response to reports that some school officials had concerns about a 19-year-old before he killed 17 people at a Parkland, Fla., high school in February.

The governor said in his veto message that the expansion of the restraining order program is unnecessary.

“All of the persons named in this bill can seek a gun violence restraining order today under existing law by simply working through law enforcement or the immediate family of the concerning individual,” Brown wrote in his veto message. “I think law enforcement professionals and those closest to a family member are best situated to make these especially consequential decisions.”

Ting said Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom may be more receptive to signing the bill, which may also include a proposal to help educate and train law enforcement agencies in using the restraining orders. On Thursday, Newsom said the state “can do more and do better on gun safety.”

Share
Advertisement

California Assembly Republicans elect Marie Waldron new leader

Assemblywoman Marie Waldron, right, talks to Assemblywoman Laura Friedman.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

California Assembly Republicans on Thursday elected a new leader, Assemblywoman Marie Waldron of Escondido, who said the minority party needs to take action to end its decline.

Waldron takes over as Assembly Republican leader from Assemblyman Brian Dahle of Bieber, who is stepping down from the role to run for a state Senate seat being vacated by incumbent Ted Gaines, who was elected to the state Board of Equalization on Tuesday.

The share of registered Republican voters in California has declined steadily from 35.5% in 1998 to 24% this year, and the party appears to have lost seats in the Legislature after Tuesday’s election, although votes are still being counted.

“As a caucus and as a party we need to seriously consider why our party continues to decline,” Waldron said in a statement. “We need an aggressive, new approach to message our values, strengthen, grow and expand our party and our caucus as we stand for hardworking Californians. I look forward to leading this effort.”

Waldron, who was elected to the Assembly in 2012, co-owns a custom screen-printing and apparel business with her husband in Escondido. She served for 14 years on the Escondido City Council and also has served as deputy mayor in Escondido.

Waldron also worked for NBC Sports in New York and the New York Mets, where she managed promotions and advertising.

The Legislature will hold a brief organizational meeting next month but begins its new session in January.

Share

Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra hails DACA ruling as ‘tremendous victory’ for ‘Dreamers’

(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

California Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra on Thursday hailed a federal court’s decision to block the ending of a program that provides temporary protections to immigrants who were brought to the country illegally as children.

Becerra said the ruling would provide relief to thousands of young so-called Dreamers across the country, calling it an unexpected and “tremendous victory” for believers in the American dream and the rule of law. But he said the legal battle would continue should the case go to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“This fight is personal to so many communities in California,” he said. “As the son of immigrants, this fight is personal to me too.”

Becerra and his counterparts in Maine, Maryland and Minnesota, as well as the University of California and other plaintiffs first sued the Trump administration last year over its actions to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which has provided work and study permits to some 700,000 people who as children crossed the border with families illegally or came with families that overstayed visas.

In January, U.S. District Judge William Alsup in San Francisco found President Obama did not exceed his executive power in implementing the initiative and that there would be immediate harm if it were ended.

Trump administration officials have said they ended the program when other states threatened to sue and have remained defiant. On Thursday, Justice Department spokesman Steven Stafford called DACA an “unlawful circumvention of Congress” and said the agency would continue to “vigorously defend” its position.

“While we are disappointed in with today’s ruling, we are pleased that the court has finally acted and that the Supreme Court now can consider our petition for review,” he said.

On Thursday, Becerra said more than 187,000 people have been able to renew their DACA status since Alsup issued his first injunction. California is home to more than 200,000 DACA recipients, state officials said.

“Today, those ‘Dreamers’ can get up, go to work, go to school, create more jobs, help another family,” he said. “We want all Americans and all Dreamers to know that whatever comes next, we will continue to fight on their behalf.”

8:16 p.m. update: This post was updated with comment from a Department of Justice spokesman.

This post was originally published at 2:05 p.m.

Share
Advertisement

Scenes from the trail: California’s candidates for governor stump in Southern California with 3 days until the election

Share

California Politics Podcast: Big choices await voters on election day

California voters have a lot of choices in front of them come election day — perhaps none larger than whether they see the state’s political choices as part of a national referendum on President Trump.

On this week’s podcast, we take a close look at the candidates in the races for governor and U.S. Senate. We also dive deep into the congressional battleground of Orange County — home to four closely watched contests. And we examine the potential impact if the polls are right and two major California ballot measures are rejected.

Share
Advertisement

Gov. Jerry Brown says repeal of gas tax increase is a ‘scam’ by ‘acolytes of Donald Trump’

Gov. Jerry Brown, shown in a picture from June, on Friday blasted Proposition 6 as a "scheme and a scam."
( (Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times))

In his last campaign as governor, Jerry Brown rallied Friday against Proposition 6, tying the initiative to supporters of President Trump and warning it will hinder California’s efforts to repair roads and bridges.

“Prop. 6 is a scheme and a scam put on the ballot by some partisans,” Brown said at a campaign rally in Palo Alto. “Actually they are acolytes of Donald Trump. They don’t have the best interest of California in mind.”

The measure, which would repeal an increase in the state’s gas tax and vehicle fees, was qualified for Tuesday’s ballot by a committee funded by the GOP leaders including House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield, House Speaker Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin and Republican gubernatorial candidate John Cox. Republican leaders hope the measure will drive conservative voters to the polls on Tuesday to boost the chances of their party’s candidates.

Carl DeMaio, head of the Proposition 6 campaign, disputed the governor’s comments.

“No amount of false partisan rhetoric changes the fact that nearly 1 million Californians, half of whom are Democrats and independents, put Prop. 6 on the ballot and will be voting yes on Tuesday to repeal the unfair gas tax hikes because they simply cannot afford California’s cost of living,” DeMaio said in a statement in response to the Brown comments.

The campaign for the initiative announced Friday that it will hold rallies on Monday at nine gas stations throughout the state where motorists will be able to get free gas for a limited time.

Brown, who leaves office in January, was joined at the event in Greer Park by representatives of the State Building and Construction Trades of California, California Professional Firefighters and League of California Cities. The groups said the $5.2 billion raised annually from taxes and fees will help address a backlog of road and bridge repairs.

“This is a great opportunity to show the rest of the country that California knows how to invest in its future,” Brown said. “Killing Proposition 6 is the right thing to do. It’s a bad idea. It’s dangerous, and it was cooked up by some shady politicians who used their campaign funds because they thought they could fool the people. Well, the people aren’t fooled.”

Share

Los Angeles-area legislator was potential target of suspected mail bomber, his office says

State Sen. Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens) on the Senate floor in 2016.
(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

A man accused of mailing bombs to top Democratic officials and public figures researched a state legislator from Southern California as a potential target, according to the lawmaker’s office.

A spokesman for Sen. Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens) said the FBI notified the lawmaker of his connection with the case on Tuesday. Lara, a candidate for California insurance commissioner, has not received any suspicious packages.

“The FBI notified Sen. Lara that the suspect researched him as a possible target,” said Michael Soller, Lara’s spokesman. “He had a conversation with the FBI and the investigation is ongoing.”

The FBI did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Authorities arrested Cesar Altieri Sayoc Jr., 56, on Friday in Plantation, Fla. He’s accused of mailing more than a dozen explosives to former President Obama, Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, billionaire Democratic activist Tom Steyer, actor Robert De Niro and others. The bombs did not detonate and no one has been injured.

The Times reported Monday that lists discovered in Sayoc’s van suggest he singled out more than 100 public figures as potential targets, including at least 15 people in Southern California.

Soller said the FBI and the California Senate’s sergeant-at-arms, the security force for state senators, were in communication to “ensure our constituents and staff are not in any risk.”

The California Senate pro tem’s office and the Senate sergeant-at-arms declined to comment.

Share
Advertisement

California housing crisis podcast: Everything you need to know about the housing issues on the state ballot

Supporters of rent control march past the Capitol in Sacramento in April.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

Proposals to address the state’s housing-affordability problems fill the November statewide ballot.

On this episode of Gimme Shelter: The California Housing Crisis Podcast, we talk about all of them.

Gubernatorial candidates Gavin Newsom and John Cox have made housing affordability central to their platforms, and we detail what they both want to do. And we break down the four housing ballot measures voters will decide on:

  • Proposition 1: A $4-billion bond to help finance new low-income housing and provide home loans for veterans.
  • Proposition 2: A $2-billion bond to subsidize housing for homeless residents with severe mental illness.
  • Proposition 5: An expansion of property tax breaks for homeowners 55 or older.
  • Proposition 10: An expansion of cities’ and counties’ ability to implement rent control.

Our interviews focus on Proposition 10, which has attracted more than $100 million in campaign donations, making it one of the most expensive campaigns in state history. We talk with Yes on 10’s Damien Goodmon and No on 10’s Steve Maviglio.

Gimme Shelter,” a biweekly podcast that looks at why it’s so expensive to live in California and what the state can do about it, features Liam Dillon, who covers housing affordability issues for the Los Angeles Times’ Sacramento bureau, and Matt Levin, data and housing reporter for CALmatters.

You can subscribe to “Gimme Shelter” on iTunes, Stitcher, Soundcloud, Google Play and Overcast.

Share

California Democratic Party headquarters briefly evacuated after suspicious package received

Less than a week before the election, the California Democratic Party headquarters in Sacramento was evacuated for two hours Wednesday after the police bomb squad was called in to investigate a suspicious package received in the mail.

The evacuation ended around 2 pm after a team of FBI and Sacramento Police Department officials determined the large envelope was not dangerous.

State Party Chairman Eric Bauman said the package arrived at party headquarters just days after a Florida man was arrested for allegedly sending pipe bombs to Democratic leaders including former President Obama and the Sacramento office of U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris of California.

“After what transpired in 13 high-profile Democrats across the country receiving pipe bombs in the mail, we have been acting in an abundance of caution,” said Bauman, who was in Los Angeles when the package was found.

He said it was “unfortunate” that the large, oversized envelope arrived just after last week’s bomb scare.

The reports of bombs sent to other Democrats convinced Bauman to have his staff trained by police in what to look for in suspicious packages. The package that arrived in the mail with a Los Angeles return address was addressed to Thomas Perez, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, although the envelope refers to him as chair of the state party.

“Special attn.: Top priority!! Please rush. Immediate response requested,” is written on the envelope.

A party employee took the package outside the building and called the Sacramento Police Department, which called in the bomb squad, Bauman said. FBI and federal postal inspectors were also at the scene.

The party chairman said he plans to bring in armed security ahead of the election to guard the headquarters, which has about 25 staff members.

“We are a high-profile target,” Bauman said. “For those people who want to see the Trump revolution continue, we are likely one of the biggest obstructers of that in the country.”

Updated at 2:45 pm to note that the suspicious package turned out to not be dangerous.

Share
Advertisement

Gov. Jerry Brown calls repeal of gas tax increase ‘dangerous’ in new ad

Gov. Jerry Brown calls Proposition 6 “dangerous” in a new digital ad that warns the initiative that would repeal an increase in the gas tax jeopardizes $5 billion annually in road repairs and transportation projects.

A week before the statewide election, the “No on 6” campaign put the ad up on social media. It will also run this week in select markets on broadcast and cable television. It features footage of Brown in a suit and tie interspersed with scenes of road and bridge construction projects.

“We are finally making progress,” Brown says in the ad. “Thousands of road repairs are under way, fixing bridges and overpasses to meet earthquake standards and improving the safety of our roads. But Proposition 6 would stop these critical repairs.”

The governor ends the ad by saying: “It’s dangerous, and bad for California.”

Carl DeMaio, chairman of the Proposition 6 campaign, responded in an email: “The only dangerous thing facing California’s working families right now is the high cost of living made worse by unfair gas tax hikes which is why they will vote yes on Prop 6.”

Share

Newsom touts California as central to Democrats’ hopes, while Cox strikes gloomier tone

Gavin Newsom speaks during a bus tour kickoff outside San Francisco City Hall on Tuesday.
Gavin Newsom speaks during a bus tour kickoff outside San Francisco City Hall on Tuesday.
(Eric Risberg/Associated Press)

Kicking off a week-long bus tour in the run-up to election day, Gavin Newsom cast the stakes of the upcoming election in national — even international — terms.

“It’s not an exaggeration to say not just the country but the world is looking to all of you at this moment, the next seven days, to step up and to step in and to send a message and repudiate this moment,” Newsom told a crowd of supporters at San Francisco City Hall on Tuesday. “Because we are better than Washington, D.C. We’re better than Trump and Trumpism. We’re better than the rhetoric and the reality of the last 72 hours.”

The Democratic lieutenant governor spent less time touting his own candidacy for governor than taking jabs at President Trump and urging get-out-the-vote efforts for Democratic congressional candidates.

“You don’t want to pick up the paper… and read the front page headline that says we got 22 congressional representatives in the Democratic corner,” one short of what’s needed for Democrats to win the House of Representatives, Newsom warned.

Newsom made no reference to his own opponent, Republican businessman John Cox. But his paean to the California dream — which he declared was “alive and well” — stood in contrast to Cox’s portrayal of the state as mired in poverty and crisis.

Both candidates appeared at a breakfast hosted by former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown earlier that morning.

“The political class in this state, the interest groups that basically run Sacramento — as well as my opponent — have made this state virtually unaffordable and unlivable for the average forgotten, hardworking Californian,” Cox said.

Cox jabbed at Newsom for supporting Proposition 47, a 2014 initiative that reclassified certain crimes as misdemeanors. He blamed the measure for leading to a spike in property crimes in San Francisco.

Newsom, who spoke after Cox, countered with a more optimistic take.

“I’m proud of California,” Newsom said, citing its economic rebound and embrace of immigrants. And, as the eager Trump antagonist noted approvingly, “California is proudly the most un-Trump state.”

Share
Advertisement

Prop. 6 leaders threaten recall campaign against California Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra

Carl DeMaio, the chairman of the Proposition 6 campaign, left, and Republican attorney general candidate Steven Bailey.
(Patrick McGreevy /Los Angeles Times)

Proposition 6 campaign leader Carl DeMaio on Monday threatened a recall campaign against state Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra for providing what he said was a misleading ballot title for the measure that would repeal increases in the gas tax and vehicle fees.

DeMaio said he filed papers Monday with the Secretary of State’s Office to form a campaign committee for a possible Becerra recall effort. He estimated that it would cost about $1 million to collect the 856,335 signatures needed to put a recall on the ballot.

“These politicians have stolen our gas tax money and now they are trying to steal our ‘yes’ vote on Prop. 6 and turn it into a ‘no’ vote, and for that there must be a punishment that is extracted,” DeMaio said during a press conference on the steps of the state Capitol building. “We intend to recall the attorney general, Xavier Becerra, over his attempt to defraud the voters of their ‘yes’ vote on Prop. 6.”

Roger Salazar, a spokesman for Becerra, declined to comment on the threat, saying, “We are not going to respond to publicity stunts.”

DeMaio said a recall would not be needed if California voters approve Proposition 6 next week. He noted that his group successfully recalled Democratic state Sen. Josh Newman of Fullerton from office in June over his support for the higher gas tax.

Becerra is up for election on the Nov. 6 ballot, but DeMaio said many people mailed in their ballots before they were made aware of allegations of the misleading ballot title.

DeMaio complained that the ballot title drafted by Becerra’s office does not make clear that Proposition 6 would repeal fuel tax increases.

Retired Judge Steven Bailey, the Republican running against Becerra for attorney general this year, attended the press conference and accused the incumbent of “lying to the voters.”

Share

Sen. Bernie Sanders endorses Proposition 10, California’s rent control initiative

Share
Advertisement

Early voting has started. Here’s where you can cast a ballot before election day

If making it to the polls on Nov. 6 will be a challenge — or if you’re eager to cast your vote — you can go to a number of of early voting locations around Southern California.

Every county has slightly different offerings, so check the secretary of state’s website and your county’s specific information, which can also be found below.

Los Angeles County will open 10 early voting locations Saturday and Sunday and Nov. 3 and 4 from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Early voting at the registrar-recorder/county clerk office in Norwalk is available Monday through Friday from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. As of Oct. 25, more than 1,000 people have cast ballots in person.

Read More

Share

Gavin Newsom has outspent John Cox by more than 2 to 1 in California governor’s race

Either Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, left, a Democrat, or businessman John Cox, right, a Republican, will be California's next governor.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

Democratic Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom heads into the final days of California’s race for governor having outspent Republican John Cox by a more than a 2-to-1 margin this year.

That gap will likely grow even wider before the Nov. 6 election. The Newsom campaign still had $15.3 million cash on hand as of Oct. 20 compared with the $569,000 in Cox’s campaign account, according to finance reports filed with the state Thursday evening.

Along with Newsom’s significant edge in fundraising, the two-term lieutenant governor has had a solid lead in the most recent opinion polls.

A USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll released last week found that 54% of likely voters in the state favored Newsom for governor compared with 31% who supported Cox, giving the Democrat a 23-percentage-point lead.

A separate poll released this week by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California showed a tighter race, although Newsom still was besting Cox among likely voters by 11 percentage points.

The vast majority of the money spent in the governor’s race has gone toward television and radio ads, one of the most effective ways to reach voters in a state as vast as California. It’s also expensive: Airing a television ad campaign in the Los Angeles metropolitan area alone can cost $2 million a week.

Campaign finance reports show that Newsom has spent $28 million in 2018 alone, with more than $20 million of that going toward TV ads on broadcast and cable networks. The Cox campaign has spent $12.9 million during that same time period, with more than $5 million paying for television and radio ads.

Cox has gone on the offensive in his campaign. His new statewide ad attacks Newsom as a politician who has led a privileged life.

“The rich made him powerful, but he’s done nothing to help us,” the narrator says, looking into the camera.

Newsom’s ad campaign has been more upbeat, focusing on his plans for California. His most recent ad makes a pitch for increasing early childhood education in the state.

Share
Advertisement

California to delay enforcing new net neutrality law pending federal court challenge of FCC’s rollback

California Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra
(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

California will not implement its new net neutrality law as scheduled on Jan. 1, Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra said Friday.

The state agreed to pause implementation of the landmark law pending the outcome of a federal court case challenging the Trump administration’s rollback of net neutrality rules.

In a statement, Becerra said the decision was “intended to put us in the best position to preserve net neutrality for the 40 million people of our state. We are fighting the Trump Administration’s attempt to repeal net neutrality in the D.C. Circuit Court and we will vigorously defend California’s own net neutrality law.”

Last month, Gov. Jerry Brown signed Senate Bill 822, which enshrined in state law Obama-era net neutrality regulations that the Trump administration repealed. The state law prohibits broadband and wireless companies from blocking, throttling or otherwise hindering access to internet content, and from favoring some websites over others by charging for faster speeds.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai said in a statement that Becerra’s decision shows that the federal government’s legal argument is sound.

“I am pleased that California has agreed not to enforce its onerous internet regulations,” Pai said.

Share

They say terrible things about Nancy Pelosi. Her response: Just win, Democrats

The crowd outside campaign headquarters was boiling, the angry mood matching south Florida’s tropical heat, as Nancy Pelosi arrived to a shower of obscenities and crude insults in English and Spanish.

With the doors locked and police standing guard, the Democratic congressional leader delivered her exhortation to dozens of volunteers — Make those phone calls, walk those precincts, the future of America’s at stake this midterm election! — as crisp and unruffled as her white pantsuit.

Pelosi doesn’t care about the invective hurled her way, in whatever language. She doesn’t care that her face has appeared, menacing and twisted, in thousands of Republican attack ads. She doesn’t care that life is a full-time residency in travel hell — a blur of meals on the run, flight delays, a different hotel each night.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Deluge of cash puts Democrats in strong position for final weeks of midterms

Democrat Katie Hill, running against Rep. Steve Knight (R-Palmdale) at a candidate forum in Lancaster.
Democrat Katie Hill, running against Rep. Steve Knight (R-Palmdale) at a candidate forum in Lancaster.
(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

A lot can happen in 17 days.

Take the latest federal campaign finance reporting period, which ran from Oct. 1 to 17, the last snapshot we’ll get of California House candidates’ financial positions before election day.

In that time, Democrat Katie Hill spent just under $2 million on her campaign in the 25th Congressional District, about as much as GOP incumbent Steve Knight of Palmdale has spent in the entire two-year cycle.

Over the course of that two weeks and change, Harley Rouda, the Democrat challenging Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Costa Mesa), raised more than $1 million, a sum six figures larger than what the incumbent amassed during the entire 2016 election.

And over those 17 days, Mike Levin, hoping to capture a coastal Southern California seat left open by retiring Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Vista), wrote checks totaling more than his Republican opponent, Diane Harkey, has spent all year and still managed to have nearly six times as much cash in the bank as her.

Five congressional candidates in California raised more than $1 million in that short period; only one, Rep. Devin Nunes of Tulare, is a Republican.

Eleven of the 14 Republicans running for GOP-held seats in California, nine of them incumbents, were out-raised by their opponents. And half of the 14 reported having less in the bank than their competitors as of Oct. 17.

Although Democrats nationally have broken one fundraising record after another this midterm election, the ongoing deluge of cash also has practical implications for candidates as they enter the home stretch in their campaign to flip GOP-held seats and take back control of Congress.

With that level of resources, candidates can blanket TV and radio airwaves with ads, paper neighborhoods with mailers and launch robust get-out-the-vote efforts to boost turnout in key areas.

That doesn’t mean GOP candidates won’t have other resources to count on. Conservative groups such as the Congressional Leadership Fund have already spent millions of dollars to boost Republicans in California races.

But there are some indications that some big Democratic funders are ready to blunt their impact. On Thursday, as campaign finance reports continued to trickle in, a PAC created by former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg reported dropping more than $9.5 million on an eleventh-hour ad campaign to promote Hill and attack Rohrabacher.

Share

Lobbyist who accused assemblyman of sexual misconduct seeks dismissal of defamation suit

Pamela Lopez, at a December 2017 news conference, accused then-Assemblyman Matt Dababneh (D-Woodland Hills) of lewd behavior.
(Rich Pedroncelli/AP)

A Sacramento lobbyist who was sued by former San Fernando Valley Assemblyman Matt Dababneh for defamation after she publicly accused him of sexual misconduct is seeking dismissal of the lawsuit.

Pamela Lopez announced on Thursday that she is filing a motion under California’s “anti-SLAPP” law, or “strategic lawsuit against public participation,” which protects a person exercising the right to free speech about an issue of public interest against being silenced through a lawsuit.

The action marks the latest development in the saga between Lopez and Dababneh, who resigned in December, one week after Lopez publicly accused him of forcing her into a bathroom in a Las Vegas hotel suite and masturbating in front of her.

Dababneh has denied the allegation and filed a defamation suit against Lopez in August, arguing her public accusation ruined his political career and reputation in his community. A legislative investigation by the Assembly made public soon after his lawsuit substantiated Lopez’s complaint. In a separate legal action filed earlier this month, Dababneh is seeking to compel the Assembly to make the investigation report public, a move his representatives said was in pursuit of full transparency around the findings.

“I’m defending myself. This defamation lawsuit from Dababneh is a shameful attempt to silence me as a survivor of sexual harassment,” Lopez said. “This anti-SLAPP motion is me indicating that I will not be silenced and more generally, indicating that survivors have a right to talk about our experiences of sexual harassment at the hands of powerful man.”

In her filing, Lopez argues that her decision to file a complaint to the Assembly and discuss that allegation at a news conference is protected under California law, because it pertained to an issue under review by a legislative body.

She is seeking immediate dismissal of Dababneh’s suit, as well as compensation for her legal fees.

“Since Day 1, Mr. Dababneh has maintained his innocence and has been adamant that the events Ms. Lopez described never occurred,” said Dababneh’s attorney Patty Glaser. “We believe that Ms. Lopez’s motion in this matter is her unfair attempt to deny Mr. Dababneh the due process he deserves. The only reason my client is pursuing legal action is so that all of the facts and evidence in this case can be made public.”

Lopez said her legal expenses are being paid for by the Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund, an organization initially founded to address the sexual harassment scandals that rocked Hollywood last year.

She said she hoped others who have experienced sexual harassment would take notice of the networks of women offering support.

“I am not trying to figure this out alone,” Lopez said. “I have been surrounded by organizations that have been supportive and helpful.”

Share
Advertisement

New poll shows Gavin Newsom with a solid lead heading into the election for governor

Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom.
(Josh Edelson / For The Times)

With less than two weeks to go before election day, Democratic Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom still holds a solid lead over Republican businessman John Cox in California’s race for governor, according to a new poll by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California.

The survey found that 49% of likely California voters favored Newsom, compared to 38% that backed Cox. The remaining 12% of voters either were undecided or said they will not vote in the November election.

Newsom’s strongest geographic bases of support were in Los Angeles County and the San Francisco Bay area, home to just under half the voters in California. Cox, a wealthy real estate investor from Rancho Santa Fe, was favored in the Inland Empire. In the Central Valley, voters were evenly divided between the two.

A PPIC poll released in September had similar results, though Newsom’s lead over Cox was slightly higher at 12 percentage points.

Newsom had a much larger lead in a USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll released last week. The survey found that 54% of likely voters in the state favored Newsom for governor compared to 31% who supported Cox.

Share

Proposition 10’s support craters in new poll, which shows 60% of voters are against rent control initiative

An apartment complex in Reseda in October.
(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

An initiative to expand rent control across California is losing ground and now faces a large deficit less than two weeks before election day, according to a new poll.

Just 25% of likely voters say they’ll vote yes on Proposition 10, with 60% against the measure and 15% undecided, a poll released Wednesday from the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California said.

“There is really no group in which we’re seeing support for Proposition 10 at this point,” said Mark Baldassare, the institute’s president and pollster.

The poll, conducted from Oct. 12 to Oct. 21, shows weaker results for the initiative than a similar PPIC survey from September. In that poll, Proposition 10 was trailing 36% to 48% with 16% undecided.

Over the past month, opponents of Proposition 10 have unleashed their significant fundraising advantage through advertisements. No on 10 campaign committees, predominantly financed by landlord interests, have raised $67.9 million, outraising the Yes on 10 side, which is almost entirely funded by the Los Angeles-based AIDS Healthcare Foundation, nearly 3 to 1. In total, more than $92 million has been raised on both sides, according to state campaign finance records.

Baldassare said the biggest change from September to October in the poll was the drop-off in backing for Proposition 10. The onslaught of advertising against the measure was likely a factor, he said.

“It has an impact on something that was already struggling to gain support,” Baldassare said.

Proposition 10 would repeal a state law that prohibits cities and counties from implementing most new forms of rent-control policies. Currently local governments are not allowed to implement rent control on single-family homes, take away the right of landlords to charge what they want for apartments after a rent-controlled tenant moves out, or control rents in buildings constructed after 1995 or earlier in some cities with longstanding rent stabilization rules. If Proposition 10 passes, those restrictions would go away.

The new PPIC poll shows opposition to Proposition 10 across demographic groups, including renters, with 53% against the initiative. Democrats are also opposed, with 54% against.

Across the state, nearly two-thirds of likely voters polled in Los Angeles said they would vote no, the strongest opposition from any part of the state. The Los Angeles figure is a reversal of the results from September’s poll that showed the proposition had the most regional support among Angelenos.

The October poll surveyed 989 likely voters and has a margin of sampling error of 4.2 percentage points in either direction for likely voters and larger for subcategories of voters.

Share
Advertisement

Los Angeles City Council backs the Proposition 10 rent-control-expansion initiative

Los Angeles City Council President Herb Wesson
(Luis Sinco / Los Angeles Times)

The Los Angeles City Council on Tuesday endorsed Proposition 10, a statewide initiative that would allow for the expansion of rent control across California.

The council voted 13 to 1 to endorse the measure, with Councilman Mitchell Englander, who represents parts of San Fernando Valley, the lone no vote.

Proposition 10 would repeal a state law that prohibits cities and counties from implementing most new forms of rent-control policies. Los Angeles ties rent hikes to inflation for those living in apartments built on or before Oct. 1, 1978, and the state law blocks the city from changing that date to a more recent date of construction.

If Proposition 10 passes, it’s likely that the city will consider strengthening its rent-stabilization policies beyond what it is allowed to do now. Mayor Eric Garcetti has endorsed doing so.

Council President Herb Wesson and Councilman Mitch O’Farrell also requested Tuesday that the city reexamine its existing rent-control rules with an eye toward expanding them — with or without Proposition 10’s passage.

“With a balanced approach that provides certainty to tenants while recognizing the need for property owners to make a reasonable return on their investments, we can begin to bridge the gap in availability of housing while continuing to build responsibly and with an eye on the future needs of Angelenos,” O’Farrell said on Twitter.

Tuesday’s vote to endorse Proposition 10 came without comment from council members. Council members Mike Bonin, Marqueece Harris-Dawson and Paul Koretz initially put forward the resolution to endorse the initiative.

Last week, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors endorsed Proposition 10.

Share

Nancy Pelosi hints at short-term lease on House speakership

Democrats have yet to win a House majority and Nancy Pelosi’s return as speaker is by no means certain, but already she has one eye on the exits.

“I see myself as a transitional figure,” Pelosi said in an interview in which she professed utmost confidence that, should Democrats take control of the chamber on Nov. 6, she will again assume the top leadership position. “I have things to do. Books to write; places to go; grandchildren, first and foremost, to love.”

She hastened to add she was not imposing a limit on her tenure. “Do you think I would make myself a lame duck right here over this double-espresso?” the San Francisco Democrat said Thursday in a downtown Miami cafe, with a raised eyebrow and a laugh.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Democrats and Republicans are spending more on TV ads than ever. One thing most have in common — they’re avoiding Trump

Republican Reps. Mimi Walters of Laguna Beach and Steve Knight of Palmdale are both staunch allies of President Trump. But only Walters is getting trashed for it in Democratic attack ads.

One spot shows a wall of shelves crowded with two brands of beer: Donald Trump (“a unique blend of malted nonsense and flavorless hops”) and Mimi Walters (“A Flat Beer Company”).

“How often does Mimi Walters vote with Donald Trump?” a narrator sneers between refrains of “99 Bottles of Beer.” “Ninety-nine percent of the time.”

Read More

Share

State officials decline to drop plan to allow home deliveries of pot in California cities that ban marijuana stores

Cities and law enforcement leaders say a state proposal to allow pot delivery to homes would increase crime.
Cities and law enforcement leaders say a state proposal to allow pot delivery to homes would increase crime.
(Mathew Sumner / Associated Press)

Despite objections from cities and police chiefs, state officials on Friday declined to drop a proposal allowing marijuana firms to deliver to homes everywhere in California, including in areas that have banned pot shops.

The proposed rule, which was made public in July, was opposed by the League of California Cities, which represents the state’s 482 municipalities, and the California Police Chiefs Assn., which said it would jeopardize public safety.

But the state Bureau of Cannabis Control announced Friday that it is moving forward with the proposed rule after a series of public hearings and after weighing hundreds of comments from residents and interested parties.

“Our regulations put forth this morning do not change what was proposed on July 13,” bureau spokesman Alex Traverso said. “Statewide delivery is legal and jurisdictions cannot ban it.”

Law enforcement leaders had voiced concern that deliveries may lead to spikes in crime, including robbery of delivery vans carrying cash and marijuana.

“The police chiefs and our coalition continue to remain opposed to the loss of local control,” said Morgan Hill Police Chief David Swing, president of the California Police Chiefs Assn. after the bureau’s announcement Friday. “I continue to believe that statewide delivery of recreational cannabis poses a risk to public safety.”

Swing said if the proposed rule is enacted, cities would still be able to adopt standards regulating how deliveries are made.

“I would suspect that that’s an area that cities will chose to explore,” Swing said.

Traverso declined a request to explain why the bureau decided to keep the proposal, but the agency has said in the past that it is following a law approved by the Legislature in 2016 that says: “A local jurisdiction shall not prevent delivery of cannabis or cannabis products on public roads” by firms holding state licenses.

Still, the proposed regulations are aimed at clarifying the issue after the police chiefs argued the law does not block them from being able to cite those who deliver to homes in cities that have banned pot shops.

The proposed regulations will now be subject to a 15-day public comment period, after which state officials will respond to the input before putting the rules in place.

Bureau Chief Lori Ajax said in a statement Friday that the previous public hearings and input provided “valuable feedback from industry stakeholders and the public. These changes we’ve proposed further clarify the requirements for cannabis businesses while protecting overall public health and safety.”

Share
Advertisement

California housing crisis podcast: How has wine country rebuilt after last year’s wildfires?

A row of houses in Santa Rosa, Calif., lies in ruins in October 2017 as fires swept through wine country.
A row of houses in Santa Rosa, Calif., lies in ruins in October 2017 as fires swept through wine country.
(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

It’s been a year since Sonoma County and other Northern California counties were hit with devastating wildfires that led to dozens of deaths and the destruction of thousands of homes.

On this episode of Gimme Shelter: The California Housing Crisis Podcast, we speak with Santa Rosa Mayor Chris Coursey about rebuilding efforts in his city, and resident John Thill, who lost both his home and business in the fires.

With less than three weeks before the election, we also break down how gubernatorial candidates Gavin Newsom and John Cox handled housing questions in their lone debate, and discuss the latest polling and fundraising for Proposition 10, the initiative that would expand rent control across the state.

Gimme Shelter,” a biweekly podcast that looks at why it’s so expensive to live in California and what the state can do about it, features Liam Dillon, who covers housing affordability issues for the Los Angeles Times’ Sacramento bureau, and Matt Levin, data and housing reporter for CALmatters.

You can subscribe to “Gimme Shelter” on iTunes, Stitcher, Soundcloud, Google Play and Overcast.

Share

John Cox tours L.A.’s skid row, likening it to a ‘third-world country’

Republican candidate for governor John Cox on tours skid row in downtown Los Angeles.
(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

After months of criticizing his opponent for his record on homelessness as mayor of San Francisco, Republican John Cox took his campaign for governor to Los Angeles’ skid row on Tuesday, where he promised to provide more housing and services for Californians in need.

As he toured the downtown neighborhood, home to a large homeless population, Cox likened the area to a “third-world country.”

“It is absolutely not compassionate to let people live on this street,” Cox told reporters. “This is 21st century California. This is not Bangladesh.”

The Rancho Santa Fe businessman, who said he had driven through the neighborhood before, visited skid row with a group of Los Angeles police officers.

“Wow, look at this,” he said as he walked down the middle of the street, gazing at rows of tents. “It extends for blocks.”

With more than 4,200 homeless residents, skid row is the epicenter of Los Angeles’ homeless crisis. About half of the population is unsheltered, according to the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, and police say drugs, gangs and lawlessness persist in the neighborhood.

A recent typhus outbreak downtown has raised new concerns about sanitary conditions in the area.

“The whole thing breaks my heart,” said Cox, who said he’d build more housing and support addiction programs if elected.

California’s homeless population topped 134,000 people in 2017, a 13.7% jump from the previous year, according to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Last week, Cox’s campaign released a new radio advertisement blasting what it called “Newsomville” homeless encampments, seeking to link the problem to his Democratic rival, Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom.

For his part, Newsom has accused Cox of failing to put forward specific policy plans to address homelessness.

Pressed for details about his proposals, Cox said Tuesday he’d use public money to partner with private groups for addiction programs. He added that he would fund the programs by auditing state departments and finding waste.

A real estate developer, Cox criticized the California Environmental Quality Act, the state’s primary environmental law governing development, for slowing down the pace of construction. He didn’t indicate how, or if, he’d replace it.

Newsom also visited Los Angeles on Tuesday to propose a new statewide volunteer program, California Service Corps. Volunteers would earn thousands of dollars through the state-run program to help cover education costs.

The program was one of 10 proposals based around community service that Newsom announced Tuesday. Others include a mobile app so Californians can find ways to volunteer and a youth program to mentor foster children.

Asked about Cox’s visit to skid row, Newsom criticized his opponent for not supporting the Affordable Care Act, and said Cox’s policies are detrimental to the working poor.

“He’s arguing for policies and he’s embraced by a president who is advancing policies that would hurt the same people he claims to help,” Newsom said.

Share
Advertisement

California’s tax revenues beat expectations by $1 billion over the summer months

Envelopes addressed to the Franchise Tax Board arrive in Sacramento.
(Laura Morton / For the Los Angeles Times)

Californians paid some $1 billion in taxes above official projections during the first three months of the state’s fiscal year, in what could be a major boost to the government’s bottom line once Gov. Jerry Brown leaves office in January.

A monthly report issued Tuesday by the state Department of Finance attributed most of the unexpected revenue — $990 million — from personal income taxes paid between July 1 and Sept. 30. Sales taxes were slightly below expectations written into the budget crafted by Brown and state lawmakers in June, while corporation tax revenues were slightly above forecasts.

The new tax windfall comes on the heels of successive years in which revenues have bested expectations, a streak that has allowed the state to push toward its largest long-term cash reserve ever — $13.8 billion by next summer. But the surprise cash from the state government’s first quarter could be erased by weaker revenue collections in the coming months.

Last month, a review by the independent Legislative Analyst’s Office concluded that “economic conditions are near historical highs and the state’s near-term revenue outlook is strong.” The analysts concluded California’s fiscal health was near the highest point measured at any time in the last quarter of a century. Unemployment rates have also been at or near historic lows; in August, the state reported the fewest number of jobless Californians than at any time since 1990.

Budgets are one of the first items on the to-do list of a new governor. Once voters choose either Democratic Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom or Republican businessman John Cox next month, the governor-elect will have only a matter of weeks to weigh in on economic projections that will be used to craft his first budget. That spending plan must be submitted to the Legislature just days after the governor takes the oath of office on Jan. 7.

Share

Plan that would increase property tax bills for California businesses qualifies for 2020 ballot

An office tower in downtown Los Angeles
(Jay L. Clendenin / Los Angeles Times)

Californians could face a major decision two years from now about whether to increase property taxes for businesses after a ballot initiative qualified for the November 2020 ballot on Monday.

The initiative would tax commercial and industrial properties at their market values, resulting in the higher tax bills. Currently, all properties are taxed based on a value tied to when they were purchased, a system put in place under Proposition 13 in 1978. The initiative would leave those tax restrictions in place for homeowners.

A coalition of education and social justice advocates is behind the 2020 initiative, noting that the effort could raise as much as $10 billion annually in new tax revenue, according to an analysis by the state’s nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office.

Advocates have long discussed levying higher property taxes on businesses — an effort known as split roll — but no initiative had ever qualified to go before voters previously. The measure is sure to face intense opposition from business groups worried about the hit to their bottom lines.

Secretary of State Alex Padilla announced in a news release late Monday that the initiative had earned more than the 585,407 valid petition signatures it needed to make the ballot.

Monday’s news does not mean the initiative will definitely go before voters — its backers can pull it back for any reason. But the initiative’s qualification is likely to shape tax conversations at the Capitol over the next two years. Democratic gubernatorial candidate Gavin Newsom recently told The Times he would consider charging businesses higher property taxes than homes.

Share
Advertisement

Duncan Hunter campaign repeats unfounded claim that his opponent is ‘a national security risk’

Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Alpine)
(Gregory Bull / Associated Press)

Rep. Duncan Hunter, the indicted Republican from Alpine, has doubled down on unfounded attacks on his opponent with a letter signed by three retired Marine Corps generals that accused the Democrat of being “a national security risk.”

Hunter, who has pleaded not guilty to federal fraud charges of misusing campaign contributions, has labeled Democratic opponent Ammar Campa-Najjar a security risk in a widely condemned ad and has sought to tie Campa-Najjar to radical Islamists. The ad said Campa-Najjar — whose Mexican American mother raised him after his Palestinian father left the family — was trying to “infiltrate Congress.” Campa-Najjar, 29, is Christian and held a security clearance while working in the Obama administration. Campa-Najjar responded to the letter calling Hunter’s attacks on him “pathological.”

Roger White, Hunter’s campaign manager, said the three retired generals wrote the letter independent of the campaign, but that the campaign paid to reprint and distribute it. A picture of the letter was posted online Sunday evening.

Read More

Share

Gov. Jerry Brown asks state Supreme Court to review pardon application by former Sen. Rod Wright

Former state Sen. Roderick Wright at a court hearing in 2014.
Former state Sen. Roderick Wright at a court hearing in 2014.
(Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)

An attorney for Gov. Jerry Brown on Friday asked the state Supreme Court to recommend whether former state Sen. Rod Wright should be pardoned for his felony convictions in 2014 on charges of voter fraud and perjury for lying about living in his district.

The request by the governor’s legal secretary, Peter A. Krause, was the next formal step in a process that began when the California Board of Parole Hearings recommended a pardon last month.

“The crimes for which Sen. Wright was convicted — … perjury, false declaration of candidacy, and fraudulent voting — were non-violent in nature,” Krause wrote to the Supreme Court. “Moreover, Sen. Wright has devoted much of his life to public service, including serving six years in the California State Senate and six years in the California Assembly. Since his conviction, Sen. Wright has been employed as a consultant on government affairs and is an adjunct professor.”

Four of the Supreme Court judges must concur in the recommendation of the parole board before it can go to Brown for consideration.

Wright, a Democrat, resigned from the Senate and was barred for life from holding public office after a jury found him guilty of perjury and voting fraud. He has argued the law on residency is not clear, but that he believed he complied with its requirements.

Share
Advertisement

California governors haven’t focused on homelessness ‘for decades,’ Gavin Newsom says

Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom didn’t mention Gov. Jerry Brown by name on Friday after he toured a facility for homeless veterans in San Diego. But the Democratic gubernatorial candidate had some not-so-subtle criticism of the governor.

On homelessness, California has to “have a governor that is actually focused on these issues, which has not been the case for decades in this state,” Newsom said. “Governors have not campaigned on homelessness, governors haven’t talked about homelessness, that’s about to change in 25 days.”

Brown has faced repeated criticism for not making homelessness a bigger priority. Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti complained earlier this year about Brown’s last State of the State speech, saying “there wasn’t one mention of homelessness. We need the state to step up.”

A spokesman for Brown didn’t immediately provide a comment on Newsom’s remarks Friday.

The 2018-2019 budget signed by the governor included a package of bills and allocations designed to increase housing supply and affordability, including $500 million to assist local governments with homelessness.

California’s homeless population swelled to more than 134,000 people in 2017, a 13.7% jump from the previous year, according to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Friday wasn’t the first time that Newsom has rebuked Brown on the topic. At a gubernatorial debate in May, the Democratic front-runner said of the homelessness problem, “What lacks is leadership in this state.”

On Friday, Newsom said that if elected he’d put forward a multi-year plan to address homelessness and housing.

“We’re going to produce real results,” he said.

Newsom’s visit to San Diego came the same week that his opponent Republican John Cox released a new radio advertisement that mentions “Newsomville” homeless encampments and seeks to link the problem to his Democratic rival.

Asked about the spot, Newsom said Friday he hadn’t heard it.

Share

After recent errors, California DMV promises new quality control of voter registration process

A line of people stretches around the South L.A. location of a California Department of Motor Vehicles office on Aug. 7.
(Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times)

The California Department of Motor Vehicles has decided to implement new quality control on its voter registration process following Monday’s revelation of as many as 1,500 non-citizens being wrongly registered to vote.

“This will ensure that only those persons who have attested to their eligibility to vote under California law are transmitted to your office,” DMV Director Jean Shiomoto and California Department of Technology Director Amy Tong said in a letter on Friday to California Secretary of State Alex Padilla.

DMV officials said they will begin checking representative samples of voter registration documents to ensure accuracy before those applications are processed.

“If any error or inconsistency is discovered, it will be thoroughly investigated and immediately addressed before any transmission of information,” Shiomoto and Tong wrote.

State finance officials also announced they will expand their existing audit of DMV operations to include the new motor voter program that went online in the spring. In three separate incidents, officials have had to disclose significant errors in correctly identifying who is eligible to vote or in a voter’s political party preference.

Padilla, whose Republican challenger in the Nov. 6 election has sought to make the DMV errors a staple of the campaign, has said he would be willing to suspend implementation of the motor voter program if needed while the errors were investigated.

Share
Advertisement

O.C. transit workers warn of service and job cuts if Californians vote to repeal gas tax hike

An initiative to repeal an increase in California’s fuel taxes and vehicle fees may force a reduction of bus service in Orange County and elimination of some transit jobs, officials and union leaders said Friday.

Members of Teamsters Union Local 952 rallied against Proposition 6 outside the headquarters of the Orange County Transportation Authority, saying repeal of transportation taxes approved by the Legislature in Senate Bill 1 could force an 11% cut in the budget for bus operations, jeopardizing nearly 200 jobs.

“We were able to avoid service cuts and job losses because of SB 1, but now if this goes through we’re going to have a bunch of job losses and we’re going to have a negative impact on the traffic,” said Patrick D. Kelly, the secretary-treasurer for the union local.

Kelly cited a memo Thursday from OCTA Chief Executive Darrell E. Johnson to his transit committee that said the agency might have to eliminate some routes and reduce service on others if it loses $19 million being provided in SB 1 funds.

“If Proposition 6 is approved by voters in November 2018, OCTA would need to decrease transit service levels because of reduced revenues,” Johnson said in the memo.

Supporters of Proposition 6 criticized the claims as scare tactics and said the state has adequate funds without SB 1 to pay for needed transit services.

“This is nothing more than political hostage-taking,” said Dave McCulloch, communications director for the Yes on 6 campaign. “Our well-documented proposal shows there’s more than enough money if the Sacramento politicians allocated 100% of existing gas tax revenues where they should instead of being misused and stolen.”

Share

Devin Nunes is attacking his district’s newspaper before the midterm election. It’s a page from Trump’s playbook

For years, Rep. Devin Nunes and the Fresno Bee got along just fine. But now, facing his first serious election challenge in years, the Central Valley congressman is on the attack — not against his Democratic opponent, but his district’s largest newspaper and what he calls its “band of creeping correspondents.”

The Republican from Tulare is bashing the Fresno Bee in TV and radio ads and a glossy, 40-page mailer after the newspaper angered him with harsh editorials and less-than-flattering news stories. In one ad, he looks into a camera and accuses the paper — which had endorsed him in the last eight elections — of “working with radical left-wing groups to promote fake news stories.”

It’s a tactic that Nunes — along with other Republican candidates — has borrowed from President Trump when encountering coverage he doesn’t like.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

L.A. County sheriff’s deputies union backs Republican John Cox for governor

Share

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, state Sen. Kevin de León to meet for Senate debate next week

Sen. Dianne Feinstein and state Sen. Kevin de León will meet Wednesday for a conversation moderated by the Public Policy Institute of California.

But is it a debate? Feinstein’s campaign says it is, De León’s team says it is not.

Moderator and PPIC president Mark Baldassare will sit between the two Democrats, posing questions to each. The candidates will have three minutes to answer each question and will not engage one another as in a traditional debate, but Baldassare will have discretion over allowing rebuttals. (PPIC says the face-off will be similar in format to a conversation last month between the state superintendent of public instruction candidates.)

The discussion is scheduled for 12:10 p.m. Wednesday and will be streamed online.

You can read about the candidates’ plans for their time in Washington here and about where they stand on state and national issues here.

Share
Advertisement

Curtailing California’s inheritance tax break would raise billions of dollars in property taxes, new analysis finds

An inherited home once owned by comedian Dom DeLuise in Malibu has received a large property tax break.
(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

Eliminating California’s inheritance tax break for vacation houses and rental property and restricting its use for primary homes could raise $2 billion a year in property taxes over time, according to a new analysis.

The tax break was subject of a recent Times investigation that found wealthy heirs across the state had received large tax benefits from inherited property and that the majority of heirs had not reported their homes as their primary residence.

For instance, actor Jeff Bridges and his siblings would have paid an additional $300,000 in property taxes if their Malibu beach property had been reassessed when they inherited it nine years ago. Earlier this year, the family listed the home for rent at $15,995 a month.

The report from the state’s nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office studied the effects of requiring heirs to live in their parents’ home to receive the tax break and limiting the benefit to the first $1 million in taxable value for primary residences. The analyst estimated these changes would increase property taxes for 40,000 to 60,000 inherited properties each year.

“This, in turn, would increase property tax revenues for local governments,” the report said.

The analyst estimated schools and other local governments would receive more than $200 million combined annually to start, with that amount growing to $2 billion annually over time.

The inheritance tax break was examined as part of determining the fiscal effects of a potential November 2020 ballot measure sponsored by the California Assn. of Realtors. The organization wants make changes to the tax break as part of broader initiative to extend property tax benefits for homeowners 55 and older and clamp down on businesses who avoid higher property taxes when they buy commercial real estate.

Steve White, president of the California Assn. of Realtors, said the state should preserve inheritance benefits for children who want to live in their parents’ homes — but that’s it.

“If it’s a going to be rental, if it’s going to be business, it should be treated differently,” White said.

Assemblyman David Chiu (D-San Francisco), the head of the Assembly Committee on Housing and Community Development, is also looking at potential changes to the inheritance tax break for when the Legislature reconvenes in January. He called the legislative analyst’s findings on potential tax revenue that could be raised by curtailing the tax break “enormous.”

“We need to have a legislative discussion on closing the [inheritance tax break] loophole and the best use of these dollars,” Chiu said.

2:35 p.m.: This article was updated with quotations from Steve White and David Chiu.

This article was originally published at 8:00 a.m.

Share

Campaign to repeal gas-tax increase attacks spending by Caltrans, Los Angeles MTA

(Joe Raedle / Getty Images)

The Proposition 6 campaign on Tuesday cited six-figure salaries given to thousands of government transportation workers as a reason why California voters should approve the initiative to repeal fuel-tax and vehicle-fee increases enacted last year.

Less than a month before the Nov. 6 election, campaign chairman Carl DeMaio is set to host a news conference Wednesday in front of Caltrans headquarters in downtown Los Angeles, where he said he will argue that the state can fix roads and bridges without raising the gas tax and vehicle fees.

DeMaio said Tuesday that public records requested by the campaign show thousands of government transportation agency employees are getting excessive paychecks.

He cited Caltrans, which he said has 6,705 workers making salaries of $100,000 or more, and the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transit Authority, where 1,406 employees make six-figure salaries. The numbers are higher when benefits are included, he said, noting that MTA CEO Philip Washington is paid $425,016 annually in salary and benefits, while hundreds of bus drivers are also topping $100,000 in total compensation.

DeMaio also criticized travel expenses by transportation agencies that receive state funds, including a $7,300 trip by one MTA administrator to France, Germany and Italy in April, and $5,000 in expenses for an MTA delegation attending March meetings in China on rail programs.

“These outrageous examples of waste of our gas tax funds are proof that voters cannot trust California government agencies with even a penny more of their money until efficiency and accountability reforms can clean up these excessive expenditures,” DeMaio said in a statement.

The campaign made similar complaints of six-figure salaries given to transportation workers in Orange County.

Robin Swanson, a spokeswoman for the campaign against Proposition 6, declined to directly address the criticism of the salaries.

“That has nothing to do with Prop. 6,” she said.

DeMaio also blasted the MTA for its March decision to purchase five electric-battery-powered buses for $1.3 million each, saying the agency could achieve the same clean-air goals paying $300,000 apiece for natural-gas-powered buses. The MTA was given a credit by the bus maker that reduced the final cost to about $718,000 per bus, public records show.

Share
Advertisement

California secretary of state rebukes DMV for voter registration errors while affirming election integrity

California Secretary of State Alex Padilla speaks about election integrity.
California Secretary of State Alex Padilla speaks about election integrity.
(Mini Racker/ Los Angeles Times)

California Secretary of State Alex Padilla criticized the California Department of Motor Vehicles on Tuesday for incorrectly registering 1,500 individuals to vote, saying he was “hugely concerned” that the agency did not uncover the errors until The Times revealed them to the public.

The registration errors might have been caused by the motor voter program, which requires Californians to opt out if they do not want to be registered to vote when they get a driver’s license. Padilla said that a freeze of the program was on the table, and has also called for an independent audit of the DMV’s technology and procedures.

“They’ve demonstrated that they’re not capable of handling it themselves, and the stakes are too high as we approach the voter registration deadline and the November election to have any more mistakes like this,” Padilla said of the DMV.

Upon discovering the mistakes, the secretary of State’s office immediately cancelled the incorrect registrations, and any affected ballots will not be counted on election day. But Padilla said his office is still uncertain as to whether people who were registered incorrectly voted in the primaries.

Those who were mistakenly registered could be non-citizens, but they could also be ineligible for other reasons, including age or parole status. Some might have been eligible to vote, but did not mark a box indicating they were.

Padilla emphasized that the errors were made by the DMV, not by his office.

“I want to make clear where the mistake was, where the responsibility lies: It’s on the DMV side,” Padilla said. “We have to continue to ask each and every day — what else they may not be telling us. There’s a huge credibility issue here with DMV. We’re doing everything we can to protect the integrity of the election.”

In particular, Padilla said his office had worked to address cyber-security threats, citing Russian interference in the 2016 election.

“There is still zero evidence of any hack or breach of any type in California in 2016,” he said. “What we did observe, for example, was probing of the state’s general network and what many Californians experienced, just like many Americans experienced: a massive, concerted disinformation campaign that tried to manipulate public opinion and sow discord and division among American citizens.”

This year, Padilla’s office has implemented additional training to prevent hacks and combat disinformation campaigns. Padilla said that, as far as he knows, there have been no foreign cyber attacks in the state ahead of the November election.

Share

No, Gavin Newsom’s dog didn’t eat his candidate statement for the California voter guide

Californians receiving their official state voter information guide for the Nov. 6 election may notice a glaring omission.

On the page displaying the candidates for California governor is a picture of Republican John Cox and a half-page candidate statement, along with his campaign website address and official Twitter handle.

But Democratic Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom’s statement is nowhere to be found. All that’s listed is his name, party affiliation and a concise message: “No candidate statement.”

Was it a printing blunder by the secretary of state’s office? Did the Newsom campaign opt not to pay for it? Did the Newsom family dog eat it?

None of the above.

Candidates for statewide office in California are only permitted to include a candidate statement in the voter’s guide if they agree to voluntary campaign spending limits. For candidates running for governor in the Nov. 6 election, that limit is $14,588,000.

The Newsom campaign did not agree to the limit, secretary of state spokesman Sam Mahood said.

For candidates who do agree to the spending limits, official statements must be limited to 250 words at a cost of $25 a word.

In 2018 alone, the Newsom campaign has spent close to $22 million — he still had more than $16 million in the bank as of late September.

Share
Advertisement

California housing crisis podcast: A homeless housing battle in Los Angeles

We tried something new on “Gimme Shelter: The California Housing Crisis Podcast.” We enlisted “LA Podcast” for our first-ever crossover episode, and talked with “LA Podcast” hosts, comedian Hayes Davenport, local activist Scott Frazier and Curbed Los Angeles editor Alissa Walker, about the connections between housing affordability issues in Los Angeles and the state as a whole.

We went deep explaining the city of Los Angeles’ proposal to build housing for homeless residents across the city, including talking about a contentious meeting in Sherman Oaks where neighbors threatened to recall Councilman David Ryu if he backed new developments.

And, according to a new poll, there is more support in Los Angeles for Proposition 10, the rent control expansion ballot initiative, than anywhere else in the state. The poll revealed a difficult path to victory for the initiative.

Gimme Shelter,” a biweekly podcast that looks at why it’s so expensive to live in California and what the state can do about it, features Liam Dillon, who covers housing affordability issues for the Los Angeles Times’ Sacramento bureau, and Matt Levin, data and housing reporter for CALmatters.

You can subscribe to “Gimme Shelter” on iTunes, Stitcher, Soundcloud, Google Play and Overcast.

Share

California GOP spends nearly $6 million against two ballot measures

Rent-control supporters march past the Capitol in Sacramento.
(Rich Pedroncelli/Associated Press)

The California Republican Party spent $5.8 million against two November ballot measures that would expand rent control and limit profits for dialysis clinics after accepting a similar amount of money from business interests.

The money paid for “member communication” opposing Propositions 8 and 10, according to campaign reports filed over the last few weeks.

It’s not illegal for political parties to ask for money to fund mailers for ballot measures as long as the contributions are reported to the state. The arrangement allows outside groups to pay for the outreach to voters and hide behind the state GOP name without disclosing their own identities on the mailers or advertisements.

Official state parties might hold more credibility with California voters than business entities or campaign committees.

“The California Republican Party voted to oppose Proposition 8 at its convention last May and we’re happy to support the party’s efforts to inform voters about the dangers of Proposition 8 in its member communications and outreach,” said Kathy Fairbanks, a spokeswoman for the No on Proposition 8 campaign funded by DaVita Inc. and Fresenius Medical Care.

The California Hospital Assn. and the No on Prop 8 campaign have given the party $2.4 million since mid-September. The state GOP has dished out $2.6 million total against Proposition 8, a union-backed ballot measure to require dialysis corporations to spend more money on patient care.

A representative for the California Republican Party declined to say if the payments for Propositions 8 and 10 were coordinated.

“In general, we work with various stakeholders to let our members know our positions and we are thankful to our donors who support our programs,” spokesperson Matt Fleming said in a statement.

Proposition 10 would repeal a law that generally restricts the ability of cities to expand rent control on apartments built after 1995. The party has spent $3.2 million against the measure, which is being pushed by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation.

Two Orange County apartment developers, the Irvine Co. and Michael Hayde, gave the state party $3.3 million this year.

The Irvine Co., which manages and owns 125 apartment communities mostly in Southern California, has not publicly reported any direct contributions to No on Proposition 10, a campaign committee primarily funded by a trade group of apartment owners, managers, investors and developers.

Hayde reported an additional $8.5 million in contributions against the measure.

The California Democratic Party has spent roughly $50,000 on each of the two ballot measures.

The party received $250,000 from the Yes on Prop 10 campaign last month. The Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West, which qualified Proposition 8 on the ballot, has given the party a total of $1.1 million since April 2017.

Share
Advertisement

Gas-tax repeal campaign sends ‘ballot correction’ to voters that opponents say is misleading

Objecting to the ballot title provided by state officials, the Proposition 6 campaign has sent a mass mailer to California voters labeled “Election Ballot Correction” that opponents of the gas-tax repeal initiative say is misleading because it looks like an official notice.

The mailer sent to some 2 million absentee voters across the state says “The correct title for Proposition 6 should read Proposition 6: Gas Tax Repeal Initiative.”

The mailer by Reform California, a group headed by Republican activist Carl DeMaio, was criticized Monday by Matt Cate, co-chairman of the No on Proposition 6 campaign.

“This is just more deception from a campaign that is steeped in spreading misinformation,” Cate said. “DeMaio’s attempts to mislead voters are despicable.”

The Yes on 6 campaign complained when Democratic Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra drafted an official title for the initiative that the campaign said was misleading because it does not say that the measure would repeal recent increases to fuel taxes and vehicle fees approved last year by the Legislature.

The official title that voters will see on the ballot is: “Eliminates Certain Road Repair and Transportation Funding, Requires Certain Fuel Taxes and Vehicle Fees be Approved by The Electorate.”

A recent poll by the Public Policy Institute of California asked likely voters if they support repealing recent fuel tax increases, and 50% agreed. But when voters are read the official ballot title, the pollsters said support drops to 39%.

“They poll-tested a scary title and they slapped it on there,” DeMaio said during a debate with Cate on Monday at the Sacramento Press Club.

The mailer says it is a notice “provided to you in compliance with election laws.”

“The official sample ballot that was mailed to you contained a title for one of the statewide propositions that is misleading and could be confusing to voters,” the mailer says. “Please retain this notice and place it with the sample ballot that was mailed to you.”

A disclaimer in fine print at the bottom of the mailer adds: “This is not an official ballot or an official county voter information guide prepared by the county election official or the secretary of state. This is an unofficial, marked ballot prepared by Reform California.”

Updated at 2 pm to include comment from DeMaio at debate.

Share

Newsom and Cox emphasize their opposing views on the state’s criminal justice, immigration laws

California gubernatorial candidates Gavin Newsom and John Cox on Monday highlighted their diametrically opposed beliefs on the state’s criminal justice and immigration policies.

In a KQED radio debate, Cox staked out a tough-on-crime stance and denounced recent voter initiatives that have reduced some theft and drug crimes and overhauled the parole system, saying they have contributed to high property crime. He said he would not continue such reforms if elected governor, while Newsom called them “enlightened policies” enacted under the administration of Gov. Jerry Brown, pledging to build on the governor’s legacy.

The two candidates also hold very different positions on bail reform and California’s so-called “sanctuary state” law, with Cox pledging to work to repeal them and Newsom arguing that his opponent “parrots in almost every opportunity Donald Trump and Trumpism.”

California’s new bail law, signed by Brown in late August, virtually eliminates the payment of money as a condition of release and grants judges and probation departments more power to decide who should remain incarcerated before trial.

Cox said those decisions were better left in the hands of the private bail industry, instead of government. Newsom said the law was necessary to address the disproportionate incarceration of African American and Latino defendants.

“Only Duterte’s Philippines and Trump’s United States of America have cash bail,” Newsom said. But the next governor’s concern will be ensuring cautious implementation and addressing concerns over judicial oversight, he said.

Newsom also expressed overwhelming support for the state’s landmark sanctuary law, which limits who state and local law enforcement agencies can hold, question and transfer at the request of federal immigration authorities.

Cox argued that sheriffs across the state told him the law was an impediment to their jobs. He said he would work to have the Legislature change it, and if not, take it to the people for a vote.

“I think this law is very unpopular, I think it sends the wrong message, I think people want to know that they are going to have their law enforcement officials work together,” Cox said.

Share
Advertisement

Gavin Newsom says past spats with other politicians are due to his lack of ‘timidity’

Gavin Newsom has centered his gubernatorial campaign on his rivalry with President Trump. But long before Trump, Newsom was known for his squabbles with fellow Democrats.

KQED’s Scott Shafer asked Newsom on Monday about the lieutenant governor’s history of tussling with other elected officials — be it colleagues on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, Gov. Jerry Brown when Newsom briefly ran against him in 2010 or leaders in the California Legislature.

Newsom said the spats were a good thing — a sign he’d go against the political grain.

“If you’re looking for timidity, I’m not your person,” Newsom said. “If you’re looking for someone to be bold and courageous, lean into issues, change the order of things, I’m committing myself to that cause as the next governor.”

At least one of those dust-ups has become a central part of Newsom’s campaign — the pushback he got from fellow Democrats when, as San Francisco mayor, he decided to issue same-sex marriage licenses in 2004. Newsom featured the episode in a campaign ad this spring.

But his colleagues in San Francisco have also chafed at Newsom’s telling of the origin of the city’s healthcare coverage for uninsured residents, with some grumbling that Newsom has taken credit for a plan that did not start with him.

In the debate on Monday, Newsom conceded he’s learned a lot in his years in public life.

“I was mayor at a relatively young age,” Newsom reflected. “There was a desire to do everything all at once,” he said, adding he’s since learned to prioritize and bring people along to his agenda.

Share

John Cox was coy on how he’d confront ‘special interests.’ That hasn’t always been the case

Republican gubernatorial candidate John Cox was quick to blame “special interests in Sacramento” for wasteful government spending during Monday’s radio debate against Gavin Newsom.

But when pressed on how he’d tackle the influence of money in politics, he repeatedly demurred, saying he’d unveil his plans after the election.

Cox hasn’t always been so coy. In fact, he got his start in California politics by pushing an out-of-the box initiative to create a “neighborhood Legislature,” which would have dramatically expanded the number of state lawmakers. Cox tried, and failed, multiple times to get the proposal on the ballot.

The neighborhood Legislature proposal was at the heart of Cox’s kickoff video for his gubernatorial run. But he’s since been more circumspect about the plan. His campaign declined to make him available for an interview about the measure for a Los Angeles Times story on the idea earlier this year.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Newsom and Cox spar over gas-tax-increase repeal initiative, Caltrans efficiency

Democratic Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, left, and Republican businessman John Cox faced off Monday in a candidate forum in San Francisco.
Democratic Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, left, and Republican businessman John Cox faced off Monday in a candidate forum in San Francisco.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

The candidates for California governor clashed in a debate Monday over Proposition 6, the initiative that would repeal fuel tax increases and vehicle fees for repairing the state’s roads and bridges.

Republican John Cox, who is co-chairman of the Proposition 6 campaign, said that if elected, Democrat Gavin Newsom would not force Caltrans to improve operations to allow the state to pay for road repairs without raising taxes.

“I think Gavin would not exercise enough control over efficiency at Caltrans,” Cox said during the debate on KQED radio, adding that Democrats are “digging into the pockets of people who are already paying” high fuel taxes “instead of reforming that system.”

“The tough job would have been making Caltrans live within its means,” Cox said.

Newsom noted that traffic congestion and road conditions are terrible, especially in areas such as Los Angeles.

“His plan is to make things worse,” Newsom said of Cox. “He is taking away over $5 billion every year for road improvement, for public safety improvements.”

Newsom said the notion that Caltrans efficiencies could make up that much money is “illusory.”

Still, he added, “We are going to find more efficiency at Caltrans.”

Share

In debate, Cox says he ousted former San Diego Mayor Bob Filner. But there’s a lot more to the story

Share
Advertisement

John Cox says he opposes sanctuary state law but says he’s wary of immigration enforcement in schools

Share

Newsom, Cox split on how California governments should respond to the housing affordability crisis

California gubernatorial candidates Gavin Newsom and John Cox outlined sharp contrasts on how to resolve the state’s housing affordability crisis during a radio debate Monday morning.

While they agreed the state needs to speed production to address the state’s low housing supply, they differed on how to do that.

Newsom, the Democratic lieutenant governor, said the state needed to increase spending to help build new low-income housing developments, and pitched giving cities and counties more financial incentives to approve new housing. Currently, the state’s tax structure provides more revenue to local governments that approve commercial and hotel projects compared with housing. Newsom said he’d be willing to reexamine Proposition 13’s property tax restrictions as part of broad changes to the tax structure.

“We would like to have that debate about tax sharing,” Newsom said.

Cox, by contrast, focused on overhauling the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA, the state’s primary environmental law governing development. A Republican businessman who develops housing in the Midwest, Cox criticized the law for slowing project approvals and adding to costs of development.

“It’s government that has driven up the cost of housing in California,” Cox said.

Still, Cox stopped short of endorsing limiting local approval over new developments, saying the power cities and counties have is appropriate.

Rather than making dramatic changes to CEQA as a whole, Newsom said he’d prefer to create more exemptions to the law for specific kinds of projects that Newsom called “socially desirable.”

Share
Advertisement

John Cox asked about past statements on gay marriage

John Cox, center, is questioned by reporters as he leaves a June news conference where he blasted a recent gas tax increase.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

In a debate between California’s gubernatorial candidate Monday morning, KQED senior politics editor Scott Shafer asked Republican John Cox about past statements on the LGBTQ community, honing in on comments the Rancho Santa Fe businessman has made about gay marriage.

Cox has been criticized by his opponents for a series of gaffes and offensive statements. Read more in Phil Willon’s story.

Share

California’s candidates for governor discuss the housing crisis, honing in on local control and CEQA

Share
Advertisement

Listen live on KQED: John Cox and Gavin Newsom hold their only gubernatorial debate

Democrat Gavin Newsom and Republican John Cox
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)
Share

Meet Young Kim, an Asian American immigrant woman running for Congress under Trump’s Republican Party

Some other year, under some other president, Republican Young Kim might have been a shoo-in to represent a majority-minority congressional district containing pieces of Orange, Los Angeles and San Bernardino counties.

Kim’s profile is as compelling as it is rare for someone running under the GOP banner: an immigrant, an Asian American and, perhaps most important, a woman in a year when female voter enthusiasm is surging. If she wins, she would be the first Korean American woman elected to Congress.

All of these facets might help her navigate the demographic changes that have been eroding Republican support for decades in the 39th Congressional District, where roughly two-thirds of residents are either Asian or Latino and immigrants make up about a third of the population.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Slings for Dana Rohrabacher at the Democratic rally

“I think you guys know I’m running in the 48th District against Dana Russiabacher, I mean Dana Rohrabacher.”

— Harley Rouda, taking a swipe at the incumbent congressman from Costa Mesa

Share

CalPERS board president is ousted in election, losing to Corona police officer

Priya Mathur, president of the CalPERS board of administration, lost her reelection bid.
(Marcus Yam / Los Angeles Times)

The president of the board of administration of CalPERS, the state’s largest public employee pension fund, lost her bid for reelection to a Corona police officer, the agency announced Thursday after tallying votes from members cast over the last two months.

Priya Mathur, who has served on the board of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System since 2003, will be replaced by Jason Perez, a police sergeant who serves as president of the Corona Police Officers Assn. Mathur was selected in January as president of the CalPERS board, and her defeat marks the second shake-up of the pension fund’s leadership in less than a year.

Perez focused his campaign squarely on Mathur’s record representing public agency workers and on what he argues is a record by the pension fund of being overly focused on the political implications of its investments.

“In the past, it’s been used more as a political action committee than a retirement fund,” Perez said in an interview Thursday. “I think the public agency [employees] are just sick of the shenanigans.”

As such, Perez could bring a decidedly different approach to the pension governance board. In March, he lashed out at state Treasurer John Chiang, who sits on the CalPERS board, during a debate over whether the fund should embrace Chiang’s request to divest from certain gun retailers.

“This is nothing more than a political ploy,” Perez said during public comment. “It has nothing to do with CalPERS and its fiduciary responsibility to invest, to maximize returns.”

The board ultimately declined to accept Chiang’s proposal.

CalPERS officials reported Thursday that Perez received about 57% of the roughly 16,000 votes cast by members. Thirteen people serve on the pension fund’s board.

In a statement posted on her Facebook page, Mathur praised the CalPERS board’s work on weathering two recessions during her time of service. “We have also worked hard to address risks — like climate change, workers rights and economic inequality — that imperil economic growth and long-term investment returns,” she wrote.

In December, Margaret Brown — a Garden Grove schools employee and vocal CalPERS critic — defeated an incumbent board member who had strong support from public employee unions. The pension fund has also faced a number of changes in the ranks of its top staff, including the hiring of Gov. Jerry Brown’s former budget director as chief financial officer and a new chief investment officer.

Two other board members won new terms after running unopposed: Rob Feckner, a Napa schools employee who has been on the board since 1999, and Theresa Taylor, a state Franchise Tax Board employee first elected in 2015.

4:45 p.m.: This article was updated with a comment from Mathur.

This article was originally published at 3:13 p.m.

Share
Advertisement

Setting the stage for Joe Biden at rally for Democratic congressional candidates

Former Vice President Joe Biden will take the stage Thursday at a rally for five of the California Democrats battling to capture U.S. House seats held by Republicans. The rally at Cal State Fullerton comes in a year when California, and especially Orange County, is one of the main battlegrounds in Democrats’ campaign to seize control of the House.

Share

70 national security, foreign policy experts condemn Hunter attack ad

Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Alpine) leaves court in September. He and his wife pleaded not guilty to charges of misusing campaign funds.
(Gregory Bull / Associated Press)

Seventy current or former national security and foreign policy officials have signed a letter condemning a campaign ad by Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Alpine) that attempts to link his Democratic opponent to radical Islamists.

Hunter, who has been charged with misusing campaign funds, is facing a stiff challenge from 29-year-old Democrat Ammar Campa-Najjar in the 50th Congressional District. Although Campa-Najjar is Christian, Hunter has sought to tie him to radical Islam.

Hunter has repeatedly mentioned Campa-Najjar’s paternal grandfather, a member of the terrorist group that killed 11 Israeli athletes and coaches at the 1972 Munich Olympics. Campa-Najjar has condemned his grandfather’s actions and pointed out that he was born 16 years after his grandfather was killed by Israeli commandos in 1973.

Campa-Najjar has said he was raised by his Mexican American single mother after his Palestinian father left the family.

Hunter’s ad, which is still on his campaign website, claims without evidence that Campa-Najjar is supported by the Muslim Brotherhood, says he is trying to “infiltrate Congress” and calls him “a risk we can’t ignore.”

“Campa-Najjar, like all of us, has served his country as a public official and worked on behalf of his fellow citizens with dedication and honor,” the letter said of the candidate, who worked for four years in the Obama administration and held a security clearance. “That’s precisely why the baseless allegation that he is somehow a ‘security threat’ is an affront to our professionalism as national security experts, our American values, and our collective national dignity.”

The letter was drafted and circulated by National Security Action, a Washington-based advocacy group co-chaired by former Obama administration officials.

Signatories included veterans, diplomats, policymakers, former intelligence officers and politicians including Mark West, the mayor pro tem of Imperial Beach in San Diego County and a member of Vets for Ammar.

National Security Action began writing the letter once members saw the ad last week, said group spokesman Ned Price.

“You can contest the ad on the tactics behind it, these fear-based xenophobic tactics, but we wanted to contest it on grounds of national security experts coming together and affirming that just because someone’s grandfather took place in these acts doesn’t mean it reflects on that person,” said Price, a former National Security Council spokesman and signatory.

Most signatories were Obama administration officials, but a few worked for both Democratic and Republican administrations.

Despite Hunter’s indictment, a recent poll from the Monmouth University Polling Institute found the GOP incumbent was favored by 8 points among potential voters in the inland San Diego County district.

Share
Advertisement

3 California Democrats trying to flip GOP House seats report large fundraising hauls

Three Democratic candidates in competitive House races have announced large hauls for the fundraising quarter that ended Sunday.

Andrew Janz, a Fresno County prosecutor challenging incumbent Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Tulare) in California’s 22nd Congressional District, revealed Wednesday that his campaign brought in $4.3 million last quarter. He entered the quarter with $1.1 million in cash on hand, according to Federal Election Commission filings. Nunes, an eight-term incumbent who has consistently polled ahead of Janz, entered the quarter with more than $6 million on hand.

In the 10th District, Josh Harder’s campaign announced it raised $3.5 million between July and September. The single-quarter haul is more than any congressional candidate in the Central Valley district has raised in an entire two-year cycle, his campaign said. Rep. Jeff Denham (R-Turlock), who is trying to fend off the former venture capitalist’s challenge, has not released fundraising numbers for the past quarter ahead of the filing deadline, but his campaign had $2.4 million on hand as of June 30. FEC filings for the most recent quarter are due on Oct. 15.

In the battle to replace retiring Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Vista), environmental attorney Mike Levin raised $2.2 million over the summer, almost doubling the amount he raised in the 15 months prior. He is facing Republican Diane Harkey, chairwoman of the State Board of Equalization, in the competition for the 49th District covering northern San Diego and southern Orange counties.

Janz, Harder and Levin’s fundraising hauls do not include personal contributions, according to their campaigns. The eye-catching totals indicate the continuation of a trend seen in the previous round of FEC filings, as five Democratic House candidates — the three men among them — surpassed $1 million last quarter without personal loans.

Democrats must capture 23 seats nationwide to regain control of the House but have their eye on more than 100 across the country. Ten are in California.

Share

California to alter road construction signs that gas-tax repeal supporters see as improper political advocacy

California’s transportation agency will remove a website address from roadside construction signs that proponents of Proposition 6 say are an improper use of taxpayer resources to campaign against the gas-tax repeal initiative, officials said Tuesday.

The decision to alter the signs was made after the Federal Highway Administration raised concerns about another issue involving the placards: Whether the long website address would cause motorists to take their eyes off the road for too long and put public safety at risk, said Matt Rocco, a Caltrans spokesman.

“They are all about trying to reduce any kind of distraction,” Rocco said of the federal agency. “We are going to remove the website from the signs.”

The signs say “Your Tax Dollars at Work. Rebuilding California,” include a logo for SB 1, the gas tax law, and provide the state website address www.rebuildingca.ca.gov, which has information on how last year’s decision to increase the gas tax and vehicle fees is helping repair roads and bridges.

Proposition 6 leaders say the signs are an improper use of taxpayer funds to campaign against the initiative on the November ballot.

However, federal safety engineer Steve Pyburn emailed the California Department of Transportation about the signs being a distraction, saying they do not comply with federal standards for the amount of lettering on highway signs.

“Our headquarters has advised us, ‘This sign’s design is particularly egregious. It is quite complicated and contains many unacceptable elements,’” Pyburn said in the email.

The letter does not mention the complaint by Proposition 6 proponents that the signs are political. But it does point out that federal standards prohibit logos and symbols promoting “items or programs of the state.”

The Proposition 6 campaign allegations of improper taxpayer-funded political advocacy including the highway signs resulted Tuesday in U.S. Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Corona) sending a letter to the inspector general for the U.S. Department of Transportation to ask for an investigation.

Calvert asked the inspector general to look into whether public agencies “have used government resources to engage in efforts to dissuade voters” from approving Proposition 6.

Share
Advertisement

Conservative super PAC pulls attack ads after woman recants sexual harassment allegation

Democrat Gil Cisneros is running in the 39th Congressional District
(Ringo H.W. Chiu / Associated Press)

The Congressional Leadership Fund, a conservative super PAC spending millions of dollars on competitive House races across the state, will no longer run an ad centered on a now-recanted sexual harassment claim made against Democratic candidate Gil Cisneros.

The move comes a day after the woman, who had accused Cisneros of inappropriate behavior at and after a Democratic Party conference months ago, called the episode a “huge misunderstanding.”

Cisneros is locked in a competitive battle with Republican Young Kim for the 39th Congressional District seat left open by retiring Rep. Ed Royce (R-Fullerton).

Attorneys for the Cisneros campaign sent cease-and-desist letters to media outlets still running the ads Monday.

In an email obtained by The Times, an attorney for the Charter Communications cable network told the Cisneros campaign that “Charter and CLF have agreed to pull the Silence ad off the air” and that the change would be made by 3 p.m. Tuesday. The decision was made after conversations with the network’s political advertising team and the Congressional Leadership Fund’s counsel, according to the email.

The super PAC said it had already planned to switch to a different ad, but did not detail what ads it would run or if they would mention the allegation.

“Unfortunately for Gil Cisneros, if he’s mad and threatening to sue CLF over our current ad, just wait until he sees our next ad,” said Courtney Alexander, a spokeswoman for the group.

Share

Gas-tax repeal campaign targets ‘mismanagement’ at California DMV

A line of customers stretches around the South L.A. location of a California Department of Motor Vehicles office in August.
A line of customers stretches around the South L.A. location of a California Department of Motor Vehicles office in August.
(Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times)

Supporters of Proposition 6 on Monday took their campaign to eight offices of the state Department of Motor Vehicles, saying the beleaguered agency is an example of mismanagement that should persuade taxpayers to approve their initiative that would repeal recent increases to the state gas tax and vehicle fees.

The DMV has come under fire in recent months for hours-long wait times, resulting in Gov. Jerry Brown ordering an audit on Sept. 21 by his Department of Finance. Proposition 6 campaign leader Carl DeMaio appeared at the DMV’s Clairemont office in San Diego and called for a more detailed and independent review to instead be done by the state auditor.

“You cannot trust California state bureaucracies with a single penny of your money,” DeMaio said after his news conference. “The DMV’s culture of chaos is another example of mismanagement.”

Other news conferences by Proposition 6 supporters were scheduled for offices in Sacramento, San Francisco, Fresno, Van Nuys, Fullerton, Norco and Palm Desert. Republican gubernatorial candidate John Cox spoke at the Norco event as part of his campaign’s statewide bus tour.

Backers of the initiative on the November ballot cited a report last month by the state’s independent Legislative Analyst’s Office that said $1.1 billion in truck weight fees collected by the DMV for the State Highway Account are spent annually on debt service on transportation bonds approved in 2006. The activists said those fees should instead be used on filling potholes and fixing bridges.

But Finance Department spokesman H.D. Palmer said the money “is in fact being used for transportation purposes — specifically, debt service on transportation bonds” that allowed the acceleration of road projects.

The Proposition 6 supporters also objected that although most money that goes into a state Motor Vehicle Account is designated for transportation, $89 million is transferred to the general fund, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

That money comes from processing fees charged to insurance companies and others for driving record information they request, Palmer said, and has “never been considered to be vehicle revenues.”

The events challenging the use of state funds were criticized by Michael Quigley, executive director of the California Alliance for Jobs, a leading group opposed to Proposition 6.

“This is yet another stunt by right-wing politicians who put their political objectives above our public safety,” Quigley said, adding that “there’s nothing in Prop. 6 that regulates the DMV or reduces gas prices.”

Share
Advertisement

Gov. Jerry Brown signs landmark laws that unwind decades of secrecy surrounding police misconduct, use of force

Gov. Jerry Brown ushered in a new era of transparency in California law enforcement on Sunday, signing two new laws that for the first time give the public access to internal police investigations and video footage of shootings by police officers and other serious incidents.

The measures begin to undo decades of laws and court decisions that had made California the nation’s most secretive state for police records.

“With Governor Brown’s signature, California is finally joining other states in granting access to the investigatory records on officer conduct that the public truly has a right to know,” said Sen. Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley), the author of one of the measures, Senate Bill 1421, in a statement.

Read More

Share

California enacts strongest net neutrality protections in the nation — and the Trump administration sues

Gov. Jerry Brown on Sunday restored net neutrality rules in California that were repealed under the Trump administration, setting up a legal battle with the federal government over whether states can prevent companies from blocking access to the internet.

News that the governor signed the ambitious new law was swiftly met with an aggressive response from Justice Department officials, who announced soon afterward that they were suing California to block the regulations. The state law prohibits broadband and wireless companies from blocking, throttling or otherwise hindering access to internet content, and from favoring some websites over others by charging for faster speeds.

“Under the Constitution, states do not regulate interstate commerce — the federal government does,” Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions said in a statement Sunday. “Once again the California legislature has enacted an extreme and illegal state law attempting to frustrate federal policy.”

Read More

Share
Advertisement

California sets new limits on who can be charged with felony murder

Gov. Jerry Brown signed legislation on Sunday that limits who can be prosecuted for felony murder to those who commit or intend to commit a killing.

The new law, which goes into effect on Jan. 1, scales back California’s current felony murder rule, which allows defendants to be convicted of first-degree murder if a victim dies during the commission of a felony — even if the defendant did not intend to kill, or did not know a homicide took place.

For defendants facing prosecution for the crime, the new law could mean a shot at less time in prison. Hundreds of inmates serving time will be able to petition the court for a reduced sentence.

Read More

Share

Once California’s governor vetoes a bill, lawmakers almost never challenge the decision

An old Sacramento adage uses baseball imagery to explain the power of California’s chief executive at the end of the legislative process: “The governor bats last.”

But that maxim is technically wrong. A governor’s veto of a bill or a budget item does not have to be the final word. It can be overridden by a supermajority vote in each house of the Legislature — a constitutional provision often overlooked and rarely invoked. Its use can have a profound impact.

That was certainly the case over a contentious eight-month period in 1979 and 1980 during Gov. Jerry Brown’s second term.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Gov. Jerry Brown, after the longest tenure of any California governor, signs his final law

Share

Gov. Jerry Brown blocks plan to let San Francisco establish ‘safe injection sites’ for drug users

Citing fears of “enabling illegal drug use,” Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed a measure on Sunday that would have allowed San Francisco to establish sites where people could inject illegal drugs in a supervised, hygienic environment.

Under Assembly Bill 186 by Assemblywoman Susan Talamantes Eggman (D-Stockton), the city would have been allowed to start a pilot program for “safe injection sites” that backers said could help address the opioid crisis.

Proponents say such sites help prevent fatal overdoses by offering access to clean needles, trained supervisors and referral to treatment programs. There are about 100 secure injection facilities around the world, according to a legislative analysis.

“After great reflection, I conclude that the disadvantages of this bill far outweigh the possible benefits,” Brown wrote in a veto message.

Brown expressed skepticism that allowing access to safe injection sites would reduce drug addiction. He also noted the program would run contrary to federal law, pointing to the U.S. Department of Justice’s threat of prosecution.

Instead of new pilot programs, Brown said the state needs to expand its drug treatment programs — both voluntary and those required by the courts.

“[E]nabling illegal and destructive use will never work,” Brown concluded. “The community must have the authority and the laws to require compassionate but effective mandatory treatment. AB 186 is all carrot and no stick.”

Share
Advertisement

Measures to end forced arbitration of sexual harassment claims, extend statute of limitations vetoed by Gov. Jerry Brown

Gov. Jerry Brown on Sunday vetoed a pair of #MeToo-inspired bills that would have made it easier to take sexual harassment complaints to court.

One measure, Assembly Bill 3080, sought to end the practice of employers requiring workers to use private arbitration instead of the courts to air out sexual harassment complaints.

Arbitration is one of several ways businesses can opt to settle disputes outside of the courts. The practice has come under scrutiny in the #MeToo era as a way to shield complaints of improper workplace behavior from public view and protect harassers from accountability.

The measure, by Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher (D-San Diego), would have banned employers from requiring employees to waive their right to sue as a condition of employment. The bill would not have barred workers from voluntarily opting for arbitration agreements. The bill also would have limited the use of non-disparagement agreements that would prevent an employee from disclosing instances of sexual harassment.

Brown referenced his rejection of a similar bill from 2015 in Sunday’s veto message and an arbitration ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court.

“The direction from the Supreme Court since my earlier veto has been clear — states must follow the Federal Arbitration Act and the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Act,” Brown wrote. He called any policy like AB 3080 “impermissible.”

The measure had high-profile champions, including former Fox News anchor Gretchen Carlson, who won a $20-million settlement against Fox News after she accused the channel’s now-deceased chairman Roger Ailes of harassment and retaliation.

The bill was branded a “job killer” by the California Chamber of Commerce, which said employers would face more lawsuits under the proposal.

A second proposal, AB 1870 by Assemblywoman Eloise Gomez Reyes (D-Grand Terrace), was one of the first bills to be introduced in the wake of the #MeToo movement last fall.

The bill would have extended the filing deadline for Californians to file employment discrimination complaints — including sexual harassment claims — with the state.

Right now, California workers have one year from the date harassment or other unlawful action occurred to file a complaint with the state’s civil rights agency. Under the measure, that timeframe would have increased to three years.

Brown said in his veto that a longer time period could pose problems. He said the one-year deadline “not only encourages prompt resolution while memories and evidence are fresh, but also ensures that unwelcome behavior is promptly rewarded and halted.”

The bill passed by a comfortable margin in both houses with bipartisan support. But business groups opposed the measure, warning it could dramatically increase claims against employers.

Earlier on Sunday, Brown signed a number of measures introduced in response to the #MeToo movement.

Share

Californians will get help clearing marijuana conviction records under bill signed by Gov. Jerry Brown

(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

Gov. Jerry Brown on Sunday signed a bill to help hundreds of thousands of Californians convicted of marijuana crimes have felonies reduced to misdemeanors and lower-level offenses removed from their record.

The measure builds on the 2016 voter approval of Proposition 64, which legalized the growing and sale of marijuana and allowed residents to possess up to an ounce of cannabis or six home-grown plants for recreational use.

The ballot measure allows those with past convictions to petition the courts to expunge misdemeanors and reduce felony charges.

But Assemblyman Rob Bonta (D-Alameda) said most people have not applied for a change in their criminal records because they don’t know about the opportunity, or because navigating the court system is too complicated.

“AB 1793 will bring people closer to realizing their existing rights by creating a simpler pathway for Californians to turn the page and make a fresh start,” Bonta said after his bill was signed. “Long after paying their debt to society, people shouldn’t continue to face the collateral consequences, like being denied a job or housing, because they have an outdated conviction on their records.”

The bill signed by the governor requires the state Department of Justice to search its criminal record database to identify all Californians potentially eligible for reduction or expungement, and to provide that information to local district attorneys who handled those cases by July 1, 2019.

After prosecutors have an opportunity to review each case, the court can then modify records if there is no challenge by a district attorney.

Some 500,000 Californians were arrested for cannabis-related felonies and misdemeanors from 2006 to 2015, but only about 5,000 of those had petitioned to have their records modified as of last September, according to the Drug Policy Alliance.

Misdemeanors that would be expunged from a person’s record include transporting up to an ounce of cannabis and home-growing up to six plants.

Felony offenses that can be reduced to misdemeanors include transporting or giving away more than an ounce of marijuana and possession with intent to sell.

“It’s safe to say the number of persons eligible to have their offenses reduced from felonies to misdemeanors is in the hundreds of thousands,” said Dale Gieringer, director of California NORML, or the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. “Most people should be relieved to no longer have a felony on their record.”

The new law, which takes effect Jan. 1, is supported by Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, the L.A. County Board of Supervisors and the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office.

Share
Advertisement

Gov. Jerry Brown signs bills that aim to fast-track new stadiums for the Clippers, A’s

A potential new arena for the Clippers and a ballpark for the Oakland A’s received a boost Sunday when Gov. Jerry Brown signed two bills that aim to speed construction for both facilities.

The bills attempt to limit to nine months any litigation against the projects under the state’s primary environmental law governing development, potentially saving the facilities from facing years tied up in court.

The Clippers want to build a new arena in Inglewood and are aiming for construction to be completed by 2024, when the team’s lease at Staples Center in downtown Los Angeles expires.

The A’s want a new ballpark at Howard Terminal on Oakland’s port to replace the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum.

The two new laws are the latest in a series of benefits under the California Environmental Quality Act that legislators have given professional sports teams over the last decade for proposed new facilities. The laws have a mixed record at best, as many planned stadiums were never built and environmental litigation against others has taken longer to complete than the timelines written into the legislation.

Share

A mandate for abortion medication on UC, CSU campuses is rejected by Gov. Jerry Brown

(Manoocher Deghati / Agence France-Presse)

Gov. Jerry Brown broke ranks with Democrats and abortion rights advocates Sunday by refusing to require student health centers at California’s public universities to provide abortion medication by 2022.

Brown, who vetoed a bill requiring the health centers to provide abortion pills during the first 10 weeks of a pregnancy, said those services are already available to University of California and California State University students.

“According to a study sponsored by supporters of this legislation, the average distance to abortion providers in campus communities varies from five to seven miles, not an unreasonable distance,” the governor wrote in his veto of Senate Bill 320.

“Because the services required by this bill are widely available off-campus, this bill is not necessary,” he wrote.

Supporters of the effort contended that a number of health centers on UC and CSU campuses already provide other reproductive health services and that access to the early pregnancy medication would be an easy addition. Late amendments to SB 320 required at least $9.6 million in private funds to be raised to help pay for the new program.

“At its core, SB 320 affirmed the constitutional right of college students to access abortion care promptly and without delay,” state Sen. Connie M. Leyva (D-Chino) said in a written statement Sunday. “As the Trump Administration continues to unravel many of the critical health care protections and services for women, legislation such as this is urgently needed to make sure that Californians are able to access the full range of reproductive care regardless of where they may live.”

Leyva said she would reintroduce the bill in 2019, after Brown is termed out of office.

Supporters of the effort said they were inspired by the experience of UC Berkeley students who complained in 2015 about abortion pills being excluded from the list of contraceptives offered by the school’s student health center.

“The attempt of the UCs and CSUs to deny their own students the on-campus full range of reproductive and sexual health care, including abortion services, won’t go unnoticed and won’t go unchallenged,” Crystal Strait, the president of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, said in a written statement after Brown’s veto. “It’s time for this state to have a bold agenda for women’s equity and health.”

Share
Advertisement

Gov. Jerry Brown signs a slate of bills inspired by the #MeToo movement

Sexual assault survivors along with their supporters at the #MeToo Survivors' March on Hollywood Boulevard in Los Angeles on Nov. 12, 2017.
Sexual assault survivors along with their supporters at the #MeToo Survivors’ March on Hollywood Boulevard in Los Angeles on Nov. 12, 2017.
(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

The #MeToo movement has now made its mark on California law, with Gov. Jerry Brown signing a number of bills Sunday that were introduced following an outpouring of attention to sexual harassment and misconduct.

Among the bills approved by Brown was a measure to prohibit settlement agreements that prevent the disclosure of facts related to sexual assault, sexual harassment or workplace discrimination.

The measure, Senate Bill 820 by state Sen. Connie M. Leyva (D-Chino Hills), was inspired by reports that Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein used nondisclosure agreements and settlements to resolve harassment complaints. The settlements inhibited accusers from speaking publicly about their encounters with Weinstein.

Leyva’s bill will allow a complainant to request provisions in settlement agreements to shield his or her identity.

Business groups oppose the measure, arguing that confidentiality in such agreements could be necessary. In a letter to Brown requesting a veto, a coalition of business groups wrote, “by potentially eliminating confidentiality, SB 820 exposes employers to a public presumption of guilt even though the decision to settle was not based upon merit at all. To avoid this public image of guilt, SB 820 will drive employers to fight these cases in court instead of resulting in an early resolution.”

Brown also approved SB 1300 by Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara), which will expand anti-harassment provisions in state law, including limiting the use of nondisparagement agreements that prevent employees from speaking publicly about incidents in the workplace.

The measure will largely prohibit employers from making their workers sign nondisparagement agreements in exchange for employment, a bonus or a raise. Nondisparagement agreements have come under scrutiny for preventing workers from speaking publicly if sexual harassment or other illegal acts occur in the workplace.

The bill also will made clear to judges that a single incidence of harassment could be sufficient to satisfy the “severe and pervasive” legal standard of sexual harassment if it severely affects the employee’s work performance or creates a hostile work environment.

Responding to pushback from business groups, Jackson significantly narrowed her bill — instead of requiring employers to train workers on how to act if they are bystanders to sexual harassment, for example, the measure simply allows such training.

The California Chamber of Commerce removed it’s “job killer” label from the bill but remained opposed, arguing its provisions “will significantly increase litigation against California employers and limit their ability to invest in their workforce.”

Brown also signed SB 1343 by state Sen. Holly J. Mitchell (D-Los Angeles), which will expand sexual harassment prevention training requirements to more businesses in the state.

Share

Smoking bans at beaches and parks again fall to Gov. Jerry Brown’s veto pen

(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

For the third year in a row, Gov. Jerry Brown rejected bills that would have restricted smoking at state beaches and parks, writing in his veto message Saturday that the “third time is not always a charm.”

Citing the danger of sparking wildfires, the risk to public health and the problem of litter, Sen. Steve Glazer (D-Orinda) introduced twin bills that would have banned smoking tobacco and marijuana and the use of electronic cigarettes at parks and beaches, but allowed parks officials to designate smoking areas.

Assemblyman Marc Levine (D-San Rafael) had a narrower bill that would have banned smoking near picnic areas in state parks, hoping that a more limited restriction would avoid the governor’s veto pen.

Both measures would have imposed $25 fines, much lower than what was proposed in bills vetoed by Brown in previous years.

But the governor was not swayed by the offers of compromise.

“My opinion on the matter has not changed,” Brown wrote in his veto message. “We have many rules telling us what we can’t do and these are wide open spaces.”

Share
Advertisement

Gov. Jerry Brown eases residency rules for California legislators after state senator was convicted of lying about where he lives

Roderick Wright resigned from the state Senate in 2014 after he was convicted for lying about living in his district.
(Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)

Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill Saturday that opens the door for state legislators to live outside their districts while keeping a residence in the area they represent.

The new law follows the 2014 resignation of Democratic state Sen. Roderick Wright in response to his conviction for felony perjury and voting fraud.

Prosecutors said that Wright acted to make it appear that he lived in a rental complex he owned in Inglewood in order to run for the Senate seat in 2008, but that his true residence, or “domicile” under the state elections code, was actually a Baldwin Hills house outside the district.

The new law, which takes effect Jan. 1, says that a legislator’s primary address is the one listed on their voter registration — even if they have another residence where their child is enrolled in school, their spouse lives to be closer an employer, they receive mail or the legislator has a lease or pays utility bills or insurance.

“This bill is about allowing all legislators, who must travel and live in our state capital, to be effective leaders for our respective districts without the fear of being targeted by overzealous prosecutors or political adversaries,” said Sen. Steven Bradford (D-Gardena), who introduced the measure and represents the district previously held by Wright.

Share

Gov. Jerry Brown vetoes California workaround to Trump tax overhaul

Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed a measure Saturday that would have allowed some California taxpayers to dodge the effects of the Trump administration’s federal tax overhaul.

“This measure started as a bold idea but because of adverse changes in the federal tax law, it now confuses an already complicated scheme and could invite intervention by the Internal Revenue Service,” Brown wrote in a veto message for Senate Bill 539.

The bill was introduced by Sen. Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles) to allow taxpayers to claim a charitable deduction for state tax payments above the $10,000 limit set in the tax cuts passed by Congress last year. But the IRS announced last month that it believed such plans, which other states have passed, were tax dodges, and is working to pass a rule that would nullify them by the end of the year.

The bill from De León, who is running for U.S. Senate against fellow Democrat Sen. Dianne Feinstein, would have allowed California residents to circumvent the new $10,000 deduction limit through a 75% tax credit to an existing state program that funds college tuition scholarships.

Share
Advertisement

California will ban the sale of most animal-tested cosmetics starting in 2020

Beginning in 2020, makeup tested on animals cannot be sold in California.
(Kirk McKoy / Los Angeles Times)

Most cosmetics tested on animals will soon be illegal in California, under a new law signed Friday by Gov. Jerry Brown.

The ban, authored by Sen. Cathleen Galgiani (D-Stockton), will go into effect on Jan. 1, 2020, and will apply only to cosmetics tested on animals after that date. It allows exceptions when a federal authority, such as the Food and Drug Administration, requires animal testing.

The measure passed easily in the Legislature last month after late amendments reduced its scope, removing most opposition. Prior to those amendments, some opponents had worried the ban would hurt business in China, which requires animal testing for health reasons. The amended law allows manufacturers to test products on animals to meet foreign regulations, as long as those tests are not used to confirm a product’s safety in California.

The August amendments also specified that a manufacturer can sell cosmetics containing ingredients tested on animals, provided the animal testing was not done by the manufacturer or its suppliers. That provision addressed some companies’ concerns that other organizations could test their key ingredients on animals, stopping sales.

The law ultimately received widespread support from cosmetics manufacturers, celebrity advocates and animal rights groups.

Share

Gov. Jerry Brown blocks medical marijuana on school campuses

(Damian Dovarganes / Associated Press)

Voicing concern about exposing minors to marijuana, Gov. Jerry Brown on Friday vetoed a measure that would have allowed parents to bring medical cannabis to school campuses for their children in districts that sign off on the practice.

State Sen. Jerry Hill (D-San Mateo) had proposed the legislation to provide medical help for children who suffer from epilepsy and other illnesses whose symptoms might be helped through oral, non-smokeable doses of cannabis.

The measure, Hill said, “lifts barriers for students who need medical cannabis to attend school.”

But the governor said he was uncomfortable with the proposal, which comes the same year that California began licensing businesses to sell marijuana to adults for recreational use.

“This bill is overly broad as it applies to all students instead of limited cases where a doctor recommends medical marijuana for a student in order to prevent or reduce the effects of a seizure,” Brown wrote in his veto message.

“Generally I remain concerned about the exposure of marijuana on youth and am dubious of its use for youth for all ailments,” he added. “This bill goes too far —further than some research has — to allow use of medical marijuana for youth. I think we should pause before going much further down this path.”

Share
Advertisement

Gov. Jerry Brown vetoes plan to allow Los Angeles and other cities to extend bar closing times to 4 a.m.

Patrons gather at a wine bar in Los Feliz.
(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

Gov. Jerry Brown has rejected a bill that would have allowed Los Angeles, San Francisco and seven other cities to extend alcohol service at bars and restaurants from 2 a.m. to 4 a.m.

“California’s laws regulating late night drinking have been on the books since 1913,” Brown wrote in his veto message of Senate Bill 905. “I believe we have enough mischief from midnight to 2 without adding two more hours of mayhem.”

The legislation from Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) was an attempt to give willing cities a chance to better shape their nightlife. Wiener had argued that later hours would allow California to compete with other cities and states that serve alcohol into the early hours of the morning.

Wiener said he planned to continue working on the policy.

“We should embrace and support our nightlife industry which brings billions of revenue to our state and employs millions of people,” Wiener said in a statement. “It is a shame that we will continue to stifle our nightlife economy, but I remain committed to modernizing these outdated laws.”

Share

California judges will soon be able to consider a pet’s well-being when awarding custody in a divorce

(Karen Bleier / AFP/Getty Images)

As more divorcing couples fight over who gets to keep their pets, a new law will allow judges to treat those conflicts more like child custody battles.

In the past, courts have generally assigned pets to spouses based on who paid for or adopted them. Under a law signed Thursday by Gov. Jerry Brown, courts would be allowed to make custody decisions based on who walks a dog, takes a cat to the vet or grooms a horse. Courts will also be authorized to order one spouse to provide food, shelter and medical care for a pet before a final ruling.

“There is nothing in statute that states a pet must be treated any differently than any other type of property we own,” said Assemblyman Bill Quirk (D-Hayward), the bill’s author. “However, as a proud parent of a rescued dog, I know that owners view their pets as more than just property. They become a part of our family, and their well-being should be a consideration during divorce proceedings.”

Supporters including the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals said Assembly Bill 2274 will lead to fewer homeless animals. Some divorcing couples are forced to give up their pets to shelters when they cannot agree to a custody arrangement.

The Assn. of Certified Family Law Specialists, however, said the measure would overwhelm the family courts system with extended debates about which spouse was a better caretaker. According to opponents, courts were already able assign pet custody to either party.

California joins Alaska and Illinois, which have passed similar laws since 2017. The new law goes into effect Jan. 1.

Share
Advertisement

L.A. landlord tells tenants Prop. 10 is reason behind rent increase, pledges to cancel hike if measure fails

A Los Angeles-area landlord is telling tenants that the company will cancel a new rent increase if a California rent control ballot measure fails in November, according to a letter obtained by a tenants activist.

The letter informs tenants of an apartment complex that their rents are increasing and cites Proposition 10, an initiative that would allow cities and counties to expand rent control, as the cause.

“What this means is that although your don’t want higher rent and we did not plan on charging you higher rent, we may lose our ability to raise rents in the future as this becomes another government control on rents,” the Aug. 24 letter said. “Therefore, in preparation for the passage of this ballot initiative we must pass along a rent increase today.”

The letter, signed by Rampart Property Management, said the company planned to cancel the rent hike if Proposition 10 failed and that it would consider upgrades to apartments if it passed.

Larry Gross, executive director of the Coalition for Economic Survival, said a tenant of a complex in Hollywood brought the letter Wednesday night to one of the twice-weekly tenants’ rights clinics his organization holds. The tenant’s current rent, Gross said, is $1,550 and is scheduled to increase to $2,250 on Nov. 1.

Gross condemned the letter as attempting to influence tenants to vote against their self-interest.

“We see it as voter intimidation and extortion,” Gross said.

Representatives of Rampart Property Management, which describes itself on its website as a midsize real estate investment and management firm with housing across Los Angeles County, did not respond to a request for comment on the letter.

Steven Maviglio, spokesman for the campaign against Proposition 10, said the campaign is encouraging landlords to tell their tenants about what the ballot measure could do to the state’s housing market. But the campaign does not condone letters like Rampart’s.

“All our property owners, we do not suggest this,” Maviglio said.

Maviglio said that the company is not connected with the campaign and isn’t a donor.

Share

Republican John Cox launches new attack ad against Democrat Gavin Newsom in California governor’s race

A new campaign ad by Republican gubernatorial candidate John Cox attacks Democratic rival Gavin Newsom for a litany of California’s ills, including higher rents, gas prices and the rising cost of other day-to-day basic expenses.

“Politicians like Gavin Newsom talk about change, but they’ve done nothing. Sky-high gas and food prices, homelessness,” the narrator of the 30-second ad says. “Gavin Newsom, it happened on your watch.”

The ad begins airing statewide Friday on cable and digital platforms at a cost of $2 million for the first week, Cox campaign spokesman Matt Shupe said.

It begins with a mother tidying up her kitchen before taking her son to school — she drives by a homeless camp and a home with a for sale sign, the latter meant to emphasize Cox’s assertion that Californians are leaving the state because it is in such decline.

The ad highlights the underlying theme of the Cox campaign: that California needs to elect a business-minded political outsider. Cox, a Rancho Santa Fe businessman, made most of his multimillion-dollar fortune through real estate investments in Illinois and Indiana.

Newsom is a former San Francisco mayor and has been California’s lieutenant governor since 2011. But in his current office, Newsom lacks the political power to pass legislation or, unlike the governor, control the actions of state agencies.

In contrast, Newsom’s first television ad for the general election featured a more upbeat message about restoring the “California dream.” Cox’s name is never mentioned.

Still, Newsom said Wednesday that if Cox attacks him, “we’ll have to respond.”

Share
Advertisement

Gov. Jerry Brown rejects bill that would have allowed immigrants in the U.S. illegally to serve in California civil office

State Sen. Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens) introduced the bill.
(Katie Falkenberg / Los Angeles Times)

Gov. Jerry Brown on Thursday vetoed legislation that would allow all Californians to serve on state and local boards and commissions regardless of immigration status.

In a short veto message, Brown said he believed “existing law — which requires citizenship for these forms of public service — is the better path.”

Sen. Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens) and Assemblywoman Wendy Carrillo (D-Los Angeles) said they introduced the legislation to address the state’s discriminatory history amid a broader legal battle between California Democrats and the Trump administration over immigration policy.

The proposal would have deleted the phrase “transient aliens” from the government code and made clear that any person, regardless of citizenship or immigration status, could hold an appointed civil office if they are at least 18 years old and a resident of the state.

The phrase is mentioned in an 1872 provision that was first adopted to exclude Chinese immigrants and other foreign-born residents from holding appointed civil positions. At that time, antipathy toward the Chinese had been building in California, though Chinese immigrants opened hundreds of businesses across the state and would play a critical role in building the First Transcontinental Railroad.

The change would have permitted any Californian to serve on hundreds of boards and commissions that advise in an array of policy areas, including farm labor, history and employment development.

Share

Gov. Jerry Brown vetoes legislation barring immigration arrests inside California courthouses

Gov. Jerry Brown on Thursday vetoed legislation that would have barred any civil arrests at state courthouses, as judges have raised concerns over the presence of federal immigration agents in courtrooms across the country.

In his veto message, Brown said he supported the underlying intent of the measure, which was introduced to protect immigrants, but expressed concerns it could have unintended consequences. He also pointed to the state’s so-called sanctuary law, which tasks the California attorney general with developing policies by October to help curb immigration enforcement at courthouses and other public institutions.

“I believe the prudent path is to allow for that guidance to be released before enacting new laws in this area,” Brown said.

The vetoed legislation by Sen. Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens) would have prevented law enforcement officials from making civil arrests during proceedings or while the person they wish to detain is conducting legal business. The legislation was part of a broader effort by Democrats to ensure places such as courthouses, schools and hospitals remain “safe zones” for immigrants without legal status amid the Trump administration’s calls for hard-line immigration enforcement.

California’s sanctuary law, signed by Brown last year, first sought to create such safe zones and tightened limits on communication and collaboration between law enforcement agencies and federal immigration authorities.

Judges in California have decried recent courthouse arrests nationwide. Attorneys and prosecutors in California, Arizona, Texas and Colorado last year all reported teams of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents — some in uniform, some not — sweeping into courtrooms or waiting outside court complexes to arrest immigrants who are in the country illegally. The latest such arrest to spark criticism took place in Sacramento.

California Chief Justice Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye, who has sparred with Trump officials over what she called the “stalking of immigrants” in courts, has called the arrests “disruptive, shortsighted and counterproductive.”

The bill would have granted judges the power to stop such arrests or other activities that interrupt their proceedings, or that threaten access to the court. Retired judges, law professors and activists with the nonprofit Legal Aid at Work have been working to implement a similar state rule in courthouses, “places where anyone can come to seek help or to testify without fear.”

Share
Advertisement

Rep. Duncan Hunter leads in reelection fight despite federal indictment, poll finds

Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter’s legal woes don’t seem to be having the devastating effect on his reelection chances that Democrats had hoped.

According to a poll released Tuesday, 49% of potential voters in his inland San Diego County district said they would vote for the Alpine congressman, who faces federal charges of misusing campaign funds, if the election were held today. By contrast, 41% of those surveyed by Monmouth University said they would support Hunter’s opponent, 29-year-old Democrat Ammar Campa-Najjar. Ten percent were undecided.

Hunter’s lead remains despite the fact that just under 4 in 10 voters believe the five-term incumbent is definitely or probably guilty. Among the district’s voters who currently support Hunter, 21% lean toward thinking he is guilty and 41% say he’s not guilty, according to the survey. Nearly a quarter of potential voters said they were unaware that Hunter had been indicted.

Read More

Share

A GOP congressional candidate walks into a mosque: How Andrew Grant’s constituents reacted to his outreach

Andrew Grant had just finished an afternoon of door-knocking in his uphill bid for Congress when he decided to drop by the Muslim community center in Folsom.

He’d visited the mosque before, and was welcomed as a familiar face, posing afterward in the 90-degree August heat with two community leaders. Later, he posted the photograph on his campaign’s Facebook page.

“I go everywhere,” Grant said this week over coffee in Sacramento. “I say yes to every invitation.”

Read More

Share
Advertisement

California initiative to expand rent control faces big deficit, new poll says

(Mel Melcon / Los Angeles Times)

With less than six weeks to go before election day, a ballot initiative to expand rent control in California is falling far short of passage, according to a new poll.

Proposition 10, which would allow cities and counties across the state to implement robust new rent stabilization efforts, has support from 36% of likely voters, with 48% opposed and 16% undecided, a poll released Wednesday from the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California said.

Mark Baldassare, the institute’s president and pollster, said proponents of the initiative have significant ground to make up.

“I think it’s very tough,” Baldassare said. “People are apparently not that enthralled with the proposition at this point.”

The poll found soft support across demographics and different regions of the state. A majority of renters, 51%, said they were against the initiative, and 39% of homeowners, who vote more frequently, were in support. Proposition 10 has its strongest backing in the Los Angeles region with 45% in favor.

Proposition 10 would repeal the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, a 1995 state law that prohibits local governments from implementing most forms of new rent control. Under the law, cities and counties can’t impose rent control on apartment complexes constructed after 1995 — or earlier in cities such as Los Angeles that had existing rent control ordinances when Costa-Hawkins passed.

The law also blocks local governments from implementing rent controls on single-family homes and gives landlords the right to charge the market rate for their apartments after a rent-controlled tenant moves out.

If Proposition 10 passes, rent control wouldn’t automatically go into effect in most cases, but cities and counties could pass new measures without restriction.

Baldassare said supporters could take some solace that the poll also found that 52% of likely voters believed rent control in general was a good thing. But supporters will probably be substantially outspent by the apartment industry, which he said would make it harder to erase the deficit.

Backers of Proposition 10, predominantly the Los Angeles-based AIDS Healthcare Foundation, have so far raised more than $13 million, according to the state Fair Political Practices Commission. Landlord opponents have countered with more than $23 million.

The poll, which was conducted in mid-September, surveyed 964 likely California voters; the margin of error is plus or minus 4.8%.

Share

Gas tax repeal opposed by majority of California voters, new survey says

(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

A slight majority of California voters oppose Proposition 6, the November ballot measure that would repeal increases to the state gas tax and vehicle registration fees to pay for improvements to roads, bridges and mass transit, according to a survey released Wednesday by the Public Policy Institute of California.

The statewide survey found that 52% of likely voters who were read the ballot title and label said they would vote against the initiative, 39% would vote in favor of the measure and 8% are undecided, said the nonpartisan research group headquartered in San Francisco.

Half of Republican voters said they would vote for the measure, while it garnered support from 42% of independents and 33% of Democrats, the survey said.

“Across all of the state’s major regions, fewer than half say they would vote yes,” PPIC President and Chief Executive Mark Baldassare said.

The least support came from voters in Orange and San Diego counties, where 35% said they would vote “yes” on Proposition 6. The support level was 43% in the Los Angeles area and the San Francisco Bay Area, 45% in the Central Valley and 38% in the Inland Empire.

Voters were also asked about how important the outcome of the vote on Proposition 6 is to them; 47% of likely voters said it is very important, while 37% said it is somewhat important.

The new survey indicates a possible shift in public opinion since a USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll in May that found 51% of the state’s registered voters supported repealing the higher gas tax.

The latest survey was conducted Sept. 9 through 18, before the $30-million campaign against the ballot measure flooded television airwaves with its first ads arguing that repeal of the tax and fee increases would jeopardize motorists by blocking road and bridge safety projects.

Proponents of the measure argued that motorists were already paying high gas taxes and vehicle fees but that the state had failed to use that money to address the deterioration of roads and bridges. On Tuesday, the supporters of Proposition 6 proposed a second initiative for the 2020 ballot to dedicate the previous car taxes and fees to transportation and halt the high-speed rail project.

Share
Advertisement

New poll shows Cox cut Newsom’s lead in half in the California governor’s race

Gubernatorial candidates John Cox, left, and Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom before a debate at UCLA in January.
Gubernatorial candidates John Cox, left, and Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom before a debate at UCLA in January.
(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

Voter support for Republican gubernatorial candidate John Cox rose enough over the summer to cut front-runner Democrat Gavin Newsom’s lead in half, according to a new poll by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California.

Newsom, California’s two-term lieutenant governor, still remains solidly ahead in the race, but Cox managed to pick up more support from independents and a smidgen of Democrats since July, the survey showed.

Those gains for Cox were enough to cut Newsom’s lead to 12 percentage points, compared with 24 percentage points in July.

“Cox has been running more as an independent and more as someone who has been complaining about the status quo,” PPIC President and Chief Executive Mark Baldassare said. “That has an audience here in California.”

But Baldassare cautioned that the campaigns are just getting revved up for the November election and that Cox’s surge might not last.

Not only do the Democrats hold a major advantage over the GOP in voter registration in California, but Cox will probably come under attack for being endorsed by President Trump. Two-thirds of likely voters in the state disapprove of the way Trump has handled his job as president, according to the poll.

“I think it’s going to change.” Baldassare said. “In some ways, the poll after Labor Day give you a sense of where things start in the campaign. We’ll see how things go from here.”

According to the survey, Newsom was supported by 51% of likely voters, compared with 39% favoring Cox. Among the remainder, 7% said they were undecided and 3% said they do not plan to cast a vote for governor.

Newsom was favored by 86% of likely Democratic voters and Cox by 85% of Republican voters.

Among voters who registered with no party preference, 42% supported Newsom and 37% backed Cox, the survey found. That was an increase in support for Cox. In July, 41% of those independent voters backed Newsom, compared with 31% who supported Cox.

Cox’s strongest areas of support are centered in Orange and San Diego counties, the Inland Empire and the Central Valley. Newsom is dominating in California’s two largest population centers: Los Angeles County and the San Francisco Bay Area, the poll showed.

Latino voters back Newsom by a more than two-to-one margin, and the former San Francisco mayor had slight edge among white voters. Newsom also leads among voters of all income and education levels, the poll found.

Baldassare noted that the overall support for Newsom and Cox closely mirrored the answers voters gave when asked if they thought California was headed in the right direction, with 51% giving positive reviews and 43% a thumbs down.

Share

Gov. Jerry Brown makes it tougher to get concealed gun permits, but vetoes other firearm bills

Gov. Jerry Brown on Wednesday signed a bill that will make it harder for Californians to obtain concealed gun permits, but he vetoed a proposal that would have expanded the number of people who could petition the courts for an order removing firearms from those thought to be dangerous.

State law currently allows police officers and immediate family members to ask a judge for a “gun violence restraining order” that temporarily removes weapons from people deemed a risk to themselves or others.

On Wednesday, Brown vetoed a bill by Assemblyman Phil Ting (D-San Francisco) that would have also allowed teachers, college professors, employers and co-workers to petition for a court order.

Ting said he proposed the measure in response to the February shooting that killed 17 people at a high school in Parkland, Fla. The legislator noted some school officials had concerns before the shooting about the behavior of the gunman.

But the governor said Wednesday in a veto message that the expansion of the restraining order program is unnecessary.

“All of the persons named in this bill can seek a gun violence restraining order today under existing law by simply working through law enforcement or the immediate family of the concerning individual,” Brown wrote. “I think law enforcement professionals and those closest to a family member are best situated to make these especially consequential decisions.”

Brown signed a bill that sets tougher standards for Californians to get a county sheriff’s permit to carry a concealed weapon. The new law will require applicants to complete at least eight hours of gun safety training and demonstrate competency with a live-fire exam.

The measure was introduced by Assemblyman Todd Gloria (D-San Diego), who said after the signing “we are increasing public safety across California.”

Brown also signed a bill Wednesday that will strengthen a law prohibiting multi-burst trigger devices called bump stocks, used in 2017 by a gunman in Las Vegas who killed 58 people and injured hundreds more. Another measures signed by the governor establishes procedures for handling ammunition that has been seized by law enforcement.

Brown vetoed a bill to require the state Department of Justice to study creating a system that would allow gun owners to voluntarily sign up for a lifetime ban on possessing firearms. Brown said the mandate is unnecessary to look at the idea.

Share
Advertisement

State Sen. Joel Anderson reprimanded for ‘completely unacceptable’ behavior toward female lobbyist

State Sen. Joel Anderson (R-Alpine) speaks at the Capitol in Sacramento in August.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

State Sen. Joel Anderson (R-Alpine) was reprimanded by the Senate this week after an investigation found he probably threatened to “bitch slap” a female lobbyist, according to documents released on Tuesday.

Stephanie Roberson, a lobbyist with the California Nurses Assn., filed a complaint in August alleging that Anderson threatened and made harassing comments to her at a Capitol-area bar.

The resulting legislative investigation found that Anderson had consumed alcoholic drinks in the lead-up to the encounter and that during the course of his interaction with Roberson, he likely became “increasingly agitated.”

The investigative report said Anderson likely said “I oughta bitch slap you,” or a similar phrase, at least twice. While the investigation said Anderson did not attempt to physically strike Roberson, it did note that two individuals physically intervened after his comment.

The Senate Rules Committee determined Anderson violated the Senate Code of Conduct.

“Your behavior was completely unacceptable,” Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) wrote in the letter of reprimand.

Anderson, who is termed out of the Senate, is currently running for the Board of Equalization.

At the time the complaint was filed, Anderson said he regretted his word choice “which was not directed at [Roberson].”

“As the report states, at issue was the context of our conversation,” Anderson said in a statement on Tuesday. “The investigation doesn’t substantiate all the wild claims reported in the press, and I stand by my original statement.”

Roberson’s employer, the California Nurses Assn., said that the lobbyist was “vindicated” by the Senate holding Anderson accountable “for his vile behavior.”

“It’s shocking how much this type of behavior is still part of the status quo, as we are reminded in the current Supreme Court nomination debate,” said Bonnie Castillo, executive director of the nurses’ union. “Hopefully this incident serves as another wakeup call on how much more still has to be done to end the all too routine sexual harassment and abuse that stains our politics and other areas of life.”

Senate Republican Leader Patricia Bates (R-Laguna Niguel) said she appreciated the Senate completing the probe in a “thorough and timely manner.”

“To ensure a safe environment for everyone, it is important for all senators to adhere to the Senate’s standards of conduct,” Bates said in a statement. ‘It is encouraging that the person who filed the complaint felt empowered to come forward. The behavior exhibited in this incident will no longer be tolerated. The decision to issue a reprimand in this case is warranted and appropriate.”

6:50 p.m. This post was updated to include comment from the California Nurses Assn. and from Senate GOP Leader Patricia Bates.

This article was originally published at 5:03 p.m.

Share

Anti-Proposition 6 campaign launches TV ad saying repeal of gas tax would put public safety at risk

The campaign against an initiative that would repeal increases to California’s gas tax launched its first television ad on Monday, asserting that Proposition 6 will put the safety of motorists in jeopardy by taking away road and bridge repair funds.

Armed with more than $30 million in contributions from the construction industry, unions and others, the campaign made a major TV buy to begin airing the ads Monday on the broadcast stations in Los Angeles, as well as other regions of the state.

The campaign has tailored different versions of the ad to address issues in each area of the state in which it runs.

In a statewide version of the ad, which has been posted to YouTube, the head of the American Society of Civil Engineers says that the higher gas tax is needed to fix the state’s deteriorating transportation system.

“Crumbling bridges and roads put lives at risk every day,” says Kristina Swallow, president of the group. “In California, 1,600 bridges and overpasses are structurally deficient. Yet Prop. 6 eliminates $5 billion in annual funding for critical infrastructure projects.”

Swallow goes on to say the measure on the Nov. 6 ballot would threaten road projects already underway and “makes traffic congestion even worse.”

A leader of the Proposition 6 campaign responded to the ad by saying the state has enough money from previous taxes to repair roads.

“This shameful, deceptive, fear-mongering illustrates our point about why you can’t trust politicians with our money,” said Carl DeMaio, who is heading a Proposition 6 campaign committee.

Updated at 1:45 pm to include comment by Carl DeMaio.

Share
Advertisement

California Politics Podcast: The Brett Kavanaugh conundrum comes to the U.S. Senate race

California’s fall election for the U.S. Senate, already a nasty intraparty fight between two Democrats, now finds itself another place where the debate over Judge Brett Kavanaugh is at center stage.

On this week’s podcast episode, we take a look at Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s central role in shepherding the allegation against the Supreme Court nominee. It is a role that her challenger, state Sen. Kevin de León, has sharply criticized.

We also look at some key bill signings by Gov. Jerry Brown, including his decision to back a reduction in the use of plastic straws and the sweeping $1-billion fire prevention proposal he signed into law last week.

Share

In a rebuke to Trump, Gov. Jerry Brown signs bans on short-term health plans, Medi-Cal work requirements

Dr George Ma draws blood from patient Ben Loya. Nearly three-quarters of his Chinatown office's patients are covered by Medi-Cal.
(Glenn Koenig / Los Angeles Times)

California will formally forbid the sale of short-term health plans and work requirements for those who receive subsidized healthcare, under laws signed on Saturday by Gov. Jerry Brown, with both proposals crafted as sharp rejoinders to efforts by the Trump administration.

Senate Bill 1108 by state Sen. Ed Hernandez (D-West Covina) will make clear that the purpose of Medi-Cal, the state’s version of Medicaid, is to provide healthcare to low-income Californians. Other benefits that could be offered by the state, such as work or housing assistance, would have to be voluntary, not a requirement in order to receive medical coverage.

As a left-leaning state that has embraced the expansion of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, California is unlikely to pursue work requirements for that program. But with the Trump administration backing efforts by a handful of states to impose such requirements, backers of the measure said it was important to enshrine in state law that California would not do the same.

Critics have said that work requirements will limit the care of those unable to work, including those with chronic physical ailments, mental illness or substance abuse problems. Four states have already taken action to move toward work mandates, though a federal judge has ruled against the effort in Kentucky.

Brown also signed a second Hernandez bill on Saturday inspired by efforts from the Trump administration to change key components of the Affordable Care Act.

Under Senate Bill 910, California will not allow the sale of short-term health plans as a cheap alternative to the federal healthcare law enacted by President Obama in 2010.

Short-term plans are less pricey than plans sold through state health insurance exchanges such as Covered California. But they often lack a number of benefits, including coverage for maternity care, mental health services or preexisting conditions. The Obama administration prohibited insurers from offering those plans for longer than three months.

“These short-term policies are dangerous because they subject people to huge healthcare bills, barely cover any services and give people a false sense of security,” Hernandez said last month when the bill passed the Legislature.

The Trump administration has sought to expand access to those plans, allowing insurers to offer them for a duration one day short of a year — and up to three years with renewals and extensions. Critics say the effect will be a proliferation of skimpier benefits offered to consumers, undercutting the Affordable Care Act.

SB 910 will bar insurers from selling health insurance plans that last fewer than 12 months.

Share
Advertisement

Gov. Jerry Brown vetoes bill to study driving on pot, calling measure a distraction for beleaguered DMV

Gov. Jerry Brown on Friday vetoed five bills to add to the DMV's workload.
( (Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times))

With the Department of Motor Vehicles under fire for hours-long wait times, Gov. Jerry Brown on Friday vetoed five bills that would have given the agency new tasks, including a measure aimed at gauging the scope of the drugged driving problem in California.

“Reducing wait times in field offices and addressing the urgent needs of customers is the top priority,” Brown wrote in his veto message. “The programming required to implement these bills will delay the department’s ability to fully modernize its aging information technology systems.”

Earlier in the day, Brown ordered an audit of the DMV over the long wait times.

Brown vetoed a bill Friday that would have required state agencies to separate data on citations for driving under the influence of marijuana from drunk driving so the state could determine how widespread the problem of drugged driving is.

The measure was introduced by Assemblyman Ed Chau (D-Arcadia) in response to the voter approval of Proposition 64, which legalized the possession and sale of marijuana for recreational purposes.

“With the legalization of cannabis rolling out in our state recently, it is reasonable to assume that more individuals will be using cannabis, and operating a car while impaired, however, there is currently no way for the state to gauge how serious of a problem cannabis drugged driving is,” Chau said in arguing for his bill.

Another bill vetoed by the governor proposed that the DMV offer “Endless Summer” license plates with the proceeds going to programs that promote surfing.

The governor also rejected bills that would have removed the $5 fee for those applying for a driver’s license with a veteran designation, and that would have allowed specially marked license plates to be issued to Gold Star families of soldiers killed in military action.

The governor said the five bills may have merit. But, he added “it would be prudent for the Legislature to pause on additional mandates while the department works to complete programming for prior legislative mandates and systems upgrades designed to reduce transaction times and improve customer service.”

Share

What has happened a year after the California Legislature passed a package of housing affordability laws

Gov. Jerry Brown signs 15 housing laws in 2017 in San Francisco.
(Eric Risberg / Associated Press)

Earlier this week, the city of Cupertino approved a massive new housing, retail and office project on the site of a mostly empty mall.

The project had been stalled for years, and only moved forward with the help of new state legislation designed to force cities and counties to approve developments that met underlying zoning rules.

The decision in Cupertino, the home of Apple, is probably the biggest demonstrable effect so far of the package of 15 bills Gov. Jerry Brown signed in 2017, which were billed as the state Legislature’s most robust response to the state’s housing affordability problems in recent memory.

Two other major bills that aimed to add state housing subsides have yet to result in any new housing. The state’s Department of Housing and Community Development is asking local governments for proposals on how to spend roughly $250 million being generated by a new $75 fee on mortgage refinances and other real estate transactions. And California voters will decide in November whether to approve Proposition 1, a $4-billion bond measure to fund low-income development and home loans for veterans.

“I can’t point you today to a house that the housing package has built,” said state housing director Ben Metcalf in an interview on the most recent episode of “Gimme Shelter: The California Housing Crisis Podcast.” “I think what I can point you to is a lot of momentum on a lot of different fronts.”

A handful of smaller projects have also made use of the new legislation to ensure local approval of their developments. The housing department has used new authority from the 2017 laws to refer at least one local government it believes is out of compliance with housing laws to the attorney general’s office for possible action, Metcalf said. And substantially more cities and counties are providing housing production data to the department, helping to remedy a key problem identified in a 2017 Times investigation of state housing supply law.

Still, Metcalf conceded that even when the full effects of the 2017 housing package were realized, the Legislature would need to do a lot more for housing to become affordable.

“There are places that we did not tackle in the package at all,” he said. “We really didn’t get, for example, to cost. Until we think about how we control some of the underlying costs of residential construction, I’m hard pressed to see how we get [a high housing production] number.”

This episode of “Gimme Shelter” also includes an interview with Darcy Paul, the mayor of Cupertino, on how the state legislation has affected his city.

Gimme Shelter,” a biweekly podcast that looks at why it’s so expensive to live in California and what the state can do about it, features Liam Dillon, who covers housing affordability issues for the Los Angeles Times’ Sacramento bureau, and Matt Levin, data and housing reporter for CALmatters.

You can subscribe to “Gimme Shelter” on iTunes, Stitcher, Soundcloud, Google Play and Overcast.

Share
Advertisement

GOP midterm strategy: Forget Trump and demonize the Democrat as wild-eyed radicals

To hear Katie Porter tell it, she’s just your average Orange County mom, clipping coupons, shopping specials at the supermarket and puttering about with three kids in a Toyota minivan that’s pushing 120,000 miles.

But turn on the TV and you’re likely to see a more ominous portrait, etched in shades of black and gray. “Liberal Katie Porter,” the advertisement intones, in a voice aquiver with indignation. “Higher taxes. Open borders.”

Saddled with an unpopular president and getting little or no traction from a robust economy, Republicans have settled on a blunt-force strategy as they struggle to hang onto the House in November: Paint the opposition as wild-eyed and dangerous.

Read More

Share

Milk and water will be default drink options for California kids’ meals starting in 2019

(David Paul Morris / Getty Images)

Restaurants in California that sell special meals for children will have to offer milk or water as the default drink option beginning in 2019, making sodas and sugary drinks available only by request.

The law, signed Thursday by Gov. Jerry Brown, follows ordinances enacted in a number of cities and counties around the state in recent years. Some fast-food and dine-in restaurants have voluntarily changed their kids’ meals, and the new law had no formal opposition as it made its way through the California Legislature.

“Our state is in the midst of a public health crisis where rates of preventable health conditions like obesity and Type-2 Diabetes are skyrocketing, due in large part to increased consumption of sugary beverages,” state Sen. Bill Monning (D-Carmel), the law’s author, said in a written statement.

“This bill is an important part of a statewide public health strategy that will better inform consumers about the unique impacts that sugary beverages have on their health and that of their children.”

Under the new law, kids’ meals will have to be served with milk, a nondairy alternative of less than 130 calories, water or flavored water with no added sweeteners.

The financial penalty for a restaurant that breaks the new law is minor. The business will receive a written notice on the first violation. Additional violations over a five-year period would result in fines starting at $250, but only a single fine would be assessed per inspection.

The law follows the trend set in some communities and by some national fast-food chains, but it also goes further by banning even watered-down fruit juice as a default drink option.

Share
Advertisement

California watchdog agency prohibits use of cryptocurrency for campaign contributions

A bitcoin display at a computer conference in Taiwan earlier this year.
A bitcoin display at a computer conference in Taiwan earlier this year.
(Ritchie B. Tongo / EPA-Shutterstock)

California’s campaign finance watchdog agency voted Thursday to prohibit the use of cryptocurrency including bitcoin for political contributions in the state amid concerns that the anonymity it provides would make it difficult to identify who is trying to influence elections.

The state Fair Political Practices Commission voted 3-1 against allowing use of the virtual currency, which is traded on the internet and not issued by a governmental entity.

The issue has drawn national attention. States that have allowed some use of cryptocurrency as campaign contributions include Colorado, Montana, Oregon and Tennessee, while the digital currency has been prohibited from political donors in Kansas, South Carolina and North Carolina.

FPPC Commissioner Frank Cardenas said cryptocurrency “is completely untraceable with respect to the identity of the individual.” He added that voter confidence in elections is already “waning,” so the panel should protect the integrity of the campaign finance rules.

Commissioner Brian Hatch also said allowing cryptocurrency would hinder the ability of the FPPC’s investigators to enforce laws against political money laundering involving campaign contributors.

“How do we know that they are not just a straw man for some oligarch or some foreign government?” Hatch asked. “This is a system that is designed to hide the source of the money, so why would we get into this?”

Commissioner Allison Hayward supported treating cryptocurrency the same as cash, but with requirements that candidates disclose donor identities. But FPPC staff attorneys issued warnings, noting that, unlike cash, there are no central bank records of transactions involving cryptocurrency.

Open-government groups including California Common Cause opposed allowing cryptocurrency in political campaigns.

Any change to state campaign finance rules regarding cryptocurrency should be rejected “at least until the risks of this emerging technology are better studied and understood, and appropriate regulatory guardrails can be put in place,” said Nicolas Heidorn, Common Cause’s policy and legal director.

He told the panel that allowing cryptocurrency donations may “hamper the commission’s ability to trace donor funds and ensure state campaign finance laws are respected.”

Anonymity and lack of central control are key features of cryptocurrency and could hinder control by the FPPC, warned Austin Graham, an attorney for the nonpartisan, nonprofit Campaign Legal Center.

Allowing the use of cryptocurrency in campaigns is supported by the Blockchain Advocacy Coalition, which represents dozens of business owners, investors and innovators in the blockchain and cryptocurrency industry, said Ally Medina, executive director of the group.

“The transfer of cryptocurrency creates an immutable record, and this technology offers the public benefits in terms of transparency of political contributions,” Medina said in a letter to the panel.

Share

Gavin Newsom’s new campaign ad focuses on renewing the ‘California dream’

Democratic gubernatorial candidate Gavin Newsom offers his upbeat prescription for renewing the “California dream” in his first campaign ad of the general election season.

The tone of Newsom’s 30-second television spot is a sharp contrast to Republican rival John Cox’s efforts to lay the blame for all of California’s ills on Newsom and Democrats, offering a hint of the broad campaign themes voters may see in the weeks ahead.

Newsom’s ad begins with the candidate looking into the camera, and is peppered with shots of him reading to young children and talking with students and young adults.

“To renew the California dream, we need to renew our promise to our children,” Newsom says. “A promise that says every single baby will have quality prenatal care, every toddler can attend preschool, every student has access to high-quality after-school programs and every graduate has meaningful job training and work opportunities.”

The ad will be broadcast statewide as well as on digital media platforms, costing the campaign in the “seven figures,” said Newsom’s spokesman, Nathan Click.

The first ad aired by Cox, who will face off with Newsom in the November election, accused the Democratic lieutenant governor of standing with “lobbyists and corrupt insiders.” Cox says as a political outsider and successful businessman, he is best equipped to put California back on track.

Cox’s ad ran on digital platforms only at a cost of $150,000.

Share
Advertisement

Dueling sides of gas tax repeal dispute the levy’s impact on California’s low-income residents

Road construction crews conduct repairs in San Francisco last year.
Road construction crews conduct repairs in San Francisco last year.
(Justin Sullivan / Getty Images)

A group working to repeal California’s recent increase in the gas tax argued Wednesday that the charges at the pump are disproportionately hurting the working poor, while the campaign against the ballot proposition countered that their opponents are exaggerating the financial impact.

Supporters of Proposition 6, the gas tax repeal measure, released an analysis that estimates the new taxes and fees have resulted in a family of four paying between $650 and $800 more in annual taxes and living expenses.

That cost is a heavier burden for low-income residents, according to the report co-authored by Reform California, a group headed by Republican Carl DeMaio, who is a leader of the drive that qualified Proposition 6 for the ballot.

“This report shows that the latest gas and car tax hikes are a crushing blow to working families,” said DeMaio, a former San Diego City Council member and radio talk show host.The analysis estimates the additional cost to working families includes $521 to $620 annually to pay the higher gas tax and vehicle fees, and an additional $124 to purchase food delivered by producers and trucking firms that are passing on the cost of higher gas taxes.

Opponents of Proposition 6 responded by citing a state Department of Finance report that estimated the gas tax increase, which funds repairs to California’s aging transportation infrastructure, will cost California drivers around $120 annually. Without the road repairs, there will be additional costs from repairing cars damaged by driving on deteriorating roads, said Kwame Agyare, region director for the American Society of Civil Engineers.

“As a civil engineer, I know that the cost of doing nothing to fix our deteriorating roads and bridges is too high a price to pay,” Agyare said in a statement.

A separate analysis was released Wednesday by the nonprofit California Budget and Policy Center, which advocates for the working poor. It said that approving Proposition 6 would “significantly decrease funding available for transportation infrastructure.”

“Rejecting Prop. 6 would allow California to continue to invest in highways, roads, bridges, transit, and other transportation improvements,” said the report by the budget group, whose financial supporters include private foundations, the California Federation of Teachers and Service Employees International Union California.

The group suggested that concerns about the taxes’ impact on low-income residents could be addressed by providing tax offsets, such as expansion of the state earned income tax credit.

Share

California parole board recommends pardon for former state Sen. Roderick Wright

Former state Sen. Roderick Wright at a court hearing in 2014.
Former state Sen. Roderick Wright at a court hearing in 2014.
(Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)

A state panel on Tuesday recommended that Gov. Jerry Brown grant a pardon to former state Sen. Roderick Wright for his 2014 conviction on eight felony counts after prosecutors said he lied about living in his Senate district.

The recommendation by the California Board of Parole Hearings next goes to the state Supreme Court, where four judges must concur in the recommendation before it can go to Brown for consideration.

Wright and Sen. Steven Bradford (D-Gardena), who now represents the Senate district, were among those who urged the parole board to recommend a pardon. The board later posted its decision online without providing a rationale.

The law on residency is unclear — Wright did not act unlawfully and he did not intend to run afoul of any requirements, said Winston Kevin McKesson, who served as the senator’s criminal defense attorney but is not involved in the pardon application.

“I am glad that finally somebody looked at the case in a fashion that is reasonable,” McKesson said Tuesday in response to the board’s decision. “He didn’t violate the law.”

Wright, a Democrat, resigned from the Senate and was barred for life from holding public office as a result of the conviction on charges of perjury and voting fraud.

During the criminal trial, prosecutors said Wright had tried to make it appear that he lived in a rental complex he owns in Inglewood in order to run for the seat in 2008, but that his true residence was a house in Baldwin Hills, outside the district.

Wright said at the time that he thought he had taken the necessary steps to establish the Inglewood property as his domicile and had not intended to deceive voters when he arranged to rent a bedroom in the unit.

Wright is pressing his case as Brown considers a bill on his desk that would loosen the requirements for legislators to live in their districts by considering a legislator’s primary address to be the one listed on their voter registration as long as they can establish that they lived there at one time.

Share
Advertisement

California sues Trump administration over repeal of methane release rule

A gas flare at a natural gas processing facility near Williston, N.D.
A gas flare at a natural gas processing facility near Williston, N.D.
(Matthew Brown / Associated Press)

California and New Mexico sued the Trump administration on Tuesday over its action to repeal requirements aimed at reducing methane leakage on federal and tribal lands, Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra said.

The lawsuit against the federal Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke was filed in San Francisco and argues that the 2016 Waste Prevention Rule facing repeal is needed to reduce waste of natural gas and air pollution.

The states argues that the agency’s action is “an abuse of discretion” that is “in excess of their statutory authority.” The court filing says the repeal of the rule violates federal laws requiring agencies to provide a “reasoned analysis for the change” and a detailed report on the environmental impacts.

“With this attempt to axe the Waste Prevention Rule, the Trump Administration risks the air our children breathe and at taxpayers’ expense,” Becerra said in a statement. “We’ve sued the Administration before over the illegal delay and suspension of this rule and will continue doing everything in our power to hold them accountable for the sake of our people and planet.”

The lawsuit, which is the latest of multiple court cases involving the rule, argues that California is already experiencing the adverse effects of climate change, including an increased risk of wildfires, droughts and air pollution harming the health of state residents.

Share

Selling home-cooked food will no longer be illegal under measure signed by Gov. Jerry Brown

Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill into law on Tuesday that would allow people to sell food they make themselves, a practice that was previously outlawed due to health concerns.

Assembly Bill 626, which will go into effect Jan. 1, imposes strict guidelines for what it labels “microenterprise home kitchens,” or MHKs. Californians operating MHKs will have to first apply for a permit. After receiving a permit, they can run their businesses if they sell no more than 60 meals per week, deal directly with their customers and consent to inspections if local officials receive complaints.

The law also exempts MHKs from rules that apply to commercial restaurants but don’t make sense at home. These include a prohibition on kitchens opening directly to living spaces and a regulation that requires a three-compartment sink.

Supporters framed AB 626 as a social justice initiative, saying that the majority of the cooks whose work will be decriminalized are women, immigrants and people of color.

The bill’s author, Assemblyman Eduardo Garcia (D-Coachella), said he hoped AB 626 will open doors for those who have been shut out of the food industry, including single parents, disabled cooks and those who cannot afford to pay thousands of dollars to rent a commercial kitchen.

“We want to create opportunity for business development, to be able to ensure that everyone has an opportunity to be their own business owner and do something that they are good at and something that they enjoy doing,” Garcia said.

Several medical organizations and county associations said the costs would be too great. They predicted that the risks of foodborne illness will be exponentially higher under AB 626, leading to expensive hospitalizations and even death.

According to the bill’s opponents, California’s cottage food law, which lets people sell non-perishables such as popcorn and candy from home, already covers the foods that are safe to produce without professional training and equipment.

Californians who have sold home-cooked food, including Akshay Prabhu, disagreed. Speaking at a rally outside the Capitol last month, he said that he and his friends ran a pop-up diner in Davis, with a variety of offerings including homemade Chinese food and croissants.

“In March this year, we got shut down by the health inspectors,” Prabhu said. “Not for causing any sickness. It was just a preemptive strike on our operation.”

“It’s been a long, difficult path for me to get into the food industry,” he added.

Share
Advertisement

California voters will be able to fix sloppy signatures and track their ballots under new election laws

(Justin Sullivan / Getty Images)

A California voter whose signature can’t be verified on an absentee ballot will have eight days to fix the problem under a law signed Monday that takes effect immediately.

It was one of two laws signed by Gov. Jerry Brown to boost the rights of those who vote by mail. Brown also signed legislation requiring elections officials to create a system in which voters can track the status of their ballot, a service that wouldn’t be available until 2020.

The sloppy signature law comes some 13 months after state and local elections officials were sued for refusing to count Sonoma County resident Peter La Follette’s ballot because his signature didn’t appear to match the one on his official registration form. In all, the plaintiffs alleged, as many as 45,000 ballots weren’t counted in 2016 because local elections officials had no uniform rules for how to determine whether signatures matched.

Until now, California did not have any mandate that a voter be made aware of such a problem. A similar standard for signatures in Florida was rejected by a judge in 2016, who wrote that a voter’s ballot shouldn’t be rejected “for no reason other than they have poor handwriting or their handwriting has changed over time.”

Absent the new law, the problem was likely to keep growing along with the rise in absentee voting. In November 2016, 61% of the state’s voters received a ballot in the mail. The new eight-day period will be in effect for the statewide election on Nov. 6.

“It’s a principle of our democracy — every vote counts,” state Sen. Mike McGuire (D-Healdsburg), the bill’s author, said last month.

Brown also signed a bill that will eventually allow California voters to track the status of their ballot by signing up for email or text notifications. The law envisions that local elections officials could also send reminders to those who haven’t cast their ballot as election day approaches.

“If you can track your online purchase of toilet paper from the time it is shipped to the time it is delivered, you ought to be able to track something in the mail as important as your ballot,” said the bill’s author, Assemblyman Marc Berman (D-Palo Alto).

Share

California’s candidates for governor agree to face off in San Francisco public radio forum

Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, left, and Rancho Santa Fe businessman John Cox
(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times; Christina House / Los Angeles Times))

California’s two contenders for governor have agreed to participate in an Oct. 8 forum on San Francisco-based public radio station KQED.

Democrat Gavin Newsom and Republican John Cox have spent most of the summer sparring over when, where and if to hold debates, creating some political suspense with less than two months to go before the November election.

The format, according to KQED, will be “a directed conversation, not subject to strict debate timelines and rules,” and will be moderated by KQED senior politics editor Scott Shafer.

Plans for an Oct. 1 debate hosted by CNN fell apart last week. Newsom had agreed to the televised event, while Republican John Cox had not committed, expressing concerns about its format and moderators.

Share
Advertisement

It’s not just Trump — California voters can thank themselves for the state’s relevancy in this November’s midterm election

Hey, California voter, way to go! People may say you’re sun-baked, a bit too laid back and, when it comes to picking presidents, largely irrelevant.

But thanks to you, the state is sitting dead center in the November fight for control of Congress.

Sure, President Trump deserves a lot of credit for putting a half dozen or more House seats in play, fully a quarter of the number Democrats need to seize control.

Read More

Share

California housing crisis podcast: What the Legislature did in 2018 and what’s coming next

Assemblyman David Chiu (D-San Francisco)
(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

In 2018, the big California housing political debates happened early in the year, or will reach a resolution when voters decide on the ballot in November.

At the beginning of the year, lawmakers rejected plans to expand rent control and boost housing density near transit stops. California voters will now decide on the fate of rent control expansion in the fall.

On this episode of Gimme Shelter: The California Housing Crisis Podcast, we talk about the housing bills that made it through in the final few weeks of the legislative session, including a measure from Assemblyman David Chiu (D-San Francisco) that, if signed by Gov. Jerry Brown, would give the Bay Area Rapid Transit District more authority over housing development on public land near their stations — a move away from the state’s history of allowing only cities and counties to make land-use decisions.

It’s also the one-year anniversary of the podcast, and we talk about how the political landscape has changed over the past year and what we think is coming next.

Gimme Shelter,” a biweekly podcast that looks at why it’s so expensive to live in California and what the state can do about it, features Liam Dillon, who covers housing affordability issues for the Los Angeles Times’ Sacramento bureau, and Matt Levin, data and housing reporter for CALmatters.

You can subscribe to “Gimme Shelter” on iTunes, Stitcher, Soundcloud, Google Play and Overcast.

Share
Advertisement

Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice endorses John Cox for California governor

Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice endorsed Republican John Cox for California governor on Thursday, saying he has the vision to address the state’s most vexing problems.

“California’s future depends on what we do today. John’s commitment to education, affordable housing, and better-paying jobs will put California on a course towards a better tomorrow,” Rice said in a statement released by the Cox campaign.

Rice served as secretary of State and national security advisor under the George W. Bush administration. She’s now a political science professor at Stanford University and also teaches at its graduate school of business.

Earlier this month, Rice praised President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, as smart and hardworking when she introduced him during his confirmation hearing before the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary. Rice also recently headed a special commission formed by the National Collegiate Athletic Assn. to address allegations of corruption in college basketball.

Cox is running as a political outsider, saying he will use the financial skills that made him a multimillionaire businessman in Illinois to put California on the right path. He will face off with Democratic front-runner Gavin Newsom in the November election.

Share

California’s candidates for governor remain in standoff over debate schedule as CNN shelves plan to host faceoff

Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, left, and Rancho Santa Fe businessman John Cox.
Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, left, and Rancho Santa Fe businessman John Cox.
(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times; Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

With less than two months until election day, California’s two gubernatorial contenders remained locked in a standoff over whether they’ll meet to discuss the issues facing the state.

The debate over debates marked a new chapter this week when plans for an Oct. 1 faceoff hosted by CNN fell apart, a network source confirmed Tuesday. Democratic candidate Gavin Newsom had agreed to that debate, while Republican John Cox had not committed, expressing concerns about the event’s format and moderators.

Cox, who agreed to four other debates that Newsom declined, said last week he would participate in the CNN debate only if it focused on housing, cost of living, water and other California-specific issues, and if a California journalist was included as a moderator. Newsom’s campaign said Cox was trying to limit the scope of questions asked.

As both campaigns point fingers about why the CNN debate sputtered, another potential venue has emerged: a debate hosted by KQED, the San Francisco-based public radio station. Newsom has accepted the station’s invitation, and KQED is working with both campaigns to nail down a date.

“Gavin has said a number of times on the campaign trail that he wants to debate ahead of election day, as he has nine times previously in this campaign,” Newsom campaign spokesman Nathan Click said in a statement Tuesday. “That’s why our campaign has accepted a debate invitation from KQED radio, one of the last outstanding debate requests that neither campaign has rejected. If Cox is serious about debating, he should accept this final debate offer.”

The Cox campaign, meanwhile, says it’s up to Newsom whether the two rivals will meet for a debate.

“Newsom never really wanted to talk to forgotten Californians — but now he has to, because he’s flailing in the polls,” said Matt Shupe, spokesman for the Cox campaign. “We’re glad to see Newsom finally accept debates we’ve been proposing for two months.”

Share
Advertisement

Assemblyman Travis Allen weighing run for chairman of California Republican Party

Having fallen short in his recent campaign for governor, conservative state Assemblyman Travis Allen said Monday that he is weighing a run for chairman of the state GOP with the goal of “leading California Republicans back to statewide relevance.”

Allen, a resident of Huntington Beach, said he talked Monday with party Chairman Jim Brulte about the operations and priorities of the state party in preparation for making a decision on whether to vie for the leadership job.

Brulte has said he will not seek another two years as leader when his term ends in February, and a candidacy by Allen would set up another contest with former Assemblyman David Hadley, a social moderate who also ran for governor before dropping out of the race after two weeks in 2017.

“I’ve been asked by a number of supporters and I am seriously considering it,” Allen said of running for state chairman. He complained that Republicans in California “are dramatically underrepresented at the state and congressional level.”

Allen, who has received support from tea party conservatives, finished fourth in the June primary for governor with a campaign promising lower taxes, tighter security at the U.S.-Mexico border and tougher law enforcement. His campaign fell short after the state Republican Party decided not to endorse in the primary for the governor’s race.

Allen, who leaves the Assembly later this year, has endorsed Republican John Cox against Democrat Gavin Newsom in the November election. He said he plans to talk to more party activists before finalizing his decision on whether to seek the chairmanship.

“If it’s the consensus of California Republicans to have me run to be the next chairman, I would be honored,” Allen said.

Former Assemblyman Tim Donnelly, a conservative who is running for Congress against Rep. Paul Cook (R-Yucca Valley), said the possibility of an Allen candidacy is “exciting” and he noted Allen has been helping GOP candidates in the November election.

“He has a lot of support from the Trump movement,” Donnelly said, adding hat Allen is “much more of a populist and a conservative” than Hadley.

The possibility of Allen becoming the party chairman raised some concerns with Rob Stutzman, a Republican consultant based in Sacramento who has been highly critical of Trump. He noted a key job of the party chairman is to raise money for Republican candidates.

“Travis certainly created enthusiasm with grassroots Republicans, but he did not create enthusiasm with donors,” Stutzman said. “The future of the party would be better in the hands of someone who has the confidence of donors.”

Having someone closely allied with Trump policies would also be a concern, he said.

“The party has receded in the era of Trump,” Stutzman said. “That’s not good for the party’s future in California.”

Republican voter registration in California has fallen from 35% in 2002 to 25% this year.

Donnelly said he is concerned Hadley wants to move the party closer to the ideology of Democrats.

“As long as the party moderates, it keeps shrinking,” Donnelly said.

Share

Governor vetoes mandatory minimum penalties for pot shops that sell to minors

Gov. Jerry Brown on Monday vetoed a bill that would have set mandatory minimum penalties for California pot shops that sell to minors, including revocation of the state license for a third violation in three years.

The measure by Sen. Jean Fuller (R-Bakersfield) would have restricted the Bureau of Cannabis Control’s “ability to carry out enforcement actions based on the pertinent facts of a violation,” Brown said in his veto message.

“This bill is not necessary,” the governor added. “The bureau already has the authority to revoke, suspend and assess fines if a licensee sells to a minor.”

Fuller introduced the bill after California voters approved Proposition 64 to legalize recreational marijuana for adults 21 and older. The senator is concerned that the current rules mean disciplinary action is taken only at the bureau’s discretion.

“With Proposition 64 now law, preventing the distribution of cannabis and cannabis products to minors should be a top priority,” Fuller said.

The bill that was vetoed by the governor would have required a 15-day suspension for a first offense, a 25-day suspension on a second offense within 36 months, and revocation of the license for a third offense during the same period.

The governor signed another bill, AB 2164 by Assemblyman Ken Cooley (D-Rancho Cordova), that allows cities to impose fines for violations of local ordinances by marijuana growers.

Share
Advertisement

President Trump is ‘the big saboteur’ of electric cars, says Gov. Jerry Brown

Gov. Jerry Brown, seen here in May, said that President Trump is helping China become the world's leader at producing electric cars.
(Rich Pedroncelli / AP)

California Gov. Jerry Brown on Monday accused President Trump of undermining the nation’s efforts to produce more electric vehicles, arguing that efforts to slow down the focus on clean energy will ultimately hurt the U.S. auto industry.

“The big driver besides California is China,” Brown said in an interview with The Times about improved battery technology. “The big saboteur is Donald Trump. He’s trying to subsidize coal and destroy the electric car.”

The governor, who had earlier signed a landmark bill to move California toward 100% clean electricity, is hosting an international climate change summit later in the week in San Francisco. Brown said the three-day event is designed to keep “building momentum” toward expanded and new efforts at reducing greenhouse gas emissions across the world. It is an agenda that has put the veteran Democratic politician on an occasional collision course with the Republican president.

Last month, Brown lashed out after the Environmental Protection Agency announced it would freeze fuel economy standards for vehicles — a program inspired by California’s well-known effort to impose cleaner air standards than those mandated by the federal government.

In the interview with The Times, the governor predicted the Trump administration’s focus on fossil fuels could result in a major economic victory for China, a country the president has sparred with over trade.

“If he gets his way and is reelected,” Brown said of Trump, “I predict China will be the overarching, dominant car manufacturer in the world. Because they’re spending billions to get the batteries to get the electric cars.”

Electric battery technology improvements — which would ostensibly bring down the price of electric cars — is key to California meeting its ambitious goal of a 40% cut in greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels by 2030.

“People think Trump’s just fighting China,” Brown said on Monday. “He’s building the Chinese auto industry and destroying the future American auto industry.”

Share

California has ended money bail. Who will bail out the industry?

Under the glare of neon signs and unforgiving fluorescent office lights, bail agents are spending time processing a new California law signed just days ago by Gov. Jerry Brown that could decimate their industry.

The new system, which would virtually eliminate the payment of money as a condition of release, could spell doom for not only bail agents, bounty hunters and surety companies across the state, but also a $2-billion bail industry nationwide. Reform in California, which holds roughly a quarter of the market, could prompt other states to follow suit, bail groups and lobbyists said.

Reaction has been swift: Just a day after Brown signed the bill into law, bail associations filed a voter referendum in an attempt to block it, asking for support from the very criminal justice groups and activists they’ve long been at odds with. Now agents say they are scrambling to find new careers, closing up shop or weighing whether to move their businesses out of state.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Watch: Gov. Jerry Brown signs law to move California toward 100% clean energy by 2045

Share

California’s ballot is a ‘hodgepodge,’ says Gov. Jerry Brown as he vetoes bill to redesign it

An effort by the California Legislature to reduce voter confusion through a ballot redesign was vetoed Friday by Gov. Jerry Brown, who said the problem doesn’t need to be solved with a new law.

The bill would have mandated new language to make voters aware of how many candidates they could choose in any given race. In the last two statewide primaries, long lists of candidates for the U.S. Senate and governor have led to calls for a wholesale redesign of ballots.

Assembly Bill 2552 would have imposed rules on the color or style of wording instructing voters to “vote for one” in single-candidate contests, an attempt by lawmakers to address confusion over long lists that may appear to apply to more than one race.

Brown didn’t deny the problem in his short veto message, but he rejected the solution.

“In recent years, California’s ballot and ballot pamphlet have become a hodgepodge of confusing, excessive and often redundant words or explanations,” Brown wrote.

But the governor, who was once California’s chief elections officer while serving as secretary of state from 1971 to 1975, said Secretary of State Alex Padilla could solve the problem on his own: “A bill is not necessary,” he wrote.

AB 2552 would have also required Padilla to convene a ballot design advisory committee and offer a proposal by Jan. 1, 2020, for additional changes.

“The Secretary of State — with or without a committee — should fix this festering problem,” Brown wrote.

Share
Advertisement

Obama’s rally for Democratic House candidates set for Anaheim on Saturday

Former President Obama will appear in Anaheim on Saturday morning to rally support for seven congressional candidates running for key House seats in California.

The event, which was announced this week, will be held in a ballroom in the Anaheim Convention Center. Doors open at 10 a.m. and the event will get underway about 10:15 a.m.

Tickets are being distributed by the candidates’ campaigns to their supporters. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which is organizing the rally, says it anticipates about 750 people will attend.

Obama’s speech, which will last about 20 minutes, is expected to highlight the stakes of this year’s midterm election and argue that “this moment in our country is too perilous for Democratic voters to sit out,” a spokeswoman said. Democrats can take control of the House if they gain 23 seats.

Saturday will be Obama’s first time hitting the campaign trail in this year’s midterm races, a nod to California’s crush of competitive races. Democrats have their sights on gaining as many as 10 seats in California.

The candidates who will appear onstage with Obama are running in GOP-held districts that supported Hillary Clinton in 2016.

They are Josh Harder, running against Rep. Jeff Denham, and T.J. Cox, challenging Rep. David Valadao, both in the Central Valley.

The others are Orange County candidates Gil Cisneros, running to replace Rep. Ed Royce; Katie Porter, opposing Rep. Mimi Walters; Harley Rouda, challenging Rep. Dana Rohrabacher; and Mike Levin, who is running to fill the seat being vacated by Rep. Darrell Issa.

A seventh candidate, Katie Hill, who is running against Rep. Steve Knight in Los Angeles County, cannot attend because of a scheduling conflict.

Share

California gubernatorial candidate John Cox was fined by securities regulators for mishandling investors’ money in 2004

Financial regulators fined Republican gubernatorial candidate John Cox and his firm $15,000 in 2004 for mishandling investors’ funds in a housing deal, according to records filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Along with the fine, which was first reported by the Sacramento Bee, Cox was also censured by the National Assn. of Securities Dealers, which regulates the securities industry. The agency is now known as the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.

Records show that Cox did not admit to or deny the allegations at the time. He was fined $2,500 and his firm, Financial Equity Associates, was fined $12,500.

“These clerical errors are almost 30 years old — when John’s business was a tiny fraction of what it is now — and, as shown, involved no client losses or complaints at all,” Cox campaign spokesman Matt Shupe said in a statement released Wednesday. “They were simply technical violations of rules designed for broker dealers that are much larger than his company was, and that have whole compliance departments dedicated to complying with these rules.”

The incident in question stemmed from an investment in a housing unit partnership. Cox’s primary source of income comes from managing apartment buildings and condominiums.

Cox had promised to return the investors’ money if a certain number of units in the project were not sold, according to SEC records. The regulators stated that Cox failed to put the investors’ money in a separate reserve bank account or promptly return the funds when the number of housing units sold did not reach the target.

In 1990, Cox was also fined $1,000 by the same regulators in another investment deal.

Last week, the Los Angeles Times reported that Cox was accused of financial misconduct in a 1998 lawsuit filed by family members who owned the well-known Chicago potato chip company, Jays Foods. Cox paid a $1.7-million settlement.

Share
Advertisement

There are shorter waits at California’s DMV offices, but agency says there’s still work to do

A line of people stretches around a California Department of Motor Vehicles building in South L.A. last month.
A line of people stretches around a California Department of Motor Vehicles building in South L.A. last month.
(Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times)

Two months after the California Department of Motor Vehicles came under scrutiny for hours-long wait times, the agency said Wednesday that it has reduced lines by flooding offices with new workers but that continued delays are not acceptable.

Agency Director Jean Shiomoto wrote in a letter to legislators that the agency has provided “better, faster and more constituent services” in the last month by hiring an additional 468 employees and bringing back 112 retired workers, while expediting improvements to computer systems and processes.

The DMV has blamed the waits on the rollout of the federal Real ID, which was designed to enhance driver’s license and identification card security, and the Motor Voter Act, which made it easier for Californians to register to vote through the DMV.

The agency reported that the average wait time for customers without appointments at the 20 offices with the highest wait times was 211 minutes between July 23 and 27, and the average was 162 minutes between Aug. 20 and 25.

The statewide average wait time for customers without an appointment was 100 minutes in late August, down 30 minutes from late July, the agency reported.

The agency said “the current wait times, even with the reductions that have been made, are not reflective of the standards and goals of the department.”

Shiomoto said the agency is opening additional offices on Saturdays, extending hours at others, and improving technology and processes to bring wait times down further.

Republican lawmakers have continued to blast the agency, saying state law requires wait times to be an hour or less.

“That’s all we are going to accept because that’s what the law says,” Assemblyman Jim Patterson (R-Fresno) said Friday. “They are patting themselves on the back for some very small improvements.”

Republican leaders noted the Democratic majority in the Legislature blocked a proposed audit of the DMV and killed a Republican bill last week that would have allowed customers to renew their driver’s licenses online or by mail and given them more time to get an appointment for a Real ID.

Share

Two newly enacted laws allow Californians to legally change their gender

(Salvador Rodriguez / Los Angeles Times)

Two new laws allowing Californians to legally change their gender went into effect over the Labor Day weekend, simplifying the process of obtaining state-issued documents and court orders for the identity designation.

Both bills were signed into law in 2017, but didn’t go into effect until Sept. 1.

“Mindful of all the people I know who are gender-nonconforming, and the families I know with transgender children, I wanted to make sure that California continued to be a leader in gender-identity equality,” the author of the bills, state Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) said on Tuesday.

Senate Bill 179 allows people who petition for a gender change, including minors, to identify as male, female or nonbinary. Under SB 179, Californians who change their gender have a more streamlined process for aligning their name with their identity or getting a matching birth certificate. Starting Jan. 1, they will also be able to apply to alter the gender listed on their driver’s license without any additional documents.

Senate Bill 310 lets California prisoners participate in the same streamlined process and makes it easier for them to change their name to conform with their gender identity. Previously, state prisons officials had more leeway to deny such requests without an explanation.

The two laws follow a move in 2014 to ensure death certificates accurately reflect a person’s gender identity.

“The implementation of these laws represents California’s commitment to treating transgender, nonbinary and gender-nonconforming residents with the dignity and respect they deserve,” Rick Zbur, executive director of Equality California, said in a written statement.

Share
Advertisement

California pot growers would be given more time to get licensed under bill approved by lawmakers

With counties facing large backlogs of applications for permits to grow marijuana, California lawmakers late Friday approved an urgency measure allowing the pot farmers to continue operating until their licenses are approved.

The bill sent to the governor would allow the state Department of Food and Agriculture to issue provisional licenses to businesses that have submitted an application for local approval.

“The growers have done what they were supposed to and this bill will ensure they can operate until the backlog is cleared,” Assemblyman Jim Wood (D-Healdsburg) said.

The state has set a Dec. 31 deadline for marijuana businesses to get permanent licenses, but many counties have been slow to provide local approval needed to stay in business. Humboldt has received 2,376 applications and has only been able to approve 240 permits, according to Sen. Anthony Cannella (R-Ceres), who authored the urgency legislation. Monterey County has received 103 applications and has approved 13.

Lawmakers also voted Friday to approve a bill that would provide grants to Los Angeles and other cities with programs aimed at helping people who have been arrested for marijuana offenses in the past set up legalized businesses under the new laws allowing recreational use.

Share

California bill banning sale of animal-tested cosmetics goes to governor after last-minute changes shrink its scope

(Kirk McKoy / Los Angeles Times)

A proposal that passed the California Legislature on Friday would impose the nation’s strictest laws on animal testing for cosmetics.

Senate Bill 1249 would make California the first state to outlaw the sale of cosmetics tested on animals. The ban applies to animal testing of a cosmetic or its ingredients conducted after 2019, but would allow exceptions to comply with Food and Drug Administration or foreign agency requirements.

In the final days of the session, legislators amended SB 1249 to narrow the ban’s scope, focusing on animal testing conducted by the cosmetic manufacturer or suppliers. The earlier version, which met significant opposition, applied even when the group conducting the animal testing was unrelated to the cosmetics company. That version would have prevented companies from using ingredients where animal tests were required for non-cosmetic reasons, including testing to ensure a chemical does not cause cancer.

“The supply-chain focus has helped to remove the majority of significant opposition,” said the bill’s author, Sen. Cathleen Galgiani (D-Stockton).

Lawmakers also removed a provision that would have put a 2023 expiration date on the foreign regulations exemption.

Central to the debate was China, where imported cosmetics are tested on animals. Opponents of SB 1249 said the measure would prompt companies to move manufacturing to China, eliminating American jobs.

Supporters, however, said the Chinese law was weakly enforced and likely to change before the foreign regulations exemption expired. They pointed to animal-free companies that have successfully managed to market products to Chinese consumers.

The bill’s new language keeps the foreign regulations exemption in place indefinitely, as long the manufacturer does not use animal testing evidence to guarantee the product’s safety in California. After the changes were made, the Personal Care Products Council, which opposed the previous version, expressed its support.

Other backers included animal rights groups, celebrities and more than 6,500 Californians who wrote to legislators praising the bill. Several dozen cosmetics companies who supported SB 1249 said that their alternative testing methods were cheaper and faster than traditional animal testing.

“We don’t have to test on animals to make sure my mascara stays on all day,” Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher (D-San Diego) said.

Supporters hoped the bill would have national and international impact.

“I think it’s a huge statement that we’re making as a state, and given the size of our market I’m hoping that it will move the global conversation on the use of animals in testing for cosmetics,” Assemblyman Ash Kalra (D-San Jose) said.

Share
Advertisement

Surcharge to boost 911 system fails to clear California Legislature

In this Aug. 10 photo, a helicopter drops water to protect a home from the Holy Fire in Lake Elsinore.
(Robyn Beck / AFP/Getty Images)

A new surcharge on landlines, cellphones and data plans meant to bolster 911 operations sputtered in the Legislature on Friday, even as lawmakers cited the need for an improved system in the wake of the state’s deadly wildfires.

“The current system is based on technology from the 1980s,” said state Sen. Holly Mitchell (D-Los Angeles), urging her colleagues to pass the bill. “Because of this outdated technology, the numbers of failures and response times continue to increase.”

The proposed charge would have been between $0.20 and $0.80 per month for each phone line. The bill would have also authorized a $0.75 monthly charge for prepaid mobile services.

Sen. Mike McGuire (D-Healdsburg) said the 911 system was overburdened in the rural counties he represents during wine country fires last year.

“The residents of this state deserve better than politics tonight,” he said. “On an issue that is as important as the 911 system, they deserve action.”

Enacting the new charges required a two-thirds vote, and Republicans in the Senate blanched at imposing a new tax.

“This Legislature has an addiction to taxes and just thinks we can keep asking and hurting our constituents more and more,” state Sen. Jeff Stone (R-Temecula) said. “My friends, we have a $10-billion budget surplus. We have plenty of money. If this is really a top priority for this Legislature, let’s allocate money out of the General Fund to get it done.”

The bill sputtered with 26 yes votes — all from Democrats, and one short of the supermajority threshold.

Share

Tired teens could get to sleep in after legislators pass bill requiring later school start times

(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

A two-year battle to set middle and high school start times at 8:30 a.m. or later was finally put to bed in the Legislature when the measure squeaked through Friday night.

Last year, Senate Bill 328 by Sen. Anthony Portantino (D-La Cañada Flintridge) failed to pass the Assembly by 15 votes. Since then, the bill was amended to exempt rural school districts in order to accommodate farming needs.

Lawmakers enthusiastically affirmed the research the bill was based on, which shows that early start times combined with teenagers’ natural sleep schedules lead to sleep deprivation. Lack of sleep, in turn, increases risks of poor grades, mental illness and car accidents. One study found moving start times from 8 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. made students happier and more likely to show up for class.

But despite agreeing about the benefits of later start times, many lawmakers did not want to impose new scheduling headaches on parents who have to drop off their children before work.

“Theory and research come in conflict with practicality,” said Assemblywoman Sharon Quirk-Silva (D-Fullerton), a former teacher. “Even without an early time slot, I’ve often seen kids dropped off at school at 7 a.m. or earlier.”

Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher (D-San Diego) said that all school hours can inconvenience working parents, many of whom do not have traditional nine-to-five jobs.

“I come from a district where we have a large population of janitors who work until 2:30, often 3:00 in the morning and then have to wake up at a certain time to take their kids to school,” Gonzalez Fletcher said.

A mandated start time could also create problems for schools as they renegotiate teacher contracts and reschedule extracurricular activities. Districts that stagger bus service might need to buy more buses. Local governments, opponents in both parties said, are better equipped to decide start times based on these kinds of challenges.

“Why have a school district if we’re going to pass this bill?” Assemblyman Patrick O’Donnell (D-Long Beach) asked.

Assemblywoman Shirley Weber (D-San Diego) said that school boards would be unable to change school start times, recalling a debate she witnessed over the issue 20 years ago during her career in education.

“You thought somebody had killed everybody’s child, stolen every grandparent on the face of the earth, blown up everybody’s business, because we were changing start times,” she said.

Several lawmakers supported the bill despite serious concerns and even their own school districts’ opposition. Some, including Assemblyman Tony Thurmond (D-Richmond), who is running for state superintendent of public instruction, suggested that schools would look to the Legislature and the governor for help implementing the 8:30 a.m. start time.

Thurmond also praised the quality of the debate.

“Everything I heard was a fact,” Thurmond said. “And that might be a first, at least for what I’ve heard on this floor.”

Share
Advertisement

California lawmakers seek to block bots from grabbing state park reservations

Californians hoping to reserve campsites at state parks may find them all booked up.

That’s because the electronic reservation system is being gamed by private operators who use computer software “bots” to snap up campsites for weeks in advance before selling them at a premium on the web.

On Friday, state lawmakers sent the governor a bill that bans using the state park service reservation system for profit without first getting approval from the Department of Parks and Recreation.

“The state’s new online reservation system has largely been a success, but we discovered a loophole that has allowed profiteers to use bots to hold campsites ransom,” said Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher (D-San Diego), who authored AB 2054.

State officials said the private firms are charging residents two to four times the normal rate for reserving a campsite.

“When it comes to the public’s parks, the state needs to do everything it can to keep them as affordable and accessible to California’s families as possible, and we need to crack down on this scam,” Gonzalez Fletcher said.

Share

California Senate panel blocks bill to require more scrutiny of Cadiz water project

Scott Slater, president and general counsel of Cadiz Inc. watches as water pours out into a spreading basin on April 18, 2012.
Scott Slater, president and general counsel of Cadiz Inc. watches as water pours out into a spreading basin on April 18, 2012.
(Al Seib / Los Angeles Times)

A last-ditch effort to impose additional environmental review on a controversial groundwater pumping project in the Mojave Desert sputtered Friday night after a key state Senate committee held the bill over concerns about legislative process.

The measure, Senate Bill 120, would have given the state Lands Commission and Department of Fish and Wildlife the authority to study the project by Cadiz Inc. to make sure the pumping would not harm surrounding lands.

A similar measure was shelved by the Senate last year. Sen. Richard Roth (D-Riverside) revived the proposal in recent days using a legislative maneuver called a gut-and-amend, or inserting a new policy into an existing, unrelated bill.

“We hit that pause button in order to make sure we get the science right,” Roth said in the Senate Appropriations Committee on Friday evening.

“If Cadiz has it wrong, if we get it wrong, who is going to accept responsibility for this?” he added. “We can’t afford to get it wrong.”

Roth’s bill had several high-profile backers, including U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom. But Cadiz strongly opposed the measure, arguing the project has already been scrutinized under the California Environmental Quality Act and won several lawsuits against it.

Labor groups also opposed the bill, arguing it would squelch jobs.

“What are we telling investors in projects, that they can invest 20 years of time, tens of millions of dollars of pre-construction costs and go through the entire process and meet everything that this Legislature has set before them to just have the rug ripped out from underneath them and threaten 6,000 jobs in one of the most economically disadvantaged areas in the state of California?” said Scott Wetch, lobbyist for the California State Pipe Trades Council.

The measure cleared the Assembly on Wednesday, but prospects looked shakier in the Senate, where the attempt to impede the Cadiz project had previously faltered in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Sen. Anthony Portantino (D-La Cañada Flintridge), chairman of the committee, said he objected to how SB 120 was resurrected, which he said would have undermined the decision of the panel’s prior chair.

“I actually support where you’re trying to do in the bill,” Portantino said. “But I have to stand up for the integrity of the House, I have to stand up for how we do what we do.”

Cadiz Inc. cheered the outcome.

“SB 120 was an attempt by its proponents at the 11th hour of session to change the rules of the game for Cadiz, but the bill also risked so much more — water reliability, jobs, and the integrity of California’s environmental laws,” said Courtney Degener, a spokesperson for the company. “We are proud to have been a part of a wide coalition of more than 70 organizations that quickly opposed SB 120 and appreciative of the respect for the legislative process expressed by the Senate tonight.”

Environmental groups blasted the move, with one pinning the blame on Senate leader Toni Atkins (D-San Diego).

“Senate leadership let down the people of California tonight by not allowing a final vote on SB120,” David Lamfrom, California Desert Director for National Parks Conservation Assn., said in a statement. “All eyes were on Senator Toni Atkins and leadership following the assembly passage of a commonsense bill to ensure science was incorporated into an industrial, desert water mining project. Blocking a final vote on SB120 furthers Trump administration actions to remove required federal review of the Cadiz project.”

In a statement after the hearing, Roth indicated he would continue to press the issue next year.

“The facts speak for themselves, and will be discussed again by myself and my colleagues,” Roth said. “The science of the Cadiz Water Project is based on a flawed process led by a self-interested agency. The discrepancies between numbers from the U.S. Geological Survey and Cadiz Inc. are alarming at best and dangerous at worst — imperiling an entire ecosystem. I am steadfast in my resolve and the conversation will continue.”

11:46 p.m.: This article has been updated to include a comment from Cadiz Inc.

11:35 p.m.: This article has been updated to include a comment from the National Parks Conservation Assn.

This article was originally published at 11:09 p.m.

Share
Advertisement

California lawmakers pass bill designed to combat President Trump’s tax plan

Sen. Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles)
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

State legislators approved a measure Friday that aims to help California taxpayers who face larger federal tax payments following the Trump administration’s recent overhaul.

The bill would allow taxpayers to claim a charitable deduction for state tax payments above the $10,000 limit set in the tax cuts passed by Congress last year. But the Internal Revenue Service announced last week that it believed such plans, which other states have passed, were tax dodges, and is working to pass a rule that would nullify them by the end of the year.

The author of the bill, state Sen. Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles), said the passage of the measure was worth it for state taxpayers, even though it would lead to litigation between the state and federal government.

“We will move forward with this measure, but it is an unfortunate reality that we will see them in court,” De León said.

Senate Bill 539 would allow California residents to circumvent the new $10,000 deduction limit through a 75% tax credit to an existing state program that funds college tuition scholarships.

Gov. Jerry Brown still needs to sign the bill for it to become law. He has expressed wariness about such plans, citing the potential for IRS action.

Share

California would bar immigration arrests inside courthouses under bill sent to Gov. Jerry Brown

A proposal that would prohibit immigration arrests at state courthouses was sent to Gov. Jerry Brown on Friday, part of a broader move by Democrats to ensure public institutions remain “safe zones” for immigrants without legal status.

The approval comes as concerns continue to rise over the presence of federal immigration agents in courtrooms across the country. The latest such arrest to spark criticism took place this month in Sacramento.

“Civil arrests in our courthouses interrupt the administration of justice and hurt all those who use our courts — crime victims, survivors of sexual abuse and domestic violence, and witnesses who are aiding law enforcement,” bill author Sen. Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens) said.

The legislation would prevent law enforcement officials from making civil arrests during proceedings or while the person they wish to detain is conducting legal business. The proposal also gives judges the power to stop such arrests or other activities that interrupt their proceedings, or that threaten access to the court.

Senate Bill 349 moved out of the state Senate with a 28-10 vote.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement directs its agents to avoid arrests in “sensitive locations” such as schools and churches. But it does not consider courthouses to fall in that category, and immigration officials have maintained that making arrests in courts is preferable because they provide a secure environment.

California Chief Justice Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye sent a letter to Trump officials in March that criticized the approach as undermining access to justice for immigrants. On Monday, she called the arrests “disruptive, shortsighted and counterproductive.”

An earlier version of Lara’s bill would have barred federal immigration agents from entering schools, courthouses and state buildings to arrest or question people without a warrant. The final bill more closely resembles a statewide courthouse rule proposed by retired judges, law professors and activists working with the nonprofit Legal Aid at Work.

The Judicial Council of California, which is led by Cantil-Sakauye, is expected to consider the rule in the fall. It says that courthouses are and should be “places where anyone can come to seek help or to testify without fear.”

Read More

Share
Advertisement

California won’t link its electricity grid with other states as lawmakers reject pet project of Gov. Jerry Brown

(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

The leader of the California Senate said Friday that she would delay a closely watched proposal to link oversight of the state’s vast electrical power grid to those in neighboring states.

Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) released a terse statement saying the bill would not be brought up for a vote before the Legislature’s final adjournment at midnight.

“We will continue this important discussion next year,” Atkins said.

Assembly Bill 813 would have used the state’s grid operator, the California Independent System Operator, as the entity for other states to join. It sought to give the state’s utility companies permission to join the multi-state effort while handing a number of the details governing the transition to the California Energy Commission.

The concept was long championed by Gov. Jerry Brown, and the decision handed the powerful governor a rare defeat by legislative Democrats.

“Without a regional grid, renewable energy cannot expand in an integrated and efficient manner, nor can California continue its climate leadership,” Brown said in a statement. “It is imperative that a regional grid is created at the earliest possible date.”

AB 813 outlined a process to craft the new governance structure for California’s grid operator that would not have taken place until 2021.

The potential for the Trump administration to interfere or block the effort led to a split among environmental groups. Critics argued the effort could link California to states with utilities that rely on coal or other fossil fuels, with disputes ultimately settled by federal regulators.

Supporters, though, said California’s recent success at creating wind and solar energy have resulted in times where excess electricity could have been sent out of state under a regional grid. Selling it to neighboring states at a cheap cost, those groups contend, could undercut higher costs for fossil fuel energy sources and thus use the market as a force for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from utilities.

AB 813 was one of the longest-discussed bills of the two-year legislative session, having been introduced in 2017. Brown’s negotiations with organized labor early in the process were crucial, as unions representing energy workers fretted over a possible loss of construction jobs as a regional grid could inspire more power plants being built elsewhere, and not in California. Some of those unions remained formally opposed to the bill through the final debate on Friday.

10:03 p.m.: This article was updated with a comment from the governor.

This article was originally published at 8:24 p.m.

Share

California legislators pass measure that would require all rape kits to be tested soon after collection

Rape kits from 2017.
Rape kits from 2017.
(Rick Bowmer / Associated Press)

A bill sent to the governor on Friday would require the swift testing of all rape kits in California.

Under Senate Bill 1449 by state Sen. Connie M. Leyva (D-Chino), law enforcement would have to send DNA evidence collected in every sexual assault case to a crime lab within 20 days. The lab would then need to process the evidence within four months, or send it to another lab within one month.

California currently has thousands of untested rape kits. Officials sometimes skip testing when it would not help an investigation — when a victim drops charges or a suspect has already pleaded guilty, for example. But failing to test the kits could cause law enforcement to miss connections to previous crimes, supporters of the bill argue.

“All survivors deserve to have their rape kits tested promptly, which in turn can help ensure justice for survivors, identifying serial perpetrators and even exonerating the wrongfully convicted,” Assemblyman David Chiu (D-San Francisco) said.

Analyzing untested rape kits has helped identify serial rapists in several states. The bill’s supporters, including law enforcement agencies and several members of Congress, hope for a similar outcome in California, where everyone arrested for a felony must submit a DNA sample.

But the California Public Defenders Assn. said that crime labs have limited resources and should be able to choose what evidence is worth processing. According to the group, analyzing all rape kits, including ones that would not immediately help prosecute offenders, would prevent labs from quickly testing evidence that could convict murderers or exonerate innocent people.

SB 1449 received strong support in the Legislature, passing through both houses without a single no vote.

“Until we test every single rape kit, victims cannot become survivors,” Leyva said.

Share
Advertisement

California lawmakers send net neutrality proposal to the governor

Proponents of net neutrality protest against Federal Communication Commission Chairman Ajit Pai in May in Washington.
Proponents of net neutrality protest against Federal Communication Commission Chairman Ajit Pai in May in Washington.
(Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images)

Nearly nine months after federal regulators voted to do away with net neutrality rules instituted under the Obama administration, state lawmakers are on the verge of bringing them back to California.

The state Senate on Friday sent a broad proposal to Gov. Jerry Brown that would prevent broadband and wireless companies from favoring some websites over others by charging for faster speeds and from blocking, throttling or otherwise hindering access to content.

At a press conference later that day, lawmakers said California should be setting the national standard on internet policy and vowed to persuade the governor to sign the legislation, calling it vital to the state’s resistance to the Trump administration.

“Make no mistake about it, it was a hard-fought battle,” Assemblyman Miguel Santiago (D-Los Angeles) said. “But… we’re going to make the strongest case to the governor to sign this bill because this is essential to our democracy. We know our progressive values will be prevail.”

Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), who introduced the bill, said this was not “a battle of the titans,” or Facebook versus AT&T, as characterized by the telecom industry. It was a battle to level the playing field for small and mid-sized businesses, activists and others who couldn’t pay their way out of internet “slow lanes,” he said.

“Fundamentally, net neutrality is that we as individuals get to decide where to go on the internet as opposed to being told,” Wiener said, echoing his comments on the Senate floor.

The legislation moved out with a 27-12 vote and little debate, capping months of aggressive feuding between tech advocates and telecom industry lobbyists.

Legislators clashed on the Assembly floor a day earlier over whether the state should step in to fill a role some said was best left to the federal government. To opponents, the rules represented burdensome, harsh regulations on companies; for proponents, they were strong and necessary protections for consumers.

On Friday, tech activists and advocacy groups hailed the passage as a landmark move toward fair and free access to the internet, saying other states were sure to follow.

“When California acts, the world pays attention,” said Stanford law professor Barbara van Schewick, who has researched net neutrality for more than a decade and testified multiple times in favor of the legislation. “SB 822 is the only state-level bill that truly restores all the 2015 net neutrality protections. That’s what makes it so special.”

Telecom industry groups and lobbyists warned the bill would be challenged in federal court.

“Governor Brown should use his veto pen on this legislation, and Congress should step in to legislate and provide consumer protections that will resolve this issue once and for all,” said Jonathan Spalter, president and chief executive of USTelecom, a Washington-based lobby group.

California is one of 29 states to consider net neutrality protections since the Federal Communications Commission voted late last year to reverse the Obama-era internet regulations. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, who was appointed by President Trump, and Republicans have called for an end to the utility-like oversight of internet service providers.

The rules, enacted in February 2015 and ended in June, barred broadband and wireless companies such as AT&T Inc. and Verizon from selling faster delivery of some data, slowing speeds for certain content or favoring selected websites over others.

Senate Bill 822 reinstates the same regulations. But it also goes further by restricting some zero-rated data plans, or package deals that allow companies such as Verizon or Comcast to exempt some calls, texts or other content from counting against a customer’s data plan.

The legislation primarily prohibits plans that exempt the same type of content from some companies over others — video streamed on YouTube but not Hulu, for example. The bill also tasks the state attorney general with evaluating potential evasion of the net neutrality rules on a case-by-case basis.

An additional proposal, Senate Bill 460, by Sen. Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles) was shelved in the state Assembly. It would have denied public contracts to companies that fail to follow the new state internet rules, but it sunk amid opposition over last-minute amendments.

On Friday, he and other legislators said they worked with the state attorney general’s office to make SB 822 legal proof and were prepared to battle the telecom industry in court.

Sen. Ling Ling Chang, of Diamond Bar, was the lone Republican to vote for the bill in the state Senate. But the legislation received overwhelming and bipartisan support in the Assembly, as opposition to the federal rollback of the rules has remained overwhelmingly bipartisan.

“The bottom line is this,” De León said. “The internet is vital to our democracy because it is part of our daily lives.

11:31 p.m. This article was updated with the final status of SB 460.

7:25 p.m. This article was updated with additional comments from supporters and opponents of the bill.

This article was originally published at 5:09 p.m.

Read More

Share

California state senator admonished after woman complains he gave her an unwanted ‘noogie’

State Sen. John Moorlach, R-Costa Mesa
(Rich Pedroncelli/Associated Press)

A California state senator has been admonished for violating the Senate’s code of conduct after a woman complained he put her in a headlock and gave her a “noogie” during a reception.

According to documents released by the Senate Rules Committee on Friday, Sen. John Moorlach (R-Costa Mesa) was the subject of a June complaint by a woman who said he grabbed her, put his arm around her neck and gave her a “noogie” while taking a photo at a reception for GOP lawmakers sponsored by a healthcare advocacy group.

An investigator hired by the Senate determined that Moorlach acted in a way that bothered the woman, who was identified only as a member of the public who worked for the healthcare group.

“While your behavior also does not appear to be sexual in nature, it is still considered ‘unwanted behavior’ and as such is inappropriate and a violation of our policy,” wrote Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) and vice-chairman of the Rules committee, Sen. Anthony Cannella (R-Ceeres).

The letter also said Moorlach had been warned about inappropriate behavior in the past regarding touching an employee on the stomach. Senate leaders warned that Moorlach’s actions will be closely monitored and that any further violation of the policy could lead to stricter punishment.

“I am a fun-loving individual who is guilty of occasional playfulness,” Moorlach said in a statement. “I apologize for giving a ‘noogie’ to someone who requested a photo. It was done during a light-hearted moment with others present. However, I will discontinue this innocent and gregarious behavior in the future.”

Share
Advertisement

California legislators advance bill to set strongest net neutrality protections in U.S.

California lawmakers advanced an ambitious proposal Thursday to prevent broadband providers from hindering or manipulating access to the internet, bringing the state closer to enacting the strongest net neutrality protections in the country.

The legislation by Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) would bring back Obama-era internet rules rolled back by federal regulators this year, the latest volley cast by state leaders already feuding with the Trump administration over immigration and climate protection policies.

The proposal prevents internet service providers from blocking or slowing down websites and video streams or charging websites fees for faster speeds. But it also goes further than the old regulations and measures taken up by other states, placing new limits on certain data plans and tasking the state’s attorney general with investigating cases in which companies might be evading the rules.

Read More

Share

California lawmakers vote to impose limits on restraining students

Assemblywoman Shirley Weber (D-San Diego), who authored AB 2657.
(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

Legislators approved a bill Thursday that would allow school officials to restrain or seclude students only if they pose an imminent threat to themselves or others.

Assembly Bill 2657 would prevent teachers from restraining students, drugging them or putting them in seclusion as a form of punishment or coercion. It would also make it illegal to restrict students’ breathing or to keep them in a prone position with their hands behind their backs.

While existing regulations protect students from corporal punishment, they do not specify when teachers can use other practices to control students. Some of them, including restraining a student lying on the ground, carry risks of long-term trauma or death, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office.

“Current law does not provide guidance on types of restraints or the use of seclusion,” the bill’s author, Assemblywoman Shirley Weber (D-San Diego), said in a statement.

In recent years, the federal government found that a disproportionate number of students who were physically restrained in school were African American boys. An overwhelming majority of them were disabled.

Under AB 2657, restraining students merely for convenience would be prohibited. An earlier version of the bill would have imposed even stricter limits, preventing law enforcement officers from handcuffing students who were not under arrest. After that language was removed, the Peace Officers Research Assn. of California removed its opposition, leaving the bill without any formal opponents.

AB 2657 easily passed the Assembly with bipartisan support, a victory that disability rights activists and other supporters have waited for since 2008, when then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed a similar bill.

Share
Advertisement

California could soon limit who can be charged with felony murder

A line at the men's central jail in Los Angeles.
(Maria Alejandra Cardona / Los Angeles Times)

California lawmakers have sent a proposal to the governor that would widely limit who can be charged under the felony murder rule, which allows defendants to be convicted of first-degree murder if a victim dies during the commission of a felony, even if the defendant did not intend to kill or did not know a homicide occurred.

Criminal justice reform advocates say the standard differs widely from how prosecutors charge all other crimes, where a person’s intent is central to the offense and punishment they face.

The legislation by Sen. Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley) would restrict the criminal charge to those who committed or intended to commit a killing. It also would allow some inmates doing time for felony murder to petition the court for a reduced sentence.

Cases in which an officer was killed would not be subject to the new law.

“California’s murder statute irrationally treats someone who did not commit murder the same as someone who did,” Skinner said in a statement Thursday. “Most people have no idea that you can be charged with murder and given a life sentence even if you didn’t kill anyone.”

Senate Bill 1437 moved out of the Senate with a 27-9 vote and bipartisan support. It moved out of the Assembly with a 41-35 vote.

On the Assembly floor this week, some lawmakers called the state’s felony murder law archaic and blamed it for disproportionately long sentences against people who did not kill anyone.

Some pointed to a 2018 survey that found 72% of women serving a life sentence for felony murder in California did not commit the homicide. The average age of people charged and sentenced under the statute was 20, according to the report from the Anti-Recidivism Coalition and Restore Justice, a nonprofit that helps offenders reenter society.

“California has an opportunity to serve the interest of justice,” Assemblyman José Medina (D-Riverside) said during a late debate on Wednesday. SB 1437 “reserves the harshest punishment for the people who committed the murder.”

But opponents argued the bill would let too many people off the hook. Assemblyman Jim Cooper (D-Elk Grove) argued it was too lenient on willful participants in crime, such as defendants who drive a killer to the scene of the crime.

“What if it was your family member lying there dead?” Cooper asked.

Share

Last call at Los Angeles bars could go to 4 a.m. under bill passed by California lawmakers

A bar in Silver Lake.
(Jessica Gelt / Los Angeles Times)

California lawmakers are fighting for your right to party.

Legislators signed off Thursday on a plan to allow Los Angeles, San Francisco and seven other cities to extend alcohol service at bars and restaurants from 2 a.m. to 4 a.m.

Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), the author of Senate Bill 905, said the bill gives willing cities a chance to better shape their nightlife.

If Gov. Jerry Brown signs the legislation, local governments in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Oakland, West Hollywood, Long Beach, Palm Springs, Sacramento, Coachella and Cathedral City can decide to allow restaurants and bars within their cities to serve alcohol until 4 a.m. with the approval of the state Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. The bill would be a pilot program in those cities for five years beginning in 2021.

Wiener and other supporters of the bill contended that the later hours would allow California to compete with other cities and states that serve alcohol into the early hours of the morning.

Share
Advertisement

California lawmakers approve bill to require corporate boards to include women

Citing a lack of diversity in corporate boardrooms, state lawmakers on Thursday sent the governor a bill that would require women to be included on the boards of directors of firms headquartered in California.

The bill would require that publicly held corporations headquartered in the state include at least one woman on boards of directors by the end of 2019, and at least two by July 2021. Corporate boards with six or more members would be required to have at least three women on the panels by the middle of 2021.

The measure was proposed because women make up 52% of the state’s population but just 15% of the directors of its public corporations, according to state Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara), a co-author of the bill with Senate leader Toni Atkins (D-San Diego).

“We are not going to ask any more,” Jackson said in a fiery floor speech. “We are tired of being nice. We’re tired of being polite. We are going to require this because it’s going to benefit the economy. It’s going to benefit each of these companies.

“It’s time that we burst that man-cave and put women in the boardrooms,” Jackson added.

The legislation was opposed by a coalition of 30 business groups including the California Restaurant Assn., the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Trucking Assn. and the Long Beach Area Chamber of Commerce. They issued a joint letter that said they support gender equity, but said the legislation is illegal.

The state chamber of commerce said the measure “requires publicly traded corporations to satisfy quotas regarding the number of women on its board or face significant penalties, which is likely unconstitutional, a violation of California’s Civil Rights statute, and a violation of the internal affairs doctrine for publicly held corporations.”

The bill was approved by the Senate on a 23-9 vote, with opposition from Republicans including Sen. Joel Anderson of Alpine.

“I can’t support a bill that underestimates the power and strength of women,” Anderson said. “To say that they can’t find their way onto a board without our help undermines all their hard work.”

Lucy Dunn, president and CEO of the Orange County Business Council, had a similar opinion.

“This legislation is, to me, insulting,” Dunn said in a statement after the vote. “Rather than celebrate the competitive advantage women bring to positions of leadership in a company, it relegates them to placeholder status.”

Atkins responded angrily to those who say the bill isn’t necessary.

“I am sick and tired of being in a position of influence and power and yet seeing so many people like me who are still pleading to be given that opportunity,” Atkins told her colleagues.

“This is going to make a big difference in the boardrooms of the companies headquartered in California,” said Annalisa Barrett, a clinical professor of finance at the University of San Diego’s School of Business, who has done research on the gender makeup of corporate boards.

She estimated that some changes will have to be made by 377 California-headquartered companies that are on the Russell 3000, an index that tracks the performance of the 3,000 largest U.S.-traded stocks. Many more smaller companies will also be affected, Barrett predicted.

Jackson said women make more than 70% of purchasing decisions so “their insight is critical to discussions and decisions that affect corporate culture, actions, and profitability.”

Supporters cite similar efforts in Norway, which in 2003 required that 40% of corporate board seats be held by women. Three years ago, Germany mandated that 30% of corporate board seats be held by women.

“Adding women board members to our public corporations will help advance family-friendly policies in the workplace and bring California one step closer to gender equity,” said Anne Staines, statewide president of the National Assn. of Women Business Owners.

5 p.m.: This article has been updated to include comments from Lucy Dunn and Annalisa Barrett.

This article was originally published at 12:24 p.m.

Share

Californians could buy no more than one long gun a month under bill sent to Gov. Jerry Brown

Terry McGuire, owner of the Get Loaded gun store in Grand Terrace in San Bernardino County, shows a customer a Cobalt Kinetics BAMF rifle.
(Barbara Davidson / Los Angeles Times)

Californians would be barred from buying more than one rifle or shotgun in any 30-day period under a bill approved Thursday by state lawmakers and sent to the governor as part of a raft of gun-control bills in response to recent mass shootings.

The state already prohibits people from purchasing more than one handgun in any 30-day period to discourage the stockpiling of weapons and to stymie straw buyers who purchase large numbers of firearms and sell them to people who cannot otherwise legally possess them.

The bill was introduced after Congress failed to act on gun-safety proposals following a string of shooting incidents, according to Sen. Anthony J. Portantino (D-La Cañada Flintridge), the bill’s author.

The legislation, Portantino said, “sends a clear message to those in Washington who continue to ignore the cries for change to our gun laws. Here in California, we create change and respond to gun violence with sensible control.”

The bill is opposed by groups advocating for gun owners including the Outdoor Sportsmen’s Coalition.

“Firearms ownership by individuals is a constitutionally protected right of all adults,” the group said in a statement to lawmakers. “Limiting all adults to a maximum of one rifle or shotgun purchase per month will not solve crime and mental health problems.”

Gov. Jerry Brown, who has acknowledged owning a rifle, vetoed a similar bill in 2015.

“Given California’s stringent laws restricting gun ownership, I do not believe this additional restriction is needed,” he wrote that year.

Portantino’s bill is different in that it would exempt people who possess a valid, unexpired hunting license issued by the Department of Fish and Wildlife. It also would allow multiple purchases at auctions by nonprofit groups

Share
Advertisement

Lawmakers OK bill that penalizes L.A. for allowing City Council members to block homeless housing

Assemblyman David Chiu (D-San Francisco) talks with Assemblywoman Monique Limón (D-Santa Barbara).
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

California lawmakers took aim at how the city of Los Angeles approves homeless housing projects Wednesday night.

Legislators passed Assembly Bill 829, which tries to stop Los Angeles’ practice of allowing City Council members to quietly block homeless housing developments in their districts prior to a formal vote.

“We cannot allow one local elected official to unilaterally stop projects that will house people and address our homelessness crisis,” Assemblyman David Chiu (D-San Francisco), the bill’s author, said in a statement. “Local elected officials will continue to have significant input in the planning process, but they will not have a pocket veto to deny supportive housing projects.”

AB 829 was inspired by Los Angeles Times coverage earlier this year of city rules that require council members to provide a “letter of acknowledgment” if a homeless project in their district wants to tap funding from Proposition HHH, a $1.2-billion housing bond.

If projects don’t receive a letter, they can be stopped before reaching the full City Council for approval. The Times found at least two projects in Los Angeles that didn’t move forward because they lacked a letter. Council members have defended the practice as allowing them to shape development in their communities.

Under AB 829, Los Angeles and other cities that have similar policies couldn’t receive state dollars for subsidized housing projects that would need a letter from a council member to go forward. The bill needs Gov. Jerry Brown’s signature to become law.

Share

California Senate shelves high-profile bill that would hold police more accountable for killing civilians

Assemblywoman Shirley Weber (D-San Diego).
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

Major legislation that would have toughened state standards for police officers to use deadly force will not advance this year.

Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) announced late Wednesday that lawmakers did not have enough time to garner support for the measure to pass both houses of the Legislature by Friday’s deadline. Atkins said lawmakers would resume work on the effort next year.

“Make no mistake: We have a critical problem that remains unaddressed,” Atkins said in a statement. “We need to end preventable deaths and to do so without jeopardizing the safety of law enforcement officers.”

Assembly Bill 931 would have required police departments across the state to update their policies to indicate when officers are allowed to use force. Under the bill, such policies would have had to include rules stating that officers must exhaust reasonable alternatives before turning to deadly force, including using verbal warnings and tactics aimed at de-escalating encounters. If such standards were violated, departments could have faced greater liability in civil court and disciplined officers more easily than they can now.

Assemblywoman Shirley Weber (D-San Diego) introduced the bill in April, just weeks after Sacramento police shot and killed Stephon Clark, an unarmed 22-year-old black man, while searching for a car vandal. The killing sparked weeks of protests in the state’s capital city.

Initially, the bill sought to make it easier to criminally prosecute officers involved in killing civilians by saying police could use deadly force only if it was necessary to prevent imminent and serious bodily injury or death.

But in the face of intense law enforcement opposition, Weber scaled back the bill late last week to remove the proposed prosecution standards. By then, the measure had been parked in a Senate committee to allow for negotiations between Weber and civil rights advocates and police groups.

Weber said in a statement late Wednesday that she was “disappointed” that the bill would not advance, and that she planned to introduce another version in January.

“My commitment is to the families of those who have lost loved ones and the communities most affected by the current use of force standard,” Weber said.

Share
Advertisement

California’s plan to rely entirely on clean energy by 2045 heads to the governor’s desk

California lawmakers gave final approval Wednesday to a plan that would put the state on a path to phase out fossil fuels by 2045.

State senators voted overwhelmingly to support Senate Bill 100, which would require California to obtain 100% of its energy from clean sources within the next three decades. The bill, which has been touted by state and national political leaders as a key plank in California’s fight against climate change, now heads to Gov. Jerry Brown for his signature.

“It’s a historic day as an example for how the United States ought to be grappling with the existential threat to our nation and to our planet, our climate,” said Sen. Kevin de Leon (D-Los Angeles), the bill’s author.

The decision follows a dramatic vote Tuesday in the state Assembly to approve SB 100, which had been on hold for nearly a year amid concerns over costs and feasibility, and larger political fights over energy policy.

Legislators opposed to the plan renewed cost concerns during debate on the Senate floor.

“I’m concerned that when we stand up and try to help those that are not in a financial position to help themselves, saddling them with higher utility rates is not the answer,” Sen. Jeff Stone (R-Temecula) said.

In addition to phasing out fossil fuels by 2045, SB 100 would also require electric utilities and other service providers to generate 60% of their power from renewable sources by 2030, up from the current 50% goal set for that date.

If Brown signs the bill, California would join Hawaii to become the only states with goals to phase out fossil fuel use by 2045.

The passage of SB 100 is almost two years in the making. Last year, lawmakers punted on the bill after it became caught up in a fight over a proposal from Brown to integrate California’s electricity grid with those of other states in the region, legislation that remains pending. In addition to discussion over that bill, lawmakers are debating how to respond to recent wildfires across the state.

In a report this week, state regulators identified a growing wildfire danger as one of the risks California faces as a result of climate change.

Read More

Share

California lawmakers vote to raise the age for buying long guns from 18 to 21

Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School students hug survivors of the Pulse nightclub shooting before heading to a rally earlier this year.
Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School students hug survivors of the Pulse nightclub shooting before heading to a rally earlier this year.
(Gerald Herbert / Associated Press)

Alarmed by a string of mass shootings by young people, California lawmakers on Wednesday sent the governor a bill that would raise the minimum age for buying long guns in the state from 18 to 21.

Sen. Anthony Portantino (D-La Cañada Flintridge) said his bill would address concerns raised by incidents including the February shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., in which a 19-year-old is accused of using an AR-15-style semiautomatic rifle to kill 17 students and school employees.

“The two most deadly recent school tragedies have been perpetrated by people under 21 with long guns,” Portantino told his colleagues before the Senate approved the bill and sent it to the governor.

Surviving students from the Florida school campaigned successfully to get that state to adopt a law limiting gun purchases to residents 21 and older in March, and have called on California and other states to follow that lead.
The measure approved Wednesday by the California Senate builds on a previously adopted law limiting handgun purchases to those 21 and older.

“As a dad and a legislator, I am determined to help California act appropriately to the tragic events our country has faced recently due to gun violence,” Portantino said. “Out of respect for young people across our country who are demanding action we must answer their plea for help.”

Backers of the bill also cited Adam Lanza, who was 20 years old in 2012 when he shot 20 children and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., In 1999, two high school students killed 12 students and a teacher at Columbine High School in Colorado. In both cases, the killers carried rifles and shotguns.

The bill was approved Wednesday by a 26-12 vote of the Senate. Republican lawmakers who voted against the measure noted people younger than 21 can legally vote, buy homes and join the military to fight for their country. Sen. Jim Nielsen (R-Gerber) argued during the floor debate that the measure will not affect criminals who he said do not buy their firearms legally. He said the age restriction in the bill is arbitrary.

“What is magic about 21? All of a sudden you are not a danger anymore?” he asked. “I believe that yet again bills like this miss the target.”

The restriction is also opposed by gun-owner advocacy groups including the National Rifle Assn., which fought the Florida law.

“Passing a law that makes it illegal for a 20-year-old to purchase a shotgun for hunting or an adult single mother from purchasing the most effective self-defense rifle on the market punishes the law-abiding citizens for the evil acts of criminals,” Daniel Reid, the California state director of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action, wrote in a letter to legislators.

The bill exempts those younger than 21 who are in the military, serve as police officers or have existing hunting licenses from the state Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Share
Advertisement

Voter referendum drive launched to block overhaul of California bail system

Gov. Jerry Brown hands a copy of the bail bill he just signed to state Sen. Bob Hertzberg, surrounded by other supporters of the measure.
( (Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

One day after Gov. Jerry Brown signed landmark legislation overhauling the state’s money bail system, the California bail industry is fighting back.

A coalition of bail industry associations, crime victims groups and other opponents have launched a voter referendum drive in an attempt to block the implementation of the new law. They have roughly three months to collect and submit an estimated 366,000 signatures to qualify the measure.

If they are successful, the law would be put on hold and weighed on the November 2020 ballot. The law, which will go into effect on Oct. 1, 2019, is expected to dismantle a bail-bond industry that includes bounty hunters, surety companies and about 3,200 registered bail agents.

The legislation virtually eliminates the payment of money as a condition of release and replaces the money bail system with one that grants judges greater power to decide who should remain incarcerated without possibility of release in a practice known as “preventive detention.”

“Senate Bill 10 has brought together scores of individuals and groups from across the political spectrum — conservative to progressive — to agree on one thing: They all hate it and think it’s a terrible law,” Jeff Clayton, a spokesman for the coalition, said in a statement.

Top state officials, judges and activists on Tuesday hailed the new law, which puts California at the forefront of a national push to stop courts from imposing a heavy financial burden on defendants who have not been convicted of a crime and have yet to face a jury. But questions remain about its effect on the criminal justice system, and even some of its most passionate supporters worry it could lead to the incarceration of more people for longer periods of time.

The blowback continued Wednesday as the national civil rights nonprofit Color of Change released a statement urging other states not to follow California’s legislation.

“Across the country, politicians are hijacking meaningful efforts to end money bail, led by black and brown communities, and turning them into empty reforms that uphold the status quo,” said Scott Roberts, the organization’s senior campaign director.

Under Senate Bill 10, counties will have to establish their own pretrial services agencies, which would use “risk-assessment tools,” or analysis, to evaluate people arrested to determine whether, and under what conditions, they should be released.

Only people charged with certain low-level, nonviolent misdemeanors — a list of charges that can be further narrowed by county — would be eligible for automatic release within 12 hours of being booked into jail. Judges and pretrial offices will weigh the release of all other defendants sorted into low-, medium- or high-risk categories based on criminal history and other criteria.

Bail agents and bounty hunters on Wednesday vowed to continue fighting the law, saying bail was needed to hold people accountable and adding that members of the industry provide vital services to counties. Some clients cycle in and out of jail, bailing out with different companies, they said, arguing that county pretrial agencies won’t have the resources to bring them back to court.

But complaints against the bail industry in California have significantly increased, as bail agents and bounty hunters undergo little training and face limited oversight. Supporters of the new law say the system is ready for an overhaul.

“By eliminating cash bail, we are saying that those with the least ability to pay should not be released or incarcerated solely on the basis of their wealth or poverty,” Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon (D-Paramount) said in a statement shortly after Brown signed the legislation. “SB 10 is only one leg of the long journey toward perfecting our justice system, but it is an important one.”

Read More

Share

Bid to revive deal on lead paint cleanup in California falters in Sacramento

Assemblyman Tim Grayson (D-Concord), left, with state Sen. Bill Dodd (D-Napa).
Assemblyman Tim Grayson (D-Concord), left, with state Sen. Bill Dodd (D-Napa).
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

After months of negotiations, a last-minute proposal for a deal in the California Legislature on cleaning up lead paint in homes across the state has failed.

With lawmakers facing a Friday deadline to pass bills for the year, Assemblyman Tim Grayson (D-Concord) introduced legislation late on Tuesday that would have required paint companies to pay $475 million over the next decade to clean up lead paint, with additional funds coming from the settlement of a long-running lawsuit with 10 cities and counties on the issue. Grayson contended that the proposal would have allowed for the clean-up of more lead in homes across the state than solely relying on the court case.

But by Wednesday morning, Grayson conceded that he couldn’t reach an agreement between the companies and the local governments involved in the litigation and was abandoning the effort.

“We were close but it wasn’t the exact framework that was going to get the deal done,” a spokesman for Grayson said.

Discussions over who is responsible for cleaning up lead paint in California homes have taken the better part of the year at the Capitol. Last fall, a state appellate court ruled that three paint companies, ConAgra, NL Industries and Sherwin-Williams, were responsible for cleaning up lead used in homes built before 1951 in Los Angeles and nine other cities and counties.

A Santa Clara County Superior Court judge has tentatively ruled the companies owe $409 million, including a settlement agreement the local governments have reached with NL Industries.

The companies had earlier sought to take the issue directly to California voters, filing a statewide ballot measure that would have eliminated their own liability in exchange for a $2-billion taxpayer-funded bond to clean up the lead paint and other health hazards. That measure qualified to appear on the Nov. 6 ballot, but the companies withdrew it so they could continue negotiations in the Legislature over the summer. The companies have also appealed the court ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.

A spokeswoman for the companies said they would still like to see lawmakers address the issue.

“There are components to [the Grayson bill] that we like and others that we do not — demonstrating the balance and compromise achieved by the Legislature,” spokeswoman Tiffany Moffatt said in a statement. “We believe our state leaders, not the courts, should address the problems created by deteriorated lead paint in poorly maintained housing through a statewide program in which all former lead paint manufactures would contribute. Unfortunately, the 10 cities and counties are blocking that legislation.”

12:30 p.m. This story was updated with a statement from the paint companies.

This story was originally published at 12:00 p.m.

FOR THE RECORD

2:09 p.m.: An earlier version of this story said that NL Industries settled a lawsuit over lead paint cleanup, and that a Santa Clara County Superior Court judge tentatively ruled other companies involved in the suit owe $409 million. A Santa Clara County Superior Court judge has tentatively ruled the companies owe $409 million, including a settlement agreement local governments reached with NL Industries.

Share
Advertisement

Proposition 6 backers allege state-paid road crew was politicking against gas tax repeal

(Joe Raedle / Getty Images)

Supporters of an initiative to repeal California’s recent gas tax increase alleged Wednesday that state-hired contractors working on a Caltrans road project in San Diego County improperly stopped traffic and gave motorists fliers opposing Proposition 6.

Former San Diego City Councilman Carl DeMaio, a leader of the Proposition 6 campaign, said he is filing a complaint with the state Fair Political Practices Commission that the activity violated state law.

“There is absolutely no grey area here,” DeMaio said in a statement. “Caltrans is caught in blatant violation of California law that prohibits the use of taxpayer funds for campaign activities or advocacy. This proves once again that Caltrans simply cannot be trusted to do what is right with our gas tax funds — they literally are using gas tax funds to support the distribution of campaign materials to raise the gas tax on working families.”

DeMaio said the improper activity was witnessed Aug. 28 along State Highway 78 and involved private contractors supervised by a Caltrans employee in a truck bearing the agency’s logo.

A flier he alleged was handed out urged voters to “Stop the attack on bridge and road safety.” The flier includes a line that it was “Paid for by No on Proposition 6,” a campaign committee funded by groups including the State Building and Construction Trade Council of California.

Contractors and labor groups have helped raise $28 million to oppose the initiative on the November ballot that would repeal gas tax and vehicle fee increases enacted in 2017, a $52-billion effort to finance road and transit improvements.

Caltrans Director Laurie Berman said Wednesday that her agency is examining the allegations.

“Caltrans is looking into the matter but it is our understanding that these individuals were private contractors, not Caltrans employees,” Berman said in a statement. “Regardless, the Department does not condone political advocacy or the distribution of campaign information on work project sites and is contacting its contractors to remind them of this.”

Share

Gavin Newsom focuses on helping fellow Democrats take control of the House

Ahead in the polls, California gubernatorial candidate Gavin Newsom plans to hit the road after Labor Day with a statewide bus tour to help fellow Democratic congressional candidates who are trying to oust Republicans so their party can take control of the House.

Newsom highlighted the tour in a fundraising email sent out Tuesday morning, which is part of his “Blue California” campaign to help Democrats in both congressional and legislative races.

In a recent Pod Save America podcast, Newsom said he’s not taking his lead in the governor’s race for granted, but plans to spend “a lot of time and energy” helping down-ballot candidates.

According to a Public Policy Institute of California poll released in late July, Newsom was supported by 55% of likely voters compared with 31% favoring his Republican opponent, Rancho Santa Fe businessman Joh Cox.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Political ad attacks Gavin Newsom as a ‘child of privilege’

An independent political committee backing Republican John Cox for California governor released a new campaign ad bashing Democratic candidate Gavin Newsom as a “child of privilege” with a far-left political agenda.

The independent expenditure committee, Restore Our Values, paid $250,000 to air the aid on Fox News, CNN and other outlets for the next week, said Jennifer Jacobs, spokesperson for the organization.

The one-minute ad attempts to contrast Cox and Newsom, casting Cox as a self-made man and Newsom as product of the well-connected, well-heeled San Francisco political class.

“John Cox, raised by a single mom, escaped poverty through academic accomplishment and hard work,” a narrator says in the ad. “Gavin Newsom is a child of privilege, his path greased by family and political connections and billionaire patrons.”

The Newsom campaign responded with a dig of its own.

“These false attacks are a desperate, last-ditch attempt to breathe life into John Cox’s flailing campaign,” campaign spokesman Nathan Click said. “Californians won’t be fooled — they know Donald Trump supports Cox because Cox would be a key ally in imposing Trump’s extreme agenda on California families.”

The ad, peppered with flattering photographs of Cox and a few not-so-flattering photos of Newsom, accuses Newsom of wanting to raise taxes and release criminals. It ends with a collage of photographs, including one of a group of shirtless, tattooed young Latino men who appear to be flashing gang signs.

Both candidates are millionaires, with Newsom making his fortune in the wine and hospitality business, and Cox through real estate ventures and as an apartment building owner.

Restore Our Values is funded largely by the Professional Investors Security Fund of Novato, which donated $100,000 to the organization and lists Kenneth Casey as president, and Jean Kvamme and E. Floyd Kvamme of Saratoga are major donors. The Kvammes also donated $100,000 and Jean Kvamme is executive director of the Lichen Oaks Adaptive Riding Center.

Newsom has a significant lead over Cox in both fundraising and the most recent opinion polls.

Share

California lawmakers finalize details of a $1-billion wildfire prevention plan, but tough votes lie ahead

A firefighter works to prevent flames from crossing Highway 29, north of Calistoga, Calif., on Oct. 12, 2017.
(Marcus Yam/Los Angeles Times)

A bipartisan group of California lawmakers proposed on Tuesday to spend $1 billion to clear fire-prone trees and brush from across the state over the next five years while providing new relief for utility companies that have said wildfire costs could lead them to bankruptcy.

But critics maintained provisions in the bill offer little protection to utility customers from footing the bill, even when the companies are found at fault for some amount of a fire’s origins.

“Make no mistake about it, it’s not perfect,” said state Sen. Bill Dodd (D-Napa), a co-chair of the committee. “Little that we do here ever is.”

The action by a special conference committee of the state Senate and Assembly — during a hearing where lawmakers seemed perplexed by the procedural rules and only one day after they bickered over the proposed policy — came only hours before a legal deadline for the proposal’s final language to be available for public review.

The two houses of the Legislature must take up the plan before they adjourn for the year on Friday night. The ultimate fate of the proposal is uncertain. Utility company representatives insisted the proposal doesn’t do enough to address their fire-related costs, while some large industries argued their own costs as customers will rise.

While the proposed law lays out dozens of new wildfire prevention policies — including a streamlining of government approval to remove trees in heavy growth forests and exceptions to existing rules on the sizes of trees that can be removed — the late negotiations in Sacramento were focused squarely on the money.

Key lawmakers wanted to ensure that the state would spend enough money on new vegetation management programs, which include grants and other financial incentives for owners of smaller parcels of land to do the necessary work. The final proposal would allocate $1 billion over a five-year period from the money collected by the sale of greenhouse gas emission credits through California’s cap-and-trade climate program.

The most contentious financial discussions, though, centered around the distress call sounded by independently-owned electric utilities of possible bankruptcy over wildfire liability costs. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. led that charge, warning analysts last month that it faces up to $2.5 billion in costs related to deadly fires that burned through Northern California in 2017.

The proposal would allow PG&E to impose a surcharge on its customers that would be used to then sell long-term bonds to cover those costs. It would require an independent assessment of how much money the company could afford to spend, described by lawmakers as a “stress test,” before any additional costs are covered in a borrowing effort that’s underwritten by a fee on ratepayers.

Mark Toney, the executive director of The Utility Reform Network, or TURN, criticized the rules for 2017 fire costs as driven mainly by the demands of PG&E.

“It sets a cap on how much PG&E pays for fire damage and no cap for how much ratepayers pay,” Toney told lawmakers.

For future fires, utility companies would have their share of fault determined by the California Public Utilities Commission. The final legislative language builds on a concept promoted last month by Gov. Jerry Brown that companies should be responsible only for the costs of a fire that are proportional with their fault. State regulators would be tasked with making those determinations.

Advocates for California consumers and fire victims seemed divided by the final proposal, which was not made public until just minutes before the meeting began.

“California victims will be better, California will be safer as a state,” said Patrick McCallum, a lobbyist whose Santa Rosa home was destroyed in 2017.

For weeks, lawmakers have been warned that any proposal seen as too deferential to the powerful utility companies would be tantamount to a “bailout,” an unfair shouldering of costs by both residential and industrial customers. Defenders of the proposal said that electricity customers were never going to be able to escape all the costs associated when a utility’s equipment plays a role in the origins of a fire. This plan, they insisted on Tuesday, will place limits on those costs while ensuring the financial stability of the companies.

“It is what it is, we’ve got to move on,” Dodd said toward the end of the brief hearing.

Times staff writer Mini Racker contributed to this report.

Share
Advertisement

California lawmakers approve gun-seizure bill in response to Parkland shooting

In response to a mass shooting six months ago at a Florida high school, California lawmakers on Tuesday sent the governor a bill that would allow teachers, employers and co-workers to ask judges to remove guns from people they see as a danger to the public.

The state Senate voted to expand the state’s gun-violence restraining order law, which currently allows family members and law enforcement to petition the court to temporarily remove guns from persons seen as a threat to the public.

Assemblyman Phil Ting (D-San Francisco) said he introduced the bill in response to the shooting at a high school in Parkland, Fla., in which a 19-year-old former student allegedly killed 17 people.

“As we saw in the February massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, teachers and administrators saw early signs that the suspected gunman, a student, could be a threat,” Ting said. “We want to give schools in California another tool to prevent more campus tragedies.”

The measure, which allows courts to take firearms away for 21 days, extendable to a year, was opposed by the National Rifle Assn. and other groups advocating for gun owners, as well as the American Civil Liberties Union of California.

The ACLU noted the measure allows teachers and employers to seek an order without informing the person who is subject to the proposed restraining order, meaning the person “has no opportunity to contest the allegations.”

“We support efforts to prevent gun violence, but we must balance that important goal with protection of civil liberties so we do not sacrifice one in an attempt to accomplish the other,” the ACLU said in a letter to lawmakers.

The Senate vote was 25 to 12 with opposition votes cast by a bloc of Republicans, including Sen. Jim Nielsen of Gerber, who said the bill is the latest in a series of state efforts to “disarm the law-abiding.”

Nielsen said the bill raises the possibility of people seeking restraining orders based on bias or “irrational fear” of a co-worker.

“I view this as another attack on our 2nd Amendment rights,” he said.

Sen. Joel Anderson (R-Alpine) said he agrees with concerns raised by the ACLU.

“This bill poses a significant threat to our civil liberties,” he said.

Sen. Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley) argued the bill includes protections for civil liberties, including the requirement that petitioners go before a judge.

The original gun-violence restraining order law was adopted in 2016 after a mass shooting in the Isla Vista area of Santa Barbara County, and allows law enforcement to remove firearms or ammunition already in possession of a person subject to a court order.

In the last two years, 190 gun-violence restraining orders were approved in California, according to state officials.

The expansion of the law was supported by the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which noted that the man who allegedly launched a massacre at a gay night club in Orlando, Fla., in 2016 had been previously reported by co-workers as “dangerous,” “unstable” and “unhinged.” They said he had made credible threats of violence and of committing a mass shooting.

Share

California Gov. Jerry Brown signs overhaul of bail system, saying now ‘rich and poor alike are treated fairly’

California Gov. Jerry Brown on Tuesday signed a landmark bill to overhaul the state’s money-bail system, replacing it with one that grants judges greater power to decide who should remain incarcerated ahead of trial.

The two-year effort fulfills a pledge made by Brown last year when he stalled negotiations over the ambitious legislation, saying he would continue to work with lawmakers and the state’s top Supreme Court justice on the right approach to change the system. The new law puts California at the forefront of a national push to stop courts from imposing a heavy financial burden on defendants before they have faced a jury.

“Today, California reforms its bail system so that rich and poor alike are treated fairly,” he said in a statement.

Senate Bill 10 would virtually eliminate the payment of money as a condition of release. Under last-minute changes, judges would have greater power to decide which people are a danger to the community and should be held without any possibility of release in a practice known as “preventive detention.”

Top state officials, judges, probation officers and other proponents of the efforts lauded the new law. Co-authors Sen. Bob Hertzberg (D-Van Nuys) and Assemblyman Rob Bonta (D-Alameda) called it a transformative day for criminal justice, and a shift away from a pretrial system based on wealth to one focused on public safety.

Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye, who helped craft the legislation through the formation of a judicial task force that spent a year studying the issue, described a three-branch solution to address a money-bail system that “was outdated, unsafe and unfair.”

But the historic passage of the bill has been bittersweet for lawmakers, as opponents — including some of the bill’s most ardent former supporters — argued the final version of the legislation would allow judges to incarcerate more people based on subjective criteria, and did not include enough oversight over risk-assessment tools found to be biased against communities of color.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

California lawmakers pledge to keep working, but remain at odds in wildfire prevention talks

A landscape is charred by a wildfire outside Redding in late July.
(Marcus Yam / Los Angeles Times)

California lawmakers crafting state wildfire prevention policy clashed late Monday night over key details in a lengthy proposal, deep disagreements that threaten to stymie action in the Legislature for 2018.

Much of the discussion during the joint conference committee hearing focused on what has consistently been the sticking point for both lawmakers and stakeholders: how much to ease the financial impact to the state’s electric utilities for fires involving their equipment. Some continued to suggest that investor-owned utility companies could be at risk of bankruptcy if no action is taken.

“The conversation up here has to be focused on making sure that event doesn’t happen,” said state Sen. Bill Dodd (D-Napa), a co-chairman of the committee.

After the unveiling last week of a short set of guidelines, lawmakers released a 72-page draft bill on Monday night that would not only address utility costs for wildfires, but new regulations for removing fire-prone trees and brush. Lawmakers are under pressure to finalize the language by the end of the day Tuesday, a firm deadline in the state Capitol for public review of pending legislation.

But the hearing revealed a deep divide by chamber, with members of the Senate saying they accepted the proposal and members of the Assembly criticizing what was — or wasn’t — included.

“The Senate has come to an agreement,” Sen. Anthony Cannella (R-Ceres) said. The co-chairman of the panel, Assemblyman Chris Holden (D-Pasadena), quickly replied, “We look forward to you meeting us on our side.”

Assemblymembers on the committee said the draft legislation failed to provide enough money, or workable solutions, to reducing the potential fuel for deadly fires in forests and coastal areas. They said the proposal offered too little in funding to pay for those removal services.

Assemblyman Jim Wood (D-Healdsburg) told his colleagues that the plan fell fall short of the $300 million he believes is needed, money he has proposed to come from proceeds of California’s cap-and-trade climate program.

“I don’t think I could settle for less than that,” Wood said.

Senators, on the other hand, emphasized the threat posed by wildfire costs to the stability of utilities like Pacific Gas & Electric Co. Dodd said the proposal would force the companies to spend “the maximum amount they could absorb” in existing dollars or funds that would otherwise go to shareholders, and only then allow wildfire costs to be financed by money from utility ratepayers.

As it has been throughout the course of the summer negotiations, the utility companies were the target of scathing criticism at Monday’s hearing. Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara) said the independently owned utilities had “profited by their profligate behavior.” But she also said lawmakers needed to act fast to help fire victims while assuring the financial markets that the utilities would remain solvent.

“We have to come to an agreement here,” Jackson said. “If not, we have failed the people of this state.”

Share

Gov. Jerry Brown vetoes bill regulating payments to family members by political campaigns

Gov. Jerry Brown.
Gov. Jerry Brown.
(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

Gov. Jerry Brown on Monday vetoed a bill that would have prevented politicians from paying family members an amount greater than fair-market value for goods and services.

The bill by Assemblyman Marc Steinorth (R-Rancho Cucamonga) sought to ban politicians from making excessive payments to parents, children and siblings working on their campaigns.

“This proposed new authority for the Fair Political Practices Commission concerns me,” Brown wrote in his veto message.

He asked whether the panel would be forced under the proposal to conduct salary surveys to determine whether a campaign consultant is overpaid.

The amount politicians pay for services is a “personal decision more properly left to the candidate and the campaign manager, and not fodder for accusations made in the heat of a campaign,” Brown wrote.

Share
Advertisement

California lawmakers shelve controversial bill that would have raised campaign contribution limits

A controversial proposal to allow state legislative leaders to accept bigger campaign checks for their favored candidates was sidelined by lawmakers for the year on Monday after it failed to garner sufficient support in the state Senate.

The measure by Assemblyman Kevin Mullin (D-South San Francisco) would have allowed Democratic and Republican leaders of the Senate and Assembly to form caucus committees to accept campaign contributions of up to $36,000 from individual sources for state races.

Legislators are now limited to accepting contributions of no more than $4,400 from each source. Mullin’s bill would have also required monthly disclosure of campaign contributions.

But the California Democratic Party and good-government groups said it would open a floodgate of special interest contributions to leaders who determine which bills advance.

Mullin defended the legislation in a statement issued Monday after the bill was moved to the inactive file.

“I chose to author [Assembly Bill] 84 … because of my role as Assembly speaker pro tem, as well as my commitment to disclosure, transparency and the need to counter unlimited money that pours into campaigns from independent expenditure committees and super PACs,” Mullin said.

The assemblyman said the bill “provided a viable option given the increased reporting requirements and disclosure it required, as well as abiding by the existing limits on donations to similar party committees.”

The bill needed a two-thirds vote to pass, but Democrats lack a supermajority in the Senate, and the Senate Republican Caucus signaled that its members were unwilling to vote for the measure.

Senate Republican leader Patricia Bates of Laguna Niguel signaled the opposition as she complained Friday that it appeared the Democrats had unfairly held up a bill she introduced to extend the DMV’s deadlines for driver’s license renewals.

The bill’s opponents included Emily Rusch of the California Public Interest Research Group.

“Voting to create new avenues for big campaign contributions is unpopular and out of touch with what voters want to see their elected leaders focus on,” Rusch said last week. “It’s bad policy and bad politics.”

Share

San Francisco could start a safe-injection site program under bill cleared by California Legislature

Used needles are collected and exchanged for clean ones by the Tenderloin AIDS Resource Center in San Francisco.
Used needles are collected and exchanged for clean ones by the Tenderloin AIDS Resource Center in San Francisco.
(Bryan Chan / Los Angeles Times)

San Francisco would be able to establish hygienic sites for people to use injectable drugs while supervised by healthcare workers under a bill approved Monday by the Legislature.

The measure, Assembly Bill 186 by Assemblywoman Susan Talamantes Eggman (D-Stockton), would let San Francisco pilot a “safe injection site” program, which would include access to sterilized needles and referrals to drug treatment programs.

Assemblywoman Blanca Rubio (D-Baldwin Park) said San Francisco Mayor London Breed has offered to make the city a “guinea pig” for the program.

“If it works, we can expand it to other places in California. And if it doesn’t work, we’ll scrap it and start all over again,” Rubio said. “If we truly are vested from saving folks from overdose and from drugs, we have to try something. What we are doing now is not working.”

But opponents argued the program would only enable harmful behavior.

“It’s encouraging prolonged use of drugs,” Assemblywoman Melissa Melendez (R-Lake Elsinore) said. “It’s perpetuating addiction, which is the opposite of what we want to do.”

There are about 100 secure injection facilities operating in at least 66 cities around the world, according to a legislative analysis. Proponents say the access to clean equipment, trained supervisors and referral to treatment programs help prevent fatal overdoses.

“Supervised locations are meant to help people get into treatment. It’s about getting people off the streets and into a safe location,” Assemblyman David Chiu (D-San Francisco) said. He said the pilot program could save his city “millions of dollars a year in medical costs.”

The measure narrowly cleared the Assembly on a 41-24 vote. It now awaits approval from Gov. Jerry Brown.

Share
Advertisement

California lawmakers approve new restrictions on who can possess firearms

Californians wanting to carry concealed weapons such as these Glock handguns would face new requirements under legislation.
Californians wanting to carry concealed weapons such as these Glock handguns would face new requirements under legislation.
(Robyn Beck / AFP/Getty Images)

California lawmakers on Monday approved a trio of bills that would reduce the number of people with access to firearms, including lifetime bans on owning guns for people convicted of domestic violence and individuals placed on involuntary psychiatric holds twice in a year by the courts.

The three bills now head to the desk of Gov. Jerry Brown for consideration.

Assemblywoman Blanca Rubio (D-Baldwin Park) proposed a lifetime gun ban on those convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence, which extends the current 10-year prohibition in state law.

“We must do more to ensure the safety of our survivors of domestic violence,” Rubio told her colleagues Monday.

Assemblyman Evan Low (D-Campbell) introduced the measure that says Californians placed on involuntary psychiatric holds twice in a year by the courts would face a potential lifetime ban on owning firearms.

The state currently imposes a five-year ban on possessing firearms on people the courts order admitted for psychiatric treatment because they are deemed a risk of harming themselves or others.

Low’s bill would allow patients to petition the court for a hearing to have guns returned.

“People at risk of harming themselves or others should not have easy access to firearms,” Low said. “AB 1968 tightens our laws to keep firearms out of the hands of people who may be suicidal or violent.”

Some two-thirds of gun deaths in the United States are suicides, according to a report last year by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Lawmakers also gave final legislative approval Monday to a measure that would require Californians to undergo at least eight hours of instruction and pass a live-fire gun test before obtaining a concealed weapon permit.

Assemblyman Todd Gloria (D-San Diego) proposed the bill, noting there is no minimum standard for the amount of instruction applicants must receive before they are eligible for a conceal-carry permit.

“If you want to have a loaded gun in public, you need to show that you know what you are doing,” Gloria told his colleagues during the floor debate Monday.

The measure drew opposition from most Republican members including Assemblywoman Melissa Melendez of Lake Elsinore, who objected that there is no cap on the amount of training hours a county can require.

AB 2013 is also opposed by the Firearms Policy Coalition, which advocates for gun owners.

The group said the measure “casually enacts a burdensome new mandate and then leaves it up to hundreds of different law enforcement agencies to determine how it should be interpreted and applied.”

Share

California Legislature passes housing desegregation measure in rebuke to President Trump

Assemblymember Miguel Santiago (D-Los Angeles) at a news conference in February.
(Maria Alejandra Cardona / Los Angeles Times)

California lawmakers on Monday made another attempt to blunt Trump administration policies by passing a bill aimed at combating housing segregation.

Assembly Bill 686 by Assemblyman Miguel Santiago (D-Los Angeles) would put into state law Obama-era rules requiring local governments to advance policies to desegregate housing in their communities. This month, Ben Carson, Trump’s secretary of Housing and Urban Development, announced he was moving forward with plans to roll back rules requiring cities and counties to flight patterns of housing segregation.

“We wanted to make sure that fair housing still exists in California even though it’s been threatened by the Trump administration and Congress,” Santiago said.

Under Santiago’s bill, cities and counties would have to include anti-segregation plans when they describe how they expect to meet state goals for housing production every eight years.

The bill passed the Assembly 42 to 19 on partisan lines. It needs Gov. Jerry Brown’s signature to become law.

Share
Advertisement

California pledged to protect net neutrality — the showdown is here

When federal regulators voted late last year to roll back net neutrality protections, state Democratic leaders pledged to wage a fight with the Trump administration to preserve fair and open access to the internet in California.

Now two bills facing final approval in the Assembly and Senate this week have become a proxy battle in the larger national fight to reshape the internet.

The ambitious proposals would establish the strongest net neutrality rules in the nation, safeguards that advocates say would be stronger than those rejected by the White House. One would prevent internet service providers from blocking or slowing down websites and video streams, or charging websites fees for faster speeds. The other would deny public contracts to companies that fail to follow the new state regulations.

Read More

Share

FBI to talk to Rep. Maxine Waters’ opponent about tweeting of fake letter

The FBI and Capitol Police want to talk with Rep. Maxine Waters’ 2018 Republican opponent about a fake letter he posted to Twitter that falsely indicated the congresswoman wants to resettle tens of thousands of refugees in her Los Angeles district.

The Republican candidate, Omar Navarro, said he will meet with FBI agents at his California campaign office Wednesday at their request.

In December, Waters formally asked the FBI and Capitol Police to investigate the letter, which appears to be on Waters’ House office stationery and includes her signature.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Bill to impose more scrutiny on controversial Mojave Desert water project gets last-minute push

A sign at the Cadiz Ranch in the Mojave Desert on April 18, 2012. Cadiz holdings proposes to pump groundwater from the Mojave Desert.
(Al Seib / Los Angeles Times)

Environmentalists are mounting a last-minute bid in the final week of the California legislative session to revive a stalled effort to require more review for a project to pump more groundwater from the Mojave Desert.

The project by Cadiz Inc. to sell that water to urban Southern California has been the subject of a long-running political drama. It was blocked by the Obama administration, then revived under President Trump.

A 2017 measure by Assemblywoman Laura Friedman (D-Glendale) that sought to impede the project has languished in a state Senate committee. Now, the effort has a new shot at life through an 11th-hour bill by state Sen. Richard Roth (D-Riverside).

The measure, Senate Bill 120, is substantially similar to Friedman’s bill. It gives the state Lands Commission and Department of Fish and Wildlife the authority to analyze the Cadiz project to make sure the pumping would not adversely affect the surrounding lands.

“Today, we find ourselves asking a critical question: should we ensure that the scientific process we have historically used to guide our public policy decisions continue to be applied to this project?” Roth said in a statement. “If the Federal government abdicates their responsibilities, as they have done in this case, the Legislature is duty-bound to ensure our decisions are scientifically sound. For that reason, I am proud to author SB 120.”

The proposal surfaced on Friday as a gut-and-amend, a legislative maneuver to insert new policy into an existing, unrelated bill.

“In the last moments of the legislative session a non-germane budget bill was gutted and amended to thwart an innovative, environmentally benign, locally approved and judicially validated water project that will provide clean drinking water for 400,000 households in Southern California,” said Courtney Degener, a spokesperson for Cadiz. “SB 120 is bad process, destructive policy and an unconstitutional effort to single out one company and one project for unique and unprecedented review. We join the over 50 organizations who have quickly urged the Assembly Committee on Natural Resources to reject the bill.”

Friedman, who carried the original measure, is a co-author on the new bill. She cast the legislation as part of an effort to “defend our environment from profiteers that seek to drain our most precious resource for a quick buck.”

“SB 120 will preserve a vulnerable groundwater basin from any development that threatens the viability of the environment and the local economy that depends upon it,” Friedman said.

12:25 p.m.: This article was updated to include comment from Cadiz Inc.

This article was originally published at 12:08 p.m.

Share

Federal judge rules against Trump administration on 3-D gun blueprint case

A federal judge on Monday issued a preliminary injunction continuing a prohibition on the Trump administration proposal to make available blueprints for so-called ghost guns, untraceable weapons that can be manufactured on a 3-D printer, California Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra said.

California was one of 20 states led by Washington that won the decision from U.S. District Judge Robert S. Lasnik in Seattle. The injunction extends a ruling last month that barred the Trump administration from taking steps that would allow the firm Defense Distributed to disseminate 3-D gun blueprints.

“When the Trump Administration inexplicably gave the green light to distribute on the internet blueprints of 3D-printed, untraceable ghost guns, it needlessly endangered our children, our loved ones and our men and women in law enforcement,” Becerra said in a statement. “The Trump Administration’s actions were dangerous and incompetent.”

The action Monday keeps in place a July 31 court decision blocking the Trump administration pending a decision on the merits of a lawsuit by states opposed to the blueprints being published.

“The Court finds that the irreparable burdens on the private defendants’ First Amendment rights are dwarfed by the irreparable harms the States are likely to suffer if the existing restrictions are withdrawn and that, overall, the public interest strongly supports maintaining the status quo through the pendency of this litigation,” Lasnik wrote in his decision.

Share
Advertisement

Partisan spat puts California campaign fundraising bill in jeopardy

A controversial proposal to boost fundraising power for legislative leaders was put in jeopardy Friday when the Senate Republican Caucus said it would not vote for the measure amid concerns that two GOP bills have been held up by the Democrats.

An aide to Assemblyman Kevin Mullin (D-South San Francisco), who introduced the legislation, said the situation was “still fluid.”

But the letter signed by Senate Republican Leader Patricia Bates and 11 other members of her caucus puts a cloud over the future of the bill, which needs a two-thirds majority to pass.

“After careful review of Assembly Bill 84 (Mullin), the Senate Republican Caucus opposes advancement of the bill this year,” said the letter, which was delivered Friday to Senate Democrats after a Democratic-controlled committee put a hold on two unrelated Bates bills.

The campaign measure, which is opposed by the California Democratic Party and dozens of open-government groups including California Common Cause, would allow partisan caucuses in the Legislature to accept campaign contributions of $36,000 from individual sources for state races, up from the current limit of $4,400.

The Democrats lack a supermajority in the Senate and would need at least one Republican vote to pass the bill, but Capitol sources say some Democratic lawmakers are also reluctant to vote for the bill.

Sen. Joel Anderson (R-San Diego) did not sign the letter that went to the Democrats, and voted for the Mullin bill in committee. He said late Friday he was open to voting for the bill on the floor, but wanted to hear the arguments on both sides and would oppose it if Democrats hold Republican bills hostage.

The Assembly Transportation Committee held up two bills by Bates that would give more time for motorists to get Department of Motor Vehicles licenses renewed and honor a firefighter who died on duty by putting his name on a freeway sign.

Bates demanded an explanation, saying during the committee hearing that “It’s very curious” that her legislation was pulled with “no explanation.”

Assemblyman Jim Frazier (D-Oakley), the committee chairman, told Bates during the hearing that her bills were “pulled at the request of the speaker,” but he added later that there was “a very good possibility” that the bills would be heard in committee next week.

A spokesman for Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon (D-Paramount) said the committee intends to move one of the bills forward next week and that it was held to work out some issues.

Sen. John Moorlach (R-Costa Mesa) said he signed the letter because he was uncomfortable with how the Mullin bill expands campaign financing in the Capitol.

“The issue is some people have to realize this bill is dead,” he said.

Emily Rusch of the California Public Interest Research Group hopes the Mullin bill is not being revived because she fears it will lead to more special-interest cash flooding to legislative leaders.

“Voting to create new avenues for big campaign contributions is unpopular and out of touch with what voters want to see their elected leaders focus on,” she said. “It’s bad policy and bad politics.”

Share

California lawmakers propose ratepayers underwrite ‘component’ of utilities’ wildfire costs

A motorist on Highway 101 watches flames from the Thomas fire in December.
(Noah Berger / Associated Press)

California’s largest electric utility companies could use payments from customers to help underwrite the cost of their wildfire liability under a broad outline released Friday by a special state legislative committee.

The proposal comes just four days before a key legislative deadline. Specific details were not presented during an afternoon committee hearing and may not be submitted until next week. That could leave little time for public review, as both houses of the Legislature will adjourn for the year Aug. 31.

Any attempt by a utility to borrow money for wildfire damages — which would likely depend on using a specific amount of money collected from ratepayers as collateral — would have to be authorized by the California Public Utilities Commission, according to the outline released Friday. Lawmakers were adamant the final plan would not let utilities and their shareholders off the hook.

“Financing these costs is not a bailout,” state Sen. Bill Dodd (D-Napa), co-chairman of the conference committee, said of providing new help for utilities.

But some stakeholder groups — including large manufacturers and consumer groups — told lawmakers they saw no guarantees in the proposal that the utilities would have to first pay wildfire costs out of existing funds, rather than impose an additional surcharge on customers.

“This looks like a bailout, smells like a bailout and certainly feels like a bailout,” Michael Shaw of the California Manufacturers and Technology Assn. said. “We haven’t heard a description of a scenario in which shareholders are going to be first at the table in paying this.”

Critics also pointed out that the proposal appeared to be retroactive in offering utilities a way to pay for past fires, even beyond the deadly Northern California blazes from 2017 that have left Pacific Gas & Electric Co. potentially liable for $2.5 billion or more in damages.

“That is extremely, extremely concerning to us,” Michael Boccadoro of the Agricultural Energy Consumers Assn. said.

But other powerful interest groups either praised the new help for utilities or worried it wouldn’t go far enough. PG&E has told industry analysts that existing wildfire costs could push the company into bankruptcy.

Scott Wetch, a lobbyist for the union representing utility industry workers, said PG&E could be on the verge of having its credit rating reduced to “junk bond status” without help from the Legislature, triggering high cash payments under existing contracts.

“Not only will they not be able to do any of the investments that you have to hope they make, but it will be challenging to keep the doors open and keep California safe going forward,” he said.

Others echoed comments made last month by Gov. Jerry Brown, whose wildfire prevention proposal included help for the utilities — that utility companies are key to the state achieving its goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

“We need to preserve the financial viability of the utilities,” said V. John White of Clean Power Campaign. “We need to keep them whole.”

Lawmakers are also calling for new flexibility by state energy regulators to assess the conduct of utility companies in preventing wildfires involving their equipment. The framework for the proposal laid out a process, labeled a “reasonableness review” by the CPUC, of the companies and their actions.

The overview document released Friday also included key elements of a plan proposed by a bipartisan duo of lawmakers to increase spending and streamline regulations for thinning trees and fire-prone brush across the state. That includes new incentives to use biomass energy plants that can burn some of the wood removed from forests and foothill regions.

But the politically difficult task of how to deal with the fate of utility companies in their wildfire liability will be the key hurdle to overcome in the remaining days of the legislative session. While lawmakers agreed last weekend to abandon efforts to change liability standards, members of the conference committee expressed concern about not doing enough to help utility companies going forward.

“Ratepayers cannot be on the hook for everything, but we cannot bankrupt the investor-owned utilities,” state Sen. Anthony Cannella (R-Ceres) said. “At the end of the day, we’re going to be providing power and somebody’s going to be paying for it.”

Share
Advertisement

California legislators pass bill that would allow non-U.S. citizens to hold some civil offices

Sen. Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens)
(Katie Falkenberg / Los Angeles Times)

Immigrants living in California who are not U.S. citizens could be appointed to public boards and commissions under a bill passed in the state Legislature Friday.

California law requires civil officeholders to be U.S. citizens. Senate Bill 174 would make it legal for non-U.S. citizens to serve in these offices, and would also clarify that children born in California are citizens of the state, even if their parents are not.

The bill’s author, Sen. Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens), said that SB 174 would provide tax-paying noncitizens fair representation in public life, while benefiting the state as a whole.

He added that non-U.S. citizens can be licensed in California to practice law, dentistry, accounting and other professions. Experts who work in these professions often serve on boards and commissions that offer technical advice and handle licensing and regulation, he said.

“Qualified Californians who have worked hard and are experts in their field should be given the opportunity to serve the state in this way, regardless of immigration status,” Lara said.

Opponents have argued that immigrants who are in the country illegally should not be able to hold civil office.

Sen. Joel Anderson (R-Alpine) said immigrants who join a state panel could be taken advantage of in the current political climate.

“There are those out there who want to conduct a war with Trump,” he said during floor debate. “If you are a visitor in our country, we have an obligation not to take advantage of you for political purposes.”

Share

California housing crisis podcast: A brief chat with actor Jeff Bridges about his property taxes

Actor Jeff Bridges
(Mini Racker / Los Angeles Times)

Every year, tens of thousands of heirs across California not only inherit their parents’ homes, but also their parents’ low property tax bills.

This system, unique to California, was subject of a Los Angeles Times story last week detailing the substantial advantages accruing to some of the state’s most prominent families and the billions of dollars in lost revenue to cities, counties and school districts.

Inheritors don’t need to live in their parents’ homes to receive the benefits — or even in California. The Times’ found that in Los Angeles and a dozen other coastal counties, heirs were predominantly using these properties as rentals or second homes.

On this episode of Gimme Shelter: The California Housing Crisis Podcast, we dig deep into the story’s findings and its implications for homeowners young and old. We start with a brief interview with actor Jeff Bridges who, along with his siblings, receive the benefit for a Malibu beach rental they inherited from their parents. We also chat with Bob Flasher, a 73-year-old retired park ranger from Berkeley, who has mixed feelings about the tax break after receiving it for a vacation home in Sonoma.

Gimme Shelter,” a biweekly podcast that looks at why it’s so expensive to live in California and what the state can do about it, features Liam Dillon, who covers housing affordability issues for the Los Angeles Times’ Sacramento bureau, and Matt Levin, data and housing reporter for CALmatters.

You can subscribe to “Gimme Shelter” on iTunes, Stitcher, Soundcloud, Google Play and Overcast.

Share
Advertisement

Politicians are advised to secure their data after two California House candidates are hacked

California Secretary of State Alex Padilla
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

Following digital attacks on two House candidates, California Secretary of State Alex Padilla told the state’s major political parties on Thursday to be vigilant.

Recent news reports revealed that hackers infiltrated the campaigns of Dave Min and Hans Keirstead. Both are Democrats who were challenging Republican incumbents in Orange County and both failed to secure spots in the top-two primary. Keirstead was running for the seat of Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Costa Mesa), who has long been friendly toward Russia.

“We’ve only heard about two candidates,” Padilla said. “But it can happen to anybody.”

In a letter to the parties, Padilla made several security recommendations, including keeping track of who uses campaign data and for what, ensuring software is up-to-date, and responding to incidents quickly. He also cited a new law that requires politicians, journalists and researchers with access to voter data to immediately report breaches to his office.

Padilla said it was important to provide guidelines on how to keep campaign data safe.

“If there’s activity that causes voter confusion or undermines people’s confidence in electoral process, that is a concern for me,” Padilla said.

Share

Actor Jeff Bridges says he was ‘kinda shocked’ after reading Times article on his property tax break

Actor Jeff Bridges.
(Mini Raker / Los Angeles Times)

Actor Jeff Bridges said he was “kinda shocked” after reading a Los Angeles Times article last week about a substantial property tax break he and his two siblings receive for a Malibu beach home once owned by his parents.

“Tax stuff is very complicated,” Bridges said in a brief interview before appearing at the Sacramento Press Club on Thursday. “Sometimes the tax bills are in your favor, sometimes they aren’t.”

The Bridges siblings have benefited from a state ballot measure passed in 1986 that allows children to inherit their parents’ property tax advantages under Proposition 13 when they inherit their parents’ homes.

The Bridges’ children would have paid an additional $300,000 in property taxes if the Malibu house had been reassessed when they inherited it in 2009, according to a Times calculation. The family is one of a number of prominent Californians to benefit from the law.

California homeowners get to pass low property taxes to their kids. It’s proved highly profitable to an elite group >>

Earlier this year, the Bridges family listed the four-bedroom home that fronts a semi-private beach for $15,995 a month in rent. Jeff Bridges and his brother Beau declined to comment for The Times story.

Bridges said Thursday he wasn’t aware of the tax break until he read the story. Afterward, he called his tax specialist to see what it was about. Bridges noted that he pays substantial California income taxes, which voters increased for the state’s highest earners in 2012.

“We got hit pretty good,” Bridges said of the 2012 vote.

Hundreds of thousands of Californians have received the inherited tax break over the last decade. The Times found that in Los Angeles and in a dozen other coastal counties, heirs were predominantly renting out their parents’ homes or using them as second residences.

Share
Advertisement

California net neutrality bill passes out of committee that initially tried to water it down

A state Assembly panel on Wednesday advanced major legislation to prevent companies from hindering access to the internet, setting up a battle on the floor next week over whether California will enact the strongest net neutrality protections in the country.

The 9-4 approval by the Communications and Conveyance Committee came more than three months after it initially tried to scale back the proposal but retreated amid fierce backlash from net neutrality proponents.

Senate Bill 822 would bar internet service providers from blocking, speeding up or slowing down websites and video streams, or charging websites fees for faster speeds.

The committee also advanced a complementary proposal, Senate Bill 460, to cheers and applause from the audience. It would prohibit companies that violate the net neutrality rules in SB 822 from receiving public contracts.

California is one of 29 states, including Hawaii, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont, that have considered net neutrality protections in the last year. Two states, Oregon and Washington, have passed such legislation. The state initiatives follow the Federal Communications Commission voted to rescind Obama-era net neutrality rules in June.

In the committee hearing Wednesday, Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), who authored SB 822, painted a grim picture of the internet without the rules. Providers would be able to sell bundled packages with access to only select shopping websites or internet platforms, he said, or slow readers’ access to news sites if the companies refused to pay more for faster service.

His bill, he said, would ensure “that we all get to decide where we get to go on the internet.”

But the legislation is facing heavy opposition from major telecom companies and broadband service providers that argue it reaches beyond the federal regulations they seek to replace. One of those areas, they said, was limits on zero-rated data plans, or package deals that allow companies like Verizon or Comcast to exempt some calls, texts or other content from counting against a customer’s data plan.

Another point of contention was a provision that requires broadband service providers to follow net neutrality rules not only as data travels through its own network but at the entry point of connection with the rest of the internet.

Proponents dispute that, saying the legislation is quite similar to the Obama-era rules.

Mitch Steiger, a legislative advocate with the California Labor Federation, said the state needs to step up to protect the rights of workers to communicate and organize.

“Overarching over all of this now is net neutrality,” he said. “It is pretty scary to think about that world would look like, without those protections.”

The concerns were voiced as a federal lawsuit this week said Santa Clara County firefighters were hindered by inadequate internet service while they helped battle the massive Mendocino Complex fire in July. The court records said Verizon slowed the speed of the Fire Department’s wireless data.

A Verizon lobbyist told the committee there was no evidence the case was related to net neutrality. The company had acknowledged a customer service mistake had been made and was looking into the incident, she said.

Wiener said details about the wildfire incident were still emerging but called it evidence of “how critical internet access is to everything — including public safety.”

Share

California lawmakers move to help expunge pot-related convictions

California lawmakers voted Wednesday to ease the process for clearing the records of those convicted in the past of marijuana offenses.
(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

With marijuana legalized by the state’s voters, Californians with past convictions for cannabis-related offenses would get state help in expunging their records under a bill sent by lawmakers to the governor on Wednesday.

Proposition 64, which state voters approved in 2016, legalized the sale and use of marijuana for recreational use and permitted those with past convictions for the activity to petition the courts to clear their records.

But state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) told his colleagues Wednesday that the process is complicated, and many with pot convictions do not know about the opportunity.

AB 1793, which was approved by the state Senate on Wednesday, “creates a simpler pathway for Californians to turn the page,” Wiener said during the floor debate.

The legislation is supported by Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors and the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office.

Some Republican lawmakers, including Sen. Jim Nielsen of Gerber, opposed the measure.

“This directs us to forget any prior behavior that was illegal,” Nielsen told his colleagues. “They should not be given a pass.”

The measure requires the state Department of Justice to prepare a list by July 1, 2019, of those convicted of marijuana crimes who are eligible to have them expunged, and to provide those names to the county prosecutors who handled the original cases.

Prosecutors would have one year to challenge any dismissal of convictions based on concerns that the action presents “an unreasonable risk to public safety.”

The bill would then require the court to reduce or dismiss the convictions, with priority given to those currently serving jail sentences.

The Drug Policy Alliance estimates there are some 500,000 people who were arrested for cannabis-related felonies and misdemeanors between 2006 and 2015, but only about 5,000 of those had petitioned to have their records modified as of last September.

Assemblyman Rob Bonta (D-Alameda), who introduced the measure, argued that “the role of government should be to ease burdens and expedite the operation of law — not create unneeded obstacles, barriers and delay.”

Share
Advertisement

Milk and water would be default drink options in California kids’ meals under bill passed by lawmakers

(Rogelio V. Solis/AP)

California lawmakers gave final approval Tuesday to a bill requiring water or milk as the primary choices for children’s meals in the state, an effort designed to combat the health effects of sugary drinks.

Senate Bill 1192 would require restaurants to shift away from offering soda or juice with those meals, though it does not prohibit a parent from requesting those options. Supporters of the bill said a number of cities in the state already have moved to limit sugary drinks as the default option for meals designed for kids.

The bill passed with no debate in the Senate, and in the Assembly last leek with only a brief debate, as supporters pointed to the negative health effects of drinks other than water, milk and dairy-free substitutes.

“Kids’ meals shouldn’t come with a side order of diabetes, obesity or cardiovascular disease,” Assemblyman Kevin McCarty (D-Sacramento) said during last week’s debate in the lower house.

A restaurant cited for breaking the law would receive a violation notice, and a second citation within five years would trigger a fine of up to $250. Fines would be higher for additional violations of the law. Republicans decried the proposal as an unnecessary intrusion of government.

The bill, which had no formal opposition from the restaurant industry, now goes to Gov. Jerry Brown. Supporters took to social media on Tuesday to denounce national news reports that incorrectly cited SB 1192 as a ban on soft drinks and juice for meals targeted at children.

Share

Activists urge change to law that allows accomplices in crimes to be sentenced for felony murder

Adam Foss of Prosecutor Impact speaks as family members of those sentenced under the felony murder rule hold images of loved ones.
Adam Foss of Prosecutor Impact speaks as family members of those sentenced under the felony murder rule hold images of loved ones.
(Mini Racker / Los Angeles Times)

Activists gathered at the state Capitol on Tuesday to demand that lawmakers change California’s felony murder law, which allows defendants to be convicted of first-degree murder if a victim dies during the commission of a felony, even if the defendant was an accomplice or did not intend to kill.

A measure being considered by lawmakers, Senate Bill 1437, would change who could be sentenced for felony murder and give inmates imprisoned under the rule a chance at re-sentencing.

Sen. Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley), the author of the bill, criticized California’s felony murder rule as irrational.

“You can literally be charged with murder and convicted of murder and then sentenced for life without committing murder and without even being present at the time of the crime,” Skinner said.

Robert Garcia, who attended the event in Sacramento, was imprisoned for more than two decades for felony murder after participating in a deadly robbery when he was 16. Garcia said he was not armed and didn’t know that another person involved in the robbery had brought a knife used in the fatal attack.

“It blew me away, because the intention was just to get some money,” Garcia said. “We were kids. We just wanted some money. So even though that was a bad act in itself, that was all we wanted.”

The teenagers who participated in the robbery with Garcia, including one 14-year-old, were also charged with first-degree murder. Critics of the felony murder rule said the average accomplice sentenced under the rule is 20 years old.

More than 50 civil rights groups have signed on to support SB 1437. Law enforcement groups, however, argue that the felony murder rule makes criminals think twice about committing serious crimes and incentivizes them to protect lives.

The bill is one of hundreds left for lawmakers to consider before they adjourn for the year on Aug. 31.

Share
Advertisement

L.A. County gets state approval of new vote-counting system using open source software

California elections officials gave final approval Tuesday to a new system for counting ballots in Los Angeles County, one that uses open source software developed by local officials and design experts.

The certification of the new tally system for the county paves the way for other improvements, including redesigned absentee ballot packets, in the Nov. 6 election. It is the first election system of its kind, using publicly available source code that has been certified for use in California.

“With security on the minds of elections officials and the public, open-source technology has the potential to further modernize election administration, security, and transparency,” Secretary of State Alex Padilla said in a written statement.

The ballot-counting equipment is part of a broader redesign of Los Angeles County’s voting system, which will include new equipment while relying on a traditional paper ballot. The county’s existing system, portions of which are now decades old, has been targeted for replacement for several years.

“This is a significant milestone in our efforts to implement a new voting experience for the voters of Los Angeles County,” Dean Logan, the county’s registrar of voters, said in a statement.

Share

San Diego County Rep. Duncan Hunter and his wife are indicted on campaign finance violations

Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Alpine) and his wife, Margaret, were indicted by a federal grand jury Tuesday on charges they used $250,000 in campaign funds for personal use and filed false campaign finance reports with the Federal Election Commission to mask their actions.

The 48-page indictment details lavish spending from 2009 to 2016, including family vacations to Italy and Hawaii, home utilities, school tuition for their children, video games and even dental work. The San Diego Union-Tribune first identified the improper spending, triggering a federal investigation by the Justice Department.

To conceal the personal expenditures, family dental bills were listed as a charitable contribution to “Smiles for Life,” the government alleges. Tickets for the family to see Riverdance at the San Diego Civic Theatre became “San Diego Civic Center for Republican Women Federated/Fundraising,” according to the indictment. Clothing purchases at a golf course were falsely reported as golf “balls for the wounded warriors.” SeaWorld tickets worth more $250 were called an “educational tour.”

Read More

Share
Advertisement

California Senate sends landmark bail reform bill to Gov. Jerry Brown

Assemblyman Rob Bonta (D-Alameda), left, and Sen. Bob Hertzberg (D-Van Nuys) celebrate after the bail overhaul was approved by the Assembly.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

California lawmakers on Tuesday passed a landmark bill that would overhaul the state’s cash-bail system, replacing it with one that grants judges greater power to decide who should remain incarcerated ahead of trial.

The proposal moved out of the chamber with a 26-12 vote and now heads to Gov. Jerry Brown, who last year pledged to work with lawmakers and the state’s top Supreme Court justice to pass the legislation.

“Today, the Legislature took an important step forward in reducing the inequities that have long plagued California’s bail system,” Brown said in a statement Tuesday.

The two-year effort puts the state at the forefront of a national push to change the way courts impose monetary fines and payments on defendants as conditions of their release from jail. But the historic victory has been bittersweet for lawmakers, as opponents — including some of the bill’s most ardent former supporters — argued the final version of the legislation could lead to more people behind bars.

Senate Bill 10 would virtually eliminate the payment of money as a condition of release. Under last-minute changes, judges would have greater power to decide which people are a danger to the community and should be held without any possibility of release in a practice known as “preventive detention.”

On the Senate floor, Republicans argued the bill was rushed through the process after major last-minute changes unveiled last week.

Sen. Jim Nielsen (R-Gerber) contended it was passed “in the dark of night.” He said the provisions would automatically grant release to many people, and warned senators would be reading the sad stories of the people they harm.

Sen. Ted Gaines (R-El Dorado Hills) said the bill was likely to face successful constitutional challenges in court, and pointed to the financial burden faced by counties in New Jersey after bail reform efforts in that state.

“It is not a template California should follow,” he said.

But supporters argued the bill was the first step to overhaul a predatory system that hurts poor defendants and had taken into consideration input from law enforcement, as well as recommendations from a judicial task force assembled by state Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye.

Sen. Holly Mitchell (D-Los Angeles) pointed to provisions in the bill that would require courts to collect and report incarceration rates and undergo in 2023 an independent review of the legislation’s impact on the criminal justice system.

“The reality is…. we don’t thoroughly collect the data to really, unequivocally give us the answer to that question,” Mitchell said, commenting on whether the final version of the bill would lead to worse outcomes in marginalized communities.

Sen. Bob Hertzberg (D-Van Nuys) teared up as he thanked staffers and lawmakers who worked to help pass the bill, saying the Legislature would not come this close to addressing the issue again for a decade.

“The fundamental change is that we are treating people as people,” Hertzberg said.

California’s bail system has long been ripe for reform, both Democrats and Republicans agreed. Police officers and prosecutors point to dangerous or repeat offenders who pay their way out of jail time, bail agents to the high number of people who jump bail and criminal justice advocates to the hefty fees levied on families.

Under Senate Bill 10, co-authored by Hertzberg and Rob Bonta (D-Alameda), counties would have to establish their own pretrial services agencies, which would use “risk-assessment tools,” or analysis, to evaluate people arrested to determine whether, and under what conditions, they should be released.

Only people charged with certain low-level, nonviolent misdemeanors — a list of charges that can be further narrowed by county — would be eligible for automatic release within 12 hours of being booked into jail.

All others arrested would have to undergo the risk analysis, a system that would sort defendants based on criminal history and other criteria into low-, medium- or high-risk categories. Courts would be required to release low-level defendants without assigning bail, pending a hearing. Pretrial services offices would decide whether to hold or release medium-risk offenders. Judges would have control over all prisoners in the system.

Martin Hoshino, administrative director of the Judicial Council, said the organization looked forward to working with Brown and lawmakers on implementation, which tasks the judicial group with developing standards for counties on the best practices to follow on risk assessments.

Some organizations that have supported the legislation from the start applauded the bill’s passage.

“For decades, the money bail system has created a two-tiered system that prioritizes profit and penalizes poverty, and has been especially detrimental for communities of color,” California billionaire activist Tom Steyer, president of progressive advocacy organization NextGen America, said in a statement.

Laphonza Butler, president of the Service Employees International Union Local 2015, called the bill’s passage a turning point, saying it “would make California the first state in the nation to completely eliminate the use of money to determine detention.”

But other criminal justice reform groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, have rescinded their support and actively worked to kill the legislation — landing on the same side as a bail industry that has worked to sink the bill from the beginning.

On the Senate floor, lawmakers warned the bill would decimate an industry of roughly 3,200 registered agents in California. Outside the Senate chamber, Sacramento bail agent Greg “Topo” Padilla, president of the Golden State Bail Agents Assn., said his organization was already looking into ways to block the legislation, either in court or through a voter referendum.

“Options are being explored, legal challenges are being weighed and all of them have a great chance of success of because of the great irresponsibility that was taken up by our Legislature,” he said.

5:17 p.m.: This article was updated with additional information about the bill and quotes from supporters and detractors of the bill.

This article was originally posted at 4:12 p.m.

Share

Effort to end cash bail in California clears major hurdle in Legislature

A landmark bill to end money bail in California passed out of the state Assembly on Monday, clearing a major legislative hurdle despite mounting opposition to last-minute changes that gave judges greater power to decide who should remain incarcerated ahead of trial.

In a heated debate on the Assembly floor, both Republicans and Democrats expressed grave concerns over the late amendments and the push to rush the legislation to a vote. But supporters called the proposal a solid first step — one not likely to come again soon — toward overturning the status quo and helping thousands of families ensnared by what they described as a predatory bail system.

The legislation would virtually eliminate the payment of money as a condition for release from jail. Counties would have to establish their own pretrial services agencies, which would use a “risk-assessment tool,” or analysis, to evaluate people booked into jail to determine whether, and under what conditions, they should be released.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Female lobbyist lodges complaint that state Sen. Joel Anderson threatened to hit her

State Sen. Joel Anderson is facing a legislative investigation after a female lobbyist accused him of threatening to “bitch slap” her and harassing her at a Capitol-area bar last week, sources say.

Stephanie Roberson, a lobbyist with the California Nurses Assn., filed a complaint with the Senate Rules Committee on Friday.

Anderson, a San Diego County Republican who is termed out this year, is running for a seat on the Board of Equalization, the state’s tax board. He released a statement Tuesday morning regarding the complaint.

Read More

Share

Trump endorses Republican Diane Harkey in race to replace Rep. Darrell Issa

(Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times)

President Trump threw his weight behind another California candidate in the closely watched midterms, giving his nod on Twitter to the GOP state tax board chair, Diane Harkey.

It’s another sign that Republicans are concerned about holding on to the House seat being vacated by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Vista), who announced he would retire after winning re-election by the slimmest margin in the country two years ago.

It’s a risky move, considering Trump lost by seven points to Hillary Clinton there in 2016, and that Trump’s approval ratings continue to be underwater in Orange and San Diego counties, where the 49th Congressional District is located.

A May poll by the Public Policy Institute of California showed just 39% of voters in the two counties approve of the job Trump is doing as president.

Share
Advertisement

Trump tweets his ‘Total Endorsement’ for Republican John Cox in California governor’s race

Share

Surf’s up forever in California as surfing becomes the official state sport

High surf pounding the Wedge in Newport Beach on July 11, 2017.
(Mark Boster/Los Angeles Times )

Let it be known that on Aug. 20, 2018, surfing became California’s official state sport.

Gov. Jerry Brown signed legislation Monday that enshrines surfing in the state’s code. The bill notes that surfing quickly became a California icon after being imported from Hawaii. Malibu, Trestles, Mavericks, Rincon, Steamer Lane and Huntington are California’s world-famous surf breaks. The Surfers’ Hall of Fame is in Huntington Beach. And the neoprene wetsuit, surfers’ unofficial uniform, was invented in the Bay Area.

“Nothing represents the California Dream better than surfing,” said Assemblyman Al Muratsuchi (D-Torrance), who authored the bill and has been a surfer since high school. “I’m stoked that we’re celebrating an iconic sport.”

The surfing bill was the brainchild of the state Assembly’s unofficial Surf Caucus. Assemblyman Ian Calderon (D-Whittier) was a co-author of the bill, and he and Muratsuchi have used their love of surfing to promote Earth Day events in the past.

Surfing has now joined a number of official state things that lawmakers have passed in recent years. Sometimes, like every other piece of legislation at the Capitol, they’re a result of lobbying efforts. Last year, a group of fourth-graders in Merced made a pitch for almonds to become the official state nut. However, nut industry lobbying added pecans, walnuts and pistachios to the effort before it became law. The quartet is now California’s official state nut, even though none of them are actually nuts and there are four of them.

Legislators also aren’t just giving out official state status willy-nilly. Earlier this year, a bill to make the California Vaquero the official state horse failed on account of too many neighs.

Share
Advertisement

Proposal that would place restrictions on plastic straws advances in California Legislature

The California Senate on Monday approved legislation barring dine-in restaurants from offering plastic straws to customers unless they are requested.

The measure, which goes back to the Assembly for concurrence in amendments, was introduced to address the environmental problems caused by plastic ending up in oceans and rivers.

Sen. Henry Stern (D-Canoga Park) said plastic contamination is showing up in 25% of the fish sold in California.

“Do you want to eat fish with plastic in it?” Stern asked his colleagues. “This is a public health issue.”

The measure exempts fast-food restaurants and other businesses.

The vote on the legislation by Assemblyman Ian Calderon (D-Whittier) was 25 to 12, with Republican lawmakers questioning the need for the bill and intervention by the state.

“This bill is the last straw,” Sen. Jim Nielsen (R-Gerber) said. “This is a first step to the total banning of plastic straws. To me it almost looks silly. I think the negative consequences [of straws] are a bit overstated.”

Sen. Joel Anderson (R-Alpine) said plastic straws are provided in Capitol facilities, including a legislative lounge, and he accused the Senate majority of asking business to “do what we’re not willing to do ourselves.”

But Sen. Bill Monning (D-Carmel) said the proposal will help educate the public about the environmental hazard of plastics that are not biodegradable.

“Let the consumer request it if they want it,” he said.

Share

ACLU moves to oppose California bail overhaul bill it once supported

More than a dozen protesters gather at the state Capitol to speak out against bail overhaul bill.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

Another major supporter behind a sweeping bill to end money bail in California has moved to oppose the effort after amendments unveiled last week granted greater power to judges to decide who should remain incarcerated while awaiting trial.

Three executive directors with the American Civil Liberties Union on Monday released a statement moving the organization’s stance from neutral to opposed, saying the state legislation falls short of its intended goals and would compromise the rights to fair court proceedings for criminal defendants.

“Unfortunately, this amended version of SB 10 is not the model for pretrial justice and racial equity that the ACLU of California envisioned, worked for, and remains determined to achieve,” read the statement from ACLU directors Abdi Soltani in Northern California, Hector Villagra in Southern California and Norma Chávez Peterson, representing San Diego and Imperial Counties.

The change in position puts the ACLU alongside other criminal justice reform supporters who are now actively working to kill the legislation — and on the same side as a bail industry that has worked to sink the bill from the beginning.

Outside the criminal courthouse in downtown Los Angeles, home to the nation’s largest jail system, some 20 new opponents of the bill on Monday chanted “Reject SB 10!” More than a dozen more gave emotional speeches against the legislation outside the state Capitol in Sacramento. The demonstrators said the measure would give judges unfettered power to hold people behind bars and lead to higher rates of incarceration with people locked up for longer periods of time.

“SB 10 will keep undocumented people accused but not convicted of crimes in custody longer without the option of bailing out quickly, exposing them to detection by ICE,” said Pete White, executive director of the Los Angeles Community Action Network, a group that helps people dealing with poverty.

The latest version of Senate Bill 10, co-written by State Sen. Bob Hertzberg (D-Van Nuys) and Assemblyman Rob Bonta (D-Alameda), would virtually eliminate the payment of money as a condition for release from jail. Counties would have to establish their own pretrial services agencies, which would use “risk-assessment tools,” or analysis, to evaluate people booked into jail to determine whether and under what conditions they should be released.

But the changes released last week also gave greater discretion to judges over conditions for all prisoners in a practice known as “preventive detention,” allowing them to decide which people are a danger to the community and should be held without the possibility of release.

On Thursday, Hertzberg and Bonta hailed the bill as a success years in the making and overhaul a system that hurts the poor. It has the support of Gov. Jerry Brown, state Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye and Democratic front-runner for governor Gavin Newsom, the state’s lieutenant governor.

Outside the Capitol on Monday, Raj Jayadev, director of Silicon Valley DeBug, said grassroots community groups like his had “pushed the boulder up the hill” before the changes to the bill made it harmful bait and switch.

Glen Maxwell, 56, who is an activist with DeBug, said the new version of the bill could lead to more defendants taking plea deals while they languish in jail, an experience he knows about first hand, he said. Maxwell, now a deacon at Greater St. John Baptist Church in San Jose, said he was released from prison a year ago after serving nearly four years for low-level drug possession charges.

“You get desperate,” he said. “You want some type of answer, so you will pretty much take the deal because those walls are just caving in on you. There’s a lot of stuff you are going through while you are in there.”

UPDATES

1:50 p.m.: This article was updated with comments from protesters.

This article was originally published at 10:30 a.m.

Share
Advertisement

California lawmakers will abandon effort to loosen wildfire liability rules for utility companies

California lawmakers have scuttled their effort to craft a new liability standard for electric utility companies in the aftermath of a wildfire, a leader of the negotiations said on Saturday.

“It clearly became a distraction,” said state Sen. Bill Dodd (D-Napa), the co-chairman of a joint legislative conference committee that was convened earlier this summer to address wildfire prevention and liability issues.

California’s large investor-owned utilities contend that the existing liability rules are too onerous and costly. Under what’s known as “inverse condemnation,” a utility company can be held liable for costs related to a wildfire involving its equipment, even when the company followed all existing safety regulations.

The topic was one of several key issues addressed by the committee, but widely seen as the centerpiece of the negotiations. Pacific Gas & Electric Co., whose equipment has been blamed for starting several of the deadly blazes in Northern California last year, has warned it faces bankruptcy in the face of what could be $2.5 billion or more in damage awards.

But a number of stakeholder groups said they were strongly opposed to modifying the liability rules. Local governments and consumer groups in particular insisted that the existing rules ensure residents will be quickly compensated for their losses. They warned that a loose, more subjective standard would result in lengthy lawsuits with utility companies.

“It just felt like the ultimate bailout of the utilities,” Dodd said.

The decision to remove the hot-button topic from negotiations is a setback for Gov. Jerry Brown, one of the staunchest supporters of changing the liability rules. Last month, Brown offered a draft proposal that would have given judges new discretion in assessing liability. The governor’s office declined to comment on Saturday.

Under Brown’s plan, courts would have to “balance the public benefit” of the utility company’s services to consumers with the “harm caused to private property.” And although the proposal would increase fines and bar electric utilities from passing the costs to their customers, it would also give relief to any company that complied with safety regulations.

Dodd, who represents some of the Napa County communities hardest hit by wildfires in 2017, said the liability issue seemed ill-suited to a compromise this summer, given that this year’s deadliest fires all appear to have origins unrelated to utility equipment.

“I’ve had some of the conference committee members say, ‘Why are we talking about anything else other than reducing the [flammable] fuels in our state?’” Dodd said.

He said other parts of the governor’s proposal, including new regulations that focus on vegetation management around power lines, will remain in play as lawmakers rush to craft a plan before the Legislature adjourns for the year on Aug. 31.

“We are still trying to achieve the underlying goals of the governor’s plan,” Dodd said.

Share

De León captures California’s anti-Trump furor, but struggles to gain traction in run to oust Feinstein

No one needs to tell Kevin de León that his campaign to unseat U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein is a long shot.

He’s reminded all the time. Clifford Tasner, a liberal activist, approached De León at a Bel Air synagogue on a recent Saturday and offered to make him a video.

“You’ve got to throw a bunch of stuff at the wall and see what sticks,” Tasner told him. “Anything that raises your profile, that people circulate in social media, that’s clever and funny and engaging, it can’t hurt.”

Read More

Share
Advertisement

California effort to allow sports betting cleared to collect signatures as foes emerge

Amado Nanalang watches basketball games while making bets at a sports book in Las Vegas.
(John Locher / AP)

A proponent of an initiative to allow sports betting in California received the state’s approval to begin collecting signatures to put the measure on the 2020 ballot, but some key players in the gambling industry distanced themselves from the idea Friday.

The state attorney general approved the title and summary for a possible ballot measure that would amend the state Constitution to allow wagering on basketball, baseball, football and other sports contests, officials said Friday.

The proposition is being driven by Russell Lowery, a political consultant who has not disclosed who else is behind the measure but has said in-state and out-of-state gaming firms have expressed interest. Lowery would have to collect the signatures of 585,407 registered voters by February 2019 to qualify the measure for the November 2020 ballot.

Some Native American tribes that operate casinos are open to allowing sports betting but oppose to the ballot measure, which could increase the types of gambling allowed at nontribal card clubs and provide more competition to brick-and-mortar tribal casinos.

“This proposed measure would bring Vegas-style gaming to nearly 100 locations and urban areas throughout California,” said Mark Macarro, chairman of the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians. “This is not in keeping with California’s longstanding policy of limited gaming, and we will vigorously oppose this measure.”

Others are watching the proposal warily, skeptical that it has widespread backing.

“The tribes are in no rush,” said David Quintana, a lobbyist who represents tribal gaming groups including the Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians near San Diego. “Our first priority with sports wagering is to ensure that brick-and-mortar casinos are protected.”

Quintana said the initiative appears to be the work of nontribal card clubs that want to expand their authority and are offering the legalization of sports betting as a “sweetener” to voters.

However, Kyle Kirkland, the head of the California Gaming Assn., which represents many card clubs, said his group “was unaware of the initiative proposed by Californians for Sports Betting prior to its introduction and was not involved in its drafting or any revisions.”

The initiative is a response to a May decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that opened the door for states to allow sports betting by invalidating a federal law that had banned the activity.

The National Basketball Assn., Major League Baseball and golf’s PGA Tour all have brought in lobbyists to California who say they are advocating for safeguards for sports leagues and fans in any sports betting system.

Those three sports leagues are not involved in the proposed initiative, according to a representative.

Assemblyman Adam Gray (D-Merced) introduced a bill in May to legalize sports betting but was unable to build consensus on the issue before the deadlines for putting a measure on the November ballot this year.

“We need to take the time to get sports wagering right in California,” Gray said. “The recent Supreme Court decision cleared the path for individual states to determine their own destiny.” He said the “complexity of this issue demands more than the handful of weeks” of work that were available to get it on this year’s ballot.

Gray said he would hold meetings and hearings before considering “proposals that seek to eliminate black markets and create legal options with safeguards for consumers, including protections against compulsive and underage gambling.”

Share

Gov. Jerry Brown grants dozens of pardons — including three for people facing deportation

Phal Sok, left, rides the Metro Blue Line train to visit with his brother in 2017. Sok is among those pardoned by Gov. Jerry Brown.
(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

California Gov. Jerry Brown announced Friday that he has issued pardons to 36 people, including three immigrants with criminal records who face possible deportation.

Brown also issued 31 sentence commutations for current inmates.

The governor has stepped up a focus on immigrants at risk of deportation in recent rounds of pardons since President Trump took office, while the federal government has increased arrests and detentions of immigrants who are in the country illegally. A pardon can be key for someone hoping to avoid deportation.

Among those who Brown pardoned is Phal Sok, who was featured in a Los Angeles Times story in March 2017. Sok, a Cambodian, was brought to the U.S. when he was a year old. At 17, he was convicted of three felony counts of armed robbery after he and his friends held up a mom-and-pop sewing shop. He served 15 years in prison on a 23-year sentence before he was released under an initiative meant to aid juvenile offenders.

Brown has exercised his pardon power substantially more than preceding governors. Since taking office in 2011, he has granted 1,186 pardons and 82 commutations.

Share
Advertisement

Early ad blitz by conservative super PAC shows it’s serious about keeping House seats in California

Joseph Joslin, left, and Evan Albertson canvass in Tustin on behalf of the Congressional Leadership Fund for Rep. Mimi Walters.
(Christine Mai-Duc / Los Angeles Times)

A conservative super PAC trying to help the GOP hold onto its majority in the House burst onto Southern California’s pricey airwaves this week with more than $2.5 million worth of buys across four congressional districts.

The ads, released by the Congressional Leadership Fund, attack Democrats running against Rep. Steve Knight (R-Palmdale), Rep. Mimi Walters (R-Irvine) and Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Costa Mesa), as well as a candidate running in an Orange County seat being vacated by Rep. Ed Royce (R-Fullerton).

A source familiar with the buy says the ads will run on broadcast and cable television and that August spending in each district ranges between $550,000 and $750,000.

The ad blitz is remarkable for its early timing — well ahead of the traditional Labor Day start of campaigning. In 2016, the group didn’t air TV ads anywhere in the country until Sept. 16.

The ads highlight vulnerabilities of each challenger, a departure from the cut-and-paste approach of outside groups that often recycles ad content on a specific issue to use in different districts.

In the 39th Congressional District, for example, the ad criticizes Gil Cisneros, a wealthy Democrat running against Republican Young Kim for the open seat, for investing his lottery winnings in “shady” business deals and highlights recent accusations of sexual harassment, which Cisneros has denied.

“Each candidate has their own identity that’s flawed for their district in a different way,” said Courtney Alexander, a spokeswoman for CLF. “In a historically challenging election year, which we have always known 2018 would be, it’s very clear that the old playbook is not going to cut it.”

The group’s latest barbs threaten to define these candidates in a negative light at a time when many of them are still trying to introduce themselves to voters.

The Congressional Leadership Fund, which received a $30-million contribution from Las Vegas casino mogul Sheldon Adelson earlier this year, says it has already raised $100 million and plans to spend at least $8 million of it on cable and TV ads in California.

By comparison, the House Majority PAC, the Democratic super PAC with links to Nancy Pelosi, has reserved $5.2 million in TV ad time in the Los Angeles media market and another $1.2 million in the San Diego area.

Share

Bid to open California’s secret police misconduct files takes major step forward

An effort to make some internal law enforcement investigations open to the public cleared a key hurdle in the Legislature on Thursday, marking the first time in four decades that lawmakers could vote to meaningfully increase transparency surrounding police misconduct.

Senate Bill 1421 would open records from investigations of officer shootings and other major force incidents along with confirmed cases of sexual assault and lying while on duty. The bill’s author, Sen. Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley), said Thursday’s decision to send the measure through a legislative fiscal committee is a major step toward building trust between police and the communities they serve.

The committee, Skinner said, “did the right thing in moving to bring California in line with other states and give access to law enforcement records where the public truly has a right to know.”

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Proposal to radically overhaul California’s bail system advances in Legislature

California could soon end money bail, but some of the criminal justice groups who worked toward that goal aren’t celebrating.

A closely-watched bill to overhaul the state’s bail system advanced out of a key fiscal committee on Thursday with broad changes that would virtually eliminate the payment of money as a condition for release from jail.

That should have been a roaring victory for legislators and supporters who have long decried a system that they say unfairly punishes the poor. But the amendments also hand over more control to local courts and probation offices to decide who should remain incarcerated, a move former sponsors of the legislation contend could lead to indefinite detention.

Read More

Share

Proposal to make hotels give panic buttons to workers fails in California

Assemblyman Al Muratsuchi (D-Torrance)
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

A measure that would have required California hotels to provide employees who work alone in guest rooms with panic buttons in case of emergency was shelved in a state Senate fiscal committee Thursday.

The effort, Assembly Bill 1761 from Assemblyman Al Muratsuchi (D-Torrance), was aimed at protecting hotel workers from sexual harassment and assault. Opponents, including the California Chamber of Commerce and associations representing hoteliers, argued that the measure was unworkable and could require costly new equipment and administrative rules.

“With the #MeToo movement making significant strides this year, the holding of this bill in committee is a clear setback for hotel housekeepers,” Muratsuchi said.

The legislator said he planned to reintroduce the bill next year.

UPDATE

5 p.m.: This article was updated with a comment from Muratsuchi.

This article was originally published at 4:37 p.m.

Share
Advertisement

Bill requiring warning labels for sugary beverages in California dies in legislative committee

AB 1335 would have required safety warnings on vending machines as well as beverage containers.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

A bill that would have required warnings on all sugar-sweetened beverages in California died in the Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday.

The bill, AB 1335 authored by Assemblyman Rob Bonta (D-Alameda), would have required that every sugar-sweetened beverage sold in California in a sealed container be labeled with the words, “STATE OF CALIFORNIA SAFETY WARNING: Drinking beverages with added sugar(s) contributes to obesity, type 2 diabetes, and tooth decay.” Vending machines that offered those drinks would have been required to have warning labels as well.

Supporters, including the Service Employees International Union and the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, argued that children who consume just one sugar-sweetened beverage each day have an increased chance of being overweight and having related health complications.

Groups that represent the beverage industry opposed AB 1335, claiming it would unfairly single out their products as contributors to poor health and that labeling containers would prove ineffective, costly and burdensome.

The bill’s defeat comes less than two months after the governor signed a law banning local soda taxes.

Share

Proposal to create state-chartered banks for California marijuana industry fails to advance

Virgil Grant arranges containers of various strains of medical marijuana in a display case at a dispensary he runs in Los Angeles.
Virgil Grant arranges containers of various strains of medical marijuana in a display case at a dispensary he runs in Los Angeles.
(Frederic J. Brown / AFP/Getty Images)

State lawmakers on Thursday shelved a proposal to allow the state to license private banks to handle the billions of dollars expected to be generated by the state’s legal marijuana industry amid questions about the plan’s feasibility.

Voters approved Proposition 64 in 2016 to legalize growing, possessing and selling marijuana for recreational use, but newly licensed pot shops and farms say they cannot put their money in federally chartered banks because cannabis remains illegal under federal law.

Sen. Bob Hertzberg (D-Los Angeles) proposed that the state could license special privately financed banks that would issue checks to the businesses to pay rent and state and local taxes and fees, and to compensate vendors for goods and services provided to their businesses.

But a legislative analysis said the proposal faced “significant obstacles,” including the fact that it does not guarantee state banks protection from federal law enforcement.

“One unfortunate side effect of this bill could be the concentration of cannabis business assets into one or several easily identifiable institutions, making them an easier target of federal law enforcement action,” the analysis said.

A banking solution is needed because the state’s marijuana industry is projected to grow by 2020 to $7 billion annually; state officials estimate they will collect $600 million in cannabis taxes each year. Marijuana businesses currently must transport large amounts of cash, which could attract robberies.

The measure was held for the year on Thursday by the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Hertzberg said he is “extremely disappointed” at the demise of his bill.

“This is a serious public safety issue that deserves swift resolution,” Hertzberg said in a statement. “We’ve got barrels of cash buried all over the state, businesses being ransacked, and it’s clear that the federal government won’t act. It’s a shock to me that the state government may not act this year either.”

A representative of the industry also said it would keep pressing for a solution.

“The evolving cannabis industry has sales in the billions, yet the industry has been consistently shut out of the banking system leading to unavoidable issues in business management, but more importantly, public safety,” said Amy Jenkins, a spokeswoman for the California Cannabis Industry Assn. “While we are disappointed that the bill is not moving forward, we remain committed to partnering with the legislature to identify solutions to addressing this very critical issue to our state and our industry.”

Updated at 3:50 pm to include comment from the California Cannabis Industry Assn. Updated at 5 pm to include comment from Hertzberg.

Share
Advertisement

California legislators shelve bill to address wage gap by collecting certain salary data

A measure that would have required large businesses to report to the state more data on how they pay their employees failed to advance past a key legislative committee on Thursday.

Under the bill, SB 1284 by state Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara), employers with 100 or more workers would have had to submit a report on how employees are compensated in each job category, broken down by race, ethnicity or sex.

The bill was backed by employment lawyers and women’s rights groups. Proponents said that such information would allow the state to “more efficiently identify patterns of wage disparities and allow for targeted enforcement of equal pay laws.”

Business groups, including the California Chamber of Commerce, opposed the bill, arguing that it would create an impression of pay inequity that may not exist, because it does not account for other factors that could cause wage disparities.

The bill was shelved in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Share

Gavin Newsom defends gas tax and high-speed rail, accuses Trump of bankrupting the nation

Gavin Newsom at a march in Los Angeles protesting immigrant family separations on June 30.
Gavin Newsom at a march in Los Angeles protesting immigrant family separations on June 30.
(Emma McIntyre / Getty Images)

Gavin Newsom, the Democratic front-runner for governor, on Thursday criticized efforts to repeal California’s recently approved gas tax increase and defended the state’s controversial high-speed rail project, two of the most contentious issues the next governor will face.

Newsom called the Republican-crafted statewide ballot measure to repeal the gas tax, which will be on the November ballot, little more than a political ploy. He dismissed the GOP argument that government efficiencies could replace the $5.4 billion expected to be raised annually for much-needed road and bridge repairs and mass transit improvements.

“They are offering nothing but rhetoric to replace these dollars,” Newsom said. “The notion you’re going to somehow find these efficiencies is nonsense.”

Newsom made the comments at a political forum in Los Angeles sponsored by Politico and the American Assn. of Retired Persons as part of their joint Deciders series of events across the nation.

John Cox, the Republican candidate for governor, was invited but unable to attend. California Republican Party Chairman Jim Brulte took the stage before Newsom.

Brutle cautioned Democrats not to underestimate how angry Californians are over the gas tax increase, noting that in June it led to the successful recall of state Sen. Josh Newman (D-Fullerton).

Brutle also predicted that California Republicans will fare much better than expected in the November election, especially members of Congress who are being targeted as part of the Democratic effort to retake control of the House. California housing has become more unaffordable, crime has increased and income inequality has worsened — all while Democrats were in power in Sacramento, Brulte said.

“I understand why [Democrats] want to talk about Donald Trump, because they are afraid of talking about their record,” he said.

Brutle and Newsom were interviewed separately by Politico reporters on stage at the InterContinental Los Angeles Downtown hotel.

Newsom acknowledged that the cost of California’s high-speed rail project now far exceeds the estimated price tag when state voters approved the system in 2008. Still, the rail system would be a major catalyst for the California economy, especially if the first leg connecting the Central Valley to the Silicon Valley is completed, he said.

“That’s a project I can support,” Newsom said, adding that he hoped the completion of that first stage will attract private investors to pay for the extension of the rail line to Southern California.

Newsom also was given plenty of opportunities to take shots at President Trump, and he obliged. He said Trump’s policies have been catastrophic to the country, and eventually will damage the Republican Party. He added that he is worried that federal tax cuts approved by Trump and the GOP-led Congress will “bankrupt” the nation, and that the resulting major increase in the budget deficit will undermine the economic recovery.

But he said, if elected governor, his focus will be on the most pressing concerns facing California and not on the Republican in the White House.

When asked if he would consider challenging Trump in 2020, Newsom was blunt: “No. Next question.”

Share
Advertisement

Legislation that would make it easier to prosecute police officers who kill civilians is put on hold

Assemblywoman Shirley Weber (D-San Diego) is the author of a bill that would make it easier to prosecute police officers who kill civilians.
(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

Major legislation that would make it easier to prosecute police officers who kill civilians is on hold, but its author said negotiations will continue before California lawmakers break for the year at the end of August.

The measure, Assembly Bill 931 by Assemblywoman Shirley Weber (D-San Diego), has been the subject of intense debate by civil rights organizations who believe it’s necessary to hold officers accountable, and law enforcement groups who argue the effort is an existential threat.

State senators Thursday morning did not advance Weber’s bill, but instead voted to move it out of a fiscal committee, where it faced a deadline to pass by the end of the week. Now, lawmakers have more time to debate the issue, Weber said.

“This is good news,” Weber said in a statement. “This is a critically important discussion that is long overdue in California.”

Under current California law, deadly force by police must be “objectively reasonable,” a standard under which few officers have faced charges. Prosecutors have often decided that officers had reason to believe they or others were at risk because suspected offenders, even if they were unarmed, posed a threat.

Weber’s bill has two key changes that aim to make it easier to prosecute officers.

It says officers can use deadly force only if it is necessary to prevent imminent and serious bodily injury or death, which could encourage prosecutors to consider whether officers could have handled the situation with verbal warnings or have used nonlethal force. It also allows prosecutors to take into account an officer’s actions prior to a killing that could have placed the officer in harm’s way.

Thursday’s decision on AB 931 came after weeks of intense lobbying by civil rights activists and law enforcement. Social justice organizations held protests at the Capitol this week.

Meanwhile, organizations that represent police chiefs and unions ran radio advertisements across Southern California criticizing the bill, arguing that it fails to take into account that officers must make split-second decisions to protect themselves and the public. The union that represents rank-and-file Los Angeles Police Department officers also displayed a memorial for police killed in the line of duty close to the Capitol this week.

Share

California lawmakers divided over long waits at DMV offices

A California DMV office in South L.A.
(Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times)

Long wait times at the Department of Motor Vehicles were the subject of continued controversy Wednesday at a Capitol hearing and at a campaign event where Republican gubernatorial candidate John Cox said the problem has been mishandled.

The Assembly Budget Committee voted 15 to 10 Wednesday on a budget bill that allows the DMV to pursue an additional $26 million to speed up the processing of licenses at field offices. But the agency must justify any request in writing and provide a monthly report on how money is being spent.

“It’s absolutely appropriate that we continue to follow up and understand how these resources are deployed so that these wait times, which are a statewide issue, can be addressed across the board,” said Assemblyman Phil Ting (D-San Francisco), the committee’s chairman.

The budget bill was opposed by a bloc of Republicans, including Assemblyman Jay Obernolte of Big Bear Lake, who said DMV officials last week could not satisfactorily explain what they plan to do with $16 million that was provided earlier this month.

He said he objected also because the bill allows new funds to be approved by a handful of people instead of the entire 28-person committee.

“I have a big problem with giving them essentially a blank check without any kind of legislative oversight,” Obernolte said.

Republicans also complained that Democrats last week blocked a proposal to audit the agency.

Some residents have ended up waiting four to six hours at DMV offices as the agency deals with complications caused by Real IDs, a new driver’s license and identification card design that federal law will require residents to present to board domestic flights starting in late 2020.

“Our wait times are unacceptable and we continue to take actions to improve service for all Californians,” DMV Director Jean Shiomoto said in a statement Wednesday. “The additional staffing along with a number of new improvements the department is currently rolling out will ease wait times in our field offices.”

Since the DMV began shifting more staff to field offices, the average wait time Tuesday was reduced to 137 minutes from 162 minutes the week before.

The DMV has already mailed driver license and ID card renewal notices earlier — 120 days before the expiration dates. The agency has also allowed customers to return to offices with a text message system. The office has also expanded the number of self-service terminals in grocery stores.

On a tour of DMV offices, GOP gubernatorial candidate John Cox said in Sacramento on Wednesday that state legislators are partly to blame for the long wait times.

“The idea that we have a government agency that’s doing this to its people without really taking advantage of innovation is just another example of how the political class is mismanaging,” Cox said.

He also complained about the DMV office in the Capitol, where legislators and staff have shorter wait times. “Their time’s valuable,” Cox said. “Yours isn’t worth very much, according to them.”

Many legislators voiced frustration Wednesday during the hearing, and not only because they are getting flooded with complaints from constituents. Assemblywoman Shirley Weber (D-San Diego) said she has been unable to get calls to her own DMV office answered.

”Is our only solution to stand in line?” Weber asked.

Share
Advertisement

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy greeted by protesters who interrupt his GOP sales pitch in Sacramento

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield) speaks to guests before his appearance in Sacramento on Aug. 15.
(John Myers/Los Angeles Times)

Almost two dozen protesters interrupted an otherwise low-key appearance by House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy in Sacramento on Wednesday, accusing the Bakersfield Republican of not doing enough to keep immigrant families from being separated.

“McCarthy, where’s your heart?” protesters chanted as they unfurled small banners that said “No justice, no peace” at the event sponsored by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California.

The demonstration was part of a series of protests and rallies held Wednesday that targeted the homes and district offices of California House Republicans for what immigrant rights organizers called their complicity in the Trump administration’s rigid immigration policies and separation of migrant families. The protesters briefly stopped the event before leaving the room. McCarthy sat quietly on stage during the interruption.

The protests continued outside the event with members of the California Dream Network leading more than 20 people in chants.

“McCarthy has the power to make DACA the topic of conversation for Congress,” student Jorge Quintana said of the work permit program for young immigrants who were brought to the country illegally as children, formally known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. “He has the power to do it, so why is he not doing it?”

Before he was interrupted by protesters, McCarthy sharply criticized Democrats in Congress for failing to negotiate an immigration reform plan.

“They just want to hunker down” and wait for the November election, he said. “If we had partners on the other side, it would be done.”

The House voted down two Republican immigration bills in June amid battles between moderate and conservative factions of the party, in what was considered an embarrassing setback for GOP leaders.

McCarthy was not specifically asked about immigrant families separated after crossing the U.S.-Mexico border. He repeated some of the points raised this year by President Trump about alleged crime sprees committed by the street gang MS-13, and he praised U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement as having “saved kids” who had come to the country illegally.

One of the president’s most vocal supporters in the House, McCarthy lamented the tone and tenor of current political discourse after the protesters left the room.

“Why can’t we sit down and communicate with one another?” he asked.

Times staff writer Mini Racker contributed to this report.

Share

Ex-Assemblyman Matt Dababneh, under legislative investigation on sexual misconduct allegations, sues lobbyist for defamation

Former Assemblyman Matt Dababneh filed a defamation lawsuit Tuesday in Sacramento County Superior Court against a lobbyist who accused him of forcing her into a bathroom and masturbating in front of her. The suit comes nearly two months after a legislative investigator reported in a letter newly obtained by The Times that preliminary findings substantiated the woman’s claim.

The Woodland Hills Democrat, who resigned eight months ago after sexual misconduct accusations, alleges that Pamela Lopez made false and public claims of inappropriate sexual conduct against him at a news conference and in a formal complaint with the Assembly.

A June 25 letter from the Assembly Rules Committee obtained by the Times on Tuesday said that an investigator determined Lopez’s allegation — that Dababneh exposed himself to her and urged her to touch him in a Las Vegas hotel bathroom — was “substantiated” and in violation of Assembly policy.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Here’s how California became the most secretive state on police misconduct

In the 1970s, Los Angeles police officers were furious that past complaints against them increasingly were making their way into court cases.

So LAPD officials did something radical: They took more than four tons of personnel records dating to the 1940s and shredded them.

That decision resulted in the dismissal of more than 100 criminal cases involving officers accused of wrongdoing whose records had been purged, sparking public outrage.

Read More

Share

Supporters of overhauling California’s bail system angered by draft plan to boost the power of judges

California lawmakers haven’t released the details of landmark legislation meant to overhaul the way judges assign bail, but the bill’s former supporters are raising alarm over possible changes that could give judges more power to incarcerate a wide array of people.

An Aug. 6 version of the amended bill obtained by the Los Angeles Times shows that judges would have greater discretion over “preventive detention,” a practice that allows them to decide which people to hold without the possibility of release. The changes to Senate Bill 10 also would narrow the number of low-level, nonviolent criminal defendants automatically eligible for release after their arrest.

A staffer for state Sen. Bob Hertzberg (D-Van Nuys), the bill’s co-author, said the proposal has undergone several rounds of changes since then. But some sponsors have already dropped their support and others are working to the kill the legislation, arguing the crux of last week’s amendments — which include giving judges and probation officers more control over the pretrial system — are likely to remain the same.

Bail agents and lobbyists, meanwhile, are gearing up to launch massive opposition of their own, saying the revised changes would decimate the industry.

An official version of the bill is expected to be released by Thursday, when SB 10 faces a decisive vote in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Hertzberg and Assemblyman Rob Bonta (D-Oakland) combined efforts in late 2016 to unveil a pair of identical bills that would eliminate the use of bail fee systems and require counties to establish their own pretrial services agencies. Under the proposals, those agencies would develop a “risk-assessment tool,” a type of analysis to evaluate people booked into jail to determine whether and under what conditions they should be released.

Only Hertzberg’s bill weathered the legislative process. Gov. Jerry Brown and state Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye have become deeply involved in the negotiations, advocating for overhauling a bail system they have said hurts the poor.

But San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi, the first to voice public criticism of the leaked language on Monday, wrote in a Sacramento Bee op-ed column that the new bill “essentially replaces the evils of money bail with a worse evil known as preventive detention.”

Raj Jayadev, director of Silicon Valley DeBug, one of the leaders of the bail reform movement and a former co-sponsor of the legislation, said the changes would allow judges to incarcerate more people based on subjective criteria and subject more people to risk-assessment tools found to be biased against communities of color.

“They are taking the rallying cry of communities to end money bail to introduce a new pretrial system to incarcerate more people,” he said. “How can we look at families in the eye and say this is better?”

Share
Advertisement

California lawmakers told money and cooperation are the keys to reducing wildfire risk

Firefighters ignite a backfire to stop the Loma fire in September 2016 near Morgan Hill, Calif.
(Noah Berger / Associated Press)

Fire and forestry officials told California lawmakers on Tuesday that any new statewide strategy to lessen the risk of deadly wildfires depends on reducing the timber and brush that fuel the blazes.

Jim Branham, executive director of the California Sierra Nevada Conservancy, told a special legislative committee that wooded or brush-heavy terrain covers some 60% of the state.

“At some point every year, they become flammable,” Branham said.

After several weeks of public and private discussions over the fire liability of electric utility companies, Tuesday’s hearing focused solely on vegetation management and the options for thinning overgrown forests. State officials said there is some $320 million budgeted for fire prevention, but Cal Fire Director Ken Pimlott told legislators that the agency is still a long way from being able to do more than broad inspections of fire zones and conduct a limited number of controlled “prescribed” fires.

“The risks are real and the challenges are real,” Pimlott said.

Several lawmakers lamented that local or regional environmental procedures that limit the controlled fires out of concerns for air quality — concerns they contend pale in comparison to the effects of fires like those that have burned more than 750,000 acres this year.

“If we reduce the fuel, period, the fires aren’t as intense,” said Assembly Republican Leader Brian Dahle (R-Bieber).

Lawmakers, timber and environmental groups also debated the use of biomass plants, which burn wood and other products to create energy. Representatives of the Sierra Club told the committee that biomass produces an unacceptable amount of air pollution, while others said there are too few workable solutions to help mitigate the state’s increased fire danger.

The Legislature is expected to craft a package of wildfire-related laws before adjourning Aug. 31. The discussions have focused on systemic challenges as California’s climate grows warmer and drier and its residents move farther into rural and wildland areas.

“Fire in this state is not negotiable,” said John Laird, secretary of the California Natural Resources Agency. “As our state’s population grows, the ignition opportunities grow.”

Share

Actress Alicia Silverstone goes to Sacramento to advocate for a ban on animal-tested cosmetics sales

Alicia Silverstone speaks in support of SB 1249.
(Mini Racker / Los Angeles Times)

Alicia Silverstone, the actress best known for the film “Clueless,” visited the Capitol in Sacramento on Tuesday to advocate for a bill that would ban the sale of most animal-tested cosmetics in California, an effort cosmetics giants oppose.

State law already bans unnecessary animal testing in California, but retailers can still sell products that are tested on animals elsewhere. The bill Silverstone is pushing, Senate Bill 1249, would make those sales illegal in the coming years. The proposal includes exemptions when the Federal Drug Administration requires animal testing and, until 2023, when foreign governments mandate it.

That provision is meant to ease the transition for cosmetics companies that operate in countries like China, where manufacturers must test all cosmetics on animals. But the bill’s supporters expect Chinese law to loosen in the coming years.

Silverstone and other advocates framed the bill as a moral choice.

“I’ve been using cosmetics that are cruelty-free for 25 years plus,” Silverstone said. “It’s easy to do and still be able to work in my industry.”

She said she expected consumers would also be happy to use products not tested on animals.

“All the people of California, given the option to choose between something that’s tested on animals and something that isn’t, they would choose it not to be,” Silverstone said. “It’s just sometimes too hard to make those choices because they don’t have the time or the money or the information.”

The bill’s major opponents, however, are not consumers, but manufacturing associations. The associations have argued they will lose the ability to sell their products in lucrative cosmetics markets if the law in China and other countries does not change.

“We all share in the goal of making animal testing for cosmetics and personal care products obsolete globally,” said Lisa Powers, a spokesperson for Personal Care Products Council, one of the associations. “However, as currently written, SB 1249 does not contribute to the goal of scientific and regulatory advancements that would end animal testing.”

State Sen. Cathleen Galgiani (D-Stockton), who wrote the bill, said that such concerns were unwarranted.

“I largely believe that a lot of the fear and opposition to change is really fear of the unknown,” Galgiani said.

Share
Advertisement

GOP lawmaker proposes California utility companies pay into a new state fund to defray wildfire costs

Flames burn near power lines in Montecito in December 2017.
(Mike Eliason / Associated Press)

With negotiations intensifying over how California’s electric utilities should help pay to fight wildfires, a prominent Republican lawmaker says the companies should contribute to a new multibillion-dollar fund that would help mitigate those expenses.

The proposal by Assemblyman Chad Mayes (R-Yucca Valley) would create the California Wildfire Insurance Fund, a pool of money collected from utility companies that could be used to cover some of the “extraordinary costs arising from wildfires,” according to the draft legislation.

The plan would help utilities that act prudently, while reducing the impact from future fires on utility ratepayers, Mayes said.

“This fund ensures victims of wildfires can quickly rebuild their lives, and utility investors have to help pay for that,” he said.

The proposal would create a state-governed entity to oversee the money contributed by investor-owned and municipal utilities. Exact contribution amounts are not outlined in the draft legislation and will be the subject of negotiations before the Legislature adjourns for the year at the end of August.

The wildfire authority would be governed by a nine-member board, with most of the directors chosen by the governor and some by legislative leaders.

The goal of the plan is to create something akin to an additional layer of insurance coverage for the utilities, given that utility company officials have found it difficult to increase coverage through traditional means. Mayes said his bill would require investor-owned utilities — a group that includes Southern California Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and San Diego Gas & Electric Co. — to use money from shareholders to help fill the wildfire fund’s coffers.

“It cannot all fall on the backs of ratepayers,” Mayes said. “This is an important piece of a comprehensive plan to ensure California’s energy utilities are financially stable.”

The proposal is being circulated among stakeholders involved in negotiations over a comprehensive wildfire liability plan, one of the most contentious issues left for legislators to resolve this month. Gov. Jerry Brown has proposed loosening the process by which utility companies are held liable for wildfire costs when their equipment contributes to sparking a blaze. Utility companies also support that proposal, along with potential regulatory changes that would incentivize wildfire mitigation efforts.

Share

Get ready for a big fight over California’s property taxes in 2020

The fountain inside the Grove mall in Los Angeles lights up in June.
(Jay L. Clendenin / Los Angeles Times)

A big battle over property taxes in California is shaping up for the 2020 ballot.

Supporters of a bid to increase taxes on commercial land announced Tuesday they’ve collected more than 860,000 signatures to force a vote on the issue in two years.

“This is a defining moment for California,” Fred Blackwell, CEO of the San Francisco Foundation, said in a statement. “Closing the commercial property tax loopholes is important to our state.”

Backers, including the California Federation of Teachers, the League of Women Voters and community organization California Calls held news conferences Tuesday in Los Angeles, Berkeley, Fresno, San Diego and San Bernardino to demonstrate support across the state for the idea. Of the signatures turned in to the secretary of State’s office, 585,407 must be deemed valid for the measure to qualify for the November 2020 election.

The initiative would make dramatic changes to the tax system established four decades ago by Proposition 13, which capped how much property tax bills could increase every year. The proposed measure would boost property tax revenues from commercial and industrial properties by assessing them at their current market value. Property tax protections would remain unchanged for residential properties.

The changes could net $6 billion to $10 billion annually in new property tax revenue statewide, according to an estimate from the state’s nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office. The analyst’s office also warned that the measure could have significant downsides for California’s economy by causing businesses to leave or opt against relocating to the state.

Business groups are girding for the fight over the tax hike, known as “split-roll” because it assesses residential properties different from commercial and industrial properties.

“California already has the worst climate for business and job creation in the country,” Rex Hime, president of the California Business Properties Assn., said in a statement. “A split-roll property tax will just increase pressure on many businesses that are already finding it hard to make ends meet.”

Share
Advertisement

California lawmakers support $321,000 settlement for discrimination lawsuit

State lawmakers agreed Monday to pay $321,000 to settle a discrimination complaint from the executive secretary of a state conservancy agency in Los Angeles County.

The Senate Appropriations Committee approved the settlement with Valerie Thompson, a 57-year-old African American woman who sued the conservancy, alleging she was mistreated by the staff of the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy, including executive director Mark Stanley.

Thompson’s lawsuit alleged that Stanley, who is also African American, spoke to her in a “demeaning and derogatory tone,” denied her promotional opportunities and time-off requests, failed to accommodate a disability, and sought to downgrade her job to a part-time position. The lawsuit also alleged that Stanley brought his ex-wife, who is Latina, to the office, and afterward favored Latina staff members over Thompson.

Thompson also alleged that Latina staff members engaged in a “smear campaign” against her.

“The differential treatment, hostile work environment and retaliation have caused Valerie Thompson to suffer severe emotional distress,” the lawsuit said.

Thompson and state officials signed a settlement agreement that calls for the lawsuit to be dropped and for Thompson to retire or resign, according to a legislative analysis.

The analysis says the state Department of Justice advised that “the cost of litigation in this case is expected to approach the cost of the settlement, and should the plaintiff prevail on even one of the 12 counts, the costs would significantly exceed the cost of the settlement.’’

Thompson and Stanley did not respond Monday to requests for comment on the settlement, which next heads to the Senate floor.

Share

California cities oppose plan to allow pot delivery in areas where sales are banned

California cities are objecting to changes in the state's rules on marijuana that they say undermine local control.
( (Mathew Sumner / Associated Press))

California cities on Monday objected to a state proposal that would allow marijuana delivery to homes in areas where storefront pot sales have been banned locally.

The changes, which are being considered by the state Bureau of Cannabis Control, “will undermine a city’s ability to effectively regulate cannabis at the local level,” said Charles Harvey, a legislative representative for the League of California Cities, in a letter to the bureau.

The cities group, which represents the state’s 482 municipalities, supports other changes to clarify the rules of Proposition 64, which was approved by voters in 2016 and allows the growing and sale of marijuana for recreational use.

The cannabis agency is holding public hearings on the proposed changes this month, including one on Tuesday at 10 a.m. at the Millennium Biltmore Hotel in Los Angeles.

West Covina City Councilman Walt Allen said the delivery rule change is “inappropriate” and goes beyond the bureau’s authority. City officials say delivery services involving marijuana are likely to result in an increase in sometimes violent robberies.

Cities that have banned pot sales have interpreted the existing state rule as allowing them to take action against deliveries in their jurisdictions.

But the bureau has always interpreted the state law differently, according to Alex Traverso, a spokesman for the bureau.

“The [proposed] regulations clarify that a licensed retailer who performs delivery may deliver to any jurisdiction within the state of California,” Traverso said Monday.

Legislation to clarify that deliveries can be made statewide recently failed to pass the state Senate because of opposition.

The cities also oppose as “unrealistic” another regulation change that would reduce from 60 days to 10 days the period for cities to respond to all bureau inquiries about the validity of a local license for marijuana businesses before that license is deemed valid.

Allowing more time to verify local licenses is “key to promoting public safety,” Harvey wrote to the state agency.

Share
Advertisement

California elects shortest-serving state senator in more than 100 years

Six months after Tony Mendoza resigned his state Senate seat following allegations of sexual harassment, the seat will be filled by another Democrat — for the next three months.

In a special election held last Tuesday for Senate District 32, Montebello Mayor Vanessa Delgado, a Democrat, beat Republican attorney Rita Topalian with 52.4% of the vote.

The term ends Dec. 3, but Delgado will have only three weeks to make her voice heard, as the Legislature adjourns Aug. 31.

Delgado was sworn into office Monday afternoon. She will be the “shortest-serving state senator in more than a century,” according to the California State Library’s Alex Vassar. In 1903, Republican state Sen. Orrin Z. Hubbell served just 15 weeks before he died in office.

“It is an unexpected result,” Delgado said. “Essentially, I thought I would serve both the full and the temporary [terms]. But this is what the voters decided so I think that it’s important to have somebody in public service who actually does as the voters request, even if it’s this weird 83-day thing.”

The senator-elect said she’s looking forward to having a say for the district on remaining bills, particularly those that create affordable housing opportunities.

“It’s challenging because I’m joining at the tail-end of session. I’m just excited to have a voice.”

This race won’t be the end of the road for Topalian, the GOP candidate.

In November’s general election, she’ll face off with Pico Rivera Councilman Bob Archuleta, a Democrat, in the same district, which is southeast of Los Angeles and includes Montebello, Whittier and Downey. The winner of that race will start a new four-year term starting Dec. 3. This will mark the first time in California history that three state senators have represented one seat in a calendar year, Vassar said.

Avoiding any potential legislative conflict of interest, Delgado will resign from her position as mayor before swearing in as a state senator, leaving a vacant seat on the Montebello City Council.

The race for Mendoza’s seat has been one of the stranger contests in California. When Mendoza resigned in February after sexual harassment allegations against him surfaced, voters had to choose his replacement. But the special election fell on the same day as California’s June primary. That meant voters had to choose not just who to elect to serve out Mendoza’s term, but also had to determine who would advance to the general election and ultimately fill the seat for a new four-year term.

Though the same set of candidates ran in both elections to fill the terms, voters chose different candidates, with Delgado facing Topalian in Tuesday’s special election runoff, and Topalian facing Archuleta in November’s general election.

Mini Racker contributed to this report.

------------

FOR THE RECORD

Aug. 13, 11:45 a.m.: An earlier version of this post said Bob Archuleta is Pico Rivera mayor. He is a Pico Rivera councilman.

------------

Read More

Share

California Politics Podcast: All eyes are on wildfire liability talks in Sacramento

With fires burning across California and smoke lingering on the skyline of the state’s capital city, it’s no surprise that wildfire prevention is on the minds of lawmakers in the Legislature’s final month of session.

But no topic seems to loom larger than the liability rules that apply to electric utility companies whose equipment plays a role in starting a blaze.

On this week’s podcast, we discuss the complicated politics surrounding efforts to rethink those liability rules. We also discuss the sharp criticism being leveled by lawmakers against the state Department of Motor Vehicles, after complaints of long lines in field offices across California.

Share
Advertisement

California housing crisis podcast: What’s the deal with Proposition 5, the property tax break for elderly homeowners?

In November, Californians will vote on four housing-related ballot measures. One of them, Proposition 5, is sponsored by the California Assn. of Realtors, and it gives homeowners 55 and older the ability to take part of their lower property tax base with them when they move to a new home.

On this episode of Gimme Shelter: The California Housing Crisis Podcast, we debate the pros and cons of the statewide measure. It will provide incentives for older Californians to move out of larger, family-friendly homes into smaller places for empty nesters. At the same time, it gives even more state subsidies to a generation of homeowners who already have benefited from California’s property tax rules favoring those who have lived in their homes a long time.

Also, don’t miss our explanation of Proposition 13, the 1978 initiative that set up the state’s property tax structure.

Our guests are Steve White, president of the California Assn. of Realtors and Dorothy Johnson, legislative representative of the California State Assn. of Counties, which is opposed to the measure because of its cost to local governments.

Gimme Shelter,” a biweekly podcast that looks at why it’s so expensive to live in California and what the state can do about it, features Liam Dillon, who covers housing affordability issues for the Los Angeles Times’ Sacramento bureau, and Matt Levin, data and housing reporter for CALmatters.

You can subscribe to “Gimme Shelter” on iTunes, Stitcher, Soundcloud, Google Play and Overcast.

Share

Gov. Jerry Brown issues executive order expediting response to California’s devastating fires

Firefighters at the Mendocino Complex.
(Marcus Yam / Los Angeles Times)

Gov. Jerry Brown issued an executive order Thursday to expedite recovery efforts in areas hardest hit by California’s wildfires.

Assisting fire-ravaged communities in Lake, Siskiyou, Shasta, Mendocino and Napa counties, the order suspends regulations on clearing fire-related debris and eliminates limits on the number of hours emergency personnel can work. More than 13,000 firefighters are battling blazes across the state.

The order also suspends planning and zoning requirements and waives state fees for manufactured homes and mobile home parks, extends a state ban on price gouging during emergencies, and allows accelerated hiring of additional personnel for emergency and recovery operations.

It comes nearly two weeks after the governor declared a state of emergency in Mendocino, Lake and Napa counties. Last week, Brown announced that the White House had approved his request for a federal major disaster declaration in Shasta County.

“This is part of a trend — a new normal — that we’ve got to deal with,” Brown said over the weekend. “We’re dealing with it humanly, financially and governmentally.”

Share
Advertisement

Recalled Sen. Josh Newman ‘more than open’ to running for the seat again in 2020

Former State Sen. Josh Newman (D-Fullerton) says he is considering a run for his old senate seat in the 2020 election.
( (Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press))

A few months after state Sen. Josh Newman was recalled from office by voters, the Fullerton Democrat has scheduled a political fundraiser to collect money for a possible 2020 campaign to reclaim the seat.

In an invitation posted on a new website, bringbacknewman.com, the ousted senator invites supporters to an Aug. 22 fundraiser at the Sacramento Masonic Temple.

“Josh Newman, everybody’s favorite recently recalled Senator, may be out — for now — but he’s not down,” the invitation reads. “Got a little extra dough to help retire the Recall debt and pave the way for 2020? We’ll take it!”

Newman, who was targeted for recall by GOP leaders over his vote to raise the gas tax, said in an interview that the fundraiser is being held to replenish his committee to run for reelection in 2020, which he had formed before the recall. It loaned $260,000 to a separate Newman committee that fought the recall.

“I am more than open to the prospect of putting my hat in the ring to do it again,” Newman said. “I am strongly considering it. Apart from my vote as one of 81 [legislators] who voted for SB 1, I was otherwise acknowledged as being a very good, capable, responsive state senator. I truly liked that part of the job.”

Newman, who was replaced in the recall election by Republican Ling Ling Chang of Diamond Bar, said the dynamic of a general election in 2020 would be different from the June recall, which focused largely on one issue — the gas tax — and included replacement candidates on the same ballot.

Newman said he plans to make a decision on whether to run for the 29th Senate District seat after the November election, which includes a ballot measure aimed at repealing the gas tax increase.

Although Newman was angry about how Republicans used the recall process to target him, the lawmaker — who once appeared in a bear costume to campaign for office — showed in the fundraising invitation that he retains a sense of humor.

The invitation includes a quote from John “Bluto” Blutarsky, a character from the comedy “Animal House”: “Over? Did you say ‘over?’ Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?”

Share

California seeks Trump administration records showing separation policy’s impact on immigrant children

Migrant families wait for immigration processing at a bus station in McAllen, Texas.
Migrant families wait for immigration processing at a bus station in McAllen, Texas.
(Larry W. Smith / EPA/Shutterstock)

California officials asked the Trump administration on Wednesday to release documents indicating whether officials considered the potential psychological impact of the federal “zero tolerance” policy on children separated from their immigrant parents after crossing the border.

State Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the Justice, Health and Human Services and Homeland Security departments requesting all records involving the agencies’ consideration of the separation policy’s effects on the mental and physical state of children.

Becerra said he took the action in response to information, detailed at a congressional hearing last week, indicating administration officials were made aware that the separation policy could traumatize children.

“The Trump Administration owes all of us answers over this cruel and immoral child separation policy,” Becerra said in a statement. “We all deserve to know what went into the federal government’s inconceivable decision to separate thousands of children from their families.”

A federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to reunite migrant parents and children who were separated at the border.

Share
Advertisement

Democrat leads in race to fill out tail end of Tony Mendoza’s state Senate term

Six months after Tony Mendoza resigned his state Senate seat following allegations of sexual harassment, it looks likely that the seat will be filled by another Democrat – for the next three months.

In a special election held Tuesday for Senate District 32, Democratic Montebello Mayor Vanessa Delgado is leading with 52% over Republican attorney Rita Topalian, who has close to 48% with 100% of precincts reporting.

The term goes through the end of November, but Delgado would have only three weeks to make her voice heard, as the Legislature adjourns on Aug. 31.

Delgado would be the “shortest-serving state senator in more than a century,” according to the California State Library’s Alex Vassar. In 1903, Republican state Sen. Orrin Z. Hubbell served just 15 weeks before he died in office.

This race won’t be the end of the road for Topalian. In November’s general election, she’ll face off with Democratic Pico Rivera Mayor Bob Archuleta in the same district, which is southeast of Los Angeles and includes Montebello, Whittier and Downey. The winner of that race will start a new four-year term starting Dec. 3. This will mark the first time in California history that three state senators represented one seat in a calendar year, Vassar said.

Topalian placed first in both contests leading up to Tuesday’s special election runoff and the November general election.

It’s not clear whether Delgado would have to step down as mayor or if she’d be able to resume the role afterward. Her spokesperson, Helen Sanchez, said the city of Montebello wouldn’t comment until she won. But Sanchez said Delgado would take the Senate seat if she won “no matter the consequences.”

The race for Mendoza’s seat has been one of the stranger contests in California. When Mendoza resigned in February after sexual harassment allegations against him surfaced, voters had to choose his replacement. But the special election fell on the same day as California’s June primary. That meant voters had to choose not just who to elect to serve out Mendoza’s term, but also had to determine who would advance to the general election and ultimately fill the seat for a new four-year term.

Though the same set of candidates ran in both elections to fill the terms, voters chose different candidates, with Delgado facing Topalian in Tuesday’s special election runoff, and Topalian facing Archuleta in November’s general election.

Read More

Share

Jane Fonda joins Time Magazine ‘Silence Breakers’ to support ending forced arbitration in wake of #MeToo

Jennifer Newsom, Jane Fonda, and Juana Melara discuss workers' rights.
Jennifer Newsom, Jane Fonda, and Juana Melara discuss workers’ rights.
(Mini Racker / Los Angeles Times)

Actress Jane Fonda joined Time Magazine “Silence Breakers” Juana Melara and Sandra Pezqueda for a panel discussion on Tuesday in Sacramento to support AB 3080, a bill intended to help victims of on-the-job harassment and discrimination.

The proposal would forbid employers from forcing employees to sign arbitration contracts to get or keep a job. Such contracts require workers to settle disputes out of court, which the bill’s supporters say disadvantages workers and hides wrongdoing.

“You don’t get a sense of pattern,” Fonda said, pointing out that arbitration could prevent the public from learning about serial offenders.

Former hospitality industry workers Melara and Pezqueda, who were included in Time Magazine’s December “Person of the Year” issue, spoke about their experiences and the importance of making their voices heard.

“When I got my first cellphone, it was because the place where I was working, one of my coworkers tried to rape me,” said Melara, who worked as a housekeeper at a hotel. “My husband said we need a cellphone so we can call 911 immediately.”

Melara said that she spoke up every time she experienced harassment, but it had little effect. She believes legislators must pass new laws before companies will protect women like her.

“It’s like they see you like another piece of furniture in the hotel,” she said.

Pezqueda worked as a dishwasher at Terranea Resort in Southern California until 2016, when she said she was fired after complaining about the sexual advances of her supervisor. Pezqueda reached a settlement in the spring with an outside temporary staffing agency whose two employees were involved in the claim of harassment at the resort. A representative for Terranea said in June that it no longer is involved in a lawsuit about harassment allegations.

“I fought not to be silenced,” Pezqueda said through a translator. “That was my number one goal: to speak up.”

Fonda said she has been trying to highlight the voices of workers like Melara and Pezqueda — she has canvassed for workers’ rights in Bakersfield and supported grassroots efforts to raise the minimum wage for tipped employees.

She said she would speak on behalf of some California candidates before November, including Katie Hill, a Democrat running to replace Republican Rep. Steve Knight of Palmdale in California’s 25th Congressional District. Fonda also planned to spend the afternoon lobbying Gov. Jerry Brown and Democratic gubernatorial candidate Gavin Newsom in support of AB 3080.

Newsom’s wife, filmmaker Jennifer Siebel Newsom, also spoke on the panel. She said that if Brown vetoes the bill and it eventually comes before her husband should he be elected governor, she expected him to sign it.

Share
Advertisement

California Gov. Jerry Brown appoints a labor leader and his budget director as UC regents

California Lt. Gov Gavin Newsom poses with Laphonza Butler, president of SEIU Local 2015, at Greater Zion Church in Compton on June 3.
(Jay L. Clendenin / Los Angeles Times)

California Gov. Jerry Brown appointed a public employee union leader and his state budget director on Monday to serve as University of California regents, while also adding the state’s community colleges board president and a longtime education advocate to round out vacancies on the panel.

Laphonza Butler, who was president of the Service Employees International Union’s state council when Brown agreed to a union-backed effort to raise California’s minimum wage in 2016, was appointed to fill one of four vacancies on the Board of Regents. Butler has led the SEIU chapter for long-term care workers since 2010, and remains one of organized labor’s most visible leaders in California.

The governor also appointed Michael Cohen, director of the California Department of Finance and his top budget advisor, as a regent. Two others were chosen to serve on the panel for 12-year terms: Cecilia Estolano, the president of the California Community College Board of Governors, and Rich Leib, a member of the Solana Beach School District Board of Education.

Cohen is the architect of many of Brown’s budget efforts since 2013, spending plans that have boosted UC funding in exchange for agreements from the university that it wouldn’t raise tuition rates. Last month, the regents approved the first cut in tuition in nearly two decades.

Regents don’t receive a salary and must be confirmed by the state Senate. The new selections will mean all but five of the UC’s appointed board members were chosen by Brown, who leaves office in January.

Share

Cox releases new ad blaming the ‘political class’ for California’s ills

Republican candidate for governor John Cox launched his first campaign ad for the general election Monday, blaming Democratic rival Gavin Newsom and California’s “political class” for a series of problems including water restrictions and the state’s high poverty rates.

In the two-minute digital ad, which will run on social media, Cox looks into the camera and tells viewers he’s the political outsider who can fix California’s ills. That’s been the theme of the Cox campaign since he announced his bid for governor in early 2017.

“This election is about the status quo versus change,” Cox says in the ad. “Gavin Newsom stands with the lobbyists and the corrupt insiders. It’s about time someone stands with the Californians he’s forgotten.”

Cox is a wealthy businessman from northern San Diego County who has never held elected office, though he unsuccessfully ran for office several times while living in Illinois. Newsom is California’s lieutenant governor and is a former mayor of San Francisco.

Cox campaign spokesman Matt Shupe said the ad will air across California over the next month on a variety of digital platforms. The ad buy cost $150,000.

During the primary election, the Cox campaign maintained a significant advertising presence on Facebook.

Cox’s ad comes with the November election less than 100 days away. According to a Public Policy Institute of California poll released in late July, Newsom was supported by 55% of likely voters compared with 31% favoring Cox.

Share
Advertisement

Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra says California will join lawsuit to block 3-D-printed guns

(Andrew Harnik / Associated Press)

California Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra announced Thursday that the state will join a lawsuit filed against the Trump administration to block the release of blueprints for 3-D-printed guns.

The announcement came weeks after Cody Wilson, known as the inventor of the 3-D-printed gun and founder of digital firearm blueprint developer Defense Distributed, reached a settlement with the U.S. Justice Department allowing him to publish the files online.

The suit, led by Washington state, was filed early this week. In addition to California, seven other states and the District of Columbia have signed on. On Tuesday, a Seattle federal judge issued an order temporarily preventing the public from accessing the blueprints.

Guns produced by 3-D printers lack serial numbers, making them untraceable. They can be made entirely out of plastic, allowing them to pass through metal detectors unnoticed. If the files become freely available, anyone with a 3-D printer would have easy access to firearms, a serious concern for gun-control advocates.

The attorney general reminded Californians that those who manufacture homemade guns must abide by state laws and apply for a serial number.

Becerra blamed President Trump for loosening restrictions on 3-D-printed weapons.

“Even though they probably will be illegal to own and possess in California, now you put us in the predicament of having to find them,” he said. “I think Californians understand. We want responsible gun owners to be able to purchase weapons the way the law permits. We don’t want people, especially criminals, to go out there evading the law because the Trump administration has made it easy for them to do so.”

Despite the government’s settlement, Trump has voiced some skepticism over 3-D-printed guns, tweeting that they don’t “seem to make much sense.”

Becerra urged him to go further.

“President Trump, you’re on notice,” he said. “Give away the protections against the 3-D-printing of untraceable ghost guns, and your fingerprints will be all over those 3-D weapons used to kill, to maim, or to threaten our children or our loved ones.”

Share

Backers of California’s gas tax repeal don’t have much campaign cash left in the tank

GOP gubernatorial candidate John Cox with Carl DeMaio, left, of Reform California and Jon Coupal of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

Supporters of an effort to repeal California’s fuel tax increase are looking for someone to fill the tank of their campaign bank account as new reports show the effort to pass Proposition 6 has spent most of the money it has raised.

State campaign reports filed on Tuesday show most of the $2.9 million that Proposition 6 supporters have collected this year has already been spent, leaving little for the fall campaign season. Opponents of the repeal, a coalition of transportation advocates, have raised more and spent much less.

Proposition 6 seeks to repeal the $52-billion transportation law enacted last year that finances a variety of road and highway repair projects. The law created additional taxes on gas and diesel sales as well as a new annual vehicle registration fee. Critics of the law quickly drafted a ballot measure to abolish the law and raised money from state Republican leaders to gather the signatures necessary for the proposition to qualify for the November ballot.

The main campaign account for the repeal effort reported having only about $87,000 in cash as of June 30. No additional contributions have been reported since then, and the campaign also reported having almost $616,000 in unpaid debt. The campaign must also repay loans of $345,000 — some of which came from Republican gubernatorial candidate John Cox and U.S. Rep. Mimi Walters (R-Irvine).

“We are actively working to raise money for the general election campaign and are fully aware that the special interests benefiting financially from the tax increase will outspend us,” said Dave Gilliard, campaign strategist for the Proposition 6 repeal effort, in an email on Tuesday. “However, our polling shows clearly that voters have already formed an opinion on the gas tax and are poised to repeal it.”

A campaign committee run by Carl Demaio, a former San Diego city councilman who helped lead the effort to get the repeal measure on the ballot, has $1 million left to spend on the fall election. He said on Tuesday his committee would be using its resources to help pass the initiative.

In contrast, opponents of the gas tax repeal reported having more than $9.6 million in cash on hand for the campaign. That money has come from a variety of labor, business and transportation groups.

Share
Advertisement

Citing free speech rights, anti-vaccine activists sue state senator for blocking them on Twitter

State Sen. Richard Pan (D-Sacramento)
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

A pair of anti-vaccine activists recently filed a lawsuit against a state senator who authored a controversial vaccine law for blocking the activists on Twitter, arguing that it limited their 1st Amendment rights.

The suit pointed to a recent court decision that deemed President Trump’s Twitter page a public forum and ruled that he must unblock users he had previously blocked. Although Trump unblocked the plaintiffs in that case, he is appealing the decision.

Along with forcing state Sen. Richard Pan (D-Sacramento) to unblock them, the activists are seeking attorney’s fees and financial relief as “deemed appropriate.”

“These tactics, whether by President Trump or Senator Pan, cannot be tolerated in our modern society,” said Marian Tone, the attorney representing anti-vaccine activists Suzanne Rummel and Marlene Burkitt. “Can we sit by and allow Senator Pan to squelch his dissenters and play favorites in this public forum? My clients will not do so any longer.”

Pan, who is a medical doctor, has focused much of his legislative work on children’s health. In 2015, he authored a controversial law that eliminated personal and religious exemptions for the state’s vaccine requirements. Vaccinations are now mandatory for children entering kindergarten who do not have medical exemptions.

Pan said he is still working to respond to the lawsuit.

“I haven’t yet been served, but in the meantime, given the information that has been shared by media sources, I am seeking legal advice,” Pan said in a statement. “As a pediatrician and public health advocate, I feel it is important that I use my non-state social media accounts to share accurate information that promotes public health and good public policy.”

Rummel and Burkitt have been vocal critics of vaccine laws. Rummel, who is one of Pan’s constituents, frequently uses her Twitter account, @SuzieQT11, to link to stories describing adverse effects of some vaccines.

Rummel has also used the forum to criticize Pan, such as when she called him a puppet and referred to his legislative agenda as a “Nazi regime.” In a different tweet, she described an interaction with a Pan staffer as “traumatic.”

Burkitt, who proclaims “End vaccine bullying” at the top of her Twitter account, has retweeted several calls to remove Pan from the state Senate’s Children with Special Needs Committee.

Share

Gov. Jerry Brown warns California’s climate change efforts hinge on changing wildfire liability law

(Marcus Yam / Los Angeles Times)

Gov. Jerry Brown offered a high-stakes assessment on Wednesday of fears that California’s utilities might buckle under the weight of billions of dollars in fire-related payments. And he urged lawmakers to take action to revamp liability law when they return to work next week.

“There is concern that we could lose our utilities,” Brown said of possible investor-owned utility company bankruptcies during a news conference at an emergency operations headquarters in Sacramento. “And if we do that, our whole program, of trying to deal with renewable energy and mitigate climate change, would be adversely affected.”

The governor offered a draft proposal to lawmakers last week that would loosen the strict liability that utilities like Pacific Gas & Electric Co. now bear following fires like the deadly blazes that swept through Napa and Sonoma counties last year.

PG&E has already made plans for payments of at least $2.5 billion for those fires. And the company has warned additional costs could raise the possibility of bankruptcy.

Current legal interpretations of what’s known as “inverse condemnation” mean that a utility company can be held liable for any wildfire damage linked to its equipment, even if there’s been no negligence.

Brown on Wednesday scoffed at past court rulings on the issue, saying judges were relying on “common law principles from 100 years ago” that aren’t applicable in the modern era. He said his proposal, highlighted at a recent legislative hearing on the topic, was only a first idea to get negotiations moving.

Under Brown’s plan, courts would have to “balance the public benefit” of the utility company’s services to consumers with the “harm caused to private property.” And although the proposal would increase fines and bar electric utilities from passing the costs to their customers, it could give relief to any company that complied with safety regulations.

“My goal was to try to find a reasonable balance that would reward players, including utilities, for doing the right thing,” Brown said, “but make them liable when they didn’t take the steps that common sense and prudence would warrant.”

The changes could be a tough sell for some Democrats and a number of consumer and insurance industry groups, many of which told lawmakers last week that only the threat of liability costs will motivate utilities to do their part for public safety.

Share
Advertisement

California’s Legislature discloses an additional sexual misconduct report against a former top staffer

(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)

Legislative officials said Wednesday that they had closed the case on sexual harassment complaints against a former high-ranking Assembly staff member, six months after disclosing earlier allegations against him and other top staffers.

The investigation into the conduct of Pedro Reyes, who left his job last December as chief consultant to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, concluded he had violated sexual harassment policy. The documents, which were redacted to keep his accuser’s identity private, outlined allegations that Reyes had “forcibly kissed her on the lips” and had given her unwelcome hugs over a period of time spanning more than a year.

“Although you are no longer an Assembly employee, you were subject to the provisions of the Assembly’s policy when you were working for the Assembly,” said the July 12 letter signed by Debra Gravert, the Assembly’s chief administrative officer.

In February, legislative officials released documents covering 18 cases of sexual harassment allegations, covering lawmakers and some staff dating to 2006. The documents were released after the Los Angeles Times told legislative officials that failure to make the files public could be challenged in court.

Share

‘Calexit’ leaders are back with a new plan to set aside land for Native Americans

The activists behind the “Calexit” proposal to cleave California are scrapping their old plans in favor a new secessionist proposal, one that would create what organizers call an “autonomous native nation” within a new independent state.

The California secretary of State cleared the group Yes California in April to begin collecting signatures from voters to place on the 2021 ballot the question of whether California should secede from the United States.

But with the group’s Oct. 17 deadline to deliver signatures from 365,880 registered voters fast approaching, organizers are moving away from that effort and redirecting resources to the new proposal, said Marcus Ruiz Evans, president of Yes California.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Big money already entering California rent control campaign

Renters facing eviction confront anti-rent-control advocates at the offices of Beachfront Property Management in Long Beach in June
(Luis Sinco / Los Angeles Times)

Opponents of expanding rent control in California raised nearly $10 million through the first half of this year, the beginning of what’s expected to be one of the costliest fights on the state’s November ballot.

Top donors to the campaign include apartment developers Essex Property Trust of San Mateo and Equity Residential of Chicago, which gave $2.3 million and $1.7 million respectively, according to state campaign finance reports released this week. The California Apartment Assn. has estimated its members will raise approximately $60 million to defeat the initiative, Proposition 10.

Rent control proponents raised $2.4 million in the first half of the year with almost all of it coming from the Los Angeles-based AIDS Healthcare Foundation. The campaign spent the lion’s share of that money on signature gathering to ensure Proposition 10 qualified for the ballot. Supporters of expanding rent control have said they expect to run a well-funded campaign, but that the opposition will outspend them.

Proposition 10 would repeal the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, a state law that prohibits cities and counties from increasing many rent-stabilization policies.

Share

Orange County lawmaker elected by gas tax anger lashes out at road construction signs mentioning the tax

An Orange County state senator, who won a special election in June that was triggered by California’s recent gas tax increase, wants transportation officials to remove the signs that point out road repairs paid for with the funds.

Sen. Ling Ling Chang (R-Diamond Bar) wrote to California Department of Transportation officials last week to protest the signs as “inappropriate,” given voters might repeal the tax hike in November with Proposition 6.

“No matter what the issue, it is not the job of taxpayer-funded state departments to influence public opinion on matters considered on the ballot,” Chang wrote in a letter to Laurie Berman, the director of Caltrans.

The signs feature a logo for “Rebuilding California,” the name given to the state’s project for allocating some $5.2 billion in new revenues from the law, which went into effect last fall. Motorists now pay higher gas and diesel taxes, and the state imposed a new annual vehicle registration fee. The revenue will go toward repair projects around the state, some of which have already begun.

Voters in Chang’s Southern California district removed her predecessor, former state Sen. Josh Newman (D-Fullerton), and chose her to fill the remaining two years on his term in office. The recall effort against Newman began after the freshman lawmaker voted in favor of the 2017 gas tax legislation. Supporters of Chang, who lost to Newman in 2016, made his support of the transportation tax a central part of the special election.

Chang’s letter asks Caltrans to remove the signs, which cost approximately $700 each. While some of them were erected before Proposition 6 qualified for the November ballot, the GOP lawmaker wrote that “no sign is needed to educate the public” on how the gas tax revenues are being used.

Melissa Figueroa, a spokeswoman for the California State Transportation Agency, said the signs are similar to those that have accompanied major roadway projects for decades.

“It’s rather ironic that those who claim to represent taxpayers’ interests now no longer want Californians to know how their tax dollars are being spent,” she said.

Share
Advertisement

Travis Allen endorses former rival John Cox in California governor’s race

Nearly two months after the primary, former gubernatorial candidate Travis Allen has endorsed fellow Republican John Cox in the race.

“It’s time we put the Primary past us and UNITE to WIN IN NOVEMBER,” Allen tweeted on Sunday to back his onetime rival. “Join TODAY, and together let’s TAKE BACK CALIFORNIA!!”

Cox responded by complimenting Allen.

“Travis was a great competitor that cares about the millions of Californians forgotten by the Sacramento political class,” Cox tweeted.

The two fought bitterly during the campaign. Allen questioned Cox’s conservative credentials because the Rancho Santa Fe businessman did not vote for President Trump in 2016, and accused him of trying to buy the election — Cox contributed millions of dollars to his own campaign. Cox also accused Allen of being inexperienced and immature.

Cox received the support of many prominent Republicans, including Trump, and greatly outspent Allen, helping him to a second-place finish in the June 5 primary. He is competing against Democrat Gavin Newsom in November.

Share

California housing crisis podcast: Should California emulate Seattle to fix its affordability problems?

Seattle's skyline
(Robert E. Klein / Associated Press)

Seattle is booming.

It’s seen some of the highest growth among large cities in recent years, as Amazon and other tech-fueled job gains has added pressure to boost housing production. Home prices have grown about $200,000 in the past two years, but rents are starting to level off and prices remain below those in the Bay Area.

On this episode of Gimme Shelter: The California Housing Crisis Pod, we speak with Seattle Times reporter Mike Rosenberg about how Seattle approaches housing issues compared with California. Rosenberg, who has one of the most widely followed Twitter accounts on housing issues, also talks about how he spots trends in political debates across the country.

We also run down the biggest housing bills the Legislature will consider in August.

Gimme Shelter,” a biweekly podcast that looks at why it’s so expensive to live in California and what the state can do about it, features Liam Dillon, who covers housing affordability issues for the Los Angeles Times’ Sacramento bureau, and Matt Levin, data and housing reporter for CALmatters.

You can subscribe to “Gimme Shelter” on iTunes, Stitcher, Soundcloud, Google Play and Overcast.

Share
Advertisement

California’s climate change regulator will keep its leadership through 2020

(Francine Orr / Los Angeles Times)

Gov. Jerry Brown will keep his imprint on the state’s powerful climate change agency beyond his time in office following an agency vote Thursday.

The California Air Resources Board, the state’s climate change and air quality regulator, granted 11 of its 14 members terms beyond the end of this year. The decision ensures that the next governor — either Democrat Gavin Newsom or Republican John Cox — won’t be able to appoint a majority of the board’s leadership for the entirety of his first term in office unless existing positions become vacant.

“I’m sure the next governor will be OK with a few of the folks here remaining on the board,” member Hector De La Torre said during debate on the measure.

The Air Resources Board’s decision comes after the passage of a 2016 law designed to increase legislative oversight over the agency, which is responsible for helping set automobile emission targets and spending billions of dollars to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The law calls for board members to serve six-year terms but allows for initial terms in office to be staggered to avoid constant turnover.

The plan approved Thursday has three terms, including the two appointees from the Legislature, expiring at the end of this year. Five members, including Chairwoman Mary Nichols, will serve terms that expire in 2020. The remaining six positions will end in 2022. Board members can be reappointed to new terms without any limits.

Former state Sen. Dean Florez (D-Shafter), one of the legislative appointees who will see his term end in 2018, was the lone vote against Thursday’s plan. He argued that the next governor should have a broader role in appointing new members.

“You’re tying the governor’s hands,” Florez said.

Florez also said he was disappointed the agency kept its proposal under wraps until Thursday morning, even though board members were notified of the staggering proposal almost two weeks ago. Advocates representing low-income communities shared those concerns.

“It’s sad to see this decision can be made today without any public process,” said Grecia Elenes, a policy advocate at Leadership Counsel for Justice & Accountability, a nonprofit that advocates for residents of the San Joaquin and Eastern Coachella valleys.

Share

Feinstein maintains lead in Senate race as Republicans signal they’ll stay home, poll finds

(Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images)

Sen. Dianne Feinstein leads fellow Democrat and state Sen. Kevin de León by 46% to 24% among likely voters in the race for the seat she’s held since 1992, according to a new poll by the Public Policy Institute of California.

Just 9% of likely voters reported being undecided, leaving De León with little room to close the gap in the roughly 100 days left until the election.

The poll found that 47% of Republicans and 24% of independents say they don’t plan to vote in the Senate race at all.

Feinstein leads De León with support from 66% of Democrats and 38% of independents and leads in all demographic categories, including ethnicity, gender, geography and education.

Feinstein received 44% of the vote in the June primary and has a dominant lead in fundraising as she seeks a fifth full term in the U.S. Senate.

The survey of 1,711 California adult residents took place between July 8 and July 17. The margin of sampling error was plus or minus 3.4 percentage points.

Share
Advertisement

New poll finds Newsom has healthy lead over Cox in California governor’s race — and fewer voters are undecided

Republican gubernatorial candidate John Cox, left, and Democratic rival Gavin Newsom.
(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times; Justin Sullivan / Getty Images)

Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom has a dominant lead over the wealthy Rancho Santa Fe businessman John Cox in the race for California governor, according to a new poll by the Public Policy Institute of California.

Opportunities for Cox to pick up support before the November election also appear to be limited, with just 9% of likely voters saying they were undecided.

“The electorate is very polarized today. For Republicans it’s hard to imagine voting for a Democrat. For Democrats, it’s hard to imagine voting for a Republican,” institute President Mark Baldassare said.

That could spell bad news for Cox: In California, Democrats have a 19-percentage-point advantage over the GOP in voter registration.

According to the survey, Newsom was supported by 55% of likely voters compared with 31% favoring Cox. Among those polled, 5% said they do not plan to cast a vote for governor.

Newsom was favored by 86% of likely Democratic voters and Cox by a nearly identical percentage of Republican voters.

Among voters registered as having “no party preference,” 41% supported Newsom and 33% backed Cox, the survey found. That’s also not a good sign for Cox, Baldassare said.

“For a Republican to succeed in this state, you have to do very, very well among independents and probably get some Democrats along the way,” he said. “[Newsom] is in a very comfortable place in this early stage of this governor’s election.”

Newsom led Cox among almost every demographic category, including racial and ethnic identity, income, education level and gender.

Cox’s strongest support was in the Inland Empire, which includes Riverside and San Bernardino counties. The Republican is neck-and-neck with Newsom in the Central Valley. Newsom had strong support in the state’s two major population centers, Los Angeles County and the San Francisco Bay Area.

The poll also found that 87% of likely California voters said the candidates’ positions on environmental issues were important in determining whom they would support. Their top environmental concern: water supply and drought.

Share

Former GOP congressman wants an official ban on ‘noncitizens’ voting in California

Former Rep. Doug Ose, left, has submitted a proposed ballot measure specifying that only U.S. citizens can vote in local or state elections.
(Steve Yeater / Associated Press)

In the wake of San Francisco’s decision to remove citizenship status as a requirement for those voting in school board elections, a former Sacramento congressman said on Wednesday that he’ll work to change state law to block such efforts.

Doug Ose, a Republican who served in the House of Representatives from 1999 to 2005, submitted a proposed ballot measure to state officials that would ban voting by those in the U.S. illegally.

“It’s very simple. I don’t think noncitizens should be voting,” Ose said.

The two-sentence proposal would amend California’s election code to require that “only persons who are United States citizens may register to vote and vote in an election.”

Ose’s initiative would apply to “elections held by the state and every subdivision of the state,” including local school board races.

In 2016, San Francisco voters approved a local measure that would allow ballots to be cast in races for the city’s board of education by any parent or legal guardian of voting age. Supporters argued the law would give more immigrant parents a voice in the operation of the city’s schools. Almost 60% of San Francisco school students are from Asian American or Latino families, according to data compiled by the San Francisco Unified School District.

Ose said while that law convinced him to take action, it was not the only reason he wanted additional clarity in state law. The former lawmaker, who briefly ran for governor earlier this year, said he believes a viable political campaign can be launched to pass his proposal.

“There’s no shortage of people who are interested in being involved,” Ose said.

While the proposal would create a new provision in California election law, it does not specify how citizenship status would be determined. The state does not require voters to show personal identification before registering or casting a ballot, though voters do sign documents under penalty of perjury that they are U.S. citizens and thus eligible. Elections officials have frequently said there’s no evidence of widespread registration or voting by noncitizens in California.

Ose said his proposed initiative is not part of a larger effort on immigration or election laws. He would have to collect 365,880 valid voter signatures to get his proposal on the 2020 statewide ballot.

Share
Advertisement

California’s powerful climate change agency would keep most of its leaders through 2020 under new plan

(Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)

California’s top climate regulator will continue serving through 2020 under a plan set to be voted on Thursday.

Mary Nichols, who has led the California Air Resources Board since 2007, would see her term expire at the end of 2020 if the board’s members confirm staff recommendations at the Thursday meeting. The Air Resources Board is one of the most powerful agencies in the state, and is responsible for implementing California’s strict greenhouse gas and air pollution rules.

Legislation passed in 2016 authorizes Air Resources Board members to serve six-year terms, part of an effort by lawmakers to wrest some control over the agency from the governor, who appoints a dozen of the board’s 14 members. The new law, however, allowed initial terms in office to be staggered so that the board wouldn’t see constant turnover.

Under the plan, the terms of three board members — the two legislative appointees and a retiring San Diego County supervisor — will wrap up at the end of 2018. The terms of Nichols and four others end in 2020, and the remaining six members — including a current vacant position — will expire in 2022.

The proposal has drawn questions from Assemblyman Eduardo Garcia (D-Coachella), who wrote the 2016 law. He has asked why the plan does not evenly stagger the terms, and why many board members who have already served for many years would receive longer terms than others. For instance, Sandra Berg, who was appointed by then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2004, would serve until 2022 while the term of Dean Florez, who was appointed by the state Senate in 2016, will end at the end of this year.

“It would be more logical and aligned with the intent of [the law] to have Board members who have served longer than six years end their terms earlier than Board members who have not yet reached their six-year term,” Garcia wrote in a July 20 letter to Nichols.

Florez said he is also troubled by the proposal and plans to vote against it. Board members appointed by lawmakers are supposed to represent perspectives from low-income neighborhoods often disproportionately affected by pollution.

“Term limits means bringing new faces on to the Board, if I understood the Legislature’s mandate correctly,” Florez said. “It doesn’t mean first-on, first-out, but rather bringing in new necessary voices like the environmental justice movement to the table, and new perspectives in our ongoing battle against climate change and pollution.”

Though board members are set to vote on the proposal Thursday, the agency has not released the plan publicly on its website. An agency spokesman told The Times it wouldn’t be made available until the day of the vote. The Times obtained the proposal from Florez.

“The most powerful board in America on climate change is about to change its decision-makers for the next decade, and yet those membership changes are hidden from public review until the day of the vote?” Florez said. “It legitimately raises suspicion all the way around.”


FOR THE RECORD

6:07 p.m. This article has been corrected to reflect that the Air Resources Board proposal establishes fixed terms rather than creating term limits. Board members can be reappointed after their term expires.

This article was originally published at 6 a.m.

Share

Former legislator David Hadley appointed vice chairman of California GOP, easing path to become next party leader

David Hadley, seen here greeting voters after a 2016 Assembly candidates' forum, was appointed vice chairman of the state Republican Party.
(Jay L. Clendenin / Los Angeles Times)

Former legislator David Hadley was unanimously appointed vice chairman of the California Republican Party on Tuesday by its board of directors. The move eases the path for the Manhattan Beach resident to become the party’s next leader once current Chairman Jim Brulte’s term ends in February.

Hadley, who ran for governor earlier this year before dropping out of the race after two weeks, served one term in the state Assembly representing much of the South Bay.

The 53-year-old businessman is a social moderate and fiscal conservative who has ties to prominent donors, relationships that could prove vital if next year’s chairman’s race is contested, and should he be elected leader of the state party.

But Hadley will likely face some backlash from state GOP activists because he did not support the Republican Party’s nominee, Donald Trump, in the 2016 presidential election, and has shown a willingness to break from party orthodoxy on issues including renewable energy, a reflection of voters’ views in his district.

Attempts to reach Hadley for comment Tuesday evening were unsuccessful.

Hadley replaces Kristin Olsen, who cited “personal and professional reasons” when she stepped down from the post in October.

Brulte, a powerful former legislative leader, is the longest serving chairman in state party history. He was first elected to the post in 2013 at a time when the party was in disarray and in massive debt, and is widely credited with turning around the organization’s finances.

He was reelected in 2015. The party’s bylaws were then changed, allowing him to run two more times. He was reelected in 2017, but has announced he will not seek another two-year term in 2019.

Share
Advertisement

California lawmakers use November’s ballot guide to debate daylight saving time

(Geraldine Wilkins / Los Angeles Times)

California lawmakers decided last month to ask voters to consider permanent daylight saving time, but a handful of prominent Democratic lawmakers are continuing their disagreement over the plan’s merits in the pages of November’s election guide.

Proposition 7 would allow the Legislature — if Congress approves — to abolish the twice-yearly changing of clocks, and instead permanently place the state on daylight saving time. It would undo provisions of a 1949 ballot measure that first created the shifting of official time by one hour every spring, thus allowing lawmakers to enact year-round daylight saving time as long as it’s consistent with federal law.

Although Proposition 7 won a spot on the ballot with bipartisan support in the state Capitol, not all lawmakers think voters should embrace it.

“We’ve tried this before and it was a disaster,” wrote Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara) in the official ballot argument against Proposition 7 released on Tuesday. Jackson cites the 1974 decision by President Nixon to impose year-round daylight saving during the nation’s energy crisis.

Jackson’s ballot arguments take aim at the purported benefits highlighted by the legislators who wrote Proposition 7, Assemblyman Kansen Chu (D-San Jose) and Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher (D-San Diego). Their ballot argument cites potential health and economic impacts from time changes.

“Since 2000, 14 countries have stopped changing their clocks,” Chu and Gonzalez Fletcher wrote. “They allow nature to determine their time, not governments.”

But Jackson uses her ballot argument to point out the specific impact of a year-round daylight saving time, citing sunrise and sunset times in a handful of California cities.

“If you live in Eureka or Susanville, it would still be dark at 8 a.m. on New Year’s Day,” Jackson wrote. “If you live in Los Angeles or Twentynine Palms, the sun won’t rise until 7:30 a.m. or later from November to February.”

Kansen and Chu point out that Proposition 7 would only give lawmakers the power to make future changes, and that any change would first need approval by a two-thirds vote in both houses of the Legislature.

Share

A Tiki bar built by a California fire official is among the state worker misdeeds in this report

An assistant chief of the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection asked employees to help build a Tiki bar behind the house he rented from the state government, according to a state audit released on Tuesday.

The high-ranking fire official “misused state employees and caused discredit” to the agency by quietly building the bar, complete with electricity and plumbing, over six months in 2016.

“The assistant chief misused state land when he built an unauthorized structure in the backyard of the home he rented from CAL FIRE,” auditors wrote. “The rental agreement states that the tenant agrees to obtain written consent from the CAL FIRE unit before making any significant improvements or changes to the site.”

The incident was one of several outlined in an annual report of government worker misdeeds compiled by State Auditor Elaine Howle. The report also said described a worker at the Department of Motor Vehicles who slept at her desk during a three-year period and other state workers who failed to put in full days.

Auditors did not name the assistant fire chief who built the Tiki bar, nor offer a full description of the 16-by-20-foot structure. But two photos included in the report showed an interior decorated in Tiki style. Auditors also described social events held inside the building that were reported by state workers under California’s Whistleblower Protection Act.

“For example, on certain dates in October 2016 and November 2017, the assistant chief invited numerous guests to travel to the residence to experience the décor and to consume alcoholic beverages,” auditors wrote. “The guests then drove off the CAL FIRE compound either in their own vehicles or in a limo bus that their driver parked in front of the residence.”

The report said the Tiki bar exposed the state to lawsuits and that the fire official was supposed to receive written permission before making any significant changes to the property.

The assistant fire chief was suspended for 30 days and Cal Fire agreed to modify its rental agreement to more clearly explain what alterations were, and were not, acceptable.

Share
Advertisement

California Rep. Barbara Lee enters a key House leadership race

Rep. Barbara Lee will seek to lead the Democratic Caucus next year, making her the second Californian to enter the race.

“Whether it’s working across the aisle to enact HIV/AIDS laws, or bringing the Sanders and Clinton campaigns together behind a cohesive and progressive Democratic platform, my career has been dedicated to finding common ground and delivering results. Over the years, I have fought to lift families out of poverty and empower everyday people. As your caucus chair, I will ensure that we hear every view, respect every member and welcome every voice,” Lee said in a letter to colleagues Monday.

If Democrats pick the Oakland lawmaker as Democratic Caucus chairwoman in the election this fall, she would be the first black woman to serve in House leadership.

Read More

Share

California’s planned new campaign finance website is delayed, price has doubled

The California Assembly
The California Assembly
(Steve Yeater / Associated Press)

A plan to replace California’s antiquated website for disclosing lobbying activity and contributions to elected officials is 11 months behind schedule, and its budget has doubled.

Secretary of State Alex Padilla notified the Legislature last week that the replacement for the Cal-ACCESS system will be delayed until the end of 2019. It had been scheduled for completion in February.

The Legislature agreed two years ago to a plan that would cost $11.6 million, but as the project has proceeded and vendors were consulted, lawmakers have repeatedly upped the budget. It now stands at $23 million.

The project was authorized in 2016 in a bill by Sen. Robert Hertzberg (D-Van Nuys), who said it is an important change that the state needs to get right.

“Democracy is undermined when the public cannot easily access information about campaign and lobbying disclosures, which is why it was so critical to overhaul Cal-ACCESS,” Hertzberg said. “Unfortunately, we still have to work within the constraints of government, which tends to be slower.”

The current system lacks state-of-the-art features that would enable the public to more easily compare and tally campaign contributions and is prone to crashing. In 2011, the system was unavailable for most of December, officials said.

Open government advocates have been asking for an overhaul for years so California citizens can more easily determine who is attempting to influence politicians and state government.

“Given the tremendous amount of donor dollars flowing into California campaigns, now is the time to build a modern reporting and disclosure system,” said Kathay Feng, executive director of California Common Cause. The secretary of state’s office, she added, is “under tremendous pressure to implement several overdue reforms, but the people’s right to know whose money is backing which candidates is paramount.”

Share
Advertisement

California’s political watchdog panel balks at lifting donor limits for legislative leaders

The state Capitol
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

California’s political watchdog panel deadlocked Thursday over allowing legislative leaders to accept much larger campaign contributions, after several open-government groups said the proposal raises “important concerns” about increasing the influence of special interests.

The California Fair Political Practices Commission split 2-2 on a motion to endorse legislation that would allow the four top Democratic and Republican leaders in the Legislature to accept individual campaign contributions of up to $36,000 per source for races they are targeting, up from the current $4,400 limit.

Commissioner Frank Cardenas was unwilling to support the new bill, which he said has been fast-tracked without the normal committee hearings “as quickly and as quietly as possible to get something done which would otherwise face the scrutiny [of the public].”

“It’s not clear to me why the Fair Political Practices Commission needs to provide them with political cover,” Cardenas said of the legislators.

Commissioner Brian Hatch, a former union lobbyist, recommended the panel support the bill, saying that allowing legislative leaders more leeway to raise money for races is “perfectly appropriate.”

The bill also requires political parties to file monthly reports showing their campaign funding in election years, which Hatch said “would provide much more public information.”

Hatch said he took “umbrage” at Cardenas’ comment on providing political cover.

“Don’t imply that I’m somehow a surrogate for the Legislature,” he said to his colleague.

AB 84 by Assembly Speaker Pro Tem Kevin Mullin (D-South San Francisco) would take effect for the November election and also would allow the legislative leaders to accept unlimited contributions for independent expenditures for and against candidates.

Chairwoman Alice Germond also opposed taking a position, saying the bill appears to have good intentions but also could open a “Pandora’s box” of unintended consequences.

Saying they have not had enough time to fully analyze the impact of the proposal, a delay was requested in a joint letter by the groups California Common Cause, the League of Women Voters of California, CALPIRG, the California Clean Money Campaign and Voices for Progress.

“We are concerned that the potential negative consequences outweigh the enhanced transparency,” Dora Rose of the League of Women Voters told the panel.

An initial analysis by the California Clean Money Campaign says it may not be lawful for the Legislature to make such significant changes to the Political Reform Act, which was approved by voters.

One possible problem, the group said, is the bill “dramatically expands the legal limits for special interests to contribute to the leaders who head the lawmaking branches of government, concentrating their fundraising and hence power over their caucus members.”

Share

Gov. Jerry Brown vetoes bill requiring colleges to provide information on dating violence in new student orientations

Gov. Jerry Brown
(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed a measure Wednesday to require incoming student orientations at California colleges and universities to include information on intimate partner and dating violence.

Under current law, colleges must address sexual violence, domestic violence and stalking in their orientations for new students. The measure, AB 2070 by Assemblywoman Eloise Gomez Reyes (D-Grand Terrace), would have expanded on those requirements to specifically include intimate partner and dating violence.

In his veto message, Brown said the “essential elements” of the bill already appear to be covered by law. The governor also said he wanted to hold off on changing existing state law until a panel of experts returned their recommendations on what, if anything, should be changed to better address sexual assault on college campuses.

The governor convened that panel after vetoing a different bill, SB 169, last year. That bill, by state Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara), would have codified federal regulations on campus sexual assault into state law to guard against potential changes by the Trump administration.

“Given the strong state of our laws already, I am not prepared to codify additional requirements in reaction to a shifting federal landscape, when we haven’t yet ascertained the full impact of what we recently enacted,” Brown wrote in his veto of SB 169, adding, “It is time to pause and survey the land.”

Share
Advertisement

California voters won’t have to pay for postage on mail-in ballots much longer

Gov. Jerry Brown signed a new law requiring counties to prepay postage for mail-in ballots.
(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

In a move to boost voter turnout, Gov. Jerry Brown on Wednesday signed a bill that requires counties to prepay postage for mail-in ballots in California elections.

The measure was proposed by Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher (D-San Diego), who said it is necessary to remove an obstacle to voting, especially for young people who are less likely to use the postal system and have stamps in the age of emails and text messages.

“Once again, California leads the way to make voting more accessible to all of our citizens,” Gonzalez Fletcher said in a statement. “No stamps? No problem!”

State officials say the requirement would have cost county elections agencies some $5.5 million if it had been in place for the 2016 general election, when 8.4 million people voted by mail in California and the average cost of postage was 65 cents per envelope. After the law goes into effect at the beginning of 2019, counties will be allowed to file claims with the state seeking reimbursement of postage costs.

Ten of California’s 58 counties had already planned to provide free mail-in ballots in the November midterm election.

Gonzalez Fletcher contended the current requirement to put a stamp on mail ballots is a de facto poll tax.

“Nobody should be disenfranchised because they forgot to put a stamp on their ballot,” she said.

Share

Schwarzenegger calls Trump a ‘little wet noodle’ and a ‘fanboy’ after Putin news conference

Former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has lashed out at President Trump’s rebuke of American intelligence agencies during a news conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“President Trump, I just saw your press conference with President Putin and it was embarrassing, I mean you stood there like a little wet noodle, like a little fanboy,” Schwarzenegger said in a Facebook video on Monday, unshaven and appearing distraught. “I mean, I was asking myself when are you going to ask him for an autograph or for a selfie or something like that?”

Schwarzenegger, who has repeatedly tangled with Trump, said the president “sold out” the nation as well as its intelligence and justice systems.

“You’re the president of the United States, you shouldn’t do that. What’s the matter with you? I mean, whatever happened to the strong words or to the strength of Ronald Reagan when he stood there at the Berlin Wall, and he said, ‘Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.’ What happened to all that?” Schwarzenegger said, before sighing heavily.

Share
Advertisement

Donations from candidate’s father fueled high-spending race for California’s No. 2 position

It’s a job that can be a stepping stone to one of the most powerful jobs in America, or nothing more than a political footnote. The race to become California’s next lieutenant governor for the first time has two Democrats battling this November.

State Sen. Ed Hernandez and former U.S. Ambassador Eleni Kounalakis have each made clear they will spend big to try and replace Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, who once described his days in Sacramento in the job as “just so dull.”

Perhaps most interesting is the personal wealth Kounalakis has spent and the $5 million her father gave to an independent expenditure promoting her campaign.

Read More

Share

California state controller Betty Yee hurt in car crash

California State Controller Betty Yee has been hurt in a car crash, but authorities say her injuries do not appear to be life-threatening.

The California Highway Patrol says Yee and her husband were in an unmarked car being driven by a CHP officer when it stopped in traffic and was rear-ended Friday afternoon in the Posey Tube, an underwater tunnel connecting Oakland and Alameda in the San Francisco Bay Area.

The CHP says the other car’s driver was hospitalized for severe injuries. He is suspected of driving under the influence of marijuana.

The crash pushed the unmarked state car into another vehicle but that driver wasn’t hurt.

The crash closed the Posey Tube in Alameda for nearly two hours.

Share
Advertisement

Gov. Jerry Brown, Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom lose 10% of followers after Twitter purge

Gov. Jerry Brown and Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom both lost followers in this week's Twitter purge
(Eric Risberg/Associated Press)

Two of California’s most prominent politicians lost a noticeable slice of Twitter followers this week, as the social media platform began a crackdown on accounts it deemed to be suspicious.

Gov. Jerry Brown and Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom both saw a slightly more than 10% reduction in followers of their accounts. In raw numbers, Brown lost 127,185 followers through early Friday. Newsom, one of two candidates seeking to replace Brown next year, had 152,997 followers erased from his account.

No other California politicians had as large a reduction in followers. Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Torrance), whose sharp criticism of President Trump has led to a large Twitter following, lost about 1.4% of his followers. Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Sen. Kamala Harris each lost less than a percentage point of their audience on the social media site.

Read More

Share

L.A. Mayor Eric Garcetti defers to LAPD in response to Times lawsuit seeking security costs

Gubernatorial candidate Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom receives an endorsement from Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti on Friday.
(Al Seib / Los Angeles Times)

Responding to a Times lawsuit seeking records of taxpayer-funded security for out-of-state trips, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti said Friday that he relies on the city’s police department to determine his security needs when he travels.

“I, like every mayor before me, defers to the Los Angeles Police Department when it comes to my security,” Garcetti said. “I won’t stop listening to police professionals in terms of what they recommend. They are the ones that make that decision.”

The Los Angeles Times sued the city on Thursday after the police department refused to disclose the costs of security for Garcetti’s out-of-state travel, or provide other details. The LAPD has said that disclosing such information could put the mayor at risk. The lawsuit accuses the city of violating the California Public Records Act and the state Constitution.

Garcetti, who is considering a 2020 presidential bid, made the remarks to reporters after endorsing Democratic gubernatorial candidate Gavin Newsom. Newsom is running to replace termed-out Gov. Jerry Brown, who has also faced criticism for not releasing some details about his out-of-state travel.

As lieutenant governor, Newsom steps in for Brown when he is out of state. He noted that the governor frequently does not tell him where he is going, and said he would disclose such information if he is elected governor.

“I presume [we will disclose], unless I have a good reason to misinform you, which I don’t think I would,” he said. “Maybe I should ask why he doesn’t tell you. Maybe he has a reason. I expect you would find out regardless, so certainly we would provide ample [disclosure].”

Share
Advertisement

Judge tentatively dismisses lawsuit seeking to remove Xavier Becerra as California attorney general

A candidate debate in May featured, from left, retired judge Steven Bailey Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra, attorney Eric Early and Dave Jones.
(Luis Sinco / Los Angeles Times)

A judge has tentatively ruled against a lawsuit by a former candidate for state attorney general who alleged incumbent Xavier Becerra is ineligible to hold the post because he was not active in practicing law in the five years before becoming the state’s top cop.

Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Richard K. Sueyoshi issued the tentative decision before a hearing Friday in which former Republican candidate Eric Early argued Becerra, a Democrat, should not be on the ballot for the November election.

The ruling said state law “does not prohibit from serving as Attorney General a person who has voluntarily been placed on ‘inactive’ status with the State Bar at any point during the five-year period immediately preceding his or her election or appointment to the office.”

Early, who was represented in court by former Los Angeles County district attorney Steve Cooley, said state law requires people serving as attorney general to be “admitted to practice” law for the five years before taking office.

His lawsuit argued that because Becerra was inactive during more than two decades as a congressman, he was not legally permitted to practice law during the five years before Gov. Jerry Brown appointed him as attorney general in 2016.

“Inactive members of the State Bar cannot practice law,” Early said in an interview after the hearing.

Early said that he hopes the judge changes his tentative ruling after hearing oral arguments Friday, “but even if he doesn’t, we are going to the California Court of Appeal.”

Early was not one of the top two finishers in the June primary, which set up a November showdown between Becerra and Republican retired judge Steven Bailey.

Share

L.A. Times sues city to get information on security costs for Garcetti trips

The Los Angeles Times sued L.A. on Thursday after the city refused to turn over records detailing taxpayer costs for security on out-of-state trips taken by Mayor Eric Garcetti.

The lawsuit, which accuses Los Angeles of violating the California Public Records Act and the California Constitution, seeks a court order to make the city turn over any information that is not exempt from public disclosure.

Garcetti has frequently traveled outside California and the country: In September, The Times reported he had spent nearly a third of his time out of state in the previous 12 months, heading to cities including Atlanta, Phoenix, Boston, Chicago, Las Vegas and Berlin. As he weighs running for president, Garcetti has repeatedly made trips to political battlegrounds including Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Thanks for the memories, and don’t forget to vote

There’s some news about the Los Angeles Times in the Friday politics newsletter. David Lauter told readers that I’ll be leaving The Times to join the USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism, and included my farewell message below.

A quick note of thanks to our readers, who have been with us through countless debates and protests, critical elections, legislative wrangling and major changes in the political power centers in the nearly three years since we started Essential Politics. I’ve appreciated your calls, emails, story tips and letters, and have been grateful for the interaction as we worked to tell political stories in new ways and get people more engaged in California politics.

I’ll be tackling a new adventure as a professor leading the student newsroom at USC Annenberg. We’ll continue to work with The Times in lots of ways, so stay tuned. And if we do it right, you might just see Annenberg’s work as the students hold politicians accountable and cover the biggest stories in Los Angeles.

Please continue to support The Times with your loyal readership — and subscriptions. You make great journalism possible, and that will only grow in the organization’s bright days ahead under new ownership.

Thank you, and don’t forget to vote.

And, as always, if you like the newsletter, tell your friends to sign up.

Share

CalPERS reports investment returns that improve the pension fund’s long-term outlook

(Max Whittaker / Getty Images)

California’s largest public-employee pension fund saw an upturn in profits generated from its investments in the last year, officials reported Thursday, a record that offered some improvement to its long-term fiscal stability.

Leaders of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, CalPERS, reported preliminary numbers showing an 8.6% net return on investments for the 12-month period that ended in June. That is a higher rate of return than the pension fund expects to earn over the coming decades, but not necessarily reflective of a change in its long-term challenges.

“While it’s important to note the portfolio’s performance at the 12-month mark, I can’t emphasize enough that we are long-term investors,” Ted Eliopoulos, CalPERS chief investment officer, said in a written statement. “We will pay pensions for decades, so we invest for a performance that will sustain the Fund for decades.”

CalPERS expects a 7% return on its investment over the next 30 years, an estimate that was lowered in late 2016 over concern that more optimistic expectations could leave employers — state and local governments — on the hook for billions of dollars in unbudgeted payments. Even so, that change raised the required government contributions. Local government officials across the state said earlier this year they remain worried about having to cut services as a result of the higher costs.

Pension fund officials said the system is now projected to have 71% of the assets it needs to pay existing public employee retirement obligations. That is a slightly higher estimate than one issued last year, but still a source of concern for critics who say the pension system will be too reliant on taxpayer dollars to meet the promises made to government workers.

Share
Advertisement

Environmentalists target another bill that would relax billboard rules in California

Electronic billboards at the Citadel Outlets shopping center in Commerce
(Christine Cotter / Los Angeles Times)

Two weeks after lawmakers shelved a proposal to increase the number of electronic signs along California freeways, environmentalists have shifted their opposition to a bill that they say could also impact highways — even though its author says it would only allow replacement of existing billboards, not an expansion.

Assemblywoman Blanca Rubio (D-Baldwin Park) has introduced a measure that would permit existing billboards to be relocated near highways and converted from static signs to electronic billboards that are taller, while expanding the area near highways where they would be allowed.

“This is a dangerous bill that would negatively impact California’s visual character,” Mark Falzone, president of Scenic America, said in a statement Thursday. “It would open up whole new swaths of the state’s freeways to bright, blinking digital billboards and completely undermine Caltrans’ efforts to promote safe and attractive roads.”

Rubio said her measure would simply provide clearer guidelines on where billboards can be placed, saying there is uneven application of Caltrans’ current definition of what constitutes a “landscaped freeway” where billboards are banned.

“AB 3168 will not add to the current inventory of billboards along California freeways,” Rubio said. “The bill makes it easier to relocate existing landscaped signs in communities that want them, without adding to the presently existing number of signs along landscaped freeways.”

The legislation is supported by the California State Outdoor Advertising Assn., which represents billboard companies, and is scheduled for a Senate committee hearing next month.

Share

California gun owners couldn’t meet registration deadline due to state computer crashes, suit claims

A variety of military-style semiautomatic rifles obtained during a buy back program are displayed at Los Angeles police headquarters.
A variety of military-style semiautomatic rifles obtained during a buy back program are displayed at Los Angeles police headquarters.
(Damian Dovarganes / Associated Press)

Gun owner groups filed a lawsuit Wednesday against state Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra, alleging that state computer crashes prevented California owners of assault weapons from registering them by a June 30 deadline, after which they were required to dispose of the firearms.

During the week before the registration deadline, the state Department of Justice’s registration system “was largely inaccessible, and inoperable on a wide variety of ordinary web browsers across the state,” the lawsuit states.

The legal action was filed in Shasta County Superior Court on behalf of three gun owners and the Calguns Foundation, the Second Amendment Foundation, the Firearms Policy Foundation and the Firearms Policy Coalition.

“If Becerra spent as much time doing his job as he does talking about his pet crusades against the federal government, hundreds of thousands of Californians would not be in legal jeopardy right now,” said Brandon Combs, president of the coalition.

The lawsuit seeks a court order allowing registration after the deadline as well as recovery of costs of the lawsuit.

Starting last year, the governor and state Legislature banned the sale of semiautomatic rifles equipped with so-called “bullet buttons” that allow the quick replacement of ammunition magazines. Those guns, newly classified as assault weapons, could be kept if purchased before last year, but were required to be registered with the state DOJ by June 30.

Lawmakers regulated rifles with bullet buttons in response to mass shootings including the 2015 terrorist attack in San Bernardino that left 14 dead.

Under the new law, people in possession of unregistered assault weapons face criminal prosecution with penalties of up to one year in jail and confiscation of the firearm.

Representatives for Becerra’s office did not respond immediately to a request for comment on the lawsuit and declined to say how many people filed applications to register their firearms.

Gun owners who tried and failed to register their weapons on the DOJ website “did everything they could to comply with the law and avoid criminal liability,” said George M. Lee, an attorney for the plaintiffs.

“The DOJ’s crashed system is a reflection of their cascading failures to build a system and allow people to register their guns before July 1 if that’s what they wanted to do,” Lee said.

Share
Advertisement

Judge denies U.S. claim on 2 of 3 California immigration laws

(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

A judge on Monday dismissed the federal government’s claim that U.S. law trumps two California laws intended to protect immigrants who are in the country illegally, affirming his ruling last week that California was within its rights to pass two of its three so-called sanctuary laws.

U.S. District Judge John Mendez rejected the U.S. government’s argument on two of the laws that the U.S. Constitution gives the federal government pre-eminent power over states to regulate immigration. The Trump administration argued that California is obstructing its immigration enforcement efforts.

As he did in last week’s decision, Mendez ruled Monday that the federal government could proceed with its attempt to block part of a third California sanctuary law, which prohibits employers from allowing immigration officials on their property without warrants.

The twin rulings by Mendez, who was nominated to the federal bench by Republican President George W. Bush, allow California to continue limiting police cooperation with immigration officials and require inspections of detention facilities despite the Trump administration’s lawsuit filed in March.

The lawsuit, announced by U.S. Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions, is part of the Trump administration’s efforts to overturn so-called sanctuary jurisdictions that he said allow criminals to remain free. Supporters of sanctuary laws argue they encourage immigrants to report crimes without fearing deportation.

California’s law limiting the sharing of information with federal agents “does not directly conflict” with U.S. law, Mendez wrote in a seven-page decision.

California Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra, in a statement, called the decision “a victory for our state’s ability to safeguard the privacy, safety and constitutional rights of all of our people. Though the Trump administration may continue to attack a state like California and its ability to make its own laws, we will continue to protect our constitutional authority to protect our residents and the rule of law.”

Justice Department spokesman Devin O’Malley did not immediately respond to telephone and email requests for comment after normal East Coast business hours.

As for California’s law that requires state inspections of detention facilities where immigrants are held, the judge wrote that he found nothing in the federal statutes saying Congress did not intend for states to have oversight of detention facilities in their borders.

The law “does not give California a role in determining whether an immigrant should be detained or removed from the country, nor does it place any substantive requirements or burdens on these detention facilities apart from providing access,” Mendez wrote.

Mendez ruled last week that California cannot enforce the warrants law, so court proceedings on that portion of the law will continue. Both sides could elect to appeal the judge’s decisions on any of the rulings.

Share

Environmental group files lawsuit to block California’s split-the-state measure from November ballot

(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

A prominent environmental group took legal action Monday to block Proposition 9, the proposal to split California into three states, from the fall ballot.

The challenge, filed with the California Supreme Court, asserts that the proposal is too sweeping in its nature to have been placed on the ballot under the same provisions used to enact traditional laws.

“In seeking to remove this initiative from the ballot, we are asking the court to protect the integrity of both the initiative process and our state constitution,” Carlyle Hall, an attorney representing the group, said in a written statement. “Proponents should not be able to evade the state constitution simply by qualifying a measure as one thing, when it is so clearly another.”

Proposition 9 seeks voter consent to begin the process of dividing California into three separate states — one in the north, one that begins in the Central Valley and curves to the south and west to the coast, and a third state centered around Los Angeles County. If voters approve, the proposal would have to ultimately be approved by Congress. The U.S. Constitution also lists a role for the California Legislature to play in the process.

The filing hinges on the belief that the ballot measure would be a “revision” to the California Constitution — a power not granted to voters under the state’s 117-year-old system of direct democracy.

Richard Hasen, professor at the UC Irvine School of Law, wrote in a recent Times op-ed column that the California Supreme Court has long recognized a rule that voters cannot approve as a constitutional amendment any measure that “revises” rather than “amends” the state Constitution.

Monday’s legal filing was sponsored by the Planning and Conservation League, one of the state’s leading environmental action groups.

Proposition 9 was crafted by Tim Draper, a Silicon Valley venture capitalist who unsuccessfully attempted to place a six-state division of California on the ballot in 2014. A request for comment to the ballot measure’s campaign wasn’t immediately returned.

Share
Advertisement

Initiative to toughen criminal penalties and expand DNA collection makes 2020 California ballot

Inmates at San Quentin State Prison.
Inmates at San Quentin State Prison.
(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

California voters will decide whether to increase penalties for some crimes while expanding the collection of DNA from those convicted of nonviolent offenses under an initiative that earned a place Monday on the 2020 ballot.

The initiative by the group Crime Victims United of California was determined by the secretary of state’s office to have enough signatures to qualify for the ballot.

“This will make California safer,” said Assemblyman Jim Cooper (D-Elk Grove), a key proponent of the initiative who spent 30 years with the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department.

The ballot measure would roll back some provisions of previous initiatives that were aimed at reducing prison populations, including one from 2014’s Proposition 47 that reduced felony theft charges to misdemeanors in cases in which the stolen goods are valued at less than $950.

Under the initiative, thefts valued at $250 to $950 could be charged as felonies, addressing what officials say has been a rash of shoplifting and taking advantage of the lesser penalties.

The measure also addresses concerns about 2016’s Proposition 57, which allowed early release from behind bars for many nonviolent offenders.

The new initiative would expand the number of crimes considered “violent felonies” to include some rape and child trafficking charges previously excluded from the definition that were subject to early release.

“The recent reforms have eroded public safety’s ability to protect people and have caused an explosion in the victims of crime in California,” Nina Salarno Besselman, the president of Crime Victims United of California, said when the initiative was first announced.

The measure would also repeal recent changes in state law that eliminated DNA collection for theft and drug crimes, and it allows more revocations of probation by requiring offenders with repeat violations to go back before a judge.

Cooper said the recent use of DNA evidence in the arrest of a man suspected of being the Golden State Killer showed how important such evidence is in solving crimes.

Besselman, who lost a sister to violent crime, said the initiative would “ensure that the prosecutors are fully able to utilize DNA evidence to catch and convict rapists and murderers and to solve cold cases so those families that long for justice can see justice served.”

The initiative addresses changes made in state law to overhaul sentencing policies after federal judges imposed a cap on the state’s prison population in 2011.

The measure earned a spot on the ballot Monday on the same day Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra released an annual report showing the violent crime rate increased 1.5% in 2017 compared with a year earlier, while the property crime rate decreased 2.1%.

Gov. Jerry Brown opposes the initiative.

“Read the fine print,” Brown said in a statement Monday. “This flawed initiative would cost taxpayers tens of millions of dollars and endanger public safety by restricting parole and undermining inmate rehabilitation.”

Share

Contractors, labor pour millions into campaign to save California gas tax hike for road repairs

Construction crews conduct repairs in San Francisco last year. A measure to repeal a gas tax increase is on the November ballot.
(Justin Sullivan / Getty Images)

In the two weeks since an initiative qualified that would repeal an increase to the gas tax, construction companies, labor groups and civic organizations have poured $3.7 million into a campaign against Proposition 6, campaign records show.

Although the total raised by supporters of the gas tax is $11.8 million, backers of the repeal initiative on the November ballot say they have raised more than $1 million in recent months, bringing their total haul to $3.2 million.

“Unions and the highway construction industry have their own stake here, given the $50-plus billion in road building and repair costs, and they are not about to roll over,” said Larry Gerston, professor emeritus of political science at San Jose State University. He said a reasonable expectation is that $50 million to $75 million will be raised for the Nov. 6 election “given the self-interest on both sides and the amount raised to date.”

The ballot measure would repeal an increase in the state gas tax and vehicle fees expected to raise more than $5 billion annually for road and bridge repairs and improving mass transit.

In the days after the initiative qualified on June 25, the campaign against the repeal received $1 million from a construction industry committee, the Southern California Partnership for Jobs, and $250,000 each from the California American Council of Engineering Companies PAC, Operating Engineers Local 3, and the construction companies Teichert Inc. and Bay City Paving and Grading.

That campaign also received $150,000 from the construction firm Myers and Sons, and $100,000 from the Associated General Contractors PAC. The League of California Cities has put $370,000 into the campaign, including contributions before the measure was officially qualified to be put before voters.

“I think the building trades and general contractors have a huge amount at stake, and will spend millions,” said Democratic political strategist Garry South, who noted that Gov. Jerry Brown, a major proponent of the gas tax, has $14 million he could spend on the issue stored in his own campaign accounts.

On the other side, congressional Republicans are expected to write big checks, as they did for the campaign to qualify the initiative, in hopes of spurring more conservative voter turnout to affect congressional races also on the November ballot. At stake is which party will control the U.S. House.

At the same time, former San Diego City Councilman Carl DeMaio, who heads a committee to repeal the gas tax, said that panel has raised $1.1 million from 25,000 donors, most giving $100 or less.

“With the support of thousands of small donors we can make our voice heard in a political system too often dominated by big money from a handful of powerful special interests,” DeMaio said in a statement.

Share
Advertisement

Democrat running for Royce seat calls reports of discharged immigrant recruits ‘shameful’

Share

Even though the deadline has passed, the California Assn. of Realtors still hopes to strike deal

A home is under construction in Irvine.
(Don Barletti / Los Angeles Times)

Last week, the deadline passed for proponents of California initiatives to pull their measures off the state’s November ballot. But that hasn’t stopped one powerful interest group from hoping it can still strike a deal with lawmakers.

The California Assn. of Realtors collected enough signatures from voters to qualify an initiative that would allow homeowners older than 55 to take a portion of their Proposition 13 property tax benefits with them if they move to a new home. The measure will be listed as Proposition 5 on this November’s ballot.

The Realtors are still interested in having state legislators put forward an alternative measure instead, one that might help clear some of the opposition to their plan. The state’s nonpartisan Legislative Analyst Office has estimated the change, should voters approve Proposition 5, would cost local governments and schools a combined $300 million a year, with that figure rising over time to $2 billion annually. Labor groups, including the California Professional Firefighters, are opposed over fears it’s too much money.

On June 28, the secretary of State certified the list of statewide measures voters will consider in November. Alex Creel, a lobbyist with the Realtors, said it was still possible for lawmakers to pull the group’s initiative from the ballot when they return in August from summer recess.

“There’s nothing in the law that prevents the Legislature from doing it,” Creel said. Lawmakers, he said, could simply pass a bill that changes the state’s election rules and force the secretary of State to pull Proposition 5 from the ballot.

The secretary of State disagrees. A spokesman for the office said legislators can’t pull initiatives off the ballot after the deadline without changing the state constitution, which would itself require voter approval.

“We are unaware of any authority to remove a qualified initiative from the ballot after the deadline specified in the state constitution,” spokesman Sam Mahood said in a statement.

In 2014, one measure that would have asked voters to express their opposition to the Citizens United campaign finance U.S. Supreme Court case was axed after the certification deadline, but that was because of a state supreme court order.

Share
Advertisement

Gov. Jerry Brown appoints members to new cannabis permit appeals panel

Marijuana on display at the Harborside dispensary in Oakland. Gov. Jerry Brown on Tuesday named members of a new cannabis appeals panel.
(Mathew Sumner / AP Photo)

Six months after California began licensing growing and selling marijuana, Gov. Jerry Brown on Tuesday appointed the first members of a new Cannabis Control Appeals Panel to consider objections from those denied permits or those facing penalties for violating regulations.

The governor gets to name three of the five members of the panel and on Tuesday appointed county prosecutor Sabrina D. Ashjian of Fresno, college lecturer Diandra Bremond of Los Angeles, and a staff attorney for the governor, Adrian Carpenter of Plumas Lake.

The other two appointments will be made by the Senate Rules Committee and the speaker of the Assembly.

The panel is responsible for appeals from any decision by cannabis licensing authorities relating to the order of any penalty assessment, as well as for the issuing, denying, transferring, suspending or revoking of licenses.

All three appointees are Democrats and each will get an annual salary of $147,778. The appointments are subject to Senate confirmation.

Ashjian, 39, has been a deputy district attorney at the Fresno County District Attorney’s Office in the Consumer Fraud and Environmental Protection Unit since 2015.

Bremond, 29, has been an adjunct lecturer at the University of Southern California’s social work school since 2018 and director of youth development at the Los Angeles Brotherhood Crusade since 2012.

Carpenter, 35, has been a deputy legal affairs secretary in the governor’s office.

Share

Gov. Jerry Brown, California lawmakers announce plans to address growing wildfire problem

Gov. Jerry Brown and legislative leaders on Monday announced plans to improve disaster preparedness and develop policies to better deal with the wildfires that are plaguing California, citing the historic fires that hit the state last year.

For the first six months of this year, the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection has battled wildfires on 53,000 acres, compared with an average of 23,000 acres over the same time in previous years, officials said. On Monday, firefighters were working to control a wildfire in Yolo County that had grown to 44,500 acres overnight.

Legislation to step up planning was sent to a conference committee for consideration, according to a statement from Brown and Democratic and Republican leaders of the Senate and Assembly.

“Wildfires and extreme weather are more destructive than ever and that’s why we must take decisive action to protect the lives and property of the people of California,” the governor and legislators said in a joint statement. “Tackling this challenge requires all of us to roll up our sleeves and to work together.”

The conference committee will consider updating rules for utility services, including steps to remove vegetation around power lines and temporarily shutting off power during extreme weather, the state officials said.

The panel will also look at ways to make sure those who cause wildfires are held accountable for damages. Lawmakers will also consider requiring utility companies to submit annual plans on emergency preparedness and wildfire prevention.

Share
Advertisement

California Assembly urges an end to Trump’s ‘zero tolerance’ policy at the border

Ely Fernandez of Honduras is questioned after being detained for crossing the border illegally in March with his 5-year-old son, Bryan.
(Carolyn Cole / Los Angeles Times)

Members of the California Assembly on Monday urged an end to the Trump administration’s immigration efforts that separated children from their families at the U.S.-Mexico border, saying the issue is one of humanity and not partisan politics.

“Generations down the line will remember those who allowed and advocated for the separation of children from their mothers,” Assemblywoman Eloise Gomez Reyes (D-Grand Terrace) said during debate on the Assembly floor.

The resolution, which carries no force of law, singles out President Trump and U.S. Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions. It urges “compassion and decency” in the enforcement of immigration laws, and offers a reminder of procedures that exist for those declaring asylum.

“I think we can do better,” said Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher (D-San Diego), the resolution’s author.

The measure passed on a bipartisan vote. Only one Republican, Assemblyman Chad Mayes (R-Yucca Valley), rose to speak in support of the measure. He sang a few verses of the hymn, “Jesus Loves the Little Children,” in his remarks on the floor.

“That’s who we are as a people,” Mayes said. “That’s who we are as Americans. Let’s not forget that.”

Share

California Politics Podcast: How three initiatives were scrapped from November’s ballot

California’s fall ballot may be on the long side — a dozen propositions will be considered by voters — but it could have been longer, if not for blockbuster deals struck in Sacramento.

On this week’s episode of the California Politics Podcast, we take a look at the negotiations that pulled sweeping privacy and tax initiatives off the ballot and the decision by some of the nation’s largest paint companies to abandon their proposal too.

We also take a quick look at the proposals that voters will consider on Nov. 6. And we assess some of the key political impacts of the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling last week on public employee union fees.

Share
Advertisement

How moderate Republicans stumbled in their gambit to force Congress to help Dreamers

The public face of the long-shot effort to pass House immigration legislation in recent weeks has been California’s Rep. Jeff Denham.

In May, a group of moderate Republicans representing heavily Latino districts banded together with Democrats in an attempt to force GOP House leaders into holding vote on a variety of immigration bills through a little used procedure called a discharge petition. They were frustrated that Congress had failed to agree on a legislative solution for the hundreds of thousands of people brought to the country illegally as children, known as Dreamers, after President Trump terminated an Obama-era program that protected them from deportation.

When the effort got close to the 218 signatures needed to force their hand, GOP leaders began instead seeking a compromise between the conservative and moderate wings of the GOP, one that they hoped would get enough Republican support to pass without Democrats.

Read More

Share

California pot retailers say state rules could force them to destroy millions of dollars’ worth of product

Jerred Kiloh, owner of the Higher Path medical marijuana dispensary, stocks shelves with cannabis products in Los Angeles.
(Jae C. Hong / Associated Press)

All marijuana sold in California by state licensed firms will be required starting Sunday to undergo new testing for quality and toxins, but retailers warn they face financial hardship because they will have to destroy tens of millions of dollars’ worth of untested product still on their shelves.

The United Cannabis Business Assn. led 128 cannabis businesses and advocacy groups in petitioning Gov. Jerry Brown on Friday to indefinitely extend the period for selling marijuana products that do not meet the new testing standards to avoid forcing some licensed firms out of business.

“This really is the destruction of the whole supply chain,” said Jerred Kiloh, president of the United Cannabis Business Assn., which represents 76 pot retailers in Los Angeles and Orange counties.

The association surveyed some 50 marijuana firms and estimated retailers statewide may lose $90 million worth of marijuana that they will have to dispose of because it cannot be sold legally after Saturday.

The coalition said in a letter to Brown that an extension is warranted in part because there are not enough state-licensed testing facilities to handle the volume of cannabis required by pot shops to meet consumer demand.

Without an extension, “retailers will be forced to destroy everything in their inventory and repurchase new products,” the group wrote to Brown. “Not only will this financially cripple the majority of retailers, but there will not be enough compliant product on the market to meet the demand.”

Californians approved pot legalization in 2016, and the state began issuing licenses for growing, testing and selling marijuana on Jan. 1 with some limited testing requirements. But many retailers stockpiled large amounts of cannabis harvested before Jan. 1, which was not required to be tested.

The state agreed to delay more costly requirements — including more comprehensive testing, labeling and child-proof packaging — until July 1 to allow new pot businesses to get on their feet financially.

The Brown administration has no plans to delay the new testing requirements, said Alex Traverso, a spokesman for the state Bureau of Cannabis Control.

“We issued our emergency regulations back in November, and at that time, we were pretty clear about the fact that there would be a six-month transition period for retailers to use up their existing supply,” Traverso said. “We felt that was a sufficient amount of time to deplete stock on hand and adapt to California’s new rules.”

Joseph Devlin, chief of cannabis enforcement for the city of Sacramento, estimates pot retailers there may end up disposing of some 4,500 pounds of marijuana worth about $10 million. The hard deadline could tempt some retailers to surreptitiously sell their valuable pot surpluses to the illicit market, even though getting caught could result in losing their state license, some officials worry.

“Looking statewide at this, we’ve at least created conditions for poor decision-making,” Devlin said. “We’re expecting people to essentially throw away a lot of money at a time when they are spending a lot of money on things like compliance and permits.”

State officials are confident the transition will happen without major disruption.

“Do we want to get more labs licensed and up and running? Absolutely we do,” Traverso said. “But we’re hopeful what we have now will be enough to test all products going forward after July 1.”

The requirement for more extensive testing is a key condition of the marijuana legalization, Traverso said.

“We want to do everything we can to ensure consumers get safe cannabis,” he added.

In the meantime, state officials and industry observers say the new testing requirement is creating a short-term benefit for consumers as retailers are holding “fire sales” to sell their surplus pot at deep discounts before Sunday.

Share
Advertisement

California housing crisis podcast: Why landlords and tenants couldn’t make a deal on rent control

Renters facing eviction confront anti-rent-control advocates at the offices of Beachfront Property Management in Long Beach in June
(Luis Sinco / Los Angeles Times)

California voters will decide on four housing measures in the November election. No issue will be more contested than rent control.

Tenant advocacy groups qualified an initiative that would repeal Costa-Hawkins, the 1995 state law that bans most new rent-control policies across the state, and allow cities and counties to set more rules for limiting rent increases. Landlord organizations are strongly opposed and have indicated that they’ll spend $60 million to defeat the measure.

With a lot at stake, both sides had reasons to try to compromise. On this episode of Gimme Shelter: The California Housing Crisis Pod, we talk about why tenants and landlords couldn’t strike a deal to keep the initiative off the ballot, and set up what the fall campaign will look like. Our guests are Debra Carlton, senior vice president at the California Apartment Assn., and Amy Schur, campaign director at Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment.

Gimme Shelter,” a biweekly podcast that looks at why it’s so expensive to live in California and what the state can do about it, features Liam Dillon, who covers housing affordability issues for the Los Angeles Times’ Sacramento bureau, and Matt Levin, data reporter for CALmatters.

You can subscribe to “Gimme Shelter” on iTunes, Stitcher, Soundcloud, Google Play and Overcast.

Share

California bans local soda taxes

California cities and counties won’t be allowed to tax soda for the next 12 years after Gov. Jerry Brown signed fast-moving legislation Thursday.

The bill, which was first unveiled Saturday evening, prohibits local governments from imposing new taxes on soda until 2031. It comes after a deal was struck between legislators and business and labor interests who agreed to remove an initiative from the Nov. 6 statewide ballot that would have restricted cities and counties from raising any taxes without a supermajority vote of local citizens.

In a signing statement, Brown said soda taxes “combat the dangerous and ill effects of too much sugar in the diets of children.” But he added that mayors across the state called him to support the deal because they were alarmed by the tax initiative.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Paint companies pull lead cleanup measure from California’s November ballot

Lead paint peeling in a home in Los Angeles in June.
(Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)

After months of pressure from state legislators and public health advocates, major paint manufacturers have withdrawn an initiative that would have appeared on California’s November ballot.

The decision avoids a fight in the fall, when voters were set to decide whether Sherwin-Williams and ConAgra would be on the hook for potentially hundreds of millions of dollars to clean up lead paint in homes. The initiative would have blunted a state appeals court ruling that made the companies liable for the cleanup. In its place, taxpayers would have funded a $2-billion loan to finance cleanup of lead-based and other hazardous paint.

“This is a victory for all Californians,” Assemblyman Rob Bonta (D-Alameda) said in a statement. “We pushed back against the lead paint industry and won.”

Paint companies had spent $2.8 million as of March on collecting the more than 365,880 signatures needed to qualify the measure for the ballot. They also ran a social media campaign to pressure lawmakers to give the companies relief from the court decision.

Sherwin-Williams and ConAgra’s gambit to blunt an unfavorable legal decision and shift their financial burden to taxpayers through a ballot initiative could have been the first of its kind in California, political observers said.

Lawmakers reacted with fury to the initiative after the companies introduced it in the fall, arguing that it was an abuse of the initiative process. In March, half a dozen legislators authored bills aimed at penalizing the companies beyond the appeals court ruling. Legislators agreed to put on hold three pieces of legislation after the paint companies took back their initiative.

“I want to be clear that our work is not over,” Assemblywoman Monique Limón (D-Santa Barbara) said. “We continue to be committed to find long-term solutions to lead-based paint.”

A state court is still calculating how much Sherwin-Williams and ConAgra will be forced to pay to clean up lead in homes built before 1951 in Los Angeles and nine other counties and cities that filed suit. The companies are still hoping that the U.S. Supreme Court will rule in their favor.

Share

Rep. Mimi Walters’ Orange County race moved to ‘toss-up’ by election handicapper

Rep. Mimi Walters’ chances of reelection just got slimmer according to one election prognosticator.

On Thursday, analysts for Larry J. Sabato’s Crystal Ball at the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics moved her race in the 45th Congressional District from “leans Republican” to a “toss-up.”

Kyle Kondik, managing editor of the ratings publisher, cited the fact that Walters received just over half of the vote share in her district during the June 5 primary, a marked decrease from previous years.

The four Democrats in the race received a total of 46% of the vote, according to final results posted by Orange County election officials. Democrat Katie Porter, the UC Irvine law professor who will face Walters in November, has leaned into progressive stances on healthcare and the tax bill, and national Republicans are likely to argue that she’s too liberal for the district, where GOP voters outnumber Democrats by nearly 8 percentage points.

Sabato’s Crystal Ball has now deemed five GOP-held districts in California toss-ups. A sixth, the seat Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Vista) will vacate when he retires at the end of this year, is rated “leans Democratic.”

Walters is one of seven California Republicans in House districts won by Hillary Clinton in 2016. Democrats have said they need to flip at least a few seats in California in order to take back control of the House.

Share
Advertisement

After winning the No. 2 spot by 125 votes, Rouda has to make up ground to unseat Rohrabacher

In the early morning hours after the June 5 primary, Democrat Harley Rouda declared victory in California’s 48th Congressional District.

“I look forward to defeating Dana Rohrabacher,” he said in a statement, even though he was only a few dozen votes ahead of fellow Democrat Hans Keirstead for a shot at unseating the 15-term Republican incumbent.

By the time Keirstead conceded this week and Rouda had won the second spot on the ballot by a margin of only 125 votes, he was more measured. “No one’s going to be calling me ‘Landslide Harley,’ that’s for sure,” Rouda said in an interview.

Read More

Share

California voters will get to weigh in on daylight saving time in November

(Elise Amendola / Associated Press)

California voters in November will get to weigh in on whether the state should continue its practice of changing the clocks twice a year after Gov. Jerry Brown on Thursday signed a bill to put the question on the statewide ballot.

The ballot measure would only give the Legislature the power to alter the practice with a two-thirds vote by both houses. Even then, approval from the federal government would be required.

“If passed, it will — albeit through a circuitous path — open the door for year-round daylight saving,” Brown wrote in a signing message, adding in Latin “Fiat Lux!” which translates to “Let there be light.”

The ballot measure would repeal the state’s 69-year-old Daylight Saving Time Act, giving lawmakers power to initiate an end to the practice of advancing the clock by one hour on the second Sunday each March, and moving the clock back an hour on the first Sunday in November.

Assemblyman Kansen Chu (D-San Jose) said the ballot measure he proposed creates a path for California to stay on daylight saving time all year. Moving the clock twice a year has not saved energy, he said, pointing out that studies show it has negatively affected public health by leading to more traffic accidents, workplace injuries and heart attacks.

Share
Advertisement

Heading off a ballot fight, California lawmakers approve consumer privacy rules

Alastair Mactaggart, left, the sponsor of a proposed internet privacy initiative, backed a similar bill by Assemblyman Ed Chau (D-Arcadia).
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

Gov. Jerry Brown signed a sweeping new consumer privacy law on Thursday that gives Californians new authority over their personal data, a framework that backers say could be adopted throughout the country.

The legislation sailed through the Senate and Assembly earlier in the day, but the vote count belied the frenzied behind-the-scenes negotiations to craft a last-minute bill to stave off a similar ballot initiative.

“Today we have a chance to make a difference by giving California consumers control of their own data,” said Assemblyman Ed Chau (D-Arcadia), the author of the measure, AB 375.

Under the new rules, Californians would have a right to know what information a business has about them, and have the ability to prohibit companies from selling that information and to ask businesses to delete information they provided.

Consumers would be able to sue companies if a data breach leads to their unencrypted information being exposed or stolen.

“This will serve as an inspiration across the country,” said Sen. Bob Hertzberg (D-Van Nuys), a coauthor of the bill.

The bill is intended to avert a showdown on the November ballot over an initiative backed by Alastair Mactaggart, a San Francisco real estate developer. Mactaggart said he would pull his measure, which has qualified for the ballot, once the bill was passed and signed by the governor.

Shortly after the bill was signed, Secretary of State Alex Padilla confirmed the initiative was withdrawn.

“I genuinely think the Legislature should be the place that does this,” Mactaggart said. “The reason that they don’t get it done in the first place is because business is so powerful.”

Opponents to the initiative bemoaned the bill as well, but said it was slightly preferable to the proposal slated for the ballot, in part because it narrowed the circumstances under which consumers could sue companies.

“Data regulation policy is complex and impacts every sector of the economy, including the internet industry,” said Robert Callahan, vice president of state government affairs of the Internet Assn. “That makes the lack of public discussion and process surrounding this far-reaching bill even more concerning.”

In a message to other states considering similar action, Callahan said “the circumstances of this bill are specific to California.”

Privacy groups generally hailed the measure as a major expansion of privacy rights, but signaled they wanted to further refine the policy in the coming year. Businesses will also seek changes next year — in advance of the bill’s implementation date of Jan. 1, 2020 — setting the stage for a major lobbying fight next year.

“While the California Consumer Privacy Act is a strong first step in protecting consumers, especially kids, we have a lot more work to do,” said James Steyer, founder of Common Sense, which advocates privacy measures for children. “For starters, we need to ensure the attorney general or any data protection authority is well-resourced, well-informed and empowered to robustly enforce this and future laws. We also need companies to limit the information they collect to the data they need, and only use it in fair and expected ways. Finally, we need to ensure our most sensitive information is not sold without our opt-in consent.”

Assemblyman Evan Low (D-Campbell), whose Silicon Valley district includes some of the largest tech companies, said he hoped next year would lead to substantive discussions about the policy.

“We have to get this right. That’s what it’s about — ensuring there’s hearings and a process in place to best understand this,” Low said. “I can guarantee you this: The Legislature did not fundamentally understand what they were voting for in this privacy bill.”

4:00 p.m. This post was updated to reflect the initiative was pulled from the ballot and to add a comment from the Internet Association.

3:15 p.m.: This post was updated to reflect that Gov. Jerry Brown signed the bill and to add comment from Assemblyman Evan Low.

This post was originally published at 12:55 p.m.

Share

California representatives considering House Democratic leadership bids

At least three California Democrats are considering a bid to lead the Democratic caucus in the House.

The surprise primary loss on Tuesday of House Democratic caucus chairman Joe Crowley of New York has triggered a wave of speculation on Capitol Hill about which Democrat will secure his high-ranking leadership position after the 2018 election.

The caucus chair is the fourth highest-ranking member of Democratic leadership in the House, and is responsible for leading the party’s closed-door meetings to gauge support for legislation, establish party policy and set the legislative agenda.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Gov. Jerry Brown signs his final state budget, California’s largest yet

Gov. Jerry Brown signs the state budget surrounded by legislative leaders on Wednesday in Los Angeles.
(Jae C. Hong/AP)

California schools, healthcare and social services programs will see spending increases under the state budget signed Wednesday by Gov. Jerry Brown.

The $201.4-billion plan, which takes effect next week, is the final budget of Brown’s eight-year tenure. It is also the third consecutive blueprint that includes notably higher-than-expected tax revenue, a sizable portion of which lawmakers are diverting into the largest cash reserve in California history.

“This budget is a milestone,” Brown said at an event in Los Angeles. “We’re not trying to tear down, we’re not trying to blame. We’re trying to do something.”

Lawmakers sent Brown the budget last week, and he chose to sign it Wednesday without any line-item vetoes — unusual in comparison to previous governors, but consistent with his recent budget actions.

As in previous years, K-12 schools and healthcare for low-income Californians comprise two of the largest spending categories. Schools will receive $78.4 billion in funds, an average of $11,640 per student, a substantial increase from the waning days of the recession in 2011. That includes money to fully fund Brown’s 2013 program to send more financial assistance to schools serving English learners and low-income communities. New education programs in the budget include $50 million for school employee training and $15 million to help fund after-school programs for kids to learn computer coding.

Spending on colleges and universities will increase by $609 million compared with the current fiscal year, with officials at the University of California and California State University systems choosing not to raise tuition. The budget also includes Brown’s proposal for a new online-only option for community college students. Estimates are some 2.5 million Californians between the ages of 25 and 34 lack a degree or credential beyond high school, limiting their long-term earning potential.

A key component of the budget crafted by Brown and legislative Democrats is a one-time infusion of cash to help address the homelessness crisis in cities across the state. The governor also signed a measure Wednesday asking voters in November to approve a $2-billion bond for new housing.

Elsewhere, lawmakers earmarked $79 million for programs to help those in the U.S. illegally. The money will be available for legal services programs, including assistance during deportation hearings, and efforts aimed at helping so-called Dreamers, young adults who signed up with the in-limbo Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA.

California’s rainy-day reserve fund, strengthened by voters in 2014, is projected to stand at $13.8 billion by next summer under the budget signed Wednesday. Brown and legislative leaders committed a large share of recent tax windfalls to the cash backup fund.

Democrats praised Brown — who over the course of four terms as governor has presided over 16 budgets — for his work at erasing a $27-billion projected deficit when he returned to Sacramento in 2011.

“We owe a great debt to Gov. Brown for his leadership in getting California back on solid financial footing,” Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) said.

The budget assumes 13.3 million adults and children will be covered by Medi-Cal, the state’s healthcare program for low-income residents. Additional dollars were also added to boost reimbursement rates for doctors who treat Medi-Cal patients.

“Does it solve all the problems? No,” Brown said about the budget in remarks on Wednesday. “Are there people suffering? Yes, there are people suffering. But there’s no place that has a more progressive, thoughtful, sensitive understanding of how to cope with modern problems.”

The governor signed some, but not all, of the state’s budget-related bills Wednesday. A handful of final proposals remain under discussion with the Legislature, including a last-minute addition that would temporarily block local communities from imposing soda taxes.

1:58 p.m.: This article was updated with additional details about the budget signed into law.

This article was originally published at 10:35 a.m.

Staff writer Javier Panzar contributed to this report.

Share

Californians face November decision on $2-billion spending plan for homeless housing

Californians will decide in November whether to borrow $2 billion to fund new housing for homeless residents.

Gov. Jerry Brown authorized the ballot measure Wednesday when he signed the state’s annual budget and related legislation. The measure would draw funding from dollars generated by Proposition 63, a 1% income tax surcharge on millionaires passed in 2004 that funds mental health services. Housing built or rehabilitated under the plan would be designated for mentally ill residents living on the streets.

This is the second try at a spending plan for Brown and state lawmakers, who first tried to approve the money without a public vote in 2016. But a Sacramento attorney and mental health advocates challenged the effort in court, arguing that the money shouldn’t be diverted from treatment programs and that legislators needed a vote of the people to authorize the funds. That case is still in litigation and the November ballot measure, if successful, would free up the money.

“I think we were right to try it and we might have gotten away with it, but we didn’t,” Brown told reporters in May when he announced his support for the ballot measure. “Now, we’ll do it through the election.”

The $2-billion homeless housing bond is one of what could be five housing-related measures on the Nov. 6 statewide ballot. Last year, lawmakers agreed to ask voters to support a $4-billion bond to help finance new low-income housing and provide home loans for veterans.

Initiatives that would expand rent control, eliminate paint companies’ liability for cleaning up lead paint in homes and increase property tax protections for older homeowners all have qualified for the ballot. Proponents of each ballot measure have held discussions with lawmakers about potential deals to avoid a fight in November, but no compromises have emerged in advance of Thursday’s deadline to remove initiatives from the ballot.

Share
Advertisement

California’s politically powerful labor unions have been preparing for this Supreme Court ruling for a long time

California’s public employee unions, for decades some of the state’s towering political giants, knew this day was coming.

Now, after a majority of justices on the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the legality of the fees charged to nonmember workers — sometimes totaling hundreds of dollars a year — union leaders are relying on plans they’ve been carefully crafting for more than five years.

“No one is trying to pretend that it’s not a hit,” said Alma Hernandez, political director of the Service Employees International Union’s California state council. “But I think that the work that our locals have done across the state will help us maintain a majority of our members in the union.”

Read More

Share

California Legislature nears deal to temporarily ban soda taxes

(Jeff Chiu / Associated Press)

State senators advanced a proposal Tuesday that would ban local governments from approving new taxes on sodas and other sugary drinks until 2031, a bill aimed at spiking an industry-sponsored initiative that would limit the ability of cities and counties to raise any taxes.

The bill, AB 1838, is moving quickly through the Legislature in advance of a Thursday deadline for proponents of initiatives to withdraw their measures from the November statewide ballot. The beverage industry is expected to have collected enough signatures for an initiative that would prohibit local governments from increasing taxes without two-thirds support from the public, which significantly raises the current threshold.

Over the weekend, legislators introduced a bill that includes the temporary soda tax ban in an effort to stave off the initiative. Local soda taxes have become popular in recent years with public health advocates arguing that they are necessary to reduce obesity and diabetes risks.

Many state senators, who debated the legislation in a committee hearing Tuesday afternoon, said they reluctantly supported it because of the threat of the initiative.

“I hope that at some point that when get beyond this political Sophie’s choice we can have a real discussion about health disparities across this state,” Sen. Holly Mitchell (D-Los Angeles) said.

Gov. Jerry Brown supports the legislation if it results in the initiative’s withdrawal from the ballot, a representative for the governor said Tuesday. Labor groups also testified in support of the deal while health advocates and representatives from local governments spoke against it.

Rob Lapsley, president of the California Business Roundtable, the initiative’s formal proponent, noted that discussions about a deal were progressing, but said his group wouldn’t make a final decision about withdrawing the initiative until its board of directors meets later this week.

Share
Advertisement

Lawmakers shelve proposal that would have increased electronic billboards along California freeways

Electronic billboards at the Citadel Outlets shopping center in Commerce at the I-5 are part of a near tripling of such signs in the state.
(Christine Cotter / Los Angeles Times)

Faced with opposition from California counties and cities, lawmakers on Tuesday shelved a proposal that would have replaced 25 digital signs operated by the state along freeways with electronic billboards running commercial ads in addition to traffic warnings.

Lacking the votes for passage, Assemblymen Kevin Mullin of South San Francisco and Rob Bonta of Alameda pulled their bill from the Senate Transportation Committee, which needed to act on it Tuesday for it to meet deadlines for approval.

“AB 1405 is no longer an active bill for this legislative year and Mr. Mullin does not plan to pursue the goals in AB 1405 through any other means in 2018,” Susan Kennedy, a spokeswoman for the assemblyman, said late Tuesday. “Future pursuit of this legislation would be determined only after discussions with all the involved stakeholders to make sure any and all concerns are addressed.”

The measure would have required Caltrans to undertake a pilot program in which it would enter into contracts with private firms to replace 25 digital traffic warning signs along highways with state-of-the-art electronic signs that would also display commercial ads. Half of the profits from those signs would have gone to the state.

When he introduced the bill two weeks ago, Mullin said he wanted to “make sure that [the state is] taking full advantage of evolving technology and reaping the potential benefits of revenue that is generated in the process.”

But the legislation was opposed by the California State Assn. of Counties and the League of California Cities, which represent hundreds of local jurisdictions concerned that they would lose control over land-use decisions and financial benefits under the measure.

“While we appreciate Assemblymember Mullin’s ideas for exploring additional ways to fund transportation, the League opposes efforts to allow for private advertisements on the state highway system,” said Eva Spiegel, a spokeswoman for the group representing cities.

The proposal was shelved after The Times reported June 17 that the number of commercial, digital signs permitted by the state along highways has nearly tripled in the last eight years, from 125 to 366.

Share

Disputed net neutrality bill moves forward in California Legislature

Proponents of net neutrality protest against Federal Communication Commission Chairman Ajit Pai in Washington on May 5.
Proponents of net neutrality protest against Federal Communication Commission Chairman Ajit Pai in Washington on May 5.
(Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images)

State Sen. Scott Wiener allowed his net neutrality bill to advance out of a committee Tuesday, but warned he is prepared to shelve the legislation if negotiations with other lawmakers fail to restore consumer protections he said were gutted from the bill last week.

The bill by the San Francisco Democrat was approved Tuesday by the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee in order to keep it alive ahead of deadlines for legislative action on bills. But Wiener said the bill, as amended by the Assembly communications committee last week, is not acceptable and must be changed.

“To be clear, if the bill ultimately remains in its current form, I will withdraw it, as I have no desire to pass a fake net neutrality bill,” Wiener said. “But my sincere hope is that we will be able to amend it in the near future back into a strong form. For today’s hearing, I simply want the current version to move forward in order to continue working on it.”

Wiener said last week that his bill was “eviscerated” by a committee headed by Assemblyman Miguel Santiago (D-Los Angeles). The senator said the changes allow internet service providers such as AT&T and Comcast leeway to slow down some websites and provide fast lanes to websites that pay more, while charging websites and small businesses access fees.

In the last year and a half, AT&T contributed $1.5 million to candidates, political parties and other campaign committees in California, including $18,800 to political committees controlled by Santiago.

Wiener said he plans to continue negotiations with Santiago, so the committee voted to send the bill to the Assembly Appropriations Committee on its way to the Assembly floor.

Assemblyman Ed Chau (D-Arcadia), the privacy committee’s chairman, said a “possible path forward” would be for the bill to require compliance with the language of the 2015 Federal Communications Commission rule that recently was repealed.

Even as amended last week, the Wiener bill is opposed by Comcast and AT&T, which argue the legislation goes beyond Obama administration rules that have since been scrapped. Opponents said the industry will have difficulty if every state has a different policy rather than deferring to uniform federal regulations.

“Both versions of SB 822 create significant harm for California consumers, the internet economy and the state of California,” said Bill Devine, a lobbyist for AT&T.

Share
Advertisement

Paint companies that want taxpayers to pay for lead cleanup still trying to strike deal with lawmakers

Less than 72 hours before the deadline for voter initiatives to get on the ballot in November, major national paint companies and the California Legislature remain far apart on a deal that could jettison an initiative sponsored by the companies.

The initiative, which is expected to have gained enough signatures to go before voters in the fall, would overturn a recent state appeals court ruling that puts the companies, Sherwin-Williams and ConAgra, on the hook for potentially hundreds of millions of dollars in lead paint cleanup in homes. In its place, the initiative would authorize a $2-billion loan so that taxpayers, not the companies, would pay to clean up lead and other environmental hazards.

The companies have long said they would prefer lawmakers pass legislation that would address their concerns about the court ruling. On Monday, the two companies released a proposed bill that would overturn the court ruling, require paint manufacturers to pay $500 million for lead cleanup over the next decade and shield the companies from liability. They said Assemblyman Tim Grayson (D-Concord) would write the bill.

But Grayson said Sherwin-Williams and ConAgra’s proposal was a nonstarter and the companies need to pony up more money.

“While some of the concepts could be used as a framework, a statewide solution for lead paint remediation is simply not going to happen with the dollar amounts that the lead paint industry has proposed,” Grayson said in a statement.

Grayson indicated he’d prefer to pass legislation rather than have a fight at the ballot box in November, but that the onus was on the companies to make a deal.

“It’s time that the paint companies take responsibility for their actions and not push liability onto the backs of taxpayers,” he said. “They must settle with the litigants of the case and be responsible to the rest of the state by funding a statewide remediation program.”

There remain significant hurdles for legislation to pass in time for companies to pull the ballot measure by the state’s Thursday deadline. Any bill that would increase fees on paint companies would require a two-thirds supermajority vote of the Legislature. Also, legislative rules require bills to be in print for 72 hours before lawmakers can give them final approval. This means the companies would have to agree to abandon the measure before a bill formally passed.

A spokeswoman for the initiative campaign said the companies still planned to negotiate with the Legislature.

“We stand ready and look forward to working with Assemblymember Grayson and other legislators on an alternative solution to the ballot initiative,” Tiffany Moffatt said.

Share

California Senate welcomes new Orange County Republican, selected after voters fired the Democratic incumbent

Ling Ling Chang is sworn in to the California Senate by Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye, as Chang's husband, Andrew Wong, looks on.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

The final chapter in the removal of an incumbent California state senator — the first since 1914 — played out in Sacramento on Monday, as Sen. Ling Ling Chang (R-Diamond Bar) filled the sudden vacancy by taking the oath of office.

Chang was selected by voters in the state’s 29th Senate District to replace Josh Newman, a Fullerton Democrat who was recalled from office in the same election. Newman had narrowly defeated Chang in 2016 and was only two years into his four-year term when voters removed him on June 5.

Newman became the face of GOP anger over California’s new gas tax increase, passed by the Legislature last year to fund transportation projects. He was a key vote for the plan, and lost the recall election by 58% to 42%.

“Voters were clear that we need someone in Sacramento to protect taxpayers, and I’m prepared to fight tax increases wherever I see them,” Chang said in a written statement. Her arrival in the Senate was coincidentally on the same day state elections officials announced a formal repeal of the gas tax increase had qualified for the November statewide ballot.

Chang, 41, served one term in the Assembly from 2014 to 2016. She was one of six candidates on the ballot as a replacement for Newman.

Before Newman, San Francisco politician Edwin Grant was the last state senator to be recalled from office. His 1914 ouster came just three years after voters created the recall process on the recommendation of then-Gov. Hiram Johnson. An article in the Los Angeles Times from that fall described Grant’s removal from office as a “revolt” against Johnson’s agenda of Progressive Era politics.

Share
Advertisement

Major changes to how Legislature handles harassment complaints advances

The statuary, "Columbus' Last Appeal to Queen Isabella," greets visitors to the rotunda at the Capitol building in Sacramento.
The statuary, “Columbus’ Last Appeal to Queen Isabella,” greets visitors to the rotunda at the Capitol building in Sacramento.
(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)

Employees of the California Legislature will have a new way to register workplace harassment complaints against lawmakers, legislative staff, lobbyists and the public under a revamped policy approved by a key panel on Monday.

The Joint Rules Committee, which governs both houses of the Legislature, approved recommendations that would significantly change how sexual harassment and other complaints are investigated and adjudicated. The overhaul was prompted by a string of sexual misconduct investigations that led to the resignation of several lawmakers.

Assemblywoman Laura Friedman (D-Glendale), who chaired the committee that created the proposal, said the plan was a “radical departure” from how the Legislature had handled internal complaints in the past.

The approved recommendations hew closely to the proposal rolled out earlier this month, which includes the creation of a unit within the Office of the Legislative Counsel to investigate and report on complaints. A panel of five subject-matter experts, such as specialists in employment law, would weigh in after a completed investigation to determine if the complaint has been substantiated, and recommend a response.

There were a few tweaks to the draft proposal, such as requesting that the chief justice of the state Supreme Court appoint three of those panelists, while each house appoints one expert. Other additions include referring reports of potential criminal conduct to law enforcement and a requirement to inform the complainant about updates to the investigation process.

The new policy is expected to go into place on Feb. 1, 2019, or once the Office of Legislative Counsel, the Legislature’s legal office, creates the new investigatory unit. Diane Boyer-Vine, who leads that office, said there would likely need to be changes in law to authorize that plan and that a bill to enable the unit’s creation is being drafted. The policy now goes before the rules committee of each house, where it is expected to be approved.

The lead architects of the changes stressed that the procedure would continue to evolve once put into practice.

“We’re not going to walk out of this meeting today being able to say we solved sexual harassment in the Legislature or even that we have the perfect policy in place,” Friedman said. “This is going to be an ongoing project.”

Some of the most prominent voices in battling sexual harassment in the Capitol — including the group We Said Enough, which formed last fall — said they were ready to work to make sure the new policies indeed led to culture change.

Pamela Lopez, a lobbyist who formed an anti-harassment organization called Work Equity after going public with a complaint against Assemblyman Matt Dababneh last year, praised what she called “excellent recommendations.”

“The devil is always in the implementation,” Lopez added.

5:22 p.m.: This post was updated to correct Assemblywoman Laura Friedman’s title. She was chair of the panel on sexual harassment prevention and response, not co-chair.

This post was originally published at 1:41 p.m.

Share

Democrat Harley Rouda will take on California GOP Rep. Dana Rohrabacher after opponent concedes

Democrat Harley Rouda will challenge GOP Rep. Dana Rohrabacher in California’s 48th Congressional District in November after his opponent Hans Keirstead conceded the second-place spot in the June 5 primary.

Rouda and Keirstead, also a Democrat, had been locked in a nasty battle for the chance to take on 15-term incumbent Rohrabacher. Keirstead maintained a razor-thin lead as the votes were counted in the days after the election. But last week, Rouda, who is a real estate investor, overtook him and at last count was leading by 126 votes.

In a statement, Keirstead, a stem cell researcher, congratulated Rouda and pledged to “work in unison...to make sure Democrats and science prevail in November.”

Democrats consider Rohrabacher’s coastal Orange County seat a key pick-up opportunity in a crucial state as they seek to take back control of the House. He is considered one of the most vulnerable incumbents in the country, having received just 30% of the vote in the primary.

The district was one of several where national Democrats feared being locked out because of California’s top-two primary system. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spent millions in this district, including $400,000 on ads backing Rouda, who some party leaders felt was better positioned to defeat Rohrabacher this fall and who was the only California House challenger to receive the committee’s explicit backing before the primary.

That set up a clash with the state Democratic party, which endorsed Keirstead.

As the ballots were counted, neither campaign ruled out the possibility of requesting a recount. Orange County election officials have said they expect to certify the final results Monday.

Share
Advertisement

California Politics Podcast: Digging through the latest polls in November’s marquee matchups

After weeks of multi-candidate battles, California’s election season has moved to one-on-one matchups. And there’s some new polling in the state’s biggest races.

On this week’s California Politics Podcast, we take a closer look at the latest USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll’s numbers in the races for governor and U.S. Senate.

We also discuss the week’s news on illegal immigration, from a closely watched lawsuit against California’s so-called sanctuary laws to how state lawmakers are reacting to the crisis on the U.S.-Mexico border.

Share

Voters will have the chance to make California a ‘cage-free egg’ state

Egg production is a $1-billion industry in California, with some 15.5 million egg-laying hens producing nearly 5 billion eggs annually, mostly on family-owned farms.

Read background about this initiative >>

Share
Advertisement

Gov. Brown appoints Democratic activist Alice T. Germond to head California’s campaign watchdog panel

California Gov. Jerry Brown on Friday appointed longtime Democratic Party activist Alice T. Germond as the chairwoman of the state’s troubled campaign finance watchdog panel.

Germond, 75, joins the state Fair Political Practices Commission to serve the remaining seven months of the term of former chair Jodi Remke, who resigned last month after part-time members voted to curtail some of her powers.

The commission voted this month to create subcommittees to weigh in on future policy changes and hiring decisions, and has also been discussing whether to seek legislation to make the chair position part time like the rest of the commissioners.

Germond’s appointment ends in January, when a new governor will take office and can make a new appointment.

A West Hollywood resident, Germond was deputy campaign manager for Brown’s gubernatorial campaign in 1978. She also was the national vice-chair for Brown’s failed presidential campaign in 1980, and has played leading roles in the campaigns of Democratic presidential candidates Bill Clinton, Gary Hart and Michael Dukakis.

Germond has been secretary emeritus of the Democratic National Committee since 2013, and was the committee’s national secretary from 2002 to 2013.

A graduate of Cal State L.A., Germond’s annual salary will be $152,473.

Share

Jinx or coincidence: Why is L.A. City Hall a graveyard for gubernatorial ambitions?

William Stephens may be best known — to the extent he’s remembered at all — for being California governor in 1917 when anarchists dynamited the governor’s mansion in Sacramento, blowing a small hole in a basement wall.

Not a whole lot there to commemorate, but Stephens boasts one thing that does set him apart from the 37 others who’ve served as governor since the first took office in 1849. For just under two weeks in 1909, Stephens was acting mayor of Los Angeles, filling the job when his predecessor quit rather than face a recall vote.

Brief though it was, that makes Stephens the only person ever to serve as both Los Angeles mayor and, eventually, California governor.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Years after resigning over voting fraud conviction, former state Sen. Rod Wright registers as Capitol lobbyist

Former state Sen. Rod Wright resigned in September 2014 after he was convicted of lying about living in his senate district.
Former state Sen. Rod Wright resigned in September 2014 after he was convicted of lying about living in his senate district.
( (Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times))

Nearly four years after resigning upon his conviction in a voting fraud case, former state Sen. Roderick Wright (D-Inglewood) has registered as a Capitol lobbyist.

Wright lists his only client as lobbyist and political consultant Richard Ross, who in turn advocates for clients including the California Applicants’ Attorneys Assn., Mercury Public Affairs, the California Business Roundtable and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Local 3299.

Ross said in an email Thursday that he retained Wright as part of an attempt to get language included in a state budget trailer bill “that would have held [the University of California] a little more accountable for its contracting out processes that result in widening gender and racial pay disparities for service workers.”

However, Ross said the effort to get the trailer bill language approved was unsuccessful.

Wright resigned and served a brief jail sentence in 2014 after he was convicted of eight felony counts, including perjury and voting fraud, for lying about living in his state Senate district.

Share

California and 9 other states plan to sue Trump administration for separating immigrant families

President Trump holds up the executive order he signed to end family separations at the border.
President Trump holds up the executive order he signed to end family separations at the border.
(Pablo Martinez Monsivais / Associated Press)

California is joining nine other states in filing a lawsuit against the Trump administration, alleging its family separation policy for immigrants in the country illegally violates due process, state Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra said Thursday.

The action was proposed a day after Trump signed an executive order requiring families detained under the administration’s “zero tolerance” policy on immigration be kept together.

“Children belong with their families, not alone and fearful in metal cages,” Becerra said in a statement. “We are filing this lawsuit because ripping children from their parents is unlawful, wrong and heartless.”

The attorney general said Trump’s executive order is “empty and meaningless” and that many children remained separated from their parents.

The states, which also include Washington, Pennsylvania, Illinois and New Jersey, will allege in the legal action planned in the next few days that the family separation policy violates due process rights of parents to be together with their children, Becerra said.

The attorneys general of the 10 states are asking that the Trump administration expand the executive order to create a process for reuniting parents and children detained in recent months.

Share
Advertisement

California’s campaign watchdog panel deadlocks on proposal to make its chairperson part time

The dome of the state Capitol glows in the early evening in Sacramento.
The dome of the state Capitol glows in the early evening in Sacramento.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

A proposal to change leadership of California’s state campaign watchdog commission from a full-time position to a part-time job stalled Thursday when the panel deadlocked over the need for a new structure.

Two of the five members of the state Fair Political Practices Commission recently resigned amid a power struggle, and Commissioner Frank Cardenas said Thursday he is not willing to be one of the three votes needed to seek legislation to make the chairperson role part time.

Cardenas noted that the commission recently adopted a new committee structure to allow the four part-time commissioners normally on the panel to have more say in policy and personal decisions, and he wants to give that more time to work.

“It’s not clear to me that we need to change course,” Cardenas said. “I am not in a position this month to provide political cover to legislators to do that.”

The commission voted to send the proposal — as well as the idea of expanding the panel from five to seven members — to a committee for more research and a recommendation.

Commissioner Allison Hayward said a recent survey of past part-time commissioners found many “felt left out” of key decision-making by the panel.

Former FPPC general counsel Bob Stern proposed the change, noting that no other state ethics panel has the same structure. He said many people think it vests too much power in one commissioner.

“I clearly made a mistake when drafting the Political Reform Act,” Stern told the panel during a hearing Thursday.

Share

No stamp, no problem: California lawmakers approve proposal for postage-free voting by mail

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

California voters no longer would have to scramble to find stamps for their ballots under legislation sent to Gov. Jerry Brown on Thursday for postage-free voting.

If signed into law, Assembly Bill 216 would require county elections officials to send prepaid postage envelopes with ballots mailed to voters. Californians frequently fail to put enough stamps on an envelope, or simply send a ballot back without any postage. Some of those ballots are ultimately delivered by postal officials.

Supporters said the changing length of ballots — in some elections stretching to multiple pages — can leave voters unprepared for determining how many stamps to use. While some counties already provide postage-paid envelopes to return ballots, most do not.

“These inequities and confusions will only increase as voting by mail becomes more prevalent,” state Sen. Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens) said during a brief floor debate Thursday.

The bill, however, offers no funding to counties for the cost of prepaid ballot envelopes. A Senate analysis used the number of mailed ballots in the November 2016 election to come up with a rough estimate of $5.5 million. But that number depends on the length of the ballot — the number of candidates and propositions that stretch into several pages in some counties — and the number of people who choose to vote by mail. That absentee vote will steadily increase as more counties adopt a 2016 state election law that allows counties to close polling places in favor of a more limited number of all-purpose “vote centers.”

The staff analysis points out that California’s past six budgets have suspended the mandates that require counties be paid for a variety of services, often including election rules. That lack of funding has in turn allowed counties to ignore some election laws. In most cases, though, local officials simply pay the extra costs out of their existing budgets.

The bill was passed in the Assembly last year and first introduced in early 2017. Brown, who has taken no position on AB 216, now has 12 days either to allow it to become law in 2019, or veto it.

Share
Advertisement

Californians could vote on daylight saving time under bill sent to governor

Gov. Jerry Brown will decide whether to put an initiative on the ballot that could put California on daylight saving time year-round
(Elise Amendola / Associated Press)

Californians would be asked in a November ballot measure whether to end the biannual practice of moving their clocks ahead and back to comply with the Daylight Saving Time Act, under a bill the Assembly approved Thursday and sent to Gov. Jerry Brown for consideration.

“This bill creates a pathway for California to stay on daylight saving time year-round,” Assemblyman Kansen Chu (D-San Jose) told his colleagues before they voted 63-4 to approve his bill.

If an initiative is approved by voters, the Legislature would be given the power, with a two-thirds vote, to initiate an end to the practice of advancing the clock by one hour on the second Sunday each March, and moving the clock hands back an hour on the first Sunday in November.

But federal approval would also be required.

Changing the clock twice a year came about as a way to save energy during World War I and World War II, but Chu said a 2008 study by the National Bureau of Economics disputed whether the amount saved was substantial.

“AB 807 is aimed to dramatically improve public health,” Chu said. “Studies have shown that when we switch our clocks, that action alone increases the chances for heart attacks, workplace injuries, crime and traffic accidents.”

Share

California candidates aren’t so sure Nancy Pelosi should be the next House speaker if Democrats win

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi didn’t seem to mind much when Rep. Conor Lamb, a Democrat who won a special election in a previously strong GOP Pennsylvania House district, said he wouldn’t support her for speaker if Democrats regain the majority.

More California candidates appear to be joining him.

In a statement provided to Politico and the Los Angeles Times on Wednesday, Democrat Gil Cisneros said “it’s time for new leadership” despite the San Francisco Democrat’s years of advocacy for California. Cisneros, running in the race to replace retiring Republican Rep. Ed Royce in Orange County, benefited from hundreds of thousands of dollars in primary spending by a super PAC tied to her, the House Majority PAC.

And he’ll probably benefit from at least some of the money Pelosi helped raise for the group Monday night at a high-dollar fundraiser in Beverly Hills.

Andrew Janz, a Democrat running against Republican Rep. Devin Nunes in the Central Valley, told NBC News in March that he wouldn’t support Pelosi either, adding that “it’s time for a new generation of leaders to go to Washington.”

It’s an indication of the nervousness of Democratic candidates over a tactic GOP strategists have pushed: Tie fresh faces to Pelosi, who remains a divisive figure.

At a candidate forum this year, only one of the Democrats on the primary ballot to replace GOP Rep. Darrell Issa in the 49th Congressional District took a clear position against Pelosi for speaker. Doug Applegate, a retired Marine colonel who came within striking distance of unseating Issa in 2016, said, “We can do better.”

But he didn’t make it through the primary, and Mike Levin, who did, said only that he wanted a “bold champion” for progressive causes as speaker.

Levin later told the San Jose Mercury News that Pelosi is one of his “political heroes” and that “we couldn’t have a better speaker” should Democrats regain control of the House.

At a debate in Republican Rep. Steve Knight’s 25th Congressional District in March, Democrat Katie Hill, who will take him on in November, was similarly noncommittal. “It is going to depend,” Hill said. “We need a stronger bench. … We will just have to see when the time comes.”

Several other California Democrats were asked by a McClatchy reporter last year whether they supported Pelosi. Hans Keirstead, who is still locked in a tight race for second place to take on GOP Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, didn’t say whether Pelosi should continue to lead the House Democratic Caucus.

The only one who said yes, Kia Hamadanchy in the 45th District, didn’t make it through the primary in Republican Rep. Mimi Walters’ district. The Democrat who is running there, Katie Porter, didn’t respond to a request for comment Wednesday.

UPDATES:

June 21, 8:48 a.m.: This article was updated to include comments Levin later made about Pelosi.

This article was originally published June 20 at 4 p.m.

Share
Advertisement

California lawmakers water down net neutrality bill

Proponents of net neutrality protest against Federal Communication Commission Chairman Ajit Pai in Washington on May 5.
Proponents of net neutrality protest against Federal Communication Commission Chairman Ajit Pai in Washington on May 5.
(Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images)

An Assembly panel decided Wednesday to rewrite a proposed net neutrality bill over the objection of its author, Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), who charged that the amendments gutted the bill and were adopted unfairly before he had a chance to testify at a public hearing.

Wiener told the Communications and Conveyance Committee that its changes would allow internet service providers such as AT&T and Comcast leeway to slow down some websites and provide fast lanes to websites that pay more, while charging websites and small businesses access fees.

“The amendments the committee adopted eviscerate the bill. It’s no longer a net neutrality bill,” Wiener told the panel after the approval of amendments submitted by the chairman, Assemblyman Miguel Santiago (D-Los Angeles).

Santiago said the vote was the start of a conversation.

“We both believe a net neutrality bill should get out,” he told Wiener. “I’m willing to continue to engage. It’s unfair to assume that this committee should not have input.”

The vote comes just more than a week after net neutrality was officially repealed at the federal level, and just days after Wiener and Sen. Kevin De León (D-Los Angeles) agreed to merge competing bills.

AT&T lobbyist Bill Devine told the panel that prior to the amendments, the Wiener bill was “too extreme” and went “far beyond” the rules approved during the Obama administration. The proposal “will harm California consumers and will damage the California economy,” he said.

“AT&T supports an open internet,” Devine added. “We do not block websites. We do not censor online content and we do not degrade internet traffic.”

Wiener was unmoved, and tried unsuccessfully to withdraw the amended bill before a vote.

“The whole point of net neutrality is that we get to decide where we go [on the internet] and the ISPs are not the ones to pick winners and losers, yet that is exactly what the amended version of the bill … will do,” he said.

The amendments were also opposed by several open-access activists, including Paul Goodman of the Greenlining Institute, who said the changes “significantly weaken the bill.”

Share

Garcetti bashes California’s top-two primary while Schwarzenegger wants it to go nationwide

Is California’s top-two primary system a “sell job” or has a “better political culture” emerged because of it?

In one corner we have Los Angeles’ Democratic Mayor Eric Garcetti, who has some harsh words for the system voters picked back in June 2010.

In the other we have Silicon Valley Rep. Ro Khanna and Arnold Schwarzenegger, California’s last Republican governor, defending the wide open primary.

The system faced a new round of scrutiny before and after this month’s high-profile primary when voters made choices on a new governor, a U.S. senator and several House seats that could swing control of Congress in November.

“If the intention was to get more moderate candidates, it’s been an abject failure,” Garcetti told the New York Times. “That was the sell job.”

“People didn’t campaign to the center,” he said.

Khanna and Schwarzenegger, who championed the system in 2010, argued in a Washington Post op-ed that the system has produced bipartisan results in Sacramento and should be expanded nationwide. The two highlighted that eight Republicans voted with Democrats in 2017 to pass an extension of the state’s cap-and-trade program.

The pair also noted a USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll this year found that just 10% of registered voters wanted to return to the “closed primary” system where registered members of a political party pick their own nominee to appear on the general election ballot.

“California landed on a way to solve this problem, and now’s the time to take it nationwide,” the two wrote.

Share
Advertisement

De León urges Gov. Brown to end California National Guard cooperation with Trump

As outcry escalates over the Trump administration’s policy of separating families caught illegally crossing the border, state Sen. Kevin de León is pressing Gov. Jerry Brown to end the California National Guard’s cooperation with the federal government.

Since April, the state National Guard has been working with federal immigration authorities after President Trump called on governors across the country to help enforce security along the southern border. Brown mobilized 400 service members for help fighting transnational crime, not enforcing immigration law, as Trump envisioned.

De León (D-Los Angeles), in a new letter, said that in light of Trump’s “zero tolerance policy,” which has resulted in thousands of children being separated from their parents, “we can no longer tolerate using our state resources to support government entities that are inflicting inhuman trauma on people seeking refuge in accordance with national and international laws.”

“Removing any and all material support for the President’s racist, inhumane and un-American immigration agenda is critical to upholding California’s values and America’s position of moral leadership in the world,” wrote De León, who is currently running for U.S. Senate against longtime Democratic incumbent Sen. Dianne Feinstein.

A growing number of governors, including the Republican chief executives of Massachusetts and Maryland, have said they are pulling their National Guard service members back from the border in light of Trump’s policy. California has a much larger commitment of service members than those states.

A spokesman for Brown said the role of National Guard personnel is “intentionally narrow/limited in scope,” noting that Brown specified in April that service members would assist in combating trafficking, drug smuggling and other criminal enterprises, rather than to help enforce immigration law or build a border wall.

In January, Brown blasted the policy of family separation as “callous” and “insensitive.”

Share

After bitter primary clash, Villaraigosa pledges to help Newsom win California governor’s race

Antonio Villaraigosa and Gavin Newsom, Democrats who clashed bitterly in the California gubernatorial primary, said their differences were behind them Tuesday as they pledged to work together to get Newsom elected governor in November.

“This wasn’t personal. Both of us love this state,” Villaraigosa told reporters after having breakfast with Newsom at Homegirl Café in downtown Los Angeles. “We grew up here, we want the best for our state and we both thought we had special qualities that would help us lead the state.”

Villaraigosa, who endorsed Newsom on election night after placing third in the June 5 primary, said the two men agree on crucial issues facing the state, notably the need to tackle poverty and homelessness, and to increase educational opportunities.

“I think it’s really important that in these times, that we move beyond whatever differences we might have had and work together,” Villaraigosa added.

The differences were stark during the campaign. Villaraigosa called Newsom a “Davos Democrat” who he said was trying to sell “snake oil” to voters. Newsom accused Villaraigosa of “shilling” for Herbalife, a multilevel marketing company that he said preys upon the poor and people of color.

Asked about the comments, Newsom chuckled and Villaraigosa responded, “We will not rain on this parade today.”

“Look, you say a lot of things on the course of a campaign,” the former Los Angeles mayor said.

The men effusively praised one another.

“I’ve known Antonio for decades, I was never looking forward to running against him for any office,” Newsom said. “I have extraordinary respect and admiration for the former mayor, enormous respect for his political talent and skills, for his remarkable contributions not only to Los Angeles, more broadly the state and this country.”

They both repeatedly tied Rancho Santa Fe businessman John Cox, the Republican Newsom will face in the fall, to President Trump and his policies on immigration and healthcare.

“A vote for John Cox is a vote for Donald Trump,” Villaraigosa said. “Let’s be clear.”

Share
Advertisement

Democrat Harley Rouda takes the lead in fight to take on Rep. Dana Rohrabacher

Real estate investor Harley Rouda has overtaken fellow Democrat Hans Keirstead with a razor-thin 40-vote lead in the fight to take on Rep. Dana Rohrabacher in November.

There’s been a tight race for second place in the 48th Congressional District since the June 5 primary as tens of thousands of provisional and late-arriving mail ballots have been tallied. The latest vote count released by Orange County elections officials Monday upended Keirstead’s nearly two-week lead since election night.

National Democrats had expected Rouda’s vote count to expand as election officials started counting provisional and late-arriving mail ballots. They spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in the closing days of the campaign to support Rouda. The ads run by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which has signaled it believes Rouda is a stronger match against Rohrabacher, were meant to hit voters who cast their votes at the last minute.

The campaigns have largely gone silent as they wait for votes to be counted, though Rouda has sent out fundraising emails for a “recount fund,” which he later called an “election protection” fund.

“We look forward to seeing the final result so that we can begin focusing like a laser on stopping the Trump-Rohrabacher agenda in Washington,” said Rouda campaign consultant Dave Jacobson.

Rohrabacher is considered one of the most vulnerable Republicans in the country as Democrats aim to take back the House by flipping at least a couple of the four GOP-held districts in Orange Country.

Orange County election officials said they have prioritized counting 48th District ballots. There are still some 34,000 ballots to count countywide, the vast majority of them provisional votes, but officials estimate fewer than a thousand are from Rohrabacher’s district. They expect most of them to be counted by Tuesday and plan to certify county election results next Monday.

Neither campaign has ruled out asking for a recount. State law does not mandate an automatic recount in congressional races, and any campaign that demands a recount is required to pay for the staff time to do it.

Share

California Legislature sends more budget-related bills to Gov. Jerry Brown, final items could come next week

Assemblyman Bill Quirk (D-Hayward) votes on budget-related bills.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

Lawmakers sparred over school funding plans and healthcare for the poor on Monday during floor debates in the California Legislature, sending nine budget-related bills to Gov. Jerry Brown’s desk, but leaving a handful of other proposals in limbo for perhaps another week.

The main budget blueprint was approved by the state Senate and Assembly on Thursday. California government’s new fiscal year begins July 1.

Monday’s most intense debates came in the Senate, as Republicans railed over provisions tucked into some of the budget bills. And one prominent Democrat refused to support the healthcare funding bill because of its failure to offer services to a wider swath of adults in the U.S. illegally.

“Nearly every Democrat on this floor has argued that healthcare should be a human right and not a privilege,” Sen. Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens) said. “This time, when it mattered most, we looked away.”

Lara criticized the budget agreement crafted by Brown and legislative leaders that reject expanded access to Medi-Cal, the state’s healthcare program for low-income residents, for those in the U.S. illegally. Children without legal status are eligible for full healthcare services, but only a portion of the adults receive emergency medical care. Lawmakers had originally called for full services to young and older adults.

Several immigrants who would have received Med-Cal services under the rejected plan were in the Senate gallery during Monday’s vote on the budget-related bill.

“Healthcare affects everybody,” said Maria Emilia Campos, 50, who works as a sidewalk vendor in Hollywood. “If they don’t give us Medi-Cal, what would we do?”

Franciella Gastelum, a 20-year-old resident of San Diego, said her father, a small business owner who does not have legal status, pays taxes that help fund state programs but doesn’t have health insurance or legal protection himself.

“If anything were to happen to my dad … and he can’t be there for his business, his business would shut down,” she said.

Republicans, meanwhile, criticized an education-related budget bill that will provide up to $50 million in supplemental pay for school support staff members who choose to set aside a portion of their paychecks to cover missed salary during the summer.

“The money that we’re putting up is really a gift,” Sen. John Moorlach (R-Costa Mesa) said.

The most closely watched budget bills that are still pending require a supermajority vote in both houses and thus need support from a handful of Republicans and business-aligned Democrats. They include final approval for a $2-billion homeless assistance bond that would be placed on the statewide November ballot, and a new surcharge on telephone lines to help pay for 9-1-1 services. Those bills may not be brought to the floor for votes until next week.

Times staff writer Melanie Mason contributed to this report.

Share
Advertisement

John Cox, endorsed for California governor by Trump, says he opposes separating immigrant parents from children

John Cox, the Republican candidate for California governor, said Monday that he opposes the separation of immigrant parents from their children at the U.S.-Mexican border, calling the problem “horrendous” and in need of congressional attention.

Cox, who will face off in the November election against Democrat Gavin Newsom, was asked by reporters about the federal separation policy during a news conference to discuss his efforts to repeal California’s gas-tax increase.

“I’m against separating parents and children,” Cox said. “I’m a father. I have four daughters. That’s a congressional problem, and I hope that we get a congressional solution very soon.”

The separation policy has been enforced by the Trump administration, which could end it without congressional action.

When asked what he would do about the problem, Cox, a San Diego-area resident endorsed by Trump, didn’t offer a plan, saying immigration is a federal issue and that he is running for statewide office.

Newsom has decried the Trump administration policy as well.

Share

Democrats who once had competing ideas on net neutrality now join forces in the California Legislature

Proponents of net neutrality protest against Federal Communication Commission Chairman Ajit Pai in Washington on May 5.
(Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images)

As the fight to preserve net neutrality gears up in California, two state senators are melding their efforts to establish rules that would prevent internet service providers from manipulating or slowing access to online content.

Under new amendments unveiled Monday, Sens. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) and Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles) have rewritten their dueling net neutrality bills to complement each other — and added conditions so that both must be signed by the governor for the other to take effect.

The move comes a week after net neutrality was officially repealed at the federal level, following a vote by the Federal Communications Commission in December to roll back the rules.

Weiner’s Senate Bill 822 will now be solely responsible for setting California’s net neutrality standards: It would bar broadband companies that do business in the state from blocking, throttling or interfering with a customer’s internet access based on the nature of the content or type of service.

It would also prevent providers from varying speeds between websites or charging customers additional fees for their services to reach more people. It would task the state attorney general’s office with enforcing the rules.

De León’s Senate Bill 460, which previously tasked the California Public Utilities Commission with creating new net neutrality rules, now will focus solely on prohibiting companies that violate the net neutrality rules from receiving any public contracts — including those awarded by schools, cities and counties.

Wiener said combining forces was necessary to reinstate net neutrality in California amid heavy lobbying in Sacramento from major internet service providers, “playing the bills against each other with the goal of killing both.”

“The internet is now the catalyst in our society for growing our economy, engaging in the democratic process, and connecting with one another,” De León said in a statement. “It is an information equalizer, and everyone from farmworkers to financiers deserves fair access to it.”

The bills are up before a key Assembly committee this week. Twitter and Facebook ads have been urging lawmakers to vote against Wiener’s bill.

Opponents argue that state-level regulations would likely increase internet service costs and diminish companies’ investment in broadband infrastructure.

In a news conference last week, representatives of the tech industry and business groups pointed to an industry-funded analysis that asserted that more than 3.6 million Californians could see their cellphone bills rise by as much as $30 per month, including disproportionate numbers of low-income and minority consumers. The findings were based on market surveys tallying up the number of people who rely on zero-rated data plans, which allow customers to stream content on their phones and mobile devices without counting against their data caps.

Wiener’s office contested the study, saying zero-data plans would be limited but not entirely affected.

Share
Advertisement

Q&A: San Francisco Mayor-elect London Breed on what she hopes to accomplish at the helm of her hometown

San Francisco Mayor-elect London Breed, center, greets students after a news conference on June 14 in San Francisco.
(Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

After a hard-fought, history-making campaign, San Francisco’s Mayor-elect London Breed took a four-day vacation in Cabo San Lucas. Now ready to assume office, the city’s first African American woman mayor talked to The Times this week about how she’ll tackle some of the biggest challenges facing the Bay Area city. Breed, who was raised by her grandmother in public housing, said homelessness and affordable housing will be among her top priorities. (This interview was edited and condensed for clarity.)

Your campaign was sort of defined by the adversity you faced as a kid growing up in the city. How do you reconnect people who are natives of a city that in recent years has become a very different place?

I think so many people are not in the city anymore that I grew up with. I think what’s important is to make sure that people who are either natives of San Francisco, or live there now, especially those who are struggling, feel like they are part of our city — feel like it’s their city too and also feel like there are opportunities that exist in this city for them. Especially the future generations and kids who are growing up now in poverty. I also want to make sure we make better decisions and incorporate everyone into the prosperity that exists in our city.

Read More

Share

4 California Democrats added to national party’s priority list of House races after primaries

Share
Advertisement

De León’s challenge in the Senate race: to oppose Feinstein but keep his future intact

Kevin de León stresses that he isn’t naive about his chances of taking down Sen. Dianne Feinstein in November’s general election.

“I recognize that the vast majority of Californians don’t know me. This is the opportunity now to get to know the voters,” De León said after last week’s primary, in which he won the second spot on the ballot for the U.S. Senate seat, but lagged far behind the incumbent, a fellow Democrat. “I’m going to roll up my sleeves and go corner-to-corner in California.”

It’s a formidable hill to climb in five months.

Read More

Share

Obama returning to Los Angeles for Democratic fundraising gala

Former President Barack Obama is returning to Los Angeles on June 28 to headline a fundraiser for the Democratic National Committee.

Tickets for the gala start at $2,700, which buys access to the former president’s speech as well as a performance by singer Christina Aguilera, according to the invitation.

To get fed, donors must pony up at least $15,000. The top ticket package, which includes five dinner tickets, premium seating, a picture, a reception, membership to the DNC finance committee and entry to two other events in 2018, goes for $100,000.

In May, Obama visited Beverly Hills for his first post-presidential fundraiser for a candidate, Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri.

Share
Advertisement

Ivanka Trump heading to California for fundraisers with Kevin McCarthy

Ivanka Trump arrives for a news conference in the Rose Garden last week.
(Richard Drew / Associated Press)

Ivanka Trump will travel to California next week to attend fundraisers with House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, according to an invitation obtained by The Times and media reports.

The two will headline events in Fresno and Los Angeles on Monday. Proceeds from the fundraisers will support Protect the House, a political action committee led by McCarthy and Vice President Mike Pence that is focused on protecting GOP control of Congress.

The eldest daughter of President Trump is not a regular on the fundraising circuit, but her visit is a sign of the priority that the administration places on the effort, particularly in California. The state is home to multiple congressional districts that are top targets for Democrats because they favored Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election but are represented in Congress by Republicans.

McCarthy, a Bakersfield Republican who is close with Trump, and Pence appeared at fundraisers for the PAC earlier this year in Malibu and Beverly Hills.

Among the hosts of the Fresno event are Richard and Karen Spencer of Spencer Enterprises, John Harris of Harris Farms and Dan Gerawan of Gerawan Farming. They previously donated to the unsuccessful gubernatorial campaign of Antonio Villaraigosa, who courted conservative voters and the agriculture industry in the Central Valley.

Share

Gov. Jerry Brown signs law seeking to end underreporting of hate crimes in California

After a state audit faulted law enforcement agencies including the Los Angeles Police Department for underreporting hate crimes, Gov. Jerry Brown has signed a measure that seeks to improve the investigation and tracking of incidents based on race, gender and sexual orientation, officials said Thursday.

The new law, which takes effect in January, sets minimum standards for how local law enforcement agencies investigate and report hate crimes, and addresses issues in a May 31 state audit that found hate crimes are underreported by 14% in California.

“We can’t stop the problem unless we know how big it is,” said Assemblyman Phil Ting (D-San Francisco), who introduced AB 1985. “My bill requires law enforcement to use the same language and follow the same reporting procedures so that we can get an accurate picture of the prevalence of hate crimes in California.

“We live in a divided America these days, and a policy like this is important now more than ever,” he added.

The new law seeks to improve reporting to the state Department of Justice and the quality of training that police officers receive on recognizing hate crimes. The governor’s action was welcomed by Rick Zbur, executive director of the LGBTQ rights group Equality California.

“This critical legislation will help empower local communities to reduce rates of hate crimes and save lives,” Zbur said in a statement.

Despite underreporting, the state said hate crimes increased by more than 11% from 2015 to 2016.

Share
Advertisement

Gavin Newsom opposes initiative to split California in three even though it was proposed by a friend

California’s Democratic gubernatorial candidate Gavin Newsom said Wednesday that he has been a friend of Silicon Valley venture capitalist Tim Draper for 20 years, but he is opposing a November ballot initiative championed by Draper to break California into three states.

“He is an incredibly bright and capable person,” Newsom told reporters at a campaign event in Sacramento. “That is not [exemplified] in this initiative, and I will not be supporting the initiative, and I don’t expect the people of this state will support it.”

Newsom, the lieutenant governor, faces Republican John Cox in the November election for governor.

“California’s success is being a cohesive state, particularly at a time of Trump and Trumpism,” Newsom said. “We’re now the fifth largest economy in the world. Why would we cede that to splitting the state up into three?”

Newsom said the breakup proposal would lead to “litigation, consternation, north versus south, all kinds of constitutional issues,” but he added he is not spending a lot of time dwelling on the proposal.

Draper has argued that “three states will get us better infrastructure, better education and lower taxes.”

Share

Gov. Jerry Brown rallies Democrats to elect Gavin Newsom as his successor

Rallying Democrats for the November election, Gov. Jerry Brown said Wednesday that he looks forward to passing the baton to Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, the party’s candidate for governor, who in turn promised to continue the progressive agenda pursued by Brown.

Standing in front of about four dozen activists and other Democratic candidates for state office, the 80-year-old governor said he would campaign for Newsom, saying the 50-year-old candidate would bring a “creative, energetic” approach to the governor’s office.

“Gavin Newsom will get stuff done. There is a time for an old guy, and there is time for a young guy,” Brown said, drawing laughter during the event at the state Democratic Party headquarters in Sacramento. “I was the right man at the right time, and right now Gavin Newsom is the right man at the right time for the next four years in California.”

Brown said problems remain to be addressed involving the environment, workers’ rights and criminal justice reform.

“Now, I think I’ve done a hell of a lot, but I didn’t do so much that I didn’t leave a lot of problems for Gavin Newsom to solve,” Brown quipped.

Newsom, who faces Republican John Cox in the November election, praised Brown and said Democratic candidates will campaign to build on his accomplishments.

“We still have work to do,” Newsom said, his voice raspy from a string of campaign appearances. “This election is not over. The next five months we’ve got to double down, not just for the top of the ticket. We will work hard to elect Democrats at every level of government … and, yes, take back Congress and put [Rep.] Nancy Pelosi back in the speakership.”

Newsom said it was “remarkable” how Brown has improved a state that once suffered from budget deficits and high unemployment.

“It’s because of our progressive policies, not despite those progressive policies, that we’ve enjoyed that kind of economic growth, that kind of economic expansion,” Newsom said, adding that Brown “has proven that you don’t need to be profligate to be progressive.”

In an interview with reporters, Newsom said he is not concerned that Republicans including Cox want to make the election a referendum on Democrats raising the gas tax.

“I appreciate differences of opinion on that, but with all due respect it shows how limited their capacity of imagination is, if that is the best they can do.”

Newsom said repealing the gas tax would take away billions of dollars needed for road and bridge repairs, and he said Republicans have failed to provide a viable alternative.

Share
Advertisement

If Californians vote to split the state, here’s what would happen

It would be the first division of an existing U.S. state since the creation of West Virginia in 1863.

California voters will have a historic decision to make in November’s election: whether they should live in three new states instead of one.

The proposal that qualified Tuesday for the fall ballot is far from the final step in the process, nor is its passage a guarantee that Northern California, Southern California and California would be newly drawn onto maps of the United States.

Here’s what would happen if voters approve the ballot measure by simple majority on Nov. 6.

Is the ‘Three Californias’ plan legal under the California Constitution? A key, first question is whether the initiative submitted to voters is even legally allowable. That’s because the state’s initiative process can be used to create constitutional amendments, but not constitutional revisions.

What’s the difference? That’s a question that ultimately would have to be answered by the courts. It’s the most important first test of the proposal. A revision is the kind of change that’s reserved for only the California Legislature or for a formal constitutional convention — which hasn’t happened in the Golden State since 1879.

Or it may be something altogether different, said Vikram Amar, dean of the University of Illinois College of Law and former dean of the UC Davis School of Law.

“Some folks might argue that this proposal should not be considered neither a revision nor an amendment to the California constitution because by its terms it doesn’t purport to change the language of California’s charter at all; it just begins a process governed by the federal Constitution,” Amar wrote in an email on Wednesday.

The California Legislature would (probably) need to agree to the state-splitting plan. Article IV, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution has instructions on what has to happen if new states are created out of existing ones. It says such a proposal must have, among other things, “the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned.”

Some legal scholars have said this suggests the California Legislature would have to approve of the proposal after voters do so in November. But because California’s initiative process — created in 1911 by voters — is the power of the people to write laws and thus use the power of the Legislature, an election victory may be all the proposal would need from the state. Here again, the issue is likely one that would have to be sorted out by the courts.

Congress would need to give its blessing. Because no state has been subdivided into new states since West Virginia in 1863, this requirement in the Constitution also is unclear in how it would be carried out.

What is clear is Congress must agree to the proposal. How that would happen, and the political calculation that would undoubtedly come into play, is unclear. Even if the proposal survived numerous legal challenges, anger over the partisan impacts of a larger U.S. Senate and a redistribution of House seats and electoral college votes could doom the idea of three California states.

Share

Harassment complaint against Assemblywoman Cristina Garcia to get ‘further investigation’

A groping allegation against Assemblywoman Cristina Garcia will get further legislative scrutiny, as lawmakers review the appeal of a complaint originally found to be unsubstantiated.

Daniel Fierro, a former legislative staffer who said Garcia (D-Bell Gardens) inappropriately touched him at a legislative softball game four years ago, filed a notice of appeal last month, after the initial months-long investigation did not substantiate his claim.

This week, an attorney for the Assembly notified Fierro’s lawyer by letter that the leaders of the Assembly Rules Committee, which oversees the investigation process, “both received and reviewed Mr. Fierro’s Notice of Appeal and instructed that further investigation be conducted with respect to Mr. Fierro’s allegations and the issues you identify in your Notice of Appeal.”

In his appeal, Fierro said several witnesses were not interviewed in the first investigation, including lawmakers who were present at the game.

The letter indicates a different investigator than the one who did the original inquiry will be handling the appeal.

“It is encouraging that the Assembly has reopened the investigation of Ms. Garcia,” Fierro said. “I look forward to working with the new investigator the Assembly has retained.”

Garcia did not know about the decision to revisit the investigation until a reporter made inquiries Wednesday.

“After a four-month process, the original ruling by the independent investigator found that the claims against me were unsubstantiated, which was accurate,” she said in a statement. “I have constantly asked that the independent investigatory process remain independent from politicization. In that regard, it is unacceptable that the letter updating parties was leaked to the news media before it was received by my legal counsel.”

The allegations against Garcia became fodder in an expensive campaign to oust her in the June primary, led primarily by the state building trades union, which represents construction workers. The pressure has extended to the Capitol, where people affiliated with the union have held protests in front of her office and in the Assembly chamber. Some members of Garcia’s staff filed a complaint with human resources, saying they felt threatened and fearful over their presence.

Garcia finished in first place last week and will face off against a Republican challenger in the heavily Democratic district in southeast Los Angeles county.

Share
Advertisement

Larry Thomas, former press aide for Wilson and others, dies at 70

Larry Thomas, a San Diego native who parlayed a newspaper job writing about politics into a career as a press spokesman and strategist for a mayor, a governor, a vice president, and one of the largest real estate development companies in California, died Monday night at his home in Newport Beach from complications of cancer.

He was 70.

The son of a newspaper editor, Mr. Thomas graduated from San Diego State with a degree in journalism. He worked for United Press International, KPBS and the Copley News Service before joining the San Diego Union, where he became, in his early 20s, one of the youngest politics writers working for a major newspaper in the nation.

Read More

Share

Bank seizes California Rep. David Valadao’s family dairy farm over unpaid loans

A bank has seized a Tulare County dairy farm owned by Rep. David Valadao and his family to resolve more than $8 million in loans that have not been repaid, according to court documents.

In November, agriculture lender Rabobank sued Triple V Dairy in Fresno County Superior Court alleging failure to repay loans for cattle and feed totaling about $8.3 million. The Republican congressman is named in the suit along with his wife, four other family members, two other farms and 50 unnamed defendants. Also listed in the suit is a separate farm owned by the family, Lone Star Dairy, in which the congressman has no stake.

Both sides agreed March 28 to hand control of the farm over to the bank until it is sold. The bank appointed a local business owner to oversee the daily operations of the farm and begin to sell off livestock and farming equipment to settle the debt.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Experts on California election panel warn of ‘voter fatigue’

Assemblywoman Former Assembly Republican leader Kristin Olsen, shown when she was still in office, warned Monday of voter fatigue.
Assemblywoman Former Assembly Republican leader Kristin Olsen, shown when she was still in office, warned Monday of voter fatigue.
(Marcus Yam / Los Angeles Times)

Californians are suffering from “voter fatigue,” so candidates who survived the June 5 primary will have to hone their message to better address specific issues and provide solutions for problems if they want to connect with the electorate in November, members of a panel of political experts said Monday.

Campaign workers found stacks of unread campaign mail on porches and in mailboxes and volunteers had trouble getting voters to open their doors and respond to canvassers, according to Bill Wong, a political consultant for Assembly Democrats.

“The voters are very disengaged. They weren’t answering phones,” Wong said during a forum on the election sponsored by California Target Book. “Clearly we are not connecting with voters and if we don’t do that in November we’re going to be in deep trouble.”

Asked about the decline in GOP voter registration, former Republican Assembly leader Kristin Olsen said the increase in the number of Californians registering with “no party preference” is a warning sign.

“What it does show is that they are fed up with both parties,” she said, adding there is “voter fatigue” in the electorate brought on partly by a lack of civility in political debate.

Republican consultant Richard Temple predicted a proposed initiative to repeal an increase in the state gas tax could be a significant issue to bring out Republican voters in the November election.

“I think that will have a greater impact on turnout” than having Republican candidates on the top of the ballot, he said.

Share

Initiative to legalize sports betting in California proposed for 2020 ballot

Guests line up to place bets at the sports book at the Westgate Las Vegas Resort & Casino in March.
(Ethan Miller / Getty Images)

An initiative to legalize sports betting in the state was proposed Monday for the November 2020 ballot by a political consultant working with California card clubs, online and out-of-state gambling firms and sports leagues.

Russell Lowery said he approached the gaming industry and received interest in a ballot measure from half a dozen firms, so he submitted a formal request Monday to the state attorney general’s office to prepare a title and summary for a possible initiative.

“I think the biggest reason for this is consumer protection. It’s going on now,” Lowery said of betting on sports. “Because of the revenue the state could generate from legal activity plus the consumer protections that could be afforded the gambling public, it ought to be regulated.”

The proposal comes a month after the U.S. Supreme Court lifted a federal ban on sports wagering, and it is separate from a bill pending in the California Legislature.

Because talks are in the initial stage, Lowery said he cannot yet make public the identity of the gambling firms that have expressed interest in a ballot measure, which the formal filing calls the Gaming Fairness and Accountability Act.

“I reached out to in-state gaming interests, out-of-state gaming interests and the sports leagues,” he said. “There was enough interest to try to build a coalition that was more viable.”

Share
Advertisement

John Cox says Trump will campaign for him in California governor’s race

Republican gubernatorial candidate John Cox.
Republican gubernatorial candidate John Cox.
(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

Republican gubernatorial candidate John Cox said Monday that President Trump would travel to California to campaign for him in his bid to defeat Democrat Gavin Newsom in the November general election.

“Gavin Newsom is going to make this race all about President Trump. Well, you know what, I welcome it,” Cox told GOP supporters at a hotel in San Diego. “President Trump is going to come here and campaign for me and for you!”

The Rancho Santa Fe businessman, who snagged the second spot in last week’s primary to move on to the general election, was speaking to a San Diego GOP monthly gathering at the Town and Country Resort alongside other Republican statewide candidates who made it past Tuesday’s election, including Secretary of State candidate Mark Meuser.

It’s unclear how much of a boost a Trump campaign appearance would give Cox — the president is viewed unfavorably in California. And though presidents of both parties have spent significant amounts of time in California raising money, in recent years they have spent little effort publicly stumping for gubernatorial candidates.

A White House spokesman did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Cox’s campaign did not offer any additional details when asked about the president’s plans Monday evening.

“We’ve been talking to the White House and they’ve expressed interest in coming out,” Cox spokesman Matt Shupe said. “There’s no set date.”

Trump’s endorsement played a major role in Cox’s ability to consolidate the GOP vote in the lead-up to the June 5 primary.

Though Cox did not vote for Trump in the 2016 election — he cast his ballot for Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson — Trump endorsed Cox as part of an effort to ensure Republicans would have a candidate at the top of the ticket in November, driving GOP turnout in an effort to help California Republicans in the U.S. House whose reelection is key to the party holding on to control of Congress.

Newsom’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment Monday night, but the Democrat did respond to Trump’s tweet congratulating Cox on his second-place finish last week.

“Please come campaign for him as much as possible,” Newsom tweeted in response to Trump early Wednesday.

Share

Recalled state senator criticizes GOP colleagues for his ouster, says recall process was abused

Sen. Josh Newman (D-Fullerton), shown last year, spoke angrily Monday about being recalled on June 5.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

Just days after voters acted to recall him from office, state Sen. Josh Newman (D-Fullerton) on Monday condemned Republican members of the Senate in an angry floor speech for what he said was their failure to stand up against a deceptive campaign by GOP operatives to oust him from office.

Newman said the campaign got voters to sign the recall petitions by saying it would repeal a gas-tax increase and they unfairly blamed him for the tax, even though many others, including a Republican senator, voted for the measure.

“It saddens me colleagues, Republican colleagues, that despite all your nice sotto voce words, not a single one of you had the integrity, the decency or the courage to say this is wrong… this is an abuse of the recall process,” Newman said in a speech toward the close of the day’s session.

Newman accused his opponents of “defamatory lies,” trespassing on his property and making threats against his wife and child. He said some Republican senators came up to him before the June 5 vote and said there was nothing personal about the recall.

“Getting someone thrown out of their job... is pretty personal,” said Newman, who must step down when the votes are certified next month.

He said state recall law exists for cases where legislators engage in malfeasance.

“No such thing has happened here,” Newman said. “Rather a series of loopholes in the recall process has been mined and exploited, a sort of hacking of our government code.”

“You sat idly by fellow members, some of you,” he said, adding some “actively abetted this abuse. This is an abrogation of your solemn obligation under the oath that you took.”

Share
Advertisement

Two Democrats sworn into office to replace California assemblymen accused of sexual misconduct

Luz Rivas, center, was sworn into the state Assembly on Monday.
(Jazmine Ulloa / Los Angeles Times)

The state Assembly on Monday welcomed Democrats Luz Rivas and Jesse Gabriel, who were sworn in after winning special elections last week to replace two former San Fernando Valley members accused of sexual misconduct.

Rivas, a science educator and Los Angeles Public Works commissioner, will fill the remaining term of former Democratic Assemblymen Raul Bocanegra in the 39th district. Gabriel, an Encino attorney with degrees from UC Berkeley and Harvard, will take over for former state Assemblyman Matt Dababneh, a Democrat, in the 45th district.

Nearly 150 women last year came forward to denounce what they called a culture of sexual harassment within the state Capitol community. The movement led to an overhaul of policies within the California Legislature and to the resignations of Bocanegra and Dababneh after multiple women reported allegations of harassment and misconduct.

In ceremonies Monday, Rivas, whose district includes Sylmar, Sun Valley and North Hollywood, touted the state’s tech sector and pledged to devote herself to removing barriers to housing and other economic obstacles that keep public school students from pursuing careers in science and tech.

“The future Steve Jobs and Elon Musks are right now in elementary school in Paicoma, Arleta, Sun Valley, North Hollywood,” she said. ”I am ready to lead with the training of an engineer, the heart and passion of an educator and the courage and instinct of a public servant.”

Gabriel, who will oversee a region spanning Hidden Hills, Canoga Park and Northridge, stressed the need to stand up to a hostile Washington administration that he said threatens California values.

He said he looked forward to working with lawmakers to “ensure all Californians, regardless of background or status, can enjoy the opportunities that drew my great-grandfather and millions of others to the Golden State.”

Gabriel and Rivas were among the top fundraisers in their races and were aided by outside spending from a pro-charter school group called California Charter Schools Assn. Advocates. Rivas benefited from $595,000 in support; Gabriel received $292,000.

Share

Budget dispute hinders state crackdown on illicit marijuana market in California

(Marcio Jose Sanchez / Associated Press)

A dispute between the governor and lawmakers over how to pay for a crackdown on the illicit marijuana market in California has resulted in the $14 million for the effort being left out of a proposed budget, officials said.

Last month, Gov. Jerry Brown proposed the funding to create five teams in the state attorney general’s office to investigate California’s black market for marijuana. The proposal was made after businesses with state licenses warned that they are at a competitive disadvantage against illicit growers and sellers.

However, a budget plan negotiated between legislators and the governor did not include the funding. The Legislature will vote on the plan this week.

The loss of the funding “disappointed” the California Cannabis Industry Assn. (CCIA), according to Amy Jenkins, a spokeswoman for the group.

“Since the rollout of the state licensing framework earlier this year, CCIA has consistently maintained that additional resources are critically needed to ensure that lawful cannabis businesses can successfully compete in the California marketplace,” Jenkins said.

So what happened?

“The Legislature didn’t approve it,” said H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for the state Department of Finance.

Kevin Liao, a spokesman for Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, offered a different take.

“The Assembly supports these cannabis enforcement units and proposed the units be funded through the General Fund due to concerns they are an ineligible use of Cannabis Tax Fund dollars,” Liao said in a statement. “The administration rejected that proposal.”

Jenkins said her group would continue to work with state leaders to find a way to increase enforcement against the illicit market.

Share
Advertisement

Second member resigns from California campaign finance watchdog panel

The dome of the California Capitol in Sacramento is lighted up.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

For the second time in a month, a member of the state’s campaign finance watchdog agency has resigned, officials said Monday.

Commissioner Maria Audero, a Los Angeles attorney, said in a letter submitted to the governor on Friday that she was quitting the state Fair Political Practices Commission before her term ends to accept an appointment as a U.S. magistrate judge.

“Though it saddens me that this appointment precludes me from completing my term as commissioner, I look forward to this new path of public service,” Audero said in a letter three years after her appointment.

Audero’s departure comes two weeks after Commission Chairwoman Jodi Remke resigned to take another state position. The panel has been locked in a power struggle in which Audero and other commissioners took some authority from the full-time chairperson’s position and gave a bigger role on budgets, legal issues and policy changes to the other panel members who will serve on two committees.

Audero also said she was proud that the FPPC agreed this month to create a task force to review the agency’s enforcement policies, although some observers have worried it might result in fewer penalties against lobbyists and politicians who violate state laws.

“I believe that this initiative, requested by our constituency for years, will help build the strong bridges that are critical to the commission’s ability to carry out its mission with credibility and public trust,” Audero wrote. “I leave my position with the hope that your administration will support this much needed effort.”

Share

California Assembly speaker backs Feinstein for U.S. Senate

Share
Advertisement

L.A. County registrar seeks independent review on thousands of people not listed on voter rosters

The Los Angeles County elections chief said Friday that he was seeking an independent review after more than 118,000 people were left off voter rosters this week.

State and county leaders had demanded answers after the massive error led to confusion and frustration at the polls. The foul-up affected roughly 2.3% of registered voters across the county and 35% of its polling places.

Los Angeles Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk Dean C. Logan said it was “critical” to get an independent assessment of what had occurred.

Read More

Share

California Politics Podcast: A closer look at the June primary results

On this week’s episode of the California Politics Podcast, we dive deep into the results from last week’s biggest statewide races.

The race for governor and U.S. Senate offered fascinating glimpses into the impact of the state’s top-two primary system. And now, the stage is set for one-on-one showdowns in November for these races and a handful of key contests for the House of Representatives.

Share
Advertisement

Lindsey Buckingham to headline star-studded fundraiser for Democratic candidates

Lindsey Buckingham will perform at a meet-and-greet fundraiser for Democratic congressional hopefuls.
Lindsey Buckingham will perform at a meet-and-greet fundraiser for Democratic congressional hopefuls.
(Luis Sinco / Los Angeles Times)

A star-studded fundraiser for Democratic candidates in key House races is scheduled for next month.

Former Fleetwood Mac lead guitarist Lindsey Buckingham will perform at the Los Angeles home of California Coastal Commissioner Chair Dayna Bochco on July 31.

The event’s co-hosts include directors Cameron Crowe and Callie Khouri, affordable housing developer Tom Safran, producers Doug Wick and Bill Mechanic and “Game of Thrones” co-creator David Benioff.

“The road to take back the House of Representatives runs through California,” Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Torrance) wrote in an email invitation. “You can meet all eight of our wonderful red-to-blue candidates in one place … eight terrific candidates. Awesome songs. Amazing people.”

Donations will go to the newly created California Candidates Victory Fund, a joint fundraising committee for these congressional hopefuls in the state: Gil Cisneros, T.J. Cox, Josh Harder, Katie Hill, Mike Levin and Katie Porter.

The candidates are all competing in races former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton won in 2016. Andrew Janz also is participating in the fundraiser. He’s running against Rep. Devin Nunes in the 22nd Congressional District, which Clinton lost.

There is still a contested race between real estate investor Harley Rouda and stem cell scientist Hans Keirstead in the 48th Congressional District race. On Friday afternoon, only 20 votes separated the two candidates. Whoever is declared the victor will get a portion the funds raised at this event.

Share

Clippers ask Legislature for help with proposed Inglewood arena

The Clippers are again asking state lawmakers to help them speed up construction of the team’s proposed arena in Inglewood.

Assemblywoman Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Los Angeles), whose district includes Inglewood, introduced new legislation that would provide shortcuts for approval should the arena proposal face challenges under California’s primary environmental law governing development.

The bill would encourage judges to decide any lawsuit under the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA, within nine months and prohibit a judge from stopping construction on the arena unless there were imminent life and safety risks.

“We are committed to really investing in the city of Inglewood knowing that its surrounding cities and ZIP codes will also benefit,” Kamlager-Dove said.

The legislation, AB 987, follows a failed attempt last year to provide even greater benefits under the environmental law for the Clippers’ plan. Lawsuits under CEQA can frequently tie up or kill projects, and the team is hoping lawmakers will grant them some legal relief.

The Clippers, currently share the AEG-owned Staples Center in downtown Los Angeles with the Lakers. The team’s lease runs through the 2024 season. Owner Steve Ballmer has said the Clippers will honor it, and the team has not unveiled renderings or other site plans for their Inglewood proposal, which would be next to the under-construction NFL stadium for the Rams and Chargers.

“We are committed to giving Clippers fans an unparalleled basketball experience, in an arena that will become a destination and a draw for the community, fans and athletes alike,” Ballmer said in a statement announcing the bill. “We believe the place to realize that vision for the future is here in Inglewood.”

Last year’s arena legislation failed after furious lobbying by Madison Square Garden Co., owner of Inglewood’s Forum, which would be a competitor to any Clippers facility in the city. More than three-quarters of the $1 million spent on lobbying over last year’s bill came from MSG Co. Earlier this year, the company sued the city of Inglewood and a Clippers-controlled company over the arena plans.

In a statement, the company blasted the legislation, saying that it eroded the state’s strong environmental protections and climate change regulations.

“Ultimately, this bill makes a mockery of existing laws in place to protect residents and the environment,” the statement said.

Kamlager-Dove said she spoke with representatives of the Forum prior to introducing the bill, and the company wasn’t pleased it might affect their financial investment.

“No one likes people messing with their paper,” Kamlager-Dove said of Madison Square Garden Co.’s reaction to the legislation. “But ultimately this is about the city of Inglewood and jobs.”

AB 987 is the second bill introduced this week that aims to help a professional sports team with potential CEQA litigation. A Bay Area lawmaker introduced legislation to speed up the environmental review for a proposed Oakland A’s ballpark.

4:21 p.m.: This story was updated with a statement from the Forum.

This article was originally posted at 2:32 p.m.

Share
Advertisement

California housing crisis podcast: What the election means for housing affordability

The results of California’s gubernatorial primary means the state’s next governor has big promises to fulfill on housing affordability.

Democratic Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom has set a goal for developers to build 500,000 new homes annually for the next seven years — a number the state has never reached since the building industry began keeping statistics in the mid-1950s. Not to be outdone, Republican businessman John Cox wants 300,000 new homes built every year, a level of production that far outpaces the state’s current rate. Both agree that the state needs a lot of new homes to keep pace with soaring demand.

On this episode of Gimme Shelter: The California Housing Crisis Pod, we talk about the differences between Newsom and Cox’s housing plans and round up action in the Legislature on key housing production and tenant bills.

Gimme Shelter,” a biweekly podcast that looks at why it’s so expensive to live in California and what the state can do about it, features Liam Dillon, who covers housing affordability issues for the Los Angeles Times’ Sacramento bureau, and Matt Levin, data reporter for CALmatters.

You can subscribe to “Gimme Shelter” on iTunes, Stitcher, Soundcloud, Google Play and Overcast.

Share

In the heart of the Central Valley, a push to get Latino voters to the polls

Mary Gonzales Gomez at her home, the campaign base of the Kings County Latino Roundtable.
Mary Gonzales Gomez at her home, the campaign base of the Kings County Latino Roundtable.
(Jazmine Ulloa / Los Angeles Times)

In a city most known for its prison and farmland, the modest, one-story home of Mary and Raul Gomez has the feel of the quintessential American dream with its trimmed green lawn, little porch and white picket fence. In the driveway, there’s even a remodeled 1968 black Chevrolet Biscayne visible from Dairy Avenue.

For 20 years, it also has served to foster a truly American value — the civic duty of voting — as the campaign headquarters for the Kings County Latino Roundtable. There, in a shaded backyard decked with Oakland Raiders memorabilia, members meet over hot dogs and cold beverages to strategize voter canvassing routes, host candidate meet-and-greets and craft their trusted election guide — logistics for the crucial task of getting Latinos to cast ballots.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Three former Obama aides advance in California primaries

Eleni Kounalakis, the U.S. ambassador to Hungary under President Obama, secured the top spot in the lieutenant governor race on Tuesday.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

Three candidates who formerly worked for President Obama advanced in California’s primary election Tuesday.

Obama administration alumni rallied to help their former colleagues in a number of races across the country. Seven such candidates were on the California ballot. Three prevailed.

Democratic fundraiser Eleni Kounalakis, who served as U.S. ambassador to Hungary, finished first in the contest for lieutenant governor with 23% of the vote. Bay Area attorney Jeff Bleich, who was the U.S. ambassador to Australia, was fourth with 9% pending the final count of mail-in ballots and won’t advance to the November general election.

In the crowded 15th Assembly District, former Obama aide Buffy Wicks finished in first place with 31%. She earned more than twice the votes of the candidates vying for the second spot on the November ballot: Oakland City Councilman Dan Kalb and Richmond Councilwoman Jovanka Beckles.

Ammar Campa-Najjar, a former White House intern who later worked at the Labor Department, secured a top-two finish in the 50th Congressional District. He will face Rep. Duncan Hunter, who won 49% of the votes compared with Campa-Najjar’s 16%.

Not making it past Tuesday were state Assembly candidate Steve Dunwoody and congressional hopefuls Brian Forde and Sam Jammal.

Giselle Hale, who was a field director for the Obama campaign, is running for Redwood City Council this fall.

Share

California Legislature could give boost to new Oakland A’s ballpark

One option the A's are considering for a new stadium is redeveloping the site of their current home, Oakland Coliseum.
(D. Ross Cameron / Associated Press)

A proposed new ballpark for the Oakland A’s would have an easier path to construction through new legislation introduced this week.

Assembly Bill 734 from Assemblyman Rob Bonta (D-Alameda) would provide shortcuts to approval should the ballpark proposal face challenges under California’s primary environmental law governing development. The bill would encourage judges to decide any lawsuit under the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA, within nine months and prohibit a judge from stopping construction on the ballpark unless there were imminent life and safety risks.

“It’s a great project that will create good jobs and benefit the city of Oakland,” Bonta said.

The bill continues the parade of legislation introduced in recent years to benefit new stadiums for California professional sports teams. The lion’s share of those bills have aimed to provide some relief under CEQA, typically by trying to speed up the resolution of lawsuits against the projects. CEQA requires developers to disclose and minimize a project’s environmental consequences, and legal battles over those findings can drag on for some time.

Bonta’s bill offers CEQA relief similar to what the Legislature provided the Sacramento Kings in 2013 to help the NBA team build a new arena downtown. That legislation, which also limited a judge’s ability to stop construction, was more aggressive than other versions of CEQA benefits passed to support stadiums and other megaprojects, such as large condominium towers.

Such legislation has not led to the construction of many new stadiums. Still, the bills often face criticism for providing advantages under the environmental law to large developers that others don’t receive.

AB 734 would apply to both sites the A’s are considering for the new ballpark: the redevelopment of the existing Oakland Coliseum and at Howard Terminal on Oakland’s port.

Team President Dave Kaval said he was happy that Bonta agreed to back the bill, saying it was vital for the team to have firmer deadlines about its environmental review if it wants to open the stadium by its 2023 goal.

“Without this type of legislation things can linger for years and years and years,” Kaval said.

Share
Advertisement

Looking for election coverage? Visit the primary day liveblog

We’re covering the California primary live over here.

Find statewide results here.

And here’s everything you need to know about the election.

Read More

Share

Villaraigosa hits Port of L.A. and soul food restaurant to persuade voters to turn out on election day

Gubernatorial candidate Antonio Villaraigosa put on an apron and served customers Monday while campaigning at Dulan's Soul Food on Crenshaw.
(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

Democrat Antonio Villaraigosa began his final campaign sprint on Monday shaking hands with Bay Area commuters streaming on and off BART trains before flying south and heading to San Pedro.

Villaraigosa visited the Port of Los Angeles for a tour of the AltaSea marine research center. The trip also provided the candidate with a picturesque backdrop for a series of local and national television interviews in the final push of his campaign for California governor.

Villaraigosa was quick to take a shot at Republican John Cox for having the support of President Trump, who remains unpopular in California along with his policies on immigration and healthcare. Recent polls show Cox is in second place behind Democratic front-runner Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom and is the candidate Villaraigosa needs to beat on Tuesday to advance to the November election.

The former two-term mayor of Los Angeles also acknowledged that his fate in the election rests on high turnout among his bases of support, including Latinos and Los Angeles voters. Both groups tend to vote in low numbers in primary elections, and far below voters in the Bay Area, a major base of support for Newsom, the former mayor of San Francisco.

“Look, I was mayor of L.A. This is where a good portion of my support is,” he said. “So, I’ve got to get L.A. to vote, and I’ve got to get L.A. to remember, this Southern California area is two-thirds of the state, and we get outvoted pretty frequently.”

Villaraigosa and his entourage, including family members and his campaign staff, then dashed off to Dulan’s Soul Food on Crenshaw Boulevard in Los Angeles, where he was accompanied by Rep. Karen Bass (D-Los Angeles) and Los Angeles City Council President Herb Wesson.

Villaraigosa went table to table shaking hands and chatting with the lunch crowd before he went behind the counter and started dishing out food to customers.

Ashlee Withers, who just graduated from Cal Poly Pomona, spent a few minutes talking with Villaraigosa. She plans to vote for him, saying she was impressed with the job he did as mayor of Los Angeles during the height of the recession.

“For him to be governor, I think it would be good for all of California,” said Withers, 25, who grew up in Los Angeles.

Withers, who majored in sociology and said she wants to be a policymaker, also asked Villaraigosa about getting a job with his administration if he’s elected.

“He said he’d give me an interview when he becomes governor,” she said.

Share
Advertisement

Republican John Cox predicts a general-election fight with Democrat Gavin Newsom over the gas tax

GOP gubernatorial candidate John Cox and his wife, Sarah, turn in their ballots after voting at the San Diego Registrar of Voters on Monday.
(K.C. Alfred / San Diego Union-Tribune)

Republican candidate for governor John Cox expressed confidence that he would place in the top two in Tuesday’s primary and face off against Democratic front-runner Gavin Newsom in November.

“I’m energized and if the polls are right, I’m going to get the chance to make my case to the voters that Gavin Newsom is going to raise your taxes,” Cox said in an interview after greeting GOP voters at a luncheon in San Diego. “He’s going to raise your property taxes, double the state income tax, he’s going to defend the regressive, horrible gas tax that impacts the working people of this state and drives up gasoline costs, and he’s going to have to defend the mismanagement of the state.”

Cox also voted Monday and planned to visit a phone bank in Corona with Assembly candidate Bill Essayli, who is running for the 60th Assembly District.

Cox has one main GOP rival in the race, Assemblyman Travis Allen of Huntington Beach. But he started consolidating the GOP vote once he received the endorsement of President Trump.

“Let’s face it — I need to get better known,” the Rancho Santa Fe businessman said. “And the president’s tweets helped get me better known. Obviously he’s got the largest bully pulpit in the world in the Twitter following he’s got. That’s certainly powerful.”

No Republican has been elected statewide since 2006, but Cox argued that voters recognize that California is overdue for change.

“They’ve had enough,” he said, noting that a Democrat called into a radio program earlier in the day frustrated after paying $4.10 per gallon to fill up his car, a price he blamed on the new gas tax Cox is trying to repeal at the ballot box in November. “The affordability, which includes the gas tax, is going to be a major issue.”

Share

Newsom greets Inglewood voters on eve of election: ‘We’re going to win or lose this race through Los Angeles County’

Gavin Newsom with his wife Jennifer Siebel Newsom, right, greet Andre Truth, left, and Zhani Jackson at The Serving Spoon in Inglewood.
(Al Seib / Los Angeles Times)

Gubernatorial front-runner Gavin Newsom said he felt confident about his chances in Tuesday’s primary election, but was taking nothing for granted as he greeted voters at a diner in Inglewood on Monday.

“I feel good,” the lieutenant governor told reporters at the Serving Spoon. “At this stage, it’s just about getting out the vote. … Polls don’t vote, people vote, and that means all this is academic until people get out there, send their ballots in, or show up on election day.”

The former San Francisco mayor kicked off the day with a television appearance in Los Angeles before heading to Inglewood with Los Angeles County Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas. The region’s voters are critical to the campaign of former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, and Newsom has spent considerable time here trying to edge his Democratic rival.

“We’re going to win or lose this race through Los Angeles County,” Newsom said. “This is determinative. Success or failure will be born of what happens down here.”

Earlier, Newsom and his wife split a cinnamon-dusted waffle.

“I haven’t had waffles in forever. Eggos we have at home, frozen waffles. I want a real waffle,” Newsom said. “I never get to eat what I want, this is good.”

Vinnessa Cook, an administrative assistant from Leimert Park, told Newsom she planned on voting for him.

“I’m grateful,” Newsom replied.

Cook said she supported Newsom because of his leadership of efforts to place new restrictions on guns as lieutenant governor, and for his decision to issue same-sex marriage licenses as mayor.

“He’s a good guy,” she said.

Asked about Villaraigosa, the 47-year-old rolled her eyes.

“I feel like the city got in financial trouble because of him,” she said.

“And he laid off my neighbor,” who was among the employees laid off from the Department of Public Social Services during the recession, Cook said.

Newsom planned to spend the rest of the day campaigning in San Diego and the Bay Area, visiting the trifecta of the state’s largest media markets.

Share
Advertisement

California campaign watchdog panel ends power struggle with sweeping changes to commission structure

The dome of the California Capitol in Sacramento is lighted up.
The dome of the California Capitol in Sacramento is lighted up.
( (Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press))

Just days after the chairwoman of California’s campaign watchdog agency abruptly quit, an internal power struggle came to a head Monday with its governing board restructuring itself to transfer powers from the chairperson to other members.

The remaining four members of the state Fair Political Practices Commission decided to shift some powers over budget, personnel, legal and policy matters from a full-time chair to the other four commissioners, who are part-time appointees and could meet behind closed doors as two-person committees to mull key issues.

Former Chairwoman Jodi Remke voiced concerns about the proposal last Friday as she resigned from her appointment, made by Gov. Jerry Brown.

Peter A. Krause, Brown’s legal affairs secretary, said in a recent letter that the changes “risk undermining and impeding the important work of the commission.” Remke has called the transfer of power “legally problematic and impracticable.”

On Monday, Commissioner Frank Cardenas indicated that the changes sprung from recent clashes between Remke and some other commissioners, who have complained they were not included enough in her key budget and policy decisions.

“The disagreeable nature of our departed chair had a hell of a lot to do with the motivation and the design of the changes that are on the table today,” Cardenas said during a special FPPC meeting.

Allison Hayward, the acting chair of the commission, said the restructuring “will better integrate the part-time commissioners into the management of the commission, improve oversight and transparency, and thus better serve the people of California.”

The change has received a flood of support from organized labor in the last few days. Valentina Joyce, who was commission counsel to the panel until last year, was among those objecting, saying it would hinder the agency from taking action against those who violate campaign finance and ethics laws.

“The regulations will tie the hands of future staff, waste future resources and benefit those in the ‘regulated community,’ who are happy when the FPPC is too busy shuffling papers to go after big violators, lobby the Legislature for higher penalties” or push for more disclosure, Joyce wrote in a letter to the panel.

Commissioners said their intent is for the public to have access to the workings of the committees, but Joyce said excluding the panels from state open meeting laws would allow “total secrecy” for committee meetings. She also suggested commissioners have “personal animosity” against Remke.

The restructuring was supported by labor groups, including the State Council of the Service Employees International Union, the state Labor Coalition, the California School Employees Assn. and the State Coalition of Probation Officers.

In nearly identical letters, the groups said the current structure “vests inordinate power” with the chairperson, who controls agendas and directs staff. “The proposed governance regulations are sensible, fair and provide a balance of power on the commission,” the four letters said, including one signed by Dave Low, executive director of the school employees group.

California Common Cause supported the concept of the reorganization, but also is concerned about excluding the committees from state public meeting laws, said Nicolas Heidorn, policy and legal director for the group.

Share

Pelosi plans pricey post-primary fundraiser for California Democrats

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, center left, and California Gov. Jerry Brown, center, at the Democratic National Convention in 2016.
(Carolyn Cole / Los Angeles Times)

While Democrats campaign down to the wire, hoping to ensure their candidates are not kept out of crucial House races by California’s top-two primary, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is thinking ahead as party leaders plot their path.

Pelosi and Gov. Jerry Brown will headline a high-dollar fundraiser in Beverly Hills on June 18, less than two weeks after Tuesday’s primary.

The event is being hosted by film mogul Jeffrey Katzenberg and his wife, Marilyn, at Spago — Wolfgang Puck’s flagship restaurant — and tickets are $25,000, according to an invitation obtained by The Times. Tickets for event co-chairs are going for $250,000, the invite says.

Proceeds will benefit the House Majority PAC, a super PAC with close ties to Pelosi that has already spent $1.3 million trying to avert a top-two disaster in three Orange County districts. Attendees will include Democratic nominees in targeted House races in California, according to the invite.

Democrats are targeting more than a half-dozen GOP-held congressional seats in California and have said flipping several of them is essential in order for the party to take back the House this fall.

Share
Advertisement

Villaraigosa spends Sunday at L.A. churches, asking for prayers and reminding congregations he’s no newcomer

As he waited in the wings to take the stage at Gardena’s City of Refuge church, Democrat Antonio Villaraigosa started swinging his hips and grooving in place as the choir belted out an extended version of the gospel song “He Got Up.”

The cavernous sanctuary was his last stop in a morning full of visits to African American churches in the Los Angeles area Sunday on the final weekend before election day. His top rival in the race for California governor, Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, was hopscotching from church to church in the city as well.

Villaraigosa apologized from the pulpit for his short visit, blaming it on the whirlwind campaign season. He reminded churchgoers that he wasn’t a newcomer.

“I’ve been coming here for 25 years. This isn’t my first visit,” Villaraigosa said. “I don’t do drive-by fellowship. I come and stay.”

The former two-term mayor of Los Angeles used a similar line earlier that morning at Mt. Moriah Baptist Church in South Los Angeles, where he has also been a frequent visitor. The comment was likely a subtle swipe at Newsom’s string of L.A. church visits that morning.

He asked the congregation for their prayers after delivering a brief speech on how quality public schools are critical to lifting children out of poverty.

“Too many of our schools have been failing our kids for too long,” said Villaraigosa, who arrived with his wife, Patricia, and a few of his children.

He praised the leader of City of Refuge, Bishop Noel Jones, saying he offered words of comfort during a difficult time.

“I’ve made my mistakes. And he stood right here alongside of me and said God believes in redemption,” Villaraigosa said. “God believes when you make mistakes, you get up, take the blood off your knees and keep on climbing up that mountain.”

Villaraigosa began the day at Agape International Spiritual Center in Culver City. He also dropped in on Teamsters Local 630 and headed in the afternoon to Zacatecas Café in Riverside for an event with local candidates.

Villaraigosa was scheduled to fly to San Jose on Sunday afternoon for more campaign stops.

Earlier at Mt. Moriah, Villaraigosa was introduced by Rep. Karen Bass (D-Los Angeles), a longtime friend who has endorsed him for governor. She recounted how they both spent their youth fighting for civil rights in Los Angeles.

“His struggle is our struggle,” she told the congregation.

Carol Alexander, 70, was waiting by the exit when Villaraigosa left. She’s already voted for him by mail and wanted to get his picture before he dashed off.

“He’s been to our church many times before,” said Alexander, a retired nurse educator. “I like Gavin, but he’s fallen down on the job a bit. I just think he could have done a lot more.”

Photo gallery: On the campaign trail

Share

Newsom campaigns on Villaraigosa’s turf, greeting Los Angeles worshipers at Sunday services

Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom campaigns at Greater Zion Church Family church in Compton on Sunday.
(Jay Clendenin/Los Angeles Times)

Gubernatorial front-runner Gavin Newsom visited African American churches Sunday morning, greeting worshipers, clapping along as gospel choirs sang and invoking Martin Luther King Jr. as he spoke of the economic divide in California.

“The Bible teaches us many things, but nothing more important to me than this: The Bible teaches us we are many parts but one body, and when one part suffers, we all suffer,” Newsom told worshipers at the Greater Zion Church Family in Compton, drawing shouts of “Amen!” from the pews.

The lieutenant governor noted that eight million Californians, including two million children, live beneath the poverty line.

“Like Dr. King said, we are all bound together by a web of mutuality,” Newsom said. “There’s no leak on your side of our boat. We rise and fall together.”

Visiting black churches in the Los Angeles area is a tradition for candidates in the lead-up to an election. Voters will be heading to the polls on Tuesday.

Newsom leads all polling and fundraising in the governor’s race, and he is campaigning hard in the Los Angeles area in an attempt to outperform former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa on his turf. African American voters were part of the coalition that propelled Villaraigosa into the mayor’s office in 2005.

The Baptist church was Newsom’s fourth stop of the day. He also visited houses of worship in Carson and Long Beach, accompanied at times by Los Angeles County Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas, NAACP leader Alice Huffman, SEIU 2015 president Laphonza Butler and wife Jennifer Siebel Newsom.

As the Greater Zion Church Family’s award-winning choir performed, Jennifer Siebel Newsom leapt to her feet and danced as Newsom clapped along and tapped his brown wingtip shoe.

The Rev. Michael Fisher noted that Newsom had frequently visited his church as he introduced him.

“Y’all know those Oreos that are reverse Oreos?” Fisher said. “He’s white on the outside but he got some chocolate inside him.”

Later in the day, Newsom planned to visit Vietnamese American voters in Westminster and Latino voters in East Los Angeles before holding a rally in Hollywood where he will be introduced by Lance Bass of former boy-band NSYNC.

Photo gallery: On the campaign trail

Share
Advertisement

Antonio Villaraigosa’s allies add $1.7 million to their late campaign attacks on Gavin Newsom

Antonio Villaraigosa, the former mayor of Los Angeles, speaks with students from Hayward's Tennyson High School in San Francisco.
Antonio Villaraigosa, the former mayor of Los Angeles, speaks with students from Hayward’s Tennyson High School in San Francisco.
(Marcio Jose Sanchez / Associated Press)

Wealthy supporters of Antonio Villaraigosa reported Saturday spending an additional $1.7 million to oppose Gavin Newsom, bringing their total efforts against the Democratic front-runner to more than $4 million in less than one week, according to campaign finance reports filed with the state.

The money was spent by the independent political committee called Families & Teachers for Antonio Villaraigosa for Governor 2018, funded largely by more than a dozen billionaires and multimillionaires who back charter schools and oppose the agenda of teachers unions. In all, the group has raised roughly $23 million.

The bulk of the money — $16.5 million — was initially spent promoting Villaraigosa’s candidacy. The committee also spent $1.9 million opposing Republican candidate John Cox, whom Villaraigosa is battling for second place in the June 5 top-two primary, and $241,000 to support Republican Travis Allen, part of an effort to divide the GOP vote and boost Villaraigosa’s chances of advancing to the November runoff.

But on Monday, the group turned its fire on Newsom, the long-established front-runner in the race, using a barrage of television ads to argue that he has been a feckless leader.

A spokesman for the pro-Villaraigosa group said it was driven to attack Newsom because of efforts by his campaign and its allies to promote Cox while attacking Villaraigosa and state Treasurer John Chiang, another Democrat in the race.

“After Newsom has spent millions attacking Democrats and boosting Cox, we had no other choice,” the group’s spokesman, Josh Pulliam, said earlier this week.

Dan Newman, an advisor to Newsom, scoffed at the efforts, invoking billionaire Meg Whitman’s unsuccessful $178.5-million gubernatorial bid in 2010, as well as the independent political action committee that spent more than $100 million in support of former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush’s 2016 presidential campaign.

“It’s the billionaire spawn of Meg Whitman and Jeb Bush’s Super PAC,” Newman said.

The infusion of cash comes as all the major candidates barnstorm the state in the final hours of the statewide primary campaign. Recent polls have shown Villaraigosa in third place, behind Newsom and Cox.

Share

Three dark horse candidates to watch in California’s U.S. Senate race

Pat Harris
(Emma McIntyre / Getty Images)

Sen. Dianne Feinstein is expected to get through Tuesday’s primary without trouble, and polls say fellow Democratic state Sen. Kevin de León is the most likely to grab second place and become her opponent on the November ballot.

But several recent surveys have shown other candidates with some support in the crowded field of 32.

In the latest, a Berkeley IGS poll released on Friday, Feinstein was favored by 36% of likely voters, while De León was in second with 11%. Republican James P. Bradley was close behind, though, with 7%. And about 25% of voters were undecided.

Here’s a little bit about the candidates who have consistently drawn some support in recent polls:

James P. Bradley, 60, of Laguna Nigel
The Republican Bradley is a bit of an unexpected possibility. He hasn’t raised enough money to be forced to file a campaign finance report with the Federal Election Commission, but he’s come in third in at least three polls in recent weeks.

Bradley is the chief financial officer of a small healthcare company and served in the Coast Guard. He has no previous political experience. Bradley told the Sacramento Bee that he registered as a Republican in March after voting as no party preference for years. His campaign website refers to him as “a Trumpian.”

Pat Harris, 60, of Studio City
Harris, a Democratic civil rights attorney, casts himself as the progressive candidate in the race. He’s largely self-funded his campaign, which has crisscrossed the state in a retrofitted school bus. An Emerson College poll found Harris with 6% support, tied with De León for second place.

Erin Cruz, 41, of Palm Springs
Cruz, a Republican author, said she became active in the tea party during the Obama administration because of her concerns about the Affordable Care Act. She backs President Trump and is running on lowering taxes. Cruz had 5% in that Emerson College poll.

Share
Advertisement

California Politics Podcast: And now, the June primary

After months of campaign events and millions of dollars’ worth of TV ads, decision day is close at hand in California’s statewide primary.

On this week’s episode of the California Politics Podcast, we take one last look at the races for governor and U.S. Senate. And, as with all political discussions this year, a key part of what to watch is the impact of the top-two primary.

Share

In pitch to women voters, Delaine Eastin and John Chiang say their campaigns hold symbolic meaning

John Chiang greets the audience at a rally in Sacramento.
(Melanie Mason / Los Angeles Times)

Democratic gubernatorial hopefuls John Chiang and Delaine Eastin tried to imbue their runs with greater symbolic meaning in speeches at a women’s rally Friday evening, framing their campaigns as a strike against President Trump and a bid for women’s equality, respectively.

Speaking on the Capitol steps to a crowd of several dozen gathered for a preelection rally from the local chapter of the Women’s March, both candidates tailored their pitches to the predominantly female crowd.

Chiang, the state treasurer, told the audience that in Tuesday’s primary election, California voters will “send a powerful and clear signal back to Washington, D.C., that we’re standing up to President Trump.”

He touted his opposition to Trump’s efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, citing his work with Planned Parenthood to provide emergency funding for community clinics.

His biggest applause line was unrelated to Trump, when he mentioned his work advocating for money to test the state’s backlog of rape kits.

“We can’t continue to have 13,000 untested rape kits in the state of California,” he said.

Delaine Eastin speaks at a rally in Sacramento
(Melanie Mason / Los Angeles Times)

Eastin, the state’s former superintendent of public instruction, said her candidacy would help make inroads in the lagging representation of women in public office.

“The fact is, right now in the state of California, we have a crisis,” Eastin said. “We do not have a Legislature that looks enough like California and that acts on behalf of the people who live here and work here.”

Noting that women have held 30% of the seats in the Legislature only once, she urged voters to back more female candidates up and down the ballot, including herself.

“Ladies and gentlemen, it’s time to elect more women as mayors, as councilmembers, as congresspeople, as senators, as Assembly members — and as governor of California,” she said. “It’s really time we had a woman.”

Share
Advertisement

Newsom highlights Trump’s support of Cox as he campaigns in the Central Valley

Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom made clear to a Central Valley audience Friday which candidate in the race for governor is President Trump’s choice to lead California: John Cox.

“As a Democrat that’s running against 26 other people, we’ll see who we end up with. If it’s a Republican, it’s likely to be Donald Trump’s handpicked candidate, John Cox,” Newsom said in front of television cameras after hosting an economic roundtable with union leaders and members in Bakersfield. “Donald Trump twice tweeted in favor of John Cox.”

His campaign has been trying to boost Cox over Democratic rival Antonio Villaraigosa. If the Rancho Santa Fe Republican gets the second spot in the June 5 primary, as several recent polls suggest he will, Cox will move on to face Newsom in the general election, greatly increasing the likelihood that Newsom will win in November.

He also spoke out against the wealthy charter school supporters who are backing Villaraigosa and bankrolling a multimillion-dollar barrage of television ads against him.

When a school employees union leader asked Newsom about increasing accountability for charter schools, Newsom responded: “There are over 23 million reasons I agree with you. That’s how much money one of the candidates for governor received from less than a dozen people. I don’t think democracy can survive when just a handful of folks can tilt [an election].”

He later said the group’s negative turn this week against him reflected the state of the race.

“What’s disappointing is that’s their closing argument on behalf of another campaign. They’re not elevating their candidate, they’re trying to tear me down, which suggests the state of their campaign,” he said.

Newsom then headed more than 100 miles northwest, past numerous farm fields, to a town hall in Fresno.

A handful of supporters of Republican Travis Allen, who is also running for governor, protested outside. They blamed Newsom for the death of Kate Steinle, a San Francisco woman who was fatally shot by an immigrant who was in the United States illegally.

“Kate’s blood is on Gavin’s hands,” read one sign carried by a man who used a megaphone to repeatedly say: “Shame on you, Gavin Newsom! You belong in jail!”

Gina Portillo, a registered nurse from Fresno who held a large American flag outside the town hall, said she disagreed with Newsom’s support of so-called sanctuary state and city policies.

“I am so upset with Gavin Newsom and the things he’s done here in California,” she said. “I was a Democrat, oh my God, for my whole life up until President Trump’s election. My eyes were opened, and I’m like this guy, the Democrats don’t care about us.”

Inside the gathering, Newsom defended his support of sanctuary policy.

“For me it was about keeping people safe,” he said, pointing to helping immigrants who are in the country illegally to report crimes or seek public services such as vaccinations for their children without fear of deportation. “One thing it is not is a shield for is criminal activity.”

He noted that the sanctuary state legislation signed by Gov. Jerry Brown does not apply to people accused of committing violent crimes.

“If you are here and you intend to commit a crime or you’re a dangerous felon, that’s where I draw the line,” Newsom said.

Share

Delaine Eastin criticizes Jerry Brown’s record on education

Delaine Eastin speaks at a community forum at First African Methodist Episcopal Church in Los Angeles.
(Michael Livingston / Los Angeles Times)

In one of her last appearances before California’s June 5 primary, longshot Democratic candidate Delaine Eastin criticized Gov. Jerry Brown’s record on children’s education.

“He has not been a supporter of preschool,” Eastin said at a community discussion held Friday afternoon at First African Methodist Episcopal Church in Los Angeles.

Eastin said that when Brown vetoed a bill mandating kindergarten in 2014, he set California children back on education.

“He said, ‘I got kicked out of preschool, and it didn’t hurt me.’ First of all, yes it did, governor,” Eastin said. She later said that thanks to Brown’s upbringing, he wasn’t the sort of child who would have needed preschool in the same way as millions of other Californians.

“You are the very demographic that gets the least value from preschool. You are from an affluent, educated family who sang and read to you,” she said, adding a promise that if elected she would get the state into the top 10 states in per pupil spending.

“The children of this state are really and truly being shortchanged right now,” Eastin said.

All of the top candidates seeking to succeed Brown were invited to the discussion at Los Angeles’ oldest African American church. Eastin and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa were the only ones to participate.

Each candidate was asked six questions on a variety of topics.

Eastin and Villaraigosa were both given their time to make a pitch to undecided voters. It was more of a discussion than a testy back-and-forth like the May 8 debate in San Jose.

Villaraigosa, who had just finished a 24-hour campaign sprint in greater Los Angeles to try to make it past the primary, found common ground with Eastin on education, public safety, housing and faith with the former state schools chief. Eastin has used the theme of rivals agreeing with her in her own ads.

The two shared a fist bump after it was announced they were the only candidates to show up.

Share
Advertisement

California landlords say they’ll back caps on rent increases — if a big rent control measure goes away

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti at an April rally endorsing an initiative that would allow for the expansion of rent control
(Katie Falkenberg / Los Angeles Times)

A statewide lobbying group that represents landlords is supporting a cap on rent increases in an effort to stave off a ballot measure that would expand rent control across California.

The California Apartment Assn. says it’s OK with limiting annual rent hikes to the cost of inflation plus 5% alongside property tax breaks for apartment owners who covert residences to low-income rentals. UC Berkeley researchers proposed both ideas this week.

“We like the direction where there’s a combination of anti-price gouging with tax incentives,” said Debra Carlton, the association’s senior vice president of public affairs.

The backdrop for the rent control debate is an initiative put forward by tenant groups that would repeal Costa-Hawkins, the 1995 state law that restricts cities and counties from implementing most new rent control policies. The initiative, which is expected to collect enough signatures to get on the statewide ballot, is likely to be one of the highest profile political fights in November. Carlton has previously estimated her group would spend $60 million to defeat the measure.

Researchers at UC Berkeley’s Terner Center for Housing Innovation said their proposal to add tenant protections and incentivize the creation of new low-income housing could eliminate the need for the November initiative. Had the proposal been in place last year, tenants in non-rent-controlled apartments and single-family homes in Los Angeles could not have had rent increases higher than 7.8%.

Tenant groups, however, greeted the Terner Center effort coldly. Dean Preston, executive director of statewide renter organization Tenants Together, said the initiative simply overturns the prohibitions on new rent controls, allowing cities to develop their own policies. There’s no need, he said, to abandon that effort in exchange for new rules against price-gouging.

“With so many people’s homes on the line, the Terner Center’s approach here is pretty reckless,” Preston said. “The proposal is unclear, riddled with inaccurate assumptions, and put out there with zero consultation with tenant groups.”

The deadline for supporters of the initiative to remove their measure from the November ballot is June 28.

Meanwhile, bills backed by tenant groups continue to face strong opposition in the Legislature. Earlier this year, a bill that would have repealed Costa-Hawkins failed to advance from a legislative committee.

Two other pro-tenant bills, one that would have required landlords to list a reason before evicting someone and another that would have made it harder to convert existing rent-controlled apartments to condominiums, were trounced in votes on the Assembly floor Thursday.

A third bill, which extends the time tenants have to respond to eviction notices, squeaked through the Assembly on Thursday by two votes.

Share

Schwarzenegger won’t vote for leading GOP candidates for governor

Former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger delivers a speech during the R20 Austrian world summit in Vienna on May 15.
(Ronald Zak / Associated Press)

Arnold Schwarzenegger, who once famously warned Republicans that they were “dying at the box office,” has decided not to support either of the leading GOP candidates for California governor, a spokesman said on Friday.

The former governor’s decision to speak out against the candidacies of John Cox, a Rancho Sante Fe businessman, and Travis Allen, an Orange County legislator, stands in sharp contrast to his past refusals to weigh in on those who have followed him into office.

“They will not get his vote,” said spokesman Daniel Ketchell.

Schwarzenegger’s decision was based on the candidates’ past statements about climate change, including California’s current efforts to curtail greenhouse gas emissions that began during Schwarzenegger’s administration in 2006.

“He won’t support any candidate that plans to take California backward and undo our environmental leadership,” Ketchell said. He would not elaborate on who Schwarzenegger might support in Tuesday’s statewide primary.

The rejection of the GOP’s leading candidates came after the former governor criticized President Trump’s endorsement of Cox. Trump had praised the candidate as someone who would “turn things around” in California.

Pointing out the state’s gross domestic product growth is higher than that of the nation overall, the actor-turned-politician suggested California was already winning.

“Instead of giving us advice, maybe you should learn from us,” Schwarzenegger tweeted at Trump. “We don’t need your endorsements. We are moving forward just fine without your help.”

On Friday, he ratcheted up the attacks after a Bloomberg News report that the Trump administration wants the nation’s power grid operators to purchase electricity from coal and nuclear plants. “I eagerly await the administration’s regulations protecting pagers, fax machines, and Blockbuster,” he tweeted.

Schwarzenegger also criticized Environmental Protection Agency efforts to revoke the federal waiver that allows California to set vehicle emission standards.

“If Republicans won’t stand up for California’s right to clean our air, and they won’t stand up against regulations protecting coal, they should leave the party to those of us who believe in the free market & states’ rights and create a new Pollution Party,” he wrote.

The timing of the strong GOP rebuke from Schwarzenegger, who had heart surgery in March, coincided with the news that Republicans have officially lost their place as California’s second-largest political group.

Registration data released by the secretary of state on Friday showed that through late May, there were 83,518 more unaffiliated “independent” voters in the state than Republicans. It was the worst showing for the GOP’s share of the electorate in modern California history and was hinted at by data released three weeks ago.

Schwarzenegger recently helped launch a political action committee seeking to promote GOP candidates who focus on “free market” economic principles and issues such as education and the environment.

Share
Advertisement

Obama alumni network activates for candidates who worked in the administration

Democratic candidates for lieutenant governor, Eleni Kounalakis, standing, and Jeffrey Bleich, far left, are former Obama officials.
Democratic candidates for lieutenant governor, Eleni Kounalakis, standing, and Jeffrey Bleich, far left, are former Obama officials.
(Steve Yeater / Associated Press)

Obama administration aides are activating their network to help former colleagues running for office, including eight candidates in California.

The Obama Alumni Assn. sent an email to members this week with a list of all candidates on the ballot and urging them to take action.

“They need your help,” the email reads. “Ask your regional or constituency Obama alumni organization to get involved ... now is the time to donate, spread the word, ask your friends in these states to vote.”

Among the California contenders on Tuesday’s primary ballot are Ammar Campa-Najjar, a former field director for the California chapter of Organizing for America who was endorsed early by liberal activists in the race against GOP Rep. Duncan Hunter.

The other congressional hopefuls are Brian Forde; Sam Jammal; state assembly candidates Steve Dunwoody and Buffy Wicks; and Giselle Hale for Redwood City Council.

Two of the candidates for lieutenant governor — Bay Area attorney Jeff Bleich and Democratic fundraiser Eleni Kounalakis — were former ambassadors in the Obama administration. The email did not endorse either candidate.

Share

Travis Allen criticized for missing work while running for governor

Assemblyman Travis Allen (R-Huntington Beach)
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

Travis Allen is asking Californians to vote for him next week to be the state’s next governor. But for right now, he’s got a day job and he missed much of it on Thursday.

Allen, a Republican legislator from Huntington Beach, walked onto the Assembly floor just before 3 p.m., even though the lower house was called to order almost five hours earlier. Unlike many days of floor session when only a few bills come up for a vote, this is the week when bills must clear the house or be scuttled for the year. The Assembly had 459 bills to consider this week, with 133 on the docket for Thursday.

Assemblyman Evan Low (D-Campbell) wrote a series of tweets throughout the day, including a live video feed in the morning showing Allen’s empty desk on the Assembly floor.

“We all showed up for work this morning,” Low wrote in one tweet. “Where are you Travis?”

Allen said he had been “working all day” and mentioned a few events he participated in for his campaign. He insisted in a brief interview that he was able to catch up quickly by adding his vote to bills already considered and that no policy debated during the day was in doubt.

He reiterated his support for the Legislature to return to the part-time status it held prior to 1966.

“All the results are pre-ordained,” Allen said. “By the time a bill comes up, it’s already been cooked.”

Allen was not excused from his Assembly duties on Thursday. Members generally must get permission if they aren’t going to be in Sacramento for committee hearings or floor votes. A tally provided by Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon’s office shows Allen has 12 unexcused absences this year — nine of them for floor votes and three on days when the work consisted of committee hearings or “check-in” sessions.

The Republican is one of a handful of leading candidates for governor, though a statewide poll published Thursday found him in fourth place with support from 12% of likely voters surveyed.

Low, who chastised his GOP colleague with the tweets, said Thursday was not the first time the Orange County lawmaker had been late.

Allen “shows up hours late to work daily. In any other job, you’d be fired,” Low tweeted.

Share
Advertisement

John Chiang, campaigning in church, says faith helped his family overcome struggles

John Chiang speaks to the congregation at Agape International Spiritual Center in Culver City on Wednesday night.
John Chiang speaks to the congregation at Agape International Spiritual Center in Culver City on Wednesday night.
(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

In a Los Angeles campaign push ahead of next week’s primary, California Treasurer John Chiang spoke to parishioners at a Culver City church about his faith and why he believes that has prepared him to lead the state.

People attending Wednesday’s service at the Agape International Spiritual Center meditated before the church’s founder and spiritual director, Michael Beckwith, introduced Chiang.

The Democratic gubernatorial candidate spoke briefly about the struggles his family endured, including discrimination, and how their faith held them together.

“When [our family] came together in facing that discrimination, my mom, who is the eternal optimist, said that good people will find each other,” he said.

Chiang talked about what his parents endured when coming to California.

“My dad, when he came to this country, had three shirts, two pairs of pants and about $100 in his pocket,” he said. “We overcame extraordinary discrimination.”

“I am a part of that dream” to build a unified California, Chiang said.

Chiang started his speech reminding people of who he is. “Some of you remember from my earlier position as state controller, you used to see my signature on your tax refund checks or your unclaimed property checks.”

Chiang’s appearance at the church drew people’s attention to the governor’s race. Many had no idea about Tuesday’s statewide primary.

David Grant, 49, a massage therapist from Echo Park, said Chiang has his support because of his faith. “I would vote for him because he’s a like-minded spirit who loves God,” Grant said.

Dana Williams said she was impressed with Chiang and will vote for him Tuesday. “The fact that he’s here shows me where his head is,” said Williams, 43, an elementary school teacher from Inglewood. “He’s taking a stand on unity and positivity” in the midst of a negative political climate.

Many attendees had not thought much about next week’s primary, or considered who was running for office.

Others, like Leroy Grayson from Inglewood, had long ago decided that Chiang had his vote.

Grayson, 76, sat listening to Chiang reminisce about his life. Grayson remembered Chiang’s role in a budget standoff with then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, and he lauded the candidate as doing a “pretty good job.”

Share

Gov. Jerry Brown chooses Diana Dooley as chief of staff for his final months in office

Two months after the death of his longtime chief of staff, Gov. Jerry Brown on Thursday appointed the state’s top healthcare official to fill the post for his final months in office.

Diana Dooley, who served as secretary of the California Health and Human Services Agency since 2011, now moves into the chief of staff role that Brown has designated as his executive secretary. She was a top staff member during the governor’s two terms that ended in 1983, including a stint as legislative affairs secretary. Dooley, 67, will earn a salary of $201,876.

She succeeds Nancy McFadden, who died in March and was widely seen as a key architect of Brown’s policy agenda over the last seven years. At her death, he called her “the best chief of staff a governor could ever ask for.”

Brown has one of the smallest inner circles of any recent California governor, and Dooley has long been part of that group. As health and human services secretary, she oversaw a sprawling $161-billion agency that provides an array of healthcare and safety net services. A key component of her work was leading the state’s implementation of the Affordable Care Act and chairing the oversight board of Covered California.

A 2011 profile in The Times described Dooley as an “affable alter-ego” to Brown, who is keenly aware of the governor’s priorities.

Dooley’s time away from government service included work as an attorney and ownership of a public relations and advertising agency. She also served as president of the California Children’s Hospital Assn. from 2006 to 2011.

Michael Wilkening, who spent a decade serving as undersecretary of the Health and Human Services Agency, will replace Dooley in the top post.

Share
Advertisement

Villaraigosa likely to be shut out of November general election, a new poll indicates

Antonio Villaraigosa is struggling to secure second place in the June primary election for California governor and is several points behind Republican businessman John Cox for the No. 2 slot, according to a new poll released Thursday.

Cox was favored by 20% of voters surveyed in the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll. Villaraigosa, the former mayor of Los Angeles, had the support of 13%, according to the poll. Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, the front-runner in polls and fundraising since he entered the race in 2015, was the choice of 33% of likely voters, according to the poll.

“We think it’s likely to be Cox against Newsom in the general election,” poll director Mark DiCamillo told the Sacramento Bee.

The trend lines of the poll are similar to other recent surveys that suggest Cox is successfully consolidating the GOP vote behind his candidacy, notably after his endorsement by President Trump earlier this month.

Among the other candidates in the race, GOP Assemblyman Travis Allen of Huntington Beach was within the margin of error of Villaraigosa, with 12% support. State Treasurer John Chiang and former state schools chief Delaine Eastin remain in the single digits.

The poll of 2,106 likely voters was conducted from May 22 to 28, with 23% of likely voters having already cast votes. The overall margin of error was plus or minus 3.5%.

Photo gallery: Round-the-clock barnstorm of greater Los Angeles with Gubernatorial candidate Antonio Villaraigosa

Share

Audit faults LAPD and other agencies for failing to identify hate crimes

The Los Angeles Police Department and other law enforcement agencies have failed to properly identify and respond to some hate crimes and need better policies and training so officers can recognize the specific characteristics of those offenses, the state auditor said in a report released Thursday.

The audit found flaws in the categorizing of hate crimes by the LAPD, San Francisco State University Police Department and the Orange County Sheriff’s Department. The first two agencies failed to correctly identify 11 of the 30 cases auditors reviewed as hate crimes, even though they met the elements of such crimes.

“Officers at these law enforcement agencies may have been better equipped to identify hate crimes if their agencies had adequate policies and methods in place to identify hate crimes,” State Auditor Elaine Howle wrote to Gov. Jerry Brown and the Legislature.

LAPD Chief Charlie Beck disputed the findings, saying in a written response to Howle that the audit information was “either incorrectly reported, or misrepresented the Los Angeles Police Department’s position on that topic.”

However, Howle said she stands by the findings that LAPD failed to properly identify three of the 15 hate crimes the report examined. Auditors redacted information from individual crime reports in the LAPD’s response and said the response “does not indicate how the audit misrepresents LA Police’s positions.”

The LAPD has created a checklist for detectives to use when investigating hate crimes “as a result of our audit findings,” Howle’s office reported.

Properly identifying incidents as hate crimes is important not only because it lets the public know of the seriousness of the problem, but also because it can result in additional fines and longer sentences for offenders, the audit said.

Hate crimes also are being underreported by law enforcement agencies to the California Department of Justice, and auditors found 97 cases in which hate crimes were not reported by four agencies examined, about 14% of those reported.

“Correct reporting to DOJ is essential to raising awareness about the occurrence of bias-motivated offenses nationwide, and to understanding the nature and magnitude of hate crimes in the State,” Howle wrote to Brown.

The auditor also faulted the Department of Justice for a “lack of proactive guidance and oversight” that she said “has contributed to the underreporting and misreporting of hate crime information.”

A representative of California Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra agreed with the recommendations to improve guidance and oversight and said steps already are being taken.

“DOJ has made a concerted effort to help ensure hate crimes are investigated and prosecuted, and to support community responses to hate-based conflict,” wrote Chris Ryan, chief of the DOJ’s division of operations.

Auditors looked at 15 hate incidents handled by the LAPD and found three were not properly identified as hate crimes, while the San Francisco State campus police made the same mistake in eight hate crimes.

Overall, reported hate crimes have risen in the state by more than 20% from 2014 to 2016, the period audited, to 931 crimes, and they are among the most dehumanizing crimes, the audit said.

“Nonetheless, law enforcement has not taken adequate action to identify, report, and respond to these crimes,” the report concluded.

Problems with investigations and evidence have hampered prosecution of hate crimes, the audit found.

In the last decade, the conviction rates for hate crimes ranged from 40% to 51% per year. That compares to an 84% conviction rate statewide for all felonies during the period. Prosecutions, auditors said, often are hampered by a lack of suspects or by the high standard of proof required.

Share
Advertisement

Republican candidate for governor John Cox courts voters in Stockton with criticism of Newsom, delta tunnels

Republican gubernatorial candidate John Cox talks to GOP activists in Stockton on May 30, 2018.
Republican gubernatorial candidate John Cox talks to GOP activists in Stockton on May 30, 2018.
(Patrick McGreevy / Los Angeles Times)

With the June primary election less than a week away, Republican John Cox brought his campaign for governor to Stockton on Wednesday, taking aim at Democrat Gavin Newsom, whom he expects to face in a November runoff.

Polls indicate Cox is neck-and-neck with Democrat Antonio Villaraigosa, the former mayor of Los Angeles, in a battle for second place in the field of gubernatorial candidates led by front-runner Newsom.

“If you look in the dictionary for the words ‘Bay Area elitist,’ you see Gavin Newsom’s picture,” Cox said in a speech to a crowd of more than 100 before the Stockton Republican Women Federated. Cox, a wealthy Rancho Santa Fe businessman, touted his endorsement last week by President Trump.

“This state is in trouble,” he said. “It needs a manager. That’s why the president endorsed me.”

He also said media “glorification” of mass shooters is a cause of school shootings.

“It’s not the gun, “ Cox said during comments at the Brookside Golf and Country Club.

He got his loudest applause in saying he opposes the proposal to build large tunnels under the Sacramento River Delta, and would repeal so-called sanctuary state laws that limit law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration agents.

Asked twice about state law requiring children to be vaccinated, he called for a balanced approach. “I believe in parental rights,” he said.

Stockton is the seat of San Joaquin County, where 43% of voters are Democrats, 30% are Republicans and 22% have no party preference. Republicans outnumber Democrats in some towns in the county, including Lodi and Ripon.

Earlier in the day, Cox stopped by the state capital to pick up an endorsement from former Sacramento County Sheriff John McGinnis.

Cox has spent much of the last week before election in the San Joaquin Valley, making campaign stops in Bakersfield and Fresno on Tuesday.

Share

Villaraigosa supporters spending $2.3 million to attack Newsom as lazy

Allies of Antonio Villaraigosa are spending at least $2.3 million to air blistering ads attacking fellow Democrat and front-runner Gavin Newsom as a lazy elected official.

“We all know guys like Gavin,” a narrator says in a 30-second ad titled “Guys” launched Wednesday, in the final days before the primary. “Boasting, overselling his achievements, making false claims.”

The ad and another one, called “Work,” that was released Monday quote Newsom’s past comments about his boredom with his lack of official duties as lieutenant governor. It concludes, “Gavin’s not going to work as governor.”

That ad also looks back to his time as mayor of San Francisco.

“When the worst oil spill in decades hit San Francisco, first responders went to work and Mayor Gavin Newsom went to Hawaii,” a narrator says over the sound of tropical music and footage of a plane taking flight.

The group that released the ads, an independent expenditure committee funded by wealthy charter school backers, reported spending $500,000 to air it on Monday and planned to report an additional $1.8 million on Wednesday.

It’s the first spending by the group, named Families & Teachers for Antonio Villaraigosa for Governor 2018, to oppose Newsom.

Shown the ads by a reporter, Villaraigosa declined to engage. “I’m so focused on the message of growing together and growing middle-class jobs that I haven’t really thought much about him and any of the other candidates,” he told The Times.

Newsom scoffed at the group’s message questioning his work ethic.

“That’s nonsense,” he said as prepared to rally labor supporters with Sen. Kamala Harris in Burbank.

The pro-Villaraigosa group had spent the bulk of its money on ads boosting the former Los Angeles mayor’s background and resume. The backers spent smaller amounts trying to ding Republican John Cox and help Republican Travis Allen in an effort to split the GOP vote and ensure that Villaraigosa comes in second in Tuesday’s primary.

A spokesman for the group said it was driven to attack Newsom because of his campaign’s and his allies’ efforts supporting Cox, and opposing Villaraigosa and state Treasurer John Chiang, another Democrat running for governor.

“After Newsom has spent millions attacking Democrats and boosting Cox, we had no other choice,” spokesman Josh Pulliam said.

The independent expenditure committee, which had raised nearly $20.2 million from charter school backers, on Wednesday reported raising $2.1 million more, including $1 million each from former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and tech investor Arthur Rock.

Villaraigosa, Newsom and independent committees supporting them have spent tens of millions of dollars on the gubernatorial primary.

Phil Willon contributed to this report.

Share
Advertisement

Democratic McCarthy challenger hosting fundraiser with former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley

Former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley will be in downtown Los Angeles fundraising for a former member of his 2016 presidential campaign.
(Jose Luis Magana / Associated Press)

Former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley will join Democrat Tatiana Matta on Wednesday evening at a fundraiser for her congressional campaign held in downtown Los Angeles. Matta was the co-chair of O’Malley’s veterans and military families committee for his 2016 presidential primary campaign.

“Tatiana is the strong, clear voice of the new generation of leadership. She will work tirelessly for the well-being of our military families and our family-owned businesses. Tatiana will always put people ahead of politics. I’m honored to support her,” O’Malley said in a statement.

Matta is one of five Democrats challenging House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield) for his seat in the 23rd Congressional District.

In April, House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) announced he would not seek reelection and endorsed McCarthy as his successor as speaker. Despite the endorsement, the McCarthy has not locked down the support from the House GOP Conference.

“If the way Kevin treats his constituents back home is any indication of how he would perform as a Speaker, I think Paul Ryan could choose better,” Matta said in a statement addressing Ryan’s endorsement.

Tickets range from $250 to $2,500 and the private fundraiser will take place from 7 to 8:30 p.m.

Share

Initiative to regulate dialysis industry qualifies for California’s November ballot

A ballot measure that would clamp down on the profits raked in by companies providing dialysis treatment will go before voters in November.

The initiative, sponsored by the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers, would cap revenue for dialysis companies at 115% of the cost of direct patient care and treatment quality efforts, as determined by the initiative. If companies’ revenue exceed that threshold, they would have to issue rebates, primarily to commercial health insurers.

Dialysis is used to treat patients experiencing kidney failure. The treatment performs some of the function of kidneys, such as removing excess salt and waste from the blood. Sessions are hours long and patients usually need treatments three times per week.

Proponents say the measure, which qualified for the ballot on Wednesday, would rein in high executive compensation and force clinics to spend more on care.

“Over the 10 years I’ve been on dialysis, I’ve reported unsanitary conditions in my clinic that put me at risk of getting an infection, but it often feels like no one cares,” Tangi Foster, a dialysis patient from Los Angeles, said in a press release put out by the union. “By passing this ballot initiative, I hope we can push dialysis corporations to finally care more about their patients than their profits.”

The measure is opposed by dialysis companies, as well as a number of physicians’ groups. They argue the cap on revenue will not cover what it costs to provide treatment and would force clinics to scale back hours or close their doors.

“This initiative is an example of a special interest looking to exert political pressure at the patient’s expense. This harmful and misleading measure will limit patients’ access to lifesaving dialysis treatment and endanger their lives,” said Scott Bruun, executive director of the Chronic Disease Coalition.

The union has also pushed a number of bills in recent years targeting the dialysis industry, including a measure to require higher staffing ratios at clinics that was shelved last year, and a current bill that would regulate third-party payers of insurance premiums, alleging that some clinics use such programs to incentivize patients to seek dialysis treatment instead of kidney transplants. The latter, SB 1156, passed the state Senate on Wednesday and heads to the Assembly for consideration.

This post was updated at 3:04 p.m. to include more detail on the initiative’s provisions and at 4:40 p.m. to specify SB 1156 passed the state Senate on Wednesday.

Share
Advertisement

On the campaign trail, Villaraigosa criticizes Trump on immigration and Newsom calls for stricter gun controls

Democratic gubernatorial candidate Antonio Villaraigosa talks with students before a news conference near the U.S.-Mexico border Wednesday.
(Phil Willon / Los Angeles Times)

Democrats Antonio Villaraigosa and Gavin Newsom on Wednesday hammered away on two signature issues in their campaigns for California governor — immigration and gun control, respectively — as they traveled the state to rally support ahead of the June 5 primary.

Near the U.S.-Mexico border, Villaraigosa joined with leaders of Border Angels, a nonprofit that provides water and other aid for immigrants trekking across the desert, and lambasted President Trump’s “immoral” immigration policies.

Villaraigosa was especially critical of a Trump administration policy to separate children from their parents when a family crosses the border illegally.

“A great state, a great nation is one where we welcome everyone who is willing to work hard and play by the rules and willing to do everything possible to sacrifice so that their kids can have a better life,” Villaraigosa told reporters at a news conference at the Border Field State Park. “We are not a nation that divides mother from daughter, father from son, family from parents. We’re better than that.”

At a campaign stop in Fresno on Tuesday, Republican gubernatorial candidate John Cox said he disagreed with the federal policy of separating children from their parents, but he blamed Congress.

“I do not agree with separating parents from children, if they can avoid it,” Cox said. “But the law is the law, and [Trump has] got to enforce the law.”

The president has endorsed Cox.

At Villaraigosa’s San Diego event, Enrique Morones, executive director of Border Angels, laid the blame squarely on the Trump administration and criticized the president for his rhetoric about immigrants.

“He said I was a rapist and I’m a criminal because I’m Mexican,” Morones said. “I assure you, I am not a rapist and I am not a criminal.”

Morones then pointed to the dozens of visiting students from KIPP Prize Middle School in San Jose, many of whom were Latino.

“I assure you, they are not animals. They are human beings,” he said, a reference Trump made calling some immigrants who entered the country illegally “animals.”

Trump, who said he was referring to MS-13 gang members, made the comment in response to a California sheriff who said she was frustrated with the state limiting local law enforcement agencies from cooperating from federal immigration officials.

Villaraigosa’s emphasis on the rights of immigrants comes as he strives to finish in the top two in the June primary and advance to the general election, knowing that he needs his strongest base of support — Latino voters — to turnout in high numbers.

Gavin Newsom and his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, talk with Bob Weiss, whose daughter was killed in the 2014 Isla Vista shooting.
(Jay L. Clendenin / Los Angeles Times)

Photo gallery: On the campaign trail

At a campaign stop in Goleta, Newsom also touched on an issue important to his base of progressive Democrats: gun control. Newsom has staked much of his gubernatorial campaign on his efforts to enact strict gun restrictions.

On Tuesday, his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, met with Bob Weiss, the father of a 19-year-old college student who was one of six killed by a 22-year-old man at UC Santa Barbara in 2014.

“Whenever I’m up here, I feel a closeness to” daughter Veronika, Weiss said, adding that he stopped at the spot she was shot before meeting the Newsoms at Caje coffee shop in Goleta.

“The time does help, but as a fellow survivor said, you don’t get over it, you get used to it,” Weiss said, as Jennifer Newsom brushed tears from her face. “I don’t go an hour without thinking about her. I couldn’t go a minute the first year. All I could do is replay an image of this happening right before my eyes. That was pretty painful to see over and over again in my mind’s eye.”

Weiss become an advocate for stricter gun regulations in the aftermath of the mass shooting at the university. He met Newsom during the 2016 campaign for Proposition 63. The lieutenant governor was a leader of the successful effort to impose background checks on ammunition purchases, require state licenses to sell ammunition and other requirements.

California has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation, but Newsom said if he is elected governor, he would seek more restrictive controls.

He said the state could seek advances on smart gun technology, close loopholes on assault weapons, ensure proper implementation of the background checks for ammunition sales, expand red flag regulations and step up enforcement of existing laws.

He also said he would use the governor’s bully pulpit to highlight politicians who he argues are “kowtowing” to the National Rifle Assn., including some fellow Democrats.

“We’re going to have to call them out because this is inexcusable,” Newsom said, “and exercise our moral authority as a state and export it across the country and hold these people accountable.”

Share

Man who accused Assemblywoman Cristina Garcia of groping appeals ruling clearing her

Assemblywoman Cristina Garcia (D-Bell Gardens)
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

A former legislative staffer who accused Assemblywoman Cristina Garcia (D-Bell Gardens) of groping him four years ago is appealing the investigation that found his claim to be unsubstantiated.

Danny Fierro filed a notice of appeal Wednesday to the Assembly Rules Committee that asserted “the investigation was not impartial or conducted in good faith, and did not afford Mr. Fierro due process.”

Fierro said several witnesses were not interviewed, including his former employer, Assemblyman Ian Calderon (D-Whittier), and other lawmakers who were present at the legislative softball game in 2014. Fierro has accused Garcia of touching him inappropriately at the game.

The Assembly investigation, concluded earlier this month, did not find a “preponderance of evidence” to back up Fierro’s claim. The probe did find that Garcia often used vulgar language and disparaged other elected officials. In response, Assemblyman Anthony Rendon (D-Lakewood) removed Garcia from all legislative committee posts.

“After an exhaustive three-month independent investigation, Assembly Garcia was cleared of the allegations of unwanted sexual misconduct,” Garcia’s campaign said in a statement. “We respect the process of the investigation. However, we do not anticipate any change in the results as the allegations are simply not true. I look forward to having the investigation finalized.”

The issue has fueled Garcia’s political critics who are attempting to oust her from the district.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

California sues Trump administration to restore rules protecting farmworkers

A worker tends a vineyard in Napa County.
( (Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times))

California Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra joined his counterparts in New York and Maryland on Wednesday in filing another in a string of lawsuits against the Trump administration, this time challenging a decision to suspend safeguards for agricultural workers.

The lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency seeks to reinstate a requirement that employers provide workers and their families with training to avoid pesticide exposure.

The lawsuit alleges that the suspension of the requirement by the EPA is arbitrary and capricious, and in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act.

“EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt is not above the law,” Becerra said in a statement. “He does not get to do away with protections simply because he does not like them.”

Becerra has sued the Trump administration more than 30 times on issues including healthcare and immigration.

Share

Gavin Newsom ruminates on the legacy of Gov. Jerry Brown, the man he is running to replace

Democratic candidate for governor Gavin Newsom speaks to reporters on a bus after departing San Francisco on a weeklong California tour.
(Jay L. Clendenin / Los Angeles Times)

California Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom said he would seek to model the budget-conscious ethos of Gov. Jerry Brown, but said he would be more active in the legislative process if elected to succeed him.

“I really do think Gov. Brown has created a new norm of expectations in terms of fiscal discipline,” Newsom told reporters aboard his campaign bus during a wide-ranging 80-minute interview on Tuesday. “It’s incumbent upon the next governor to model that.”

But he said on certain issues — notably healthcare and homelessness — he would be more engaged in legislative efforts in Sacramento than he believes Brown, who is termed out, has been.

“I’m going to pull a lot more things into the governor’s office and not just see them fester in the Legislature,” Newsom said. “Certain issues require the governor’s office to be more proactive on the front end rather than engaging on the back end.”

Healthcare has been a flashpoint in the governor’s race, and Newsom’s rivals have accused him of being fiscally irresponsible for saying he would pursue a state single-payer system if elected. He pushed back, arguing that doing nothing about the healthcare crisis and its growing impact on the state budget is irresponsible.

“I have no interest in going back to the old ways. I’m not a profligate Democrat,” he said. “I have bold ideas. I want to be audacious in terms of the goals, not reckless.”

Newsom also said he had no interest in running for president, pointing to advice he learned from Brown, who ran for president three times.

“God no,” he said. “The most indelible thing Jerry Brown said to me … is that the most significant contrast between his first two terms and his last two terms was that in the last two, he wasn’t running for any other office. He was focused on the state. That’s what I want to focus on, that’s all that I want to focus on. The minute you have your eye elsewhere … you’re not doing justice to the people of this state.”

Share
Advertisement

California’s legislative budget writers must iron out differences with Gov. Jerry Brown, and each other

(Marcus Yam / Los Angeles Times)

Members of the California Legislature’s budget conference committee convene Wednesday with one task above all others: reconcile the plans put forth by their two houses, both of which would be more costly than the proposal crafted by Gov. Jerry Brown.

The 10-member committee, equally split between the Senate and Assembly but dominated by Democrats, will knit the proposals together to form most of the budget sent to Brown by June 15. The most contentious disagreements are usually settled in closed-door negotiations with the governor.

While both houses propose higher spending than Brown did in his blueprint, they also have noticeable policy differences with him on healthcare, higher education and social services. And in some cases, the Senate and Assembly disagree with each other on those topics.

Here’s a look at a few of the key areas.

Legislators (again) predict higher tax revenues than Brown. Using projections from the independent Legislative Analyst’s Office, both the Senate and Assembly have budgets built on at least $2.7 billion more in tax receipts than the governor. It’s worth remembering that when Brown unveiled his revised plan in mid-May, he already assumed an almost $9-billion tax windfall.

It’s also worth noting that over the past seven years, the governor has consistently demanded — and successfully done so — that the final budget use more conservative tax revenue estimates than those preferred by legislative Democrats. This has now become one of the most consistent budget debates in Sacramento.

Assembly Democrats want $1 billion more in spending than their Senate counterparts. An outline prepared by legislative analysts for Wednesday’s hearing shows the Assembly budget plan would cost $1.1 billion more than the Senate’s and $4 billion more than Brown’s proposal.

Legislative Democrats want more money to help the homeless. One key cost is an Assembly effort to boost the response to California’s homelessness crisis by some $1.2 billion above the governor’s $359-million plan. It would include money for shelters and rental assistance. The Senate would better Brown’s offer by $641 million. Local officials in cities hardest hit by the issue likely will applaud the efforts.

Brown will hear new ideas for stashing away cash, above the existing ‘rainy day’ fund. Lawmakers in both houses have drafted new plans to save money that could be used to ease future shortfalls. Senate budget writers are proposing a $1 billion set-aside that would stave off cuts to social services programs that have been on the chopping block in deficit years of the past. The Assembly, on the other hand, proposes setting up a more general use fund — but one that might have strict rules for using the money — to catch spillover cash not deposited in the account voters established through Proposition 2 in 2014.

Substantial amounts would be added to healthcare, social services. Both the Senate and Assembly propose spending more than Brown on healthcare. The Senate’s $169-million effort would add more seniors and disabled residents to the state’s Medi-Cal program, with seniors enrolled regardless of immigration status. The Assembly, with a total that would exceed the governor’s plan by $412 million, would expand Medi-Cal eligibility for those in the U.S. illegally between the ages of 19 and 25. Assembly Democrats also want to offer new subsidies for some who would otherwise be charged higher premiums on the state-run exchange, Covered California.

Elsewhere, Senate Democrats would add $505 million in higher cash grants to those on welfare assistance and for the aged, blind and disabled. Both houses would add more than $200 million to subsidized child care for the working poor.

Colleges and universities would get more from legislative Democrats than from the governor. Both houses propose additional spending on higher education compared with Brown’s May budget plan. The Senate proposes a slightly bigger boost — $473 million over Brown’s proposal, compared with the Assembly’s $369-million effort. In both cases, the goal would be to avoid tuition increases and expand enrollments at the University of California and California State University campuses.

Share

John Cox seeks to consolidate GOP support as he courts voters in the Central Valley

Republican John Cox kicked off the final week of his campaign by starting a tour with GOP attorney general candidate Steven Bailey, first stopping in Bakersfield and then Fresno.

In Fresno, a small crowd of supporters gathered at the county’s Republican Party headquarters, where Chairman Fred Vanderhoof urged conservatives statewide to get behind Cox and Bailey to make sure they survive the June primary.

“Don’t let the Democrats steal the election,” Vanderhoof said.

Cox spoke only for a few minutes, fondly recalling visiting his mother in Fresno, where she lived for two decades before she died. Cox said his younger brother still lives in town.

The Republican was quick to tout his endorsement by President Trump, first delivered in a tweet in mid-May.

“He’s done that because I’m a businessman like him. I’ve achieved results in the private sector just like he did,” Cox said. “I started with nothing and built a business one year after another. Working hard. I’ve lived that American dream, but that American dream is being denied to so many Californians.”

Cox then drifted back into his well-worn talking points about the “disaster the Democrats have created” in California. He blamed California’s Democratic leadership for the state’s high poverty rates, high taxes, failing schools and crumbling, traffic-choked roads.

Cox scoffed when asked by reporters about Villaraigosa’s comment earlier in the day that a vote for him would be a de-facto vote for Newsom in November.

“A vote for me is a vote to make sure that people have better schools, they have better roads, that we don’t waste money in government, that we have a lower tax burden. A vote for me is a lower gasoline tax as well,” Cox said. “So I think Villaraigosa has it all wrong.”

Share
Advertisement

Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra sued by Republican challenger over qualifications to hold office

Candidates, from left: Steven Bailey, state Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra, Eric Early and Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones at a recent debate.
(Luis Sinco / Los Angeles Times)

California Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra’s campaign manager disputed allegations in a lawsuit filed Tuesday by Republican challenger Eric Early that the incumbent does not meet qualifications to hold office and should be kept off the November ballot.

The legal challenge alleges that Becerra is constitutionally ineligible to hold the office because he was an “inactive” member of the California Bar from 1991 to 2016, most of which was time he served in Congress.

The lawsuit argues that state law requires those holding the office to have been “admitted to practice before the Supreme Court of the state for a period of at least five years immediately preceding his election or appointment.”

Some Republicans briefly raised similar concerns before Becerra’s appointment by Gov. Jerry Brown was confirmed by legislators in January 2017. A decade earlier, a judge dismissed a similar lawsuit filed by GOP activists against Brown when he was elected as attorney general.

“Another day, another tired Republican campaign tactic,” Dana Williamson, Becerra’s campaign manager, said Tuesday. “They made this same frivolous argument after Jerry Brown was elected attorney general and the courts shut them down and ordered them to pay Brown’s court costs. I don’t anticipate a different outcome in this case.”

The lawsuit was filed in Sacramento on behalf of Early, a private attorney, by former Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley, who ran unsuccessfully as a Republican for state attorney general in 2010.

“The law must be applied equally to everyone, no matter how politically inconvenient,” Early said in a statement. “If we just look the other way when the state’s chief law enforcement officer is in violation of the law, then the message to California’s citizens is that there’s one standard for the rulers and a different one for the ruled.”

Share

Villaraigosa courts Central Valley voters and touts law enforcement endorsements

Democrat Antonio Villaraigosa kicked off the final week of the gubernatorial campaign with a drive from Los Angeles to Fresno, where he nabbed the endorsement of Fresno Police Chief Jerry Dyer, visited a boxing program for troubled youth and planned to end the day at a Teamsters union hall.

Dyer praised Villaraigosa for making good on his commitment to hire more officers at the Los Angeles Police Department while he was L.A. mayor, even in the heart of the recession. Fresno cut its force by 150 officers during that time, he said.

“As the mayor of Los Angeles, Antonio Villaraigosa demonstrated that continued support of the officers on the street, as well as the support of his police chiefs,” Dyer said at a noon news conference outside Fresno police headquarters. “He was responsible for ensuring that crime was rescued in the city of Los Angeles at a time with other cities were seeing an increase in crime.”

Dyer praised Villaraigosa for opposing prison realignment under AB 109, legislation passed in 2011 to relieve the state’s overcrowded prison system by shifting nonviolent offenders from state prisons to county jails.

“They were doing reform on the cheap,” Villariagosa said. “They weren’t giving the county the resources.”

At the event, Villaraigosa also received the endorsement of the Fresno Police Officers’ Assn. and the Fresno County Deputy Sheriff’s Assn.

Villaraigosa vowed that, if elected, he wouldn’t be a big-city politician who just flies over the interior of the state, rarely stopping to hear voters’ concerns. He said he had already been to the Central Valley dozens of times since exploring a bid for governor.

When asked why Republicans in the Central Valley should vote for him over Republican businessman John Cox, Villaraigosa gave a pointed response.

“A vote for John Cox is a vote for Gavin Newsom,” he said, effectively saying that Cox doesn’t have a chance of beating Newsom in the November general election.

Share
Advertisement

Newsom warns of divisive Democratic battle if he and Villaraigosa advance to general election for California governor

Gavin Newsom speaks with media in San Francisco before departing on a weeklong California bus tour on Tuesday.
(Jay L. Clendenin/Los Angeles Times)

Gubernatorial front-runner Gavin Newsom on Tuesday predicted a bruising, divisive general-election campaign with $100 million spent against him if he and fellow Democrat Antonio Villaraigosa emerge as the top two winners in the June 5 primary.

“You want a race that’s a just knock-out, drag-down [between] Democrats driving down turnout? I think that’s guaranteed to do that,” Newsom told reporters on his campaign bus.

He was pushing back at a narrative among pundits that his campaign’s efforts to boost the candidacy of Republican John Cox could ultimately hurt Democratic efforts to retake the House in the fall. The conventional wisdom is that having a Republican at the top of the ticket on the November ballot would increase GOP voter turnout, which could help vulnerable Republican members of Congress hold on to their seats.

Newsom argued the opposite, saying that having Democrats consolidate behind one candidate in the general election would do more to create unity and passion among their voters than a Democrat-on-Democrat battle.

“If you have a governor’s race where you can line up the Democratic agenda and support the down-ballot ticket and unite the party, and instead of spending resources attacking one another spend those very sizable resources building a war chest … I think that’s a lot more powerful than, with all due respect, John Cox driving huge turnout,” he said.

Newsom made the remarks in an 80-minute interview with reporters aboard his bus as it drove from San Francisco to San Jose. The lieutenant governor plans to crisscross the state, hitting about two dozen events in the run-up to the June 5 primary.

He kicked off the tour with a rally outside San Francisco City Hall, pledging to grapple with poverty, economic inequality and homelessness if elected governor.

“Aristotle was right: You can’t live a good life in an unjust society,” he told cheering supporters. “We’re here in the richest state in America and the poorest state in America. That needs to end.”

Newsom noted that although California has the fifth-largest economy in the world, 8 million of its residents live below the poverty line and one-quarter of the nation’s homeless live in the state.

“We can do more. We can do better,” he said. “It’s a question of intentionality, a question of audacity, a question of courage to recognize and reconcile that we need to do more and better.”

He urged supporters to not let his commanding lead in the polls lead to overconfidence.

“Let’s get this done and take nothing for granted over the next seven days,” said Newsom, who was accompanied by his wife, Jennifer, and the youngest of their four children.

Share

Prosecutors step up targeting of illegal pot farms in California

Top federal and state prosecutors in California raised alarms Tuesday over the growing problem of illegal marijuana farms — including many tied to Mexico-based drug cartels — in remote public forests and parks.

They promised a stepped-up effort to shut them down.

“We are going to do everything in our power to get after this problem as vigorously and as strongly as we possibly can,” U.S. Atty. McGregor W. Scott told gathered law enforcement officials and reporters at the federal courthouse in Sacramento on Tuesday.

He said U.S. Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions has taken a “keen interest” in the problem and got Congress to recently allocate $2.5 million for greater enforcement efforts, while the California National Guard is assigning 70 more people to help with eradication efforts. State Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra, who has criticized Sessions over immigration enforcement and other issues, on Tuesday welcomed the partnership with federal prosecutors.

Last year, 1.4 million illegal marijuana plants were seized in national forests in California, the vast majority of the plants seized on such lands nationwide, officials said. California is the top source of illegal marijuana for the United States, exporting more to other states than is provided by Mexico, according to Bill Ruzzamenti, director of a local High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas program.

Illegal, commercial pot cultivation has been a problem on federal public lands for more than a decade, Scott acknowledged, but he said new scientific research has raised red flags about the use of a banned pesticide, Carbofuran, that has killed wildlife, polluted streams and soil and put at risk law enforcement officers and the public.

Siskiyou County Sheriff Jon Lopey said he needs the help of state and federal law enforcement to stem the tide of illegal pot cultivation, much of which is guarded by armed criminals and dangerous booby traps.

“We’ve been besieged in recent years and absolutely overwhelmed,” Lopey said.

Sessions also has threatened to go after state-sanctioned marijuana businesses, but Scott said his top priorities are prosecuting interstate trafficking, organized crime and illegal pot farms on federal lands.

“There is so much black-market marijuana in California that we could use all of our resources going after just the black market and never get there,” he said.

Share
Advertisement

Chairwoman of California’s state campaign watchdog agency resigns amid power struggle

One week before the election, Jodi Remke on Tuesday submitted her resignation as chairwoman of California’s state campaign watchdog agency amid turmoil as other members of its governing panel were moving to reduce her powers.

The resignation, which takes effect Friday, comes after a majority of the state Fair Political Practices Commission supported the creation of two subcommittees to provide input on key decisions that previously have been made largely by Remke, who is the only member of the panel who has a full-time role.

Remke said she is “extremely proud” of accomplishments that include a crackdown on serious campaign finance violations and making it easier for the public to get information on lobbyists and personal finances of elected officials.

“And although I remain concerned with the proposed changes to the commission’s longstanding governance structure, I’m confident that during this busy election cycle staff will continue to build on the significant progress we have made in advancing governmental integrity and the public’s trust in government,” Remke said in a resignation letter Tuesday to Gov. Jerry Brown, who appointed her to the post in 2014.

Remke is leaving a week before the June 5 statewide primary election and just days before the commission considers a final vote on a restructuring of the agency that transfers some of the chairwoman’s powers to other commissioners on issues including policy changes and legal and personnel matters.

Remke is becoming the presiding administrative law judge for the state Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, a move that sources say has been in the works for months.

Share

It could be another ‘Year of the Woman,’ but in California, probably not

Comedian-turned-activist Chelsea Handler made a prediction a few months ago.

“They had the ‘Year of the Woman’ in 1992,” Handler told a crowd, almost all women, who had gathered in a Los Angeles hotel ballroom over avocado toast and roasted tomatoes at a brunch for Emily’s List, the group dedicated to electing pro-choice Democratic women.

“This is obviously going to be a bigger year for women.… Hopefully we’ll win so much we’ll be so sick and tired of winning.”

In California, that’s a wish that is likely to remain unfulfilled, with many top-tier female candidates at risk of getting left behind in the approaching primaries.

It’s not for lack of candidates. On June 5, a record 57 women from the two major parties — mostly Democrats — will be on the ballot for House races in California, a 24% increase from the last record in 2012. Nationwide, it’s about 400, another record. Many are established professionals — doctors, nurses, lawyers, technology executives and nonprofit directors — who are running to oppose President Trump.

But in California, crowded primaries in crucial battleground districts, entrenched incumbents, notoriously expensive media markets and a top-two primary system that may prove disastrous for Democrats are some of the formidable barriers women face.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

California housing crisis podcast: How evictions affect people’s lives

The big fight in California this year over tenant issues will be in November, when voters are likely to weigh in on an initiative that would expand rent control across the state.

But there are still a number of bills aimed at helping renters pending in the Legislature, including making evictions more difficult and making it harder to convert rent-controlled apartments to condominiums.

On this episode of Gimme Shelter: The California Housing Crisis Pod, we talk about the bills’ chances and why tenant legislation often fails to advance. Our guest is Fernando Nadal, a Sacramento organizer with Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment, who tells us his eviction story.

Gimme Shelter,” a biweekly podcast that looks at why it’s so expensive to live in California and what the state can do about it, features Liam Dillon, who covers housing affordability issues for the Los Angeles Times’ Sacramento bureau, and Matt Levin, data reporter for CALmatters.

You can subscribe to “Gimme Shelter” on iTunes, Stitcher, Soundcloud, Google Play and Overcast.

Share

Trump again tweets support of Cox, who hopes to capitalize on the president’s endorsement with new TV ad

President Trump reiterated his support for gubernatorial candidate John Cox on Monday as the GOP hopeful plans to launch a television ad touting the endorsement in a bid to consolidate the Republican vote.

“California has a rare opportunity to turn things around and solve its high crime, high tax, problems - along with so many others. On June 5th., vote for GOP Gubernatorial Candidate JOHN COX, a really good and highly competent man. He’ll Make California Great Again!” Trump tweeted.

Trump first tweeted his endorsement on May 18, and his campaign last week put out a video about the nod that was widely shared on social media.

The moves come as Republican leaders have grown increasingly concerned that if a GOP candidate does not make one of the top two spots in the June 5 primary, it could dampen turnout in the November election and harm the party’s ability to hold control of the U.S. House of Representatives. Cox is competitive for the No. 2 spot in the primary, according to recent polling.

Neither Cox nor Travis Allen, his top Republican rival, secured the 60% vote required to win the state GOP’s endorsement at its convention earlier this year.

However, the Trump nod, which came as Californians began voting by mail, was viewed a critical signal to the more than 4 million people who supported Trump in the state in the 2016 presidential election.

Allen and his supporters have pushed back against the endorsement, saying that the president was led astray by members of the GOP establishment, such as House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield.

“Donald Trump listened to Kevin McCarthy and the rest of the swamp-dwellers in Washington, D.C., who care nothing about the governor’s seat,” Allen told the Times of San Diego on Sunday as he had a rally at the border.

Allen also urged supporters to take pictures at the event and tweet them to the president to show that he “is the candidate that the people want in California.”

Meanwhile, Cox is launching a 15-second television ad touting the president’s endorsement.

“President Donald Trump endorsed John Cox for governor saying California deserves a great governor who understands borders, crime and lowering taxes. John Cox is the man,” the narrator says over pictures of Trump and Cox. “Support the president’s choice: Republican John Cox for governor.”

His campaign said the ad would be aired statewide. However, in financial disclosures filed with the state on Thursday, Cox’s campaign reported having $124,000 cash on hand and debts of nearly $278,000 as of May 19. Cox, a multimillionaire who has donated more than $4 million to his campaign, reported chipping in an additional quarter-million dollars since then.

Share
Advertisement

Three candidates in California’s race for governor have millions to spend in final days before primary

Three Democratic candidates for governor have millions of dollars to spend in the closing days of the California primary, according to campaign finance reports filed with the secretary of state’s office. Their rivals are badly lagging, though the top Republican candidate in the race has the ability to pour more of his personal wealth into his campaign.

The reports, filed Thursday with the state, insure that Californians will continue to see a barrage of advertisements and mailers up until the June 5 primary.

Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, the long-time polling and fundraising front-runner, once again leads the pack with nearly $9.8 million cash on hand. That’s roughly the amount he spent between April 22 and May 19, the period covered by the fundraising reports. About 85% was spent on television ads.

Newsom also raised more than $1.5 million during that period, with major donations from labor unions, as well as wine industry interests and a law enforcement political action committee. Notable individual contributors included Los Angeles Chargers owner Alex Spanos, a major GOP donor, and HBO’s “Real Time” host, Bill Maher.

Newsom also has $2.9 million parked in his 2014 lieutenant governor’s campaign account.

Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa reported having $2.3 million cash on hand, having spent $5.8 million in the month-long reporting period. He also allocated the vast majority of the nearly $5.5 million he spent on television ads. The remainder went to polling, political consultants, fundraising and other campaign expenses.

California agricultural organizations were among some of the biggest donors during the reporting period. Blue Diamond Growers, which represents two-thirds of California’s almond growers, contributed $40,000 to Villaraigosa’s campaign. California Citrus Mutual donated $24,000 and the California Rice political action committee wrote a check for $20,000.

Both Newsom and Villaraigosa have multiple independent expenditure committees with large reserves of cash supporting them — $2.4 million for pro-Newsom efforts and $1.8 million for pro-Villaraigosa efforts.

Villaraigosa is in a tight contest with Republican businessman John Cox for second place in the June primary. He reported spending $1.7 million during the reporting period, fairly evenly divided between television and radio advertising, telephone banks and campaign mailers.

Cox raised $506,410, including $50,000 from Cox’s personal bank account, plus $100,000 he loaned to his campaign. That comes on top of the more than $4 million he’s already donated to his campaign.

He ended the fundraising period with $124,000 cash in his campaign account, but political observers question whether he will invest more of his wealth in the race, particularly to tout the Friday endorsement by President Trump.

Of the three candidates in the single digits in the polls, only one has notable resources. State Treasurer John Chiang has nearly $4.4 million cash on hand to spend between now and June 5. He reported spending $4.1 million in the most recent reporting period, while he raised nearly $614,000.

Fellow Democrat Delaine Eastin reported having $127,000 cash on hand, and spending almost the same amount during the reporting period.

Republican Assemblyman Travis Allen, meanwhile, reported $37,540.

Times staff writer Ryan Menezes contributed to this report.

Share

In new ad, John Chiang says Democratic rivals have turned California governor’s race into a ‘scam’

State Treasurer John Chiang is taking his two main Democratic rivals in the governor’s race to task in a new ad, hitting Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom for boosting a Republican and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa for his wealthy backers.

“I call it like I see it. The race for governor has turned into a scam,” Chiang says in the new spot.

He singles out Newsom, the front-runner in the race who has been running campaign ads against leading Republican John Cox, calling him too conservative. The attacks may actually serve to help Cox in the June election by consolidating Republicans behind him. Newsom has said he’d prefer to face a GOP contender than a fellow Democrat in November.

He also calls out Villaraigosa, who has been aided in recent weeks by millions of dollars in spending from an outside group funded by wealthy charter school advocates including Netflix founder Reed Hastings and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

“It’s everything that’s wrong with politics. And none of it is helping struggling families,” Chiang says in the ad, before vowing to support affordable housing and universal healthcare.

Chiang has struggled to gain traction in the polls, while Cox and Villaraigosa have battled for the second-place slot in the top-two primary.

Share
Advertisement

Rohrabacher’s remarks about selling homes to gay people could be another wrench in crucial California primary

Republican Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (Costa Mesa) told a group of California Realtors this month that it should be OK for homeowners to refuse to sell their homes to gays and lesbians, prompting the National Association of Realtors to withdraw its endorsement.

“Every homeowner should be able to make a decision not to sell their home to someone (if) they don’t agree with their lifestyle,” the congressman said, according to the Orange County Register.

Rohrabacher, who is prone to off-the-wall statements and positions, told the paper in an interview, “We’ve drawn a line on racism, but I don’t think we should extend that line. … A homeowner should not be required to be in business with someone they think is doing something that is immoral.”

His coastal Orange County contest is considered crucial for Democrats seeking to retake control of the House. But the late entrance of well-known Republican Scott Baugh into the race ignited fears that the congressman and Baugh would win more votes than any of the Democrats on the ballot, and lock the rival party out of contention in November.

In California, the top-two vote getters advance to the November election regardless of party.

The system makes it hard to predict outcomes, but another inflammatory remark from Rohrabacher could send voters who would otherwise choose him to a Republican alternative.

As he tends to do, the congressman is standing by this one.

“Congressman Rohrabacher does not believe the federal government should force those with strong religious convictions into a personal or business relationship that is contrary to their religion,” a campaign spokesperson said in a statement.

Rohrabacher has usually sailed to reelection, but his district voted for Hillary Clinton for president in 2016, and his connections to Russia have put him in the spotlight amid the investigation into Russian meddling in the election.

Times staff writer Sarah D. Wire contributed to this report.

Share

Trump’s daughter-in-law touts his endorsement of John Cox for California governor in new video

President Trump’s reelection campaign released a video on Thursday touting his endorsement of GOP businessman John Cox for governor of California.

The video, which has been viewed more than 272,000 times and shared more than 2,500 times in less than 24 hours, could be a boon to Cox’s effort to consolidate the Republican vote and come in second in the June 5 primary.

“President Trump endorsed businessman John Cox in his campaign for governor because John Cox is the one person in this race who will cut taxes, secure the border and fight crime,” Lara Trump, the wife of the president’s son Eric, says in the 48-second video. “As a successful businessman, John Cox can reform California’s government by cutting taxes, including the regressive state gas tax, and reduce state spending.”

She urges viewers to visit Cox’s website and to vote for him in the primary.

Trump endorsed Cox with a tweet last Friday, a show of support that could significantly boost Cox’s standings in the race if the millions of Californians who voted for Trump heed his call.

Cox has already started airing radio ads featuring the endorsement, and is expected to send out mailers and air television ads touting it.

It comes as prominent Republicans in the state are calling on Cox’s Republican rival, Assemblyman Travis Allen of Huntington Beach, to drop out of the race so GOP voters can align behind one candidate.

No Republican has been elected statewide in California since 2006. The president’s boost is widely viewed as an effort by House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield) and others to make sure a Republican appears on the November ballot to boost GOP voter turnout — which could help protect California’s seven Republican-held congressional districts that are targeted by Democrats.

Share
Advertisement

Proposal to reduce California pot taxes shelved

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

California lawmakers on Friday shelved a proposal to reduce pot tax rates in an effort to help licensed businesses compete with the black market.

The sidelining of the proposal came a week after a report found pot tax revenue is far below projections.

The bill, AB 3157, would have reduced the state excise tax on cannabis from 15% to 11% and suspended a cultivation tax that charges $148 per pound.

“It’s a win for the illegal market, so of course I’m not happy about that,” said Assemblyman Tom Lackey (R-Palmdale), an author of the bill. “Until we bring the price difference between legal and illegal markets closer together, I think tax revenues will continue to be struggling.”

Hezekiah Allen, head of the California Growers Assn., said he would continue to pursue tax reform to allow licensed businesses to better compete.

“We are definitely disappointed but not surprised,” Allen said of the Assembly Appropriations Committee’s action. “With the tax revenue coming in so low in the first quarter, it seemed unlikely that a proposal which would further reduce that revenue would be able to pass.”

An analysis by legislative staff said the cuts could have reduced revenue to the state by up to $297 million in the fiscal year starting July 1. Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher (D-San Diego), the committee chair, said the state could not afford the lost revenue from the proposed tax cuts.

“It was really expensive,” she said.

Share

De León still badly trails Feinstein in money race ahead of primary

Share
Advertisement

California bill to cap prices on many healthcare services is shelved in Assembly

Assemblyman Ash Kalra (D-San Jose)
Assemblyman Ash Kalra (D-San Jose)
(Jonathan J. Cooper / Associated Press)

A sweeping California proposal to curb healthcare costs by imposing price controls sputtered Friday, but backers vowed to continue the effort next year.

The measure, Assembly Bill 3087 by Assemblyman Ash Kalra (D-San Jose), would have created a state commission to determine prices for a large swath of healthcare services, including doctor’s visits, hospital stays and medical procedures. The bill would have applied to the commercial insurance market, including those who get healthcare coverage through their employers, but not those on public plans such as Medi-Cal.

The plan was sponsored by labor unions and consumer groups, and it faced fierce opposition from physicians and hospitals.

It was shelved in the Assembly Appropriations Committee, a key fiscal panel.

“Doctors, private and public hospitals, insurers, healthcare advocates, purchasers, organized labor, business, and the public recognize the importance of this issue,” Kalra said in a statement. “This is the type of attention and investment we need to find a solution to the skyrocketing costs of healthcare.”

Kalra said he would convene academics and policy experts to craft a new version of the bill next year, and sponsors signaled they’d revisit the effort again.

“The California labor movement is committed to seeing this through to the finish line, and we will be back next year with a new bill,” said Art Pulaski, executive secretary-treasurer of the California Labor Federation.

The California Medical Assn., which opposed the bill, cheered Friday’s action.

The group “applauds the Assembly for recognizing that this deeply flawed legislation would result in enormous costs to the state and restricted access to care for millions,” said Dr. Theodore M. Mazer, a San Diego ear, nose and throat specialist who is president of the physician organization.

He said the group is committed to working on “a practical solution that addresses the affordability and accessibility of healthcare in California.”

Share

A silent protest as Assemblywoman Cristina Garcia returns to work

Share
Advertisement

Villaraigosa campaign accuses Newsom’s backers of foul play in California governor’s race

Gavin Newsom speaks at the California Democrats' state convention in San Diego on Feb. 24.
(Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times)

Antonio Villaraigosa’s campaign filed a complaint Thursday against an independent political committee supporting Democratic rival Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom in the governor’s race, alleging that the committee failed to disclose its efforts to help the top Republican in the race.

The complaint, filed with the state Fair Politicial Practices Commission, accuses Citizens Supporting Gavin Newsom for Governor of assisting the campaign of GOP candidate John Cox with a television ad.

The complaint alleges that the effort is an attempt to help Cox finish in the top-two primary in June to advance the Rancho Santa Fe businessman to a general election face-off with Newsom, the front-runner in the race — instead of Villaraigosa or another Democrat. No Republican has won a statewide race in California since 2006, so facing Cox in the November election would be to Newsom’s advantage.

The complaint states that California law requires the political committee to disclose its efforts to help Cox. It also alleges that the organization failed to disclose in a timely fashion the major donations it had received.

Citizens Supporting Gavin Newsom for Governor has received major financial backing from Blue Shield of California, a handful of labor organizations and Gordon and Ann Getty, Newsom’s longtime financial benefactors.

One of the ads cited in the complaint reminded viewers that President Trump endorsed Cox for governor, which could help Cox consolidate the GOP vote in the primary. The complaint cites several news stories and columns highlighting that Newsom himself has said he would prefer to face a Republican in November.

“Republican John Cox says he’s glad Trump is president,” the ad says. “Cox says we need tough border security, including Trump’s wall. Cox is a conservative businessman who supports Trump’s tax cuts.”

Share

California lawmakers seek to waive taxes for medical marijuana given to indigent patients

Patrons shop at Bud and Bloom, a Santa Ana marijuana dispensary.
(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

Last year, a Santa Cruz medical marijuana group headed by Valerie Leveroni Corral gave away $230,000 worth of cannabis to low-income residents with medical problems including HIV/AIDS and cancer.

However, California’s new pot legalization rules that took effect Jan. 1 now require her to pay taxes on such donations. If she made the same level of charitable contributions of cannabis this year, her tax would be up to $85,000. “It’s just too costly,” said Corral, director of the Wo/Men’s Alliance for Medical Marijuana, which has been shut down for the last five months.

On Thursday, state lawmakers announced a new bill to exempt compassionate care programs from paying state cannabis taxes when they are providing free medical pot to financially disadvantaged people living with serious health conditions.

“Compassionate care programs aid people who are seriously ill and suffering, and we should be helping them thrive, not squeezing them with business taxes that are forcing many of them to close,” said Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), who authored the measure with Assemblyman Jim Wood (D-Santa Rosa).

The requirement to pay taxes was included in Proposition 64, which was approved in 2016 by state voters. The measure legalized the growing and sale of recreational pot in addition to requiring those firms and medical marijuana cooperatives to pay a 15% excise tax on sales and a cultivation tax on top of existing sales taxes.

Wood said the proposed new law would allow nonprofit groups to “once again receive donations from cultivators and help patients treat their symptoms and maintain the best quality of life possible.”

Corral welcomed the legislation. “It’s a really good start,” she said.

Share
Advertisement

Sen. Mark Warner raising money at Brentwood fundraiser next week

Mark R. Warner (D-Va.) speaks during an Intelligence Committee meeting.
(Joe Raedle / Getty Images)

Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) is raising money in Los Angeles next week. Donors will gather at a private home Wednesday for Warner, the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

The reception for Warner, a former Virginia governor, is being hosted by local influential couples. It will be held at the Brentwood home of attorney Barry Porter and real estate agent Lea Porter. The other hosts are ICM Partners co-founder Chris Silbermann and creative consultant Julia Franz, and Universal Filmed Entertainment Chairman Jeff Shell and Laura Shell.

Contributions will go to the Friends of Mark Warner PAC, according to a copy of the invitation obtained by The Times. An attendee ticket costs $500, and prices go up to $5,400 for someone to be called a host.

Share

One voter, two registration forms: Errors reported in rollout of California’s ‘motor voter’ system

California’s elections officials have found themselves with an unexpected headache ahead of the June 5 primary: potentially thousands of cases where two voter registration forms were created for one person, errors caused by the state’s “motor voter” program that launched last month.

But local and state officials said Wednesday they don’t believe the foul-up has resulted in actual mistakes in California’s voter database. The errors are being resolved one at a time in each county’s elections office, a lengthy process that coincides with one of the busiest periods of the year.

“We don’t have the time to be researching this, but we have to because we’re being thrown into it,” said Kammi Foote, registrar of voters in Inyo County.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Some see a Newsom strategy to boost Republican John Cox: ‘Putin would be proud’

California’s gubernatorial primary boils down to this: It will determine whether Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom is a slam-dunk winner in November — or still must fight to be elected governor.

The former San Francisco mayor is a virtual cinch to finish No. 1 in the June 5 “top two” primary and advance to the November general election. All the polls show that.

If the No. 2 finisher is Republican businessman John Cox and he faces Democrat Newsom, it’s game over. Newsom can start writing his inaugural speech.

Read More

Share

New poll shows Cox, Villaraigosa still locked in tight contest for second place in race for California governor

Republican John Cox and Democrat Antonio Villaraigosa continue to battle it out for second place in the June primary, according to a new poll released Wednesday night by the Public Policy Institute of California.

The findings come after a USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll released this week showed the two neck and neck in the race, which will send the top two finishers to the November ballot.

Democrat Gavin Newsom, long the front-runner in the race, won the support of 25% of likely voters, with Cox winning the support of 19% and Villaraigosa 15%, according to the PPIC poll. Republican Assemblyman Travis Allen of Huntington Beach won the support of 11% of likely voters, while Democrats John Chiang and Delaine Eastin were stuck in the single digits.

The poll showed 15% of voters were undecided in the contest, a lower number than in the USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times survey.

In the Senate contest, incumbent Sen. Dianne Feinstein dominated the race, winning 41% of likely voters, according to the PPIC poll. Her Democratic rival, state Sen. Kevin de León, won the backing of 17%. More than one-third of likely voters were undecided in that race.

The poll surveyed 1,702 Californians by phone May 11 to May 20. The margin of error was 3.1% overall, 3.4% for registered voters and 4.1% for likely voters.

Share
Advertisement

Meg Whitman backs Antonio Villaraigosa for governor

Republican billionaire Meg Whitman, who spent $144 million of her own money on her unsuccessful gubernatorial bid in 2010, is backing Democrat Antonio Villaraigosa’s campaign for governor this year.

Whitman is among the co-hosts of a Silicon Valley fundraiser for the former Los Angeles mayor on Thursday night.

“From her perspective, Antonio’s better on the economy and education than Gavin [Newsom],” the Democratic front-runner in the race, said a source close to Whitman who asked not to be named to speak freely about her position. “While she’s a Republican, she supports the candidate who she thinks is best qualified for the position.”

Tickets for the fundraiser cost from 1,000 to $25,000, according to an invitation obtained by The Times. Other co-hosts include Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings, who has donated $7 million to an independent expenditure group supporting Villaraigosa; former state Controller Steve Westly, who spent more than $35 million on his unsuccessful 2006 gubernatorial bid; and San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo.

A spokesman for one of Villaraigosa’s Democratic rivals blasted Villaraigosa for accepting the support.

“It’s fitting that Republican billionaire Meg Whitman has joined up with Antonio Villaraigosa’s billionaire crew to put on a high stake, high dollar fundraiser in yet another attempt to buy this election,” said Fabien Levy, spokesman for state Treasurer John Chiang. “... if past is prologue, Whitman is joining Antonio’s other billionaire buddies just to spend millions to lose.”

A spokesman for Newsom did not respond to a request for comment.

Whitman’s decision not to donate to the Republicans in the race, Assemblyman Travis Allen and businessman John Cox, comes as no surprise — they frequently criticize her on the campaign trail.

A spokesman for Cox declined to weigh in on the nod; Allen’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment.

The source close to Whitman said she got to know Villaraigosa in education circles. In 2011, when Villaraigosa was mayor, Whitman donated $500,000 to Los Angeles schools, including campuses he was overseeing as part of a nonprofit he created.

During her gubernatorial campaign, Whitman shared similar views to Villaraigosa on education — the need to reform schools that are failing underprivileged children, and a desire to decrease the clout of teachers’ unions and to support charter schools as an alternative to traditional public schools.

A representative for Villaraigosa’s campaign did not discuss the candidate’s positions on education when asked for comment about the fundraiser.

“[Whitman] is participating in a broad-based Silicon Valley event with many other supporters,” spokesman Luis Vizcaino said. “We are organizing a campaign that unites all Californians who agree that we need to grow our economy to create more middle-class jobs.”

Whitman, the former head of eBay and Hewlett-Packard, ran the most expensive campaign for governor in California’s history, ultimately spending $178.5 million on the race.

That year marked the last time there were closed primaries in the governor’s race, and Whitman tacked hard to the right on issues including immigration to beat then-Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner for the GOP nomination.

But she struggled in the general election against Jerry Brown, who was campaigning to return to the governor’s office decades after he left it. Brown and his allies worked to paint Whitman as a wealthy corporate leader who was more concerned with helping the rich than the state. Whitman also suffered self-inflected wounds — it was revealed she hadn’t voted most of her adult life and employed an immigrant in the U.S. illegally as a housekeeper.

After losing the race, she went back to the business world and stayed out of California politics, though she continued to be involved nationally. She was a national finance chairperson for the 2012 presidential campaign of Mitt Romney, her longtime mentor in the business world. She was also a major backer of Chris Christie’s 2016 presidential bid until he dropped out of the race and backed then-candidate Donald Trump.

Whitman was among the most prominent Republicans in the nation to speak out against Trump during the 2016 campaign, calling him a “dishonest demagogue” and comparing him to Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini.

She endorsed Democrat Hillary Clinton, and raised money, campaigned and voted for her.

Earlier this year, Whitman signed on as CEO of a Jeffrey Katzenberg-backed mobile content start-up and said she would never again run for public office.

Updated at 5:33 p.m.: This article was updated to add responses from other gubernatorial campaigns.

Share

Watch: Talking about the new USC/LAT poll

Did you miss the new USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times California poll? It showed that the fight for second place in the governor’s race is neck-and-neck between Republican John Cox and Democrat Antonio Villaraigosa.

Los Angeles Times Assistant Managing Editor/Politics Christina Bellantoni, USC pollster Jill Darling and Robert Shrum, director of USC’s Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics chatted about the poll on Facebook Live Wednesday, discussing what the numbers tell us about the June 5 primary.

You can watch the conversation above and learn more about how the statewide poll was conducted here.

If you missed our conversation about the national poll in January, check that out here.

Share
Advertisement

Tax bill and Obamacare repeal are potent issues in California congressional races, poll shows

With Democrats angling to win back control of the U.S. House, the new tax law and the failed attempt to repeal Obamacare may prove to be important campaign flashpoints against California Republicans, according to a new USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll.

Sixty percent of registered voters statewide approved of the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. The support was highest among Democrats and people who disapprove of President Trump, and concentrated in urban and coastal areas — which happen to be regions where there are several competitive congressional races.

A majority of voters, 54%, said they would be less likely to reelect their representative if that member of Congress voted to repeal the healthcare law.

Read More

Share

Running for fifth term, Feinstein now says capital punishment is unfair and ineffective

Sen. Dianne Feinstein says she now opposes the death penalty, a surprising reversal from her long-standing support for capital punishment — a stance that helped catapault her to the U.S. Senate 25 years ago.

“Several years ago I changed my view of the death penalty. It became crystal clear to me that the risk of unequal application is high and its effect on deterrence is low,” she said in a statement to The Times.

The shift is the latest example of Feinstein — who built her career as a moderate Democrat — embracing more liberal positions as she faces reelection in November in a state that has become increasingly progressive.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Why centrist Dianne Feinstein is moving so much to the left that she now opposes the death penalty

Dianne Feinstein built one of California’s most successful political brands by standing up to her party’s liberal wing.

In her first run for statewide office in 1990, she defiantly faced down raucous booing from California Democratic Party delegates angry over her support for the death penalty. Undeterred, she used footage of the public rebuke in campaign ads to show the state’s then more moderate population — including many Republicans — that she was tough, pragmatic and mainstream.

That centrist formula propelled Feinstein to the U.S. Senate two years later, and after one tough race, she’s coasted to reelection pretty much ever since.

Read More

Share

National Democrats burst into Orange County races over primary fears

After months of hand-wringing over the possibility of being shut out of crucial House races in California, national Democrats are overtly backing two of their own in crowded primaries as a last-ditch effort to prevent that from happening.

With the June 5 primary fast approaching, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has been engaged in a rigorous debate over whether it should make a more explicit play to elevate one Democrat over others in each of the races, a strategy that backfired spectacularly in one Texas race this year.

On Tuesday, the group’s independent expenditure arm began airing TV ads in support of Gil Cisneros, a navy veteran running in the 39th Congressional District to replace retiring Rep. Ed Royce (R-Fullerton).

The Spanish-language ad, titled “Sueño,” is running on Spanish-language cable and TV stations in Orange County and contrasts his work with youth education nonprofits with those of Republicans who are “denying Dreamers a path to citizenship.”

Its campaign side also started joint ads with the campaign of Harley Rouda, a real estate executive hoping to unseat GOP Rep. Dana Rohrabacher of Costa Mesa, highlighting his stances on women’s equality and gun control.

Track the California races that could flip the House

In California’s top-two primary, which advances the top two vote-getters regardless of party, letting nasty intraparty primaries play out could mean having to choose between two Republicans in November.

The risk is so acute that on Tuesday, election handicapper Cook Political Report downgraded Democrats’ chances to win California’s two open seat races, the 39th District and the battle to replace Rep. Darrell Issa in the 49th District, switching them from “lean Democratic” to “toss-up.”

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee previously had elevated Cisneros and Rouda to the its “Red to Blue” program, stopping short of a formal endorsement but indicating nevertheless which campaigns they preferred.

But Democratic leaders were hesitant to do more. As recently as two weeks ago, DCCC officials hoped attacking some Republicans in the races could help ensure the top Democrat gets through.

But with a dizzying 33 candidates between the two races, it wasn’t clear that would be enough. The latest move, is a clear indication Democrats aren’t willing to risk it.

“The role of party organizations in primaries in California is and should be greater than in any other state,” said Jesse Ferguson, a Democratic consultant who ran the committee’s independent expenditure arm in 2014, in a recent interview. “Because losing the primary could be tantamount to losing the general [election].”

Share
Advertisement