For Clients & Friends of The Gualco Group, Inc.

IN THIS ISSUE – “This approach is ‘Who can I buy off?’ “

          Assembly Speaker’s political advisor, commenting on rival’s campaign tactics

Capital News & Notes (CN&N) harvests California policy, legislative and regulatory insights from dozens of media and official sources for the past week. Please feel free to forward this unique client service.

FOR THE WEEK ENDING OCT. 14, 2022

 

Rendon & Rivas Take Assembly Speakership Battle to the Campaigns

Poltico’s California Playbook

The ongoing Assembly speakership struggle has made this year anything but typical — as a rival campaign machine is demonstrating. A political action committee funded by Assembly members who are allies of speaker contender Assembly Member Robert Rivas — with a Rivas loyalist serving as treasurer — is spending money to elect aspiring members of an enormous incoming class.

Those new lawmakers will have a say in who serves as speaker. The committee’s name telegraphs it pretty clearly: Democratic Leadership Coalition. A spokesperson put an even finer point on it: Donors want “to support Democratic candidates throughout the state in key races and ensure Robert Rivas is the next Assembly speaker.”

Rivas backers believe they are clearing a path to replace a speaker who has lost his way. Former Rendon campaign general Bill Wong argued the play puts arriving members in an “untenable position” while setting a “horrible precedent” for the speakership. “The speaker’s role is to protect the majority,” Wong said, but “this approach is: ‘who can I buy off?’”

Most of the beneficiaries are Democrats running against Republicans in safely blue seats. In other words, they don’t need the extra help getting elected in November and thus won’t be priorities for Speaker Anthony Rendon and the party. That includes a candidatewho has publicly pledged allegiance to Rivas and another whom the PAC’s treasurer referred to as “the Rivas candidate.”

Other recipients are frontline contenders like Christy Holstege and Esmeralda Soria — caucus priority candidates who are emphases for the speaker-driven system, although the PAC money has so far not flowed to defend vulnerable incumbents. Democratic Leadership Coalition members have donated directly to battleground candidates, and they’d collectively sent about $800,000 to the California Democratic Party this cycle as of Friday afternoon — most of it before the speakership fight detonated.

In other words, the two systems are functioning in parallel — a process that you can see as complementing, circumventing, or competing with Rendon’s operation. This is partially an effort by Rivas and his cohort to cultivate a base. It is partially a declaration of dissipated confidence in Rendon. It is unmistakably an attempt to reorient the balance of power. We’ll see the results soon enough, when the November election yields to a speaker vote.

 

QUICK TAKES:

Newsom Matches Brown’s Veto Rate

CalMatters

Before the legislative session ended in August, state lawmakers sent Newsom 1,166 bills, of which he signed 997 and vetoed 169, according to his office. That makes for a veto rate of 14.5%, slightly lower than the 16.5% he notched in 2019, his first year in office, but higher than in the pandemic-impacted years of 2020 and 2021, when he vetoed 13% and 7.9% of bills, respectively. That’s more or less in line with Newsom’s predecessor, fellow Democrat Jerry Brown, who vetoed between 10% and 15% of bills that reached his desk during his second eight-year term as governor.

 

Dry Water Wells Increase 50%

Associated Press

More than 1,200 wells have run dry this year statewide, a nearly 50% increase over the same period last year, according to the California Department of Water Resources. By Contrast, fewer than 10 dry wells were reported annually in 2018, 2019, and 2020.

The groundwater crisis is most severe in the San Joaquin Valley, California’s agricultural heartland, which exports fruirts, vegetables and nuts around the world.

https://apnews.com/article/california-droughts-climate-and-environment-e49c8c5c34ead7ef7f83b770082f20bc?campaign_id=49&emc=edit_ca_20221005&instance_id=73765&nl=california-today&regi_id=80823166&segment_id=109051&te=1&user_id=ebedd9f525ae3910eeb31de6bb6c4da0

 

US Hispanic Voters Trend Republican…In California, Not So Much

Sacramento Bee

Swing state Republicans are making a bet this fall that they can draw more Latino voters to the GOP, helping to flip critical House and Senate seats that could give them control of Congress.

They’re pouring money into battlegrounds in Colorado, Florida, Nevada and Texas, aiming to take advantage of a rightward trend among working-class Latino voters that became apparent during the Trump administration.

But one big state is proving to be an exception to the trend: California. Polls and recent election results show California Latinos by and large remain rooted in the Democratic Party, reflecting the legacy of the anti-immigrant rhetoric California Republicans employed in the 1990s and the rise of left-leaning Hispanic leaders who have focused on delivering for their communities.

In 2020, precincts with higher concentrations of Latino voters were more likely to support President Joe Biden. And despite expressing initial reservations about Gov. Gavin Newsom, Latinos voters overwhelmingly voted against the recall at 78%.

The high Latino support was unchanged from 2018.

“Democrats fight for Latinos, whether they’re fifth-generation or just came across the border,” said Sen. Maria Elena Durazo, D-Los Angeles. “We will fight because that’s who we are and that’s who we care about.”

Latinos appear to moving away from the Democratic Party in other states. The National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials’, better known as NALEO, most recent poll found Latino voters favor Democrats over Republicans in congressional races by a margin of 54% to 30%.

The 24-point lead is down from 2018 when it was 47 points. A NBC/Telemundo poll showed a similar decrease.

Those numbers fueled recent Republican ad buys in Texas, Nevada and other states that take aim at Democrats over inflation and expensive housing, while painting the GOP as the party of the American Dream.

Mike Madrid, a Republican Latino voting trends expert, called California the “exception” to a pattern unfolding across the country of Hispanic working class voters moving rightward. “There was a strategic error on the side of Democrats assuming that Latinos would all vote the same way forever. They’re not. They are in California. But you have to study why California is unique.”

Though outnumbered, conservative Latinos have been elected to prominent offices recently in California, most notably Sen. Rosicile Ochoa Bogh and U.S. Rep. Mike Garcia, R-Santa Clarita. They are trying to make up ground after years of Republicans driving the Latino electorate into the arms of Democrats.

Despite California Latinos’ reluctance to vote for Trump in 2020, the state’s Republican party made inroads during his administration with three conservative Hispanic leaders: state Sen. Ochoa Bogh, U.S. Rep. Garcia and Assemblywoman Suzette Martinez Vallardes, R-Santa Clarita.

Ochoa Bogh, the first Republican Latina elected to the California Senate, called it a product of Latinos being “smart people” and realizing the quality of life has gone down under one party.

She also cited better messaging by Republicans in recent years, a change from post-Prop 187 rhetoric, which she called “appalling.” “I have seen a change in being more aware of language…If we continue to do that, I think we’re going to see more Latinos identifying more with the conservative Republican,” she said.

She acknowledged her party faces an uphill battle due to the progressive mindset that has taken a strong hold on California. Ochoa Bogh said Latino constituents will sometimes judge her because of the “R” next to her name.

But after speaking to her, they will often change their minds and reconsider “what a Republican stands for.” Ochoa Bogh, a daughter of two Mexican immigrants, calls her family’s story the “story of the American Dream.” And in her position, she prioritizes strengthening schools, lowering taxes and more affordable house prices — issues on which she said Latino voters are increasingly like-minded. “It’s 2022 and being the first one (Republican Latina in the Senate) is very unique, but I’m grateful….And hopefully, give hope to many people in California and give them the courage to stand up for what they believe in,” Ochoa Bogh said.

Before 1994, the Latino vote in California only slightly leaned to the Democrats. Republican Gov. Pete Wilson won 44% of the Hispanic vote in 1990. Then came Proposition 187 in 1994, which sought to ban immigrants from receiving social services, health care and education.

Wilson supported the initiative and voters approved it. Legal challenges prevented the law from taking effect, but more racially charged measures followed including Proposition 209, prohibiting affirmative action, and Proposition 227, an effort to end bilingual education.

The measures coincided with the Latino population exploding in the state. They led to backlash at the time, but also set a decades-long “anti-Republican narrative” for Latinos, said Mindy Romero, director of USC’s Center for Inclusive Democracy. Romero added that the Latino community gained a “whole generation of advocates” through Prop. 187, many of whom contribute to organizations responsible for mobilizing voters. “Prop. 187 sent this shift in the Latino electorate that has not only influenced the Latino turnout story here in California, but has really influenced California politics,” Romero said.

Madrid said the mid-1990s bills “decimated the Republican Party” for years. He said most of the progress made in the last 30 years was wiped out during the Trump era with his party’s continual anti-Latino rhetoric.

Romero concurred, calling Trump a “booster shot” to younger generations. “Republicans have made it very easy to be painted as anti-Latino and racist…And now it’s as close to anything being irreversible as possible in California” Madrid said.

Madrid believes there’s more to why California is an anomaly to the Latino rightward shift. He argues that California’s declining middle class is the main reason that the state primarily votes blue.

For years, lower- and middle-income families have left California for other states, while wealthier people have been moving to California. “Poor people vote for Democrats,” Madrid said. “Rich people vote for Democrats. Middle class people tend to vote more Republican. And that’s what’s happening with Latinos in other parts of the country, where there is more economic mobility…California is one of the worst states economically to be in as a Latino.”

Madrid pointed to a lack of middle-income Latino economic agenda in the state, with progressive lawmakers too focused on issues that won’t help solve the “crushing economic concerns.

“We focus on farmworker bills,” Madrid said. “Those are important, but they’re symbolic, less than 1% of Latinos are farmworkers. We need to focus on the 99% of Latinos that are not.” There are an estimated 400,000 to 800,000 farmworkers in California. About 97% are Latino, according to the Public Policy Institute of California.

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article266765936.html#storylink=cpy

 

Who Draws the Lines for County Supervisors & City Councils? Legislature Takes an Increasing Role

CalMatters commentary from Dan Walters

California once had a history of epic political and legal battles over redrawing legislative and congressional districts after each decennial census.

The Legislature, dominated then as now by Democrats, would create maps that enhanced the party’s prospects of gaining, or at least holding, power and if the governor was a Democrat, the gerrymandered districts would become law.

That happened after the 1980 census when then-Gov. Jerry Brown signed redistricting bills that were especially one-sided. The late Congressman Phil Burton, who largely drew weirdly shaped, but highly partisan, congressional maps called them “my contribution to modern art.”

The initial set of maps was challenged by Republicans via referenda and voters rejected them, but Democratic legislators and Brown simply passed slightly amended versions.

However, if the governor happened to be a Republican, he would veto the Democrats’ maps and the state Supreme Court would step into the impasse and appoint a special master to draw replacement maps that tended to favor neither party. It happened under Republican Gov. Ronald Reagan after the 1970 census and 20 years later under GOP Gov. Pete Wilson.

A twist on the process occurred after the 2000 census. Although a Democrat, Gray Davis, was governor, leaders of both parties agreed on what amounted to a bipartisan gerrymander, freezing in place the partisan status quo in the Legislature and congressional delegation. An indirect threat that the Republican-led U.S. Justice Department would thwart a Democratic gerrymander forced the compromise.

The obvious self-interest of Capitol politicians dictating the shape of legislative and congressional districts ultimately sparked a backlash — a 2008 ballot measure to shift legislative redistricting to a 14-member commission of five Democrats, five Republicans and four declined-to-state independents. Two years later, voters extended the commission’s authority to congressional districts.

The professional politicians in both parties didn’t like losing their authority. Democrats were particularly unhappy since they had legislative majorities and the national party tried to thwart having the commission change congressional districts.

Nevertheless, the commission drew new districts after the 2010 and 2020 censuses and while their maps may have been imperfect, they more fairly captured the population’s very diverse makeup.

So if it’s a good idea at the state level, why not for local governments, such as city councils, county boards of supervisors and school boards, which are just as prone to self-interested redistricting?

In 2016, the Legislature decreed that a 14-member commission would redraw districts of Los Angeles County’s five-member Board of Supervisors. A year later, virtually identical legislation was passed for San Diego County and this year, clones were enacted that affect Fresno, Riverside and Kern counties.

All five measures, however, deviate significantly from the state model of even-handed party representation. They require that county redistricting commissioners reflect the partisan makeup of each county’s registered voters.

That means Democrats dominate the Los Angeles and San Diego commissions and will do so in Fresno and Riverside counties as well. Republicans have a slight voter registration edge in Kern County, however.

In effect, therefore, these county redistricting commissions are being stacked to enhance the power of the dominant local party — exactly contrary to the party-neutral intent of the state commission.

Sponsors of the local bills said they were needed to prevent county supervisors from gerrymandering their own districts. But as constituted, the local commissions will be empowered to create gerrymanders of a different kind.

Institutionalizing party control of local redistricting also further undermines California’s historic commitment to non-partisan local government. That’s not progress.

https://calmatters.org/commentary/2022/10/new-laws-trade-one-gerrymander-for-another/

 

Grid Operator Urges Utilities Commission to Keep Adding Emergency Power Generators

Utility Dive

The California Public Utilities Commission should reject calls to delay adding new power supplies in the state even though the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant’s impending retirement may be put on hold, according to the California Independent System Operator.

CAISO also supports a recommendation from the CPUC’s Public Advocates Office that the commission authorize immediate procurements to address system needs from 2026 through 2030, the grid operator said in comments it filed at the commission on Thursday.

“Recent procurement authorization does not actually meet all of the needs of the 2021 Preferred System Plan, and load growth is rapidly increasing,” CAISO said in explaining the need for additional near-term procurement. “Extreme weather and load conditions will eventually be incorporated into future load forecasts, thereby increasing overall planning requirements.”

The CPUC is considering creating a procurement program for reliable and clean resources, including possibly ordering utilities and other load-serving entities to buy near-term power supplies to make up for project delays in previous procurements.

CAISO and other parties last week filed reply comments on an “options paper” CPUC staff developed. An initial round of comments was triggered by a request for input from a CPUC administrative law judge, including on the possible need for near-term procurements.

A recently established electricity reliability reserve fund and legislation that could delay the retirement of the 2,200-MW Diablo Canyon nuclear plant cannot be part of the CPUC’s integrated resource planning process, according to CAISO.

The reserve fund is designed to address extreme weather events outside of IRP planning and the Diablo Canyon legislation prohibits including the nuclear power plant in the CPUC’s planning process, the grid operator said.

The CPUC should also order load-serving entities to line up resources for 2026 through 2030 as soon as possible to help reduce any potential delays caused by bottlenecks such as grid interconnection studies, according to CAISO.

“LSEs should make every effort to procure resources in locations the CAISO has identified as needing few if any upgrades or where transmission is under development,” the grid operator said. “Forward planning and increased awareness of system conditions will alleviate some of the bottlenecks.”

The Environmental Defense Fund supported CAISO’s call to speed up resource procurement to 2024 at the latest to replace projects that are not yet online, according to comments the group filed with the CPUC.

EDF said a proposal by the CPUC’s Public Advocates Office for interim procurements from 2026 through 2030 has merit, but it would be better to set permanent rules governing the procurement process.

“EDF is seriously concerned with the Commission becoming stuck in an endless cycle of issuing ad hoc, interim procurement orders, in lieu of establishing a durable, programmatic approach to procurement,” the group said.

The California Environmental Justice Alliance and Sierra Club urged the CPUC to swiftly conduct a study to determine California’s near-term electricity needs, according to joint comments.

“Without clear Commission action soon, California could end up in the same situation it did this summer when it dropped health-protective air pollution requirements and paid dirty backup generators to operate,” the groups said. “There is no evidence that prior [CPUC] orders or the next phase of this proceeding will ensure sufficient clean, zero-emissions procurement that will meet needs during the next few years.”

The CPUC should wait for the study results before ordering any procurements for 2026 through 2030, the groups said.

https://www.utilitydive.com/news/caiso-california-puc-procurement-diablo-canyon-resource-planning-IRP/633790/?utm_source=CalMatters+Newsletters&utm_campaign=91260e047c-WHATMATTERS&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_faa7be558d-91260e047c-150181777&mc_cid=91260e047c&mc_eid=2833f18cca

 

California Exports Fall to Record Low

Beacon Economics

California’s share of the nation’s merchandise export trade continued to shrink in the latest numbers, falling to its lowest level since state-of-origin export statistics were first published 35 years ago.
The state’s share of the $180+ billion in total U.S. exports in August was 8.6%, down from 8.7% in July and 8.9% in June. A year ago, California accounted for 10.4% of all U.S. merchandise exports, a percentage more in line with the state’s export share in the pre-pandemic era
Imports into the state, on the other hand, have continued to rise. California was the state-of-destination for 15.3% of all U.S. merchandise imports this August, with a value of $43.213 billion, a nominal 5.4% bump over August 2021. It should be noted that the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis reports that U.S. import prices have advanced by 7.8% over the past year.

With those major caveats in mind, California exported goods valued at $15.587 billion in August, a nominal gain of just 4.7% over the $14.894 billion recorded in August 2021. Exports of manufactured goods nominally rose by 8.7% to $10.029 billion from $9.229 billion one year earlier. But the state’s exports of agricultural products and raw materials fell even in nominal terms by 6.4% to $1.862 billion from $1.989 billion. Re-exports, meanwhile, edged 0.5% higher to $3.695 billion from $3.677 billion. Year-to-date, the state’s exports have totaled $124.510 billion, nominally 7.4% above the $115.971 billion exported at the same point one year earlier.

The real fall-off in exports from one year ago was partially reflected in an 8.3% year-over-year decline in containerized export tonnage that sailed from California’s three major ports in August as well as a 10.9% decrease in export tonnage from Los Angeles International Airport. Airborne export tonnage at San Francisco International, however, did inch up by 1.6% in the latest numbers over last August.

https://beaconecon.com/publications/ca-trade-report/

 

Inland Empire is US Logistics Center…Now, Residents Protest Warehouse Explosion – From 650 to 4,000 in 30 Years

NY Times

A growing coalition of residents and leaders in Colton and neighboring cities — a logistical hub for the nation — who are increasingly frustrated with the proliferation of warehouses in the region, as well as the side effects of the rapid expansion.

As warehouse construction has ballooned nationwide, residents in communities both rural and urban have pushed back. Neighborhood apps like Nextdoor and Facebook groups have been flooded with complaints over construction. In California, the anger has turned to widespread action.

Several cities in this slice of Southern California, known as the Inland Empire, have passed ordinances in recent months halting new warehouse projects so officials can study the effects of pollution and congestion on residents like Ms. Lemos. Similar local moratoriums have cropped up in New York and New Jersey in recent years, but on a much smaller scale.

Labor groups and business coalitions have entered the fray, warning that the new ordinances — along with a push in the state Legislature to widen the restrictions — will cost the region tax revenue and needed jobs and could further disrupt a shaky national supply chain.

Jonathan Gold, a vice president at the National Retail Federation, among the industry’s largest trade groups, said “placing a ban or moratorium on building new distribution centers or warehouses while we continue to experience a supply chain crisis is not good policy.”

The Inland Empire, where the population has quadrupled to 4.6 million in the last 50 years as people were priced out of places closer to Los Angeles, is a critical storage-and-sorting point because of its proximity to rail lines that are a short jaunt from the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, global hubs that handle 40 percent of the nation’s seaborne imports.

In the early 1990s, there were about 650 warehouses in the region, according to a data tool from Pitzer College in Claremont, Calif. By last year, there were nearly 4,000.

Image

Amazon is a major presence, with more than a dozen warehouses in the Inland Empire. Although it is slowing its warehouse expansion nationally and has closed or mothballed some buildings, it is constructing a five-story, four-million-square-foot facility in the city of Ontario. The warehouse, which is scheduled to be completed in 2024 and expected to be one of the company’s largest in the nation, will provide jobs for roughly 1,500 people.

Susan Phillips, a professor of environmental analysis at Pitzer who has studied the growth of warehouses in the Inland Empire, says the only way to regulate construction is through the municipal planning process.

“Warehouse growth is totally demand-driven,” Ms. Phillips said. “Developers and many municipalities do not want any regulation on this, and at this point warehouses are growing at many times the rate of population growth.”

Since 2020, elected officials in a half-dozen Inland Empire cities, including Riverside, its most populous, have imposed moratoriums on warehouse construction. The timeouts are meant to assess, among other things, the effects of pollution, the appropriate distances between homes and warehouses, and the impact of heavy truck traffic on streets.

Assemblywoman Eloise Gómez Reyes, who represents several Inland Empire cities, including Colton, has taken the fight to Sacramento, the state capital. She sponsored a bill this year that would require new logistics projects in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties that are 100,000 square feet or larger to be at least 1,000 feet from homes, schools and health care centers.

“The warehouses bring with them trucks producing diesel particulate matter,” Ms. Gómez Reyes said, noting an American Lung Association report this year that found that those counties were among the worst for annual particulate pollution.

Ms. Gómez Reyes, who withdrew her bill from consideration after struggling to find votes, even among fellow Democrats who dominate the Legislature, said she planned to reintroduce the measure next year.

The efforts to suspend and regulate warehouse construction have faced staunch opposition from groups including the Laborers’ International Union of North America, which represents construction workers in the United States, and the California Chamber of Commerce.

Jennifer Barrera, chief executive of the California Chamber of Commerce, said a measure like the one put forth by Ms. Gómez Reyes would hurt job growth and apply a one-size-fits-all approach that would strip local jurisdictions of necessary freedom around land-use decisions.

In the first half of 2022, there were roughly 135,400 warehouse jobs in the Inland Empire, according to the Inland Empire Economic Partnership, a group that works with business and government leaders. In 2010, there were roughly 19,900 warehouse jobs in the region.

“A warehouse ban would only exacerbate the goods movement and logistics backlogs California consumers are facing,” Ms. Barrera said. “With more people ordering goods online and wanting quick delivery, the need for storage space is growing.”

Last year, Southern California officials adopted rules for warehouses that aim to cut truck pollution and reduce health risks.

Morris Donald has witnessed the warehouse boom from his backyard in San Bernardino, Calif.The regulations from the South Coast Air Quality Management District require large warehouses to curb or offset emissions from their operations or pay fees that go toward air-quality improvements.

In San Bernardino, where a proposed effort last year fell one council vote shy of establishing a 45-day moratorium on the construction of new warehouses, Morris Donald has witnessed the warehouse boom from his backyard.

For 11 years, he has rented a three-bedroom home in a neighborhood now surrounded by four warehouses. In recent years, he said, most of the neighbors he knew have moved away and several landlords have sold to developers.

“It’s taken away the neighborhood feel,” Mr. Donald said. “Kids don’t play outside. No one is in their yards.”

But he sees the benefits as well — he works as a forklift mechanic at a Quiksilver warehouse, his wife is a manager at another and his son works as a security guard at a third facility.

“If you want jobs,” Mr. Donald said, “they’re out here in the warehouses, and that’s a fact.”

MORE:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/10/business/economy/warehouses-moratorium-california.html