For Clients & Friends of The Gualco Group, Inc.
IN THIS ISSUE – “As long as people are showing up and willing to do the work, the California dream is alive and well, although a little more anemic these days.”
Natalia Molina, USC American Studies Professor, on California’s changing identity
- California 2.0?
- State Senate Surprise – A New Leader & A Smooth Transition
- Women Candidates Face Daunting Challenges on Campaign Trail
- 2 New Voter Fact Sheets from Public Policy Institute of California
- Climate Change, California-Style:
- Climate Change Drives Assembly Dem Team
- Climate Jobs Fuel Union Conflicts
- California Copes with Climate-Change Catastrophes; Are 40 New Laws Enough?
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 SEPT. 1, 2023
NY Times
Suddenly, the Golden State, so proudly aware of its popularity, finds itself having to rethink its identity.
That feeling reverberates around the state as rents soar, the median sale price of a single family home hovers around $830,000 and homeless encampments proliferate. The promise of easy living in Mediterranean weather has faded in the shadow of a housing crisis.
“We’re witnessing the death of the thing that really made California great, which was its middle class,” said the writer Héctor Tobar, 60, whose novels have explored the economic divide in the state.
“What fueled the boom in population was the new subdivisions, it was people migrating here to get a taste of middle-class life. And today California is divided more than ever into rich and poor.”
Mr. Tobar’s own father was able to access that middle-class life, arriving from Guatemala with a sixth-grade education but managing to eventually obtain an associate degree and find work in the hotel industry. California living, he insisted, meant that his son would grow taller than him. “I guessed that we would grow up to be this race of giants,” Mr. Tobar said. “It was a place of plenty and opportunity.”
The reasons for the plateau are not surprising. Fertility rates have declined as couples wait longer to have children, focusing on education or establishing their careers. Which can often mean having fewer children or none. At the same time, the death rate is expected to rise as the baby boomer generation ages.
The most variable, and perhaps critical, component to the expected population is migration.
It is not a new phenomenon for people to leave the state to get a new job, find a lower cost of living or be closer to family. But when Covid-19 restrictions were in place, those factors were amplified. Workers were allowed to perform the same job remotely in another state while dramatically cutting their expenses. And immigration came to a standstill.
Eric McGhee, a senior fellow with the Public Policy Institute of California, said those leaving make up about 1 or 2 percent of the total population, not the exodus some would believe. (“Tell me: Where are you going to go?” former Gov. Jerry Brown once mused as he dismissed the popular notion that Californians were headed elsewhere en masse.) But, Mr. McGhee noted, those departures send a disconcerting signal about the lifestyle available in California, that the state is less welcoming to lower-wage workers and younger generations.
“There is this kind of broader philosophical question that has to do with why are we losing people to other states?” he said. “Why is it that California, which has these very dynamic industries, can’t seem to accommodate the people who want to be here?”
Politically, California’s influence could shrink while other states like Texas and Florida grow. California already lost a congressional district for the first time in its history, after the 2020 census, and could eventually lose more.
A dearth of young people and immigrants also will mean less consumer spending, and a smaller labor force, threatening the dynamism that has fueled California’s growth for decades.
California is already in a constant state of bumping up against its boundaries: the dramatic swings between flood and drought. An intractable homeless crisis that has increased tension in many cities. The collapse of Silicon Valley Bank. Even Hollywood has lost its luster as the ongoing strikes reveal deep problems for the movie industry in a digital era.
America has always had a frontier mentality, but perhaps that should be reimagined, said Chris Tilly, a professor of urban planning and sociology at the University of California, Los Angeles.
“Maybe it’s time for us to grow up and realize we live in a world of limits,” he said. “That could be a level of maturity. If California is in a position to lead the country and come to terms with its limitations on growth, that could be a way California could still be in the lead. Which could really be an interesting twist.”
Of course, the population was never meant to grow infinitely. Leveling off can be a good thing when it comes to creating more sustainable approaches as climate change forces California to think differently. The increasing threat of catastrophic wildfire, for instance, has persuaded many leaders that the state cannot keep converting rural land into large suburbs.
And California remains the most populous state in the nation, with 10 million more residents than Texas, the second-largest state. Public agencies looking at the data to make planning decisions are using it to make projections, but not sounding an alarm.
“The momentum doesn’t shift for us,” said Kome Ajise, the executive director of the Southern California Association of Governments, a joint powers authority that focuses on mobility, sustainability and livability.
“There is that mythical feel about California, but there is some substance to that draw that is more real,” Mr. Ajise said. “We have all the foundational industries, like entertainment and hospitality, and a big job market. The basic economic foundation of California is still in place.”
Natalia Molina, a professor of American studies and ethnicity at the University of Southern California, said the state’s path can be looked at “as a harbinger of what does it mean when you don’t have affordable housing, investment in social welfare, clear immigration policies.”
Yet, Ms. Molina notes that her grandmother left Mexico and arrived alone in California, then ran a successful restaurant that welcomed other immigrants. Threads of similar stories seemed apparent to her on a recent Saturday when she picked up a sandwich from a century-old restaurant started by a French immigrant in downtown Los Angeles, then drove through Chinatown, where both aguas frescas and boba can be found.
Communities have been forged here that still feel special and worth sticking around for, she said.
“As long as people are showing up and willing to do the work,” she said, “the California dream is alive and well, although a little more anemic these days.”
State Senate Surprise – A New Leader & A Smooth Transition
Politico’s California Playbook
Who knew leadership transitions could go so smoothly?
After less than 24 hours of behind-the-scenes negotiations, Sen. Mike McGuire, President Pro Tem Toni Atkins and the whole crew of Senate Democrats piled into a committee room late Monday evening to confirm the news: McGuire will be the next leader, scheduled to take over sometime in 2024.
“The pro tem and I, we are unified on transition,” McGuire told reporters. The agreement does not yet include any formal transition plan or date, but McGuire’s tenure will be relatively short, as he terms out only two years later in 2026.
Instead of playing out in a multi-season drama, the decision of who should be the next Senate leader opened and closed in just a matter of days, with the North Coast Democrat spending the weekend whipping votes before getting a unanimous show of approval in the Democratic caucus late Monday afternoon.
Standing alongside McGuire Monday night, Atkins made her message clear — the Senate was not going to handle this the same way the Assembly did. With the end of session nearing, the lawmakers needed to focus on the work, she said.
“That work does not mix well with internal caucus politics being at the top of everyone’s mind,” she said. “A big reason for the decision today is because the caucus concluded that a long, drawn-out successor campaign would not be in the best interest of the Senate, nor the people that we were elected to represent. ”
McGuire’s maneuverings were Sacramento’s worst-kept secret for the better part of Monday — with tips pouring in from lawmakers, lobbyists and lookie-loos who had heard rumblings about a possible play for power.
As with any change of power, there is always the risk of dissent, and senators, hyper-aware of the fractiousness that had rocked their Assembly counterparts last year, were keen to keep the peace.
With McGuire and new Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas leading the Legislature, the Capitol’s power center shifts away from Southern California. Both Rivas, whose district is on the Central Coast, and McGuire hail from more rural, agriculture-heavy areas.
Sen. Bill Dodd was one of McGuire’s top lieutenants who worked the phones to sway caucus members over the weekend (along with Sen. Angelique Ashby and a handful of other moderates). He said McGuire avoided a drawn-out fight because he’s shown he’s “an expert at bringing people together” as majority leader.
As for his priorities, McGuire said there’s no shortage of issues plaguing California and plans to address climate change, wildfires, insurance markets, reproductive rights and homelessness.
“The reason why I would like to work with these senators is to continue to make sure that the California Dream is available to all,” he said.
Atkins, who is also set to term out next year, said she did not plan to remain pro tem until the end of her term, calling that expectation “not fair or realistic.” She served as Assembly speaker prior to Rendon, so this will not be her first leadership transition.
“You need to know when it’s time to go,” she said. “And I felt I’ve had the wonderful opportunity to be the pro tem for five, almost and a half, years. I feel very grateful. And so I was prepared at the beginning of next year. And our timeline is probably going to flow that way too.”
Women Candidates Face Daunting Challenges on Campaign Trail
CalMatters’ What Matters e-newsletter
It’s well-documented that women have faced more institutional challenges than men when they run for office. But a new survey tries to quantify some of the threats and harassment faced by female candidates, and the impact on their mental health.
The survey was conducted by California Women’s List, a political action committee, with support from elected officials and several unions.
In responses from 103 people who ran for various levels of public office in California between 2016 and 2022, 65% of women said they experienced harassment — including stalking and online abuse — compared to 50% of men.
The women said the hostility was often based on gender, and women of color and LGBTQ candidates experienced harassment in greater numbers, according to the survey. (Those data points are in line with findings on harassment of local officials from Princeton University’s Bridging Divides Initiative and the University of San Diego’s Violence, Inequality and Power Lab).
Marissa Roy, president of California Women’s List, said at a press conference Wednesday that the organization was originally founded on the assumption that women needed help fundraising, but after interviewing candidates, learned the obstacles went beyond money to “invisible barriers” such as mental health impacts that candidates were told was to be expected.
Sen. Susan Talamantes Eggman: “Sleeplessness, anxiety, panic attacks… I have certainly experienced all of these things.”
She said she has seen hostility against elected officials increase since she took office in 2006, leading to her holding fewer town halls. That’s something she thinks male colleagues might have a hard time recognizing.
About 80% of all respondents — 56% of them first-time candidates and 98% Democrats — reported experiencing new mental health symptoms that they believed were caused, at least in part, by hostility during their campaigns:
- 64% of women surveyed reported frequent fatigue or loss of energy, 65% sleep disturbance and 50% excessive anxiety or worry;
- About 44% reported recurrent, unexpected panic attacks;
- And nearly half of women said they had to change their campaigns due to concerns about safety and well-being.
Former Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf: “I have talked to women who carry knives or pepper spray with them at all times, women who have to check their driveways before they pull out to bring their children to school in the morning, women whose weeks begin with their security details, briefing their children on who has threatened their families that week.”
Despite that, California boasts relatively high percentages of women in office, though representation still falls below parity. California has sent more women to Congress than any other state. It currently ranks 11th in the nation when it comes to women in state legislatures (a record 50), 20th in state legislative leadership, and 9th in the percentage of municipal office holders.
Roy described the report as a call to action. Among the solutions the organization proposes: allowing campaign funds to be used for mental health services, authorizing the Fair Political Practices Commission to crack down on threats and harassment, and holding social media companies accountable for enforcing protection for online abuse.
2 New Voter Fact Sheets from Public Policy Institute of California
Likely voters:
Party profiles:
Climate Change Drives Assembly Dem Team
Politico
In deep-blue California, it’s a given that the state’s political leaders will be into climate change. But what flavor of climate advocate is new Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas?
Inquiring minds want to know — even if he’s not ready to say, after nearly two months on the job.
The big questions are which policies Rivas will prioritize, and if he’ll be more hands-on in setting the chamber’s priorities than his predecessor, famously laissez-faire Assemblymember Anthony Rendon (D-Lakewood).
Here’s what we got from the horse’s mouth:
“The Speaker recognizes that climate change is the crisis of our lifetime,” Cynthia Moreno, Rivas’ press secretary, said in a statement. “Unlocking solutions is not just a priority. It is essential. And he is committed to representing the diverse perspectives and priorities of the caucus to sustain California as a leader on climate and environmental justice issues.”
Rivas is the first speaker to hail from the agriculture- and oil-heavy Central Coast. He’s known for championing one of the first bans on hydraulic fracturing, in 2014, when he was a San Benito County supervisor.
He’s not reflexively anti-oil, though. Environmental groups that have worked with Rivas on legislation called him a detail-oriented lawmaker with a strong grasp on climate policy. But they also say he’s a pragmatist who’s willing to break with the environmental justice community.
See: his support for last year’s SB 905, which set the stage for deploying carbon capture and storage technology that EJ groups argue allows oil and gas companies to continue operating as usual.
Environmental and EJ groups are heartened, though, by other bills Rivas has carried, including efforts to capture carbon through natural processes like soil management, streamline building of farmworker housing and bolster the state’s response to extreme heat. And they give him props for helping to secure votes for a $54 billion climate spending package last fall.
Assembly leadership:
It does indeed represent “diverse perspectives and priorities.” His No. 2 is Assemblymember Cecilia Aguiar-Curry (D-Winters), a moderate, and his No. 3 is Assemblymember Isaac Bryan (D-Los Angeles), a progressive.
“In order to attain his speakership, he put together a weird coalition of some of the most progressive and most conservative Dems in the Assembly,” one person said anonymously (because absolutely no one wants to be on the record speaking at all critically about a brand-new person in power).
That could result in some unpredictable vote counts.
We’re watching to see what he does this session on a pair of bills to require companies to disclose their carbon emissions and climate-related financial risks.
Business groups are fervently against them, and the marquee bill, SB 253 by Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), died by one vote on the Assembly floor in its previous incarnation last year.
Rivas voted for it, but many of his allies, including Aguiar-Curry and Assemblymembers Carlos Villapudua (D-Stockton) and David Alvarez (D-San Diego), stayed off, helping ensure its demise. Will he push them to take a position?
We’re also looking to see how much clout he exerts on wildfire insurance, where insurers, regulators and lawmakers are trying to hammer out a deal as soon as this week. He was one of 45 lawmakers who backed homebuilders’ pitch to get the insurer of last resort, the FAIR Plan, to raise its coverage limits to cover more condos.
Environmental groups are also looking out for any signs of influence from Rivas’ brother, Rick Rivas, who helped run his fracking ban campaign and is a vice president of the American Beverage Association, which is a major player on plastic packaging bills. Robert Rivas has maintained that his brother is not a lobbyist and won’t influence his decision-making. But people are still watching!
Assembly senior staff:
Rivas lost longtime environmental policy veterans Alf Brandt and Marie Liu when the speakership changed hands. He’s moved relatively quickly to replace them with Keith Cialino and Susan Chan (as Camille reported today) — and he’s retained Chase Hopkins, who’s handling energy. We’ve heard nothing but unequivocal praise for Cialino, Chan and Hopkins.
We’re obviously also looking to see who he installs as the all-important committee chairs, who set (or don’t set) bills for hearings. But that’s not expected to happen until next year, so we’re also watching to see how Rivas’ policy team continues to shape up — and if he adds anyone else.
That could signal a stronger speakership than under Rendon, who ran a tight ship and preferred to cede authority to his committee chairs, and, by association, committee staffers.
Climate Jobs Fuel Union Conflicts
Politico
The millions of dollars California is pumping into climate jobs are adding fuel to long-simmering conflicts among the state’s powerful labor groups.
Fights between environmental groups and labor unions, two key political constituencies in deep-blue California, are multiplying as the state adds green jobs. They’re threatening to slow California’s progress on climate change.
“There is progress, but we’re not where we need to be,” said state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), whose bill to connect new buildings to the electrical grid more quickly stalled in June after labor unions accused him of trying to circumvent collective bargaining by making it easier to hire non-unionized contractors.
Clashes over whether wildfire workers should be paid more and whether solar panel installers should also be allowed to install batteries are pitting labor unions against wildfire prevention advocates and a segment of the renewable energy industry.
Underlying all of the squabbles is a tension between cost and job quality that policymakers will have to contend with for the next two decades as California hurries to neutralize its carbon emissions while trying to make sure the shift benefits middle- and lower-income residents.
“The state really has a choice whether to let the market determine skills and wages and labor practices in general, or whether it should intervene,” said Carol Zabin, director of UC Berkeley’s Labor Center.
Union representatives say a bill in the state Legislature to increase pay for workers who trim roadside brush and create fuel breaks in wildfire-prone areas will help attract more applicants.
“We all want more forest mitigation done,” said Tim Cremins, political director for the Western region of the International Union of Operating Engineers, which is sponsoring the bill. “We want it done with a more skilled and better paid workforce.”
The bill, CA AB338 (23R), is drawing opposition from rural counties that want to move faster on wildfire treatments, though. The state is already behind in meeting its forest management goals, and rural advocates say that adding a prevailing wage requirement could reduce the number of acres treated annually by more than a third.
“We’re talking about a fuel break that could save a whole community in the event of a high-severity wildfire,” said Staci Heaton, a policy advocate for the Rural County Representatives of California, which opposes the bill.
Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a version of the proposal last year, saying he was concerned the change would delay essential fire preparedness work. It’s not clear what he thinks of this year’s bill, which is largely unchanged.
Complicating the proposal this year is the late opposition by the state’s main electrical workers’ union, which represents workers thinning vegetation along utility lines and has been tussling with other industries over jobs it sees as its own.
Another spat is pitting the state’s main electrical workers’ union against solar contractors, who are resisting a proposal to tighten standards for who can install battery storage systems alongside solar panels — a key part of the state’s push to decarbonize its grid while maintaining enough round-the-clock supplies to prevent blackouts.
The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, which represents utility-employed electricians, argues that contractors who don’t have broader training in electrical systems are doing a poor job of installing the batteries, creating a higher chance of fires.
“This issue is about an industry wanting to be unregulated and wanting to cut corners and not wanting to be as concerned about safety,” said Scott Wetch, IBEW’s main lobbyist. “Because the union is on the other side, people want to make it about a work issue, and it’s not about a work issue, it’s about a safety issue.”
Solar industry representatives say that with the proposed restrictions, there won’t be enough qualified workers to meet the growing demand for storage systems, which are getting a boost from new state incentives as well as tax credits under the federal Inflation Reduction Act.
“It hurts our ability to hire people to do solar and storage,” said Bernadette Del Chiaro, executive director of the California Solar and Storage Association, which represents contractors employing the solar panel installers.
But lawmakers weren’t able to resolve the conflict with IBEW over CA SB284 (23R), a bill to open utility work to the same labor standards as public works projects. It was intended to speed up the connection of new buildings to electrical lines — a process that in California can take months or years, delaying housing projects and other critical developments.
The bill would have prohibited utilities from requiring union contracts for projects over $10,000. IBEW called it an “anti-union right to work provision.” The bill was shelved for the year shortly thereafter.
Wiener said he hopes to bring the bill back next year. He said the building trades unions have backed wind energy and some other renewable projects, but that the state is “not where we need to be” to build at the pace required.
“We should never use lack of existing workforce as an excuse not to save the planet,” he said. “The solution is to save the planet and ramp up the workforce.”
But lawmakers weren’t able to resolve the conflict with IBEW over CA SB284 (23R), a bill to open utility work to the same labor standards as public works projects. It was intended to speed up the connection of new buildings to electrical lines — a process that in California can take months or years, delaying housing projects and other critical developments.
The bill would have prohibited utilities from requiring union contracts for projects over $10,000. IBEW called it an “anti-union right to work provision.” The bill was shelved for the year shortly thereafter.
Wiener said he hopes to bring the bill back next year. He said the building trades unions have backed wind energy and some other renewable projects, but that the state is “not where we need to be” to build at the pace required.
“We should never use lack of existing workforce as an excuse not to save the planet,” he said. “The solution is to save the planet and ramp up the workforce.”
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/28/california-green-jobs-labor-fights-00113221
California Copes with Climate-Change Catastrophes; Are 40 New Laws Enough?
LA Times
Last September, record-shattering temperatures nearly broke the state’s power grid, and according to a Times investigation, extreme heat waves are killing more Californians than official records show.
In the winter, after the driest three-year period on record that dried up wells and forced farmers to fallow fields, atmospheric river storms pummeled the state. Farms flooded. Levees failed.
For decades, scientists have warned us that climate change will produce a growing number of weather catastrophes. But as the impact of global warming unfolds across the world, events once expected to happen decades from now are already here.
Envisioning the future is scary. A recent poll found that the majority of Californians are increasingly worried about the state’s changing climate. Another survey found that most Americans are feeling the same way.A new study warned that burned areas in California could increase up to 52% by 2050 relative to the last several decades. But “megafires” in the state scorched about 50% more land in 2020 compared with 2018, the state’s biggest year for wildfires before that.
“The simple equation is climate change, warmer atmosphere, more intense rain, more pollution, more problems but also major catastrophic infrastructure damage,” said Stefanie Sekich, senior manager of Surfrider Foundation’s coast and climate initiative. Just last year, coastal erosion temporarily halted a scenic train route along the California coast, and land subsidence — a result of overpumping of groundwater driven by worsening droughts — has damaged canals, aqueducts and roads in the Central Valley.
California officials are making efforts to adapt to a changing climate and to mitigate worst-case projections. In 2021, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a $15-billion package to fight and prepare for global warming,
In 2022, the state passed nearly 40 climate change laws aimed at slashing greenhouse gas emissions, Sekich said. Among them was legislation requiring all new vehicles sold in California to be zero-emission or plug-in hybrids by 2035, and another requiring a combination of renewable and zero-carbon sources to make up 90% of statewide electricity sales by 2030 and 95% by 2035.
Here’s a snapshot of projections for California’s “big five climate threats,” what’s being done, and where we’re falling short:
EXTREME HEAT
Perhaps the most devastating impact of a warming planet can be seen in extreme heat events. California suffered its worst heat wave ever less than a year ago, and the state’s six warmest years have all occurred since 2014.
By 2050, daily maximum average temperatures in California are expected to rise by 4.4 to 5.8 degrees, and heat waves in cities could cause two to three times more heat-related deaths.
Extreme heat that can adversely impact human health is projected to last two weeks longer in the Central Valley and will happen four to 10 times more frequently around the Northern Sierra region, according to a state report. By the late century, state temperatures are projected to increase by 5.6 to 8.8 degrees, with the greatest increase expected if greenhouse gas emissions remain unchanged.
California has attempted to respond to those imminent threats. Last year, Newsom announced the state’s Extreme Heat Action Plan with the goal to protect Californians from rising temperatures.
In addition, Los Angeles appointed its first-ever chief heat officer, Marta Segura, who said she’s putting an equity lens on climate solutions. She’s working to identify neighborhoods where cooling centers can save lives, and she’s making plans to plant trees and preserve existing ones as well as install shade structures and hydration stations in public spaces.
WILDFIRE
Studies have warned that wildfires will scorch an increasing number of acres in California in the coming years.
If greenhouse gas emissions keep rising, the average area of land burned will increase 77% by 2100, and wildfire insurance will rise about 18% by 2055, according to California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment.
California has made efforts to prepare for worsening wildfires. Newsom’s 2021 $15-billion climate change package included $1.5 billion for wildfire response and forest resilience.
Nonprofits like the Climate and Wildfire Institute are connecting the science community to decision-makers in an effort to address megafires. There’s also been a push for databases and tool kits — a set of resources for local governments and communities — that support climate resilience-planning efforts.
But they tend to be fuel-oriented and derived from a forested-landscape mentality,
COASTAL EROSION
The California coast is disappearing. Melting glaciers, ice sheets and ocean water expansion from warming are causing the sea to rise, and the Golden State is particularly vulnerable, with nearly 70% of the population living in coastal areas.
In the next three decades, sea level rise on the West Coast is expected to be between 4 and 8 inches, according to the most recent Sea Level Rise Technical Report.
Projections beyond that are uncertain and will depend on emissions reductions and how quickly ice sheets respond to warming, said Patrick Barnard, research director at the U.S. Geological Survey’s Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center in Santa Cruz. But data show it’s accelerating. “We’ve more than doubled the rate of sea level rise over the last decade compared to the sort of more historical past,” he said.
Some projections warn that without massive human intervention, up to 67% of state beaches could completely erode by 2100. Transportation infrastructure such as airports and highways will be susceptible to flooding from storm surges and sea level rise, or both, without protective measures.
PRECIPITATION PATTERNS
Climate change is increasing the frequency, intensity and duration of California droughts. Warmer temperatures are enhancing evaporation, which dries out soils and plants, and reduces surface water. This will lead to drier seasonal conditions and contribute to water scarcity.
Rising temperatures are also reducing Sierra Nevada snowpack — a natural reservoir that traditionally supplies California with a third of its water. With more precipitation falling as rain instead of snow, and as snow melts more quickly, that supply of stored water will shrink. Some projections estimate that by the end of the century, California’s snowpack will plummet by 48% to 65%.
And some scientists have projected that the Colorado River, which serves about 40 million people, could lose about one-fourth of its flow by 2050 as the climate gets hotter and drier.
Projections indicate that global warming is also contributing to more intense wet periods and heightening the whiplash transition between periods of extended drought and intense precipitation.
One study projects that by the latter part of the century, extreme storms could bring 200% to 400% more runoff in the Sierra Nevada because intense precipitation will fall as rain rather than snow.
Researchers say such conditions will increase the risk of megafloods — inundations equivalent to California’s Great Flood of 1862, which killed thousands and formed a vast inland sea hundreds of miles long.
FLOODS
Although climate researchers point out that this year’s storms were not the worst in California’s history, they do offer a glimpse of the destructive floods scientists have warned about.
By 2072, experts predict that peak flood flows in the Central Valley will increase up to five times compared with historical records, according to a recent flood protection plan for that area. Future flooding would threaten millions of Californians and cause widespread death and damage. The destruction could be as high as $1 trillion. Without adequate investments in infrastructure and other projects, massive floods could lead to more than 500 deaths annually in the Central Valley by 2072.
The Central Valley Flood Protection Plan hopes to avert those scenarios. The plan calls for $25 billion to $30 billion in investments over the next 30 years for infrastructure upgrades, emergency preparation and floodplain restoration.
But experts have said that modeling where floodwaters might go, how deep and for how long is essential to how well-prepared California will be for an Atmospheric River 1,000 Storm, or ARkStorm, a severe winter-storm scenario that would ravage the state.