Considering the recent growth of “salt mining”

by Brian Leubitz

Even with recent rains, California is continuing to suffer from a historic drought. This lack of water has opened up a new front of attack on fracking technology, which suddenly is coming under scrutiny for the massive consumption of water it requires in order to break apart shale to release oil.

Anti-fracking activists are beginning to connect the dots between the drought and fracking. In addition to my own writing on the subject, a opinion piece in the community newspaper Oakland Local  shows how grassroots opposition to the fracking due to its effect on water supplies is gaining traction.

And it’s not just at the local level. Just a  few weeks ago, the Los Angeles Times examined how fracking is creating water supply issues in Colorado, and predicted the same may happen in California. And in Sacramento, Senators Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) and Sen. Holly Mitchell (D-Los Angeles) have introduced legislation to put a moratorium on fracking in California in part because of its potential impact on water supplies.

“A moratorium on fracking is especially critical as California faces a severe drought with water resources at an all-time low,” Leno told Reuters News Agency, “We are currently allowing fracking operations to expand despite the potential consequences on our water supply, including availability and price of water, the potential for drinking water contamination and the generation of billions of barrels of polluted water.”

Meanwhile, Assemblyman Marc Levine (D-Marin) has unveiled a fracking moratorium bill that he ties directly to the drought.

“We have to decide what our most precious commodity is – water or oil?,” Levine told Reuters. “This is the year to make the case that it’s water.”

Nationwide, the impact of fracking on water supplies has been staggering. The Environment America Research and Policy Center estimated last fall that at least 250 billion gallons of water has been used in fracking operations for 80,000 wells in 17 states.

That’s why a Tetra Technologies project in Southern California is beginning to attract attention. The Texas-based company has filed paperwork for a project in San Bernardino County with hopes of adding five additional production wells in order to expand its sodium chloride (aka salt) and calcium chloride mining production by 20 percent. (Both sodium chloride and calcium chloride are widely known to be chemicals used in fracking.)

The company’s January 2013 Mining Plan Amendment would seem to fit in with Tetra Technologies’ recent growth in the fracking industry. Earlier this month, it bought WIT Water Transfer, a firm that provides water services for fracking. Last year, it purchased Patterson-UTI Energy Inc.’s fracking services unit for $42.5 million in 2012. Yet the company has said little, billing itself as a “salt mining operation” to anyone who asks.

These moves haven’t gone unnoticed on Wall Street. Analyst Travis Holom of the popular Motley Fool financial column focused on Tetra’s recent stock gains by noting:

“Investors clearly like the growth opportunity the larger company has ahead. Texas is the big growth market right now in fracking, and TETRA’s services will be a key piece of that growth. It’ll take a while to see the financial impact, but given the growth expected next year, I think shares have room to run higher, especially as natural gas drilling picks up nationwide.”

Tetra clearly has high hopes for expanding its operations in San Bernardino. That’s why the potential environmental impacts, both locally and globally, of the proposed expansion may be cause for alarm.

Yet San Bernardino County hasn’t seemed to be taking the necessary steps to ensure full Tetra Tech’s full compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. It’s unclear what, if any, mitigation be required. Hopefully, answers will emerge soon.

Competitive Endorsement Races Amounted to a Whole Lot of Nothing

by Brian Leubitz

If you happened to walk into the Westin Bonaventure over the weekend, you may be confused why the key cards said “Alex Padilla”. But the endorsement races for the Secretary of State and Controller races were the highlight of the weekend.

But when it came down to it, the races weren’t settled at the party convention and the party will remain silent, at least until after the general election.  In the controllers race, Speaker John A. Perez got a plurality, but wasn’t able to garner anywhere near the necessary 60% required to get the endorsement. Betty Yee was able to attract strong support as well, showing that we might have an interesting race here.

In the Secretary of State race, Alex Padilla was nearly able to pull off the 60% endorsement. However, when all of the votes were counted, Padilla fell a few votes short.

In the end, the voters will have to decide for themselves without the help of the party endorsement. One thing is clear, all of the five Democratic candidates in the two races are qualified for the position. Perhaps the endorsement is most useful to let voters know when there is a Democratic candidate who doesn’t honor the values of the Democratic party.

Convention features a few legislative endorsement fights and two statewide

by Brian Leubitz

This year is a “platform convention”, meaning that all the policy focus will be to define our party’s general goals. You can see the 2012 platform here to get an idea of the general document and what you can expect moving forward.

On the endorsement front, there will be much hubub about the Secretary of State race, with Sen. Padilla looking to get the endorsement and the other candidates looking for a block.

The other statewide race to watch is the Controller’s race, where Board of Equalization Member Betty Yee will be facing off against Assembly Speaker John Perez as well as a Republican, David Evans, and former Green Party gubernatorial candidate Laura Wells. Perez would certainly appear to be the favorite for the party endorsement, but the 60% threshold could be an obstacle.

I’ll be watching hanging around the convention all weekend, say hi if you see me. I’ll probably be posting more to my twitter account than Calitics, so keep an eye out there.

Wide Field of Candidates Could Lead to Interesting General Election

by Brian Leubitz

The Secretary of State gig will be turning over this year, and there will be change. Lots of it. No matter which of the six announced candidates wins in November, the change from Debra Bowen will be stark. But as one of the two heavily contested races this year, I thought it would be worth a review of the current crop of candidates before the Democratic convention in LA this weekend. The race for the endorsement at this point seems to be Sen. Alex Padilla or a no endorsement position, but, of course, everything could change down at the CADem Convention. So, on to the candidates.

•Derek Cressman – Democrat, Former Director of State Operation for Common Cause.

Derek Cressman is not a household name, but under the auspices of Common Cause, he’s done a lot of work on California campaign finance and other voter related reform. I’ve had the chance to work with him on a couple of occasions, and have always been impressed with the depth of his knowledge on the issues the SoS will face. From approving voting machines, to improving access and participation rates, and campaign finance regulations, I can attest that few people in California are as qualified for the job. And as far as I can tell, few people have anything negative to say about him.

All that being said, elections aren’t always about qualifications. Cressman will need to continue to fundraise and then do everything he can to increase his name ID. He may get a bump if he is able to get a good ballot title, but clearly his vote total is limited by this recognition question. If he’s able to squeak into the general election, all bets are off. His profile and qualifications would be very formidable in a two man race.

•David Curtis – Green, Artist and designer

Curtis faces the same name recognition issues as Cressman without the long history in public policy around SoS-type issues. That being said, he clearly cares about the issues, with a special interest in using the power of the office in environmental issues. You can view his platform here.

Curtis has previously run for Governor in Nevada in 2010 and been active on other Green Party campaigns.

• Alex Padilla – Democrat, State Senator, LA

Alex Padilla brings a lot of innate advantages into the race for SecState. First, he is known as being a very bright guy around the capital, with a firm grasp on the issues. He is the only Latino in a crowded field; that alone may be enough to get him through to the general election. But if he does get there, he’ll need to rely on a record that has only recently begun to be focused on the issues relevant to the office. While Padilla does bring a wealth of experience in local and legislative politics, only a handful of bills are relevant to the office. However, he does have some notable legislative accomplishments, including championing the Earthquake Early Warning System, a driverless car bill, and the bill for an LA NFL stadium.

On the other hand, Padilla is a bit more divisive than Cressman. The recent story about the lavish fundraisers thrown by Kevin Sloat won’t help a campaign for an office that handles elections, especially for a politician that has a bit of a track record with campaign finance violations. All that being said, Padilla is leading the cash on hand race. At the very least, he seems a favorite for one of the two November spots.

• Pete Peterson – Republican, Executive Director of Davenport Institute at the School of Public Policy at Pepperdine University

Peterson’s biggest advantage is something that he has no control over: he is the lone Republican. If another labeled Republican drops into the race, his position becomes a lot more difficult. That being said, Peterson is going to be as conservative as you could possibly elect in California statewide at this point. He has a record of working in bipartisan good government work, and the Davenport Institute, while at a conservative university, isn’t overtly conservative.

However, he is attempting to consolidate the conservative vote. He’s written a few articles for Flash Report that won’t hurt his cause there. The June Republican vote will be relatively strong. If he is able to get 80%+ percent of the GOP vote, he’d be pretty tough to dislodge from one of those two November spots. However, come November, that Republican tag becomes more of a liability than an asset.

• Dan Schnur – No party preference. Former FPPC chair, Director of Jess Unruh Center at USC

First, let’s be clear about something: Dan Schnur is a Republican. He worked as Gov. Pete Wilson’s press director for five years, and then worked on John McCain’s 2000 campaign. Now, he’s always professed to be a moderate, and the McCain2000 work could back that up. However, his lack of party preference is more about wanting to draw votes from both Democrats and Republicans. It is an astute political move. Two Republicans in the race could very well mean no Republicans in the general election.

But his bio is stronger than Peterson’s with his brief tenure at the FPPC and very public appearances on the behalf of government reform. And as Joe Matthews points out, he’s the media’s candidate. He’ll need to use all of those media connections in the next three and a half months to increase name ID. Despite the rising number of decline to state voters, by definition those voters don’t stick together. He has no real base of support, but will instead have to hope voters can embrace the “outsider” schtick from a former political consultant.

• Leland Yee – Democratic State Senator from San Francisco

Yee, having recently lost in his bid for San Francisco Mayor, has been building a strong resume for the office. Most notably, his online voter registration bill has made voting a lot easier and got a lot of good press for the senator and the state in general. More than a million voters have now registered to vote using the system. And over the past few years, he has built a long list of bills relevant to the job. He is seemingly following the steps that Debra Bowen took in her last few years in the Senate, and he is certainly a strong resume for this particular position.

On the other hand, Yee will also be carrying that state legislator ballot label and will have to hope that there is a strong turnout in the Asian-American community. That being said, he does have a complicated relationship with the community here in San Francisco, finishing a disappointing fifth place after taking some knocks in the press over a mixed record. He has built up a nice war chest, second only to Padilla, and could be a formidable candidate if the chips fall right. High Democratic turnout and/or weak Republican turnout could make this a two-Dem race, and you have to think that Yee would be in the best place to capitalize on that.

Watch the Secretary of State Forum in Los Angeles

by Brian Leubitz

Here is the live stream of the forum with the six candidates.

Here are the air times on LA36: Sat 3/08/14 @12:30pmSun 3/09/14 @ 2:30pmSun 3/09/14 @10:00pmMon 3/10/14 @ 1:00pmMon 3/10/14 @ 9:00pmTue 3/11/14 @ 8:00amThu 3/13/14 @12:00pmThu 3/13/14 @ 6:30pmFri 3/14/14 @10:00amSat 3/15/14 @ 2:00pm

LA36 archive will be avaialable begining Monday March 10.

Senator Facing Corruption Charges Looks for His Day in Court

by Brian Leubitz

Say goodbye to that Senate Supermajority, as Ron Calderon has announced that he will be taking a paid leave of absence to focus on the corruption charges he faces.

“This is not a resignation since I still have my day in court,” Calderon said in a statement. “However, due to the nature and complexity of the charges, and the discovery materials that I will have to review, I expect this to be a lengthy period of absence continuing until the end of the session in August.”(SacBee)

Now, I’m not sure that there were going to be a ton of supermajority votes coming up this session, so perhaps that takes away a bit of the sting. However, don’t tell MSNBC that, as they have a big headline on their homepage announcing that “Corruption suit costs Dems control of state” despite it actually doing nothing of the sort. (UPDATE: It now says “Dems lose supermajority in key state.” Not sure why they couldn’t say California, but hey, headline writers, amiright?)

On the more practical side of things, surely this will be annoying for Calderon’s constituents. However, the fact that he is not actually resigning means that the rather expensive process of a special election will likely be avoided.  The election would have been for a seat that has been redistricted out of existence, and would only have been filled for a few months by the time all is said and done. So, perhaps Calderon drawing a paycheck is actually the best of some pretty rotten choices.

Half hour film describes how Californians coped, circa 1977

by Brian Leubitz

UPDATE: The Legislature just passed the drought relief package:

In a concerted effort to aid California’s drought-stricken communities, the Legislature on Thursday sped a $687 million relief package to Gov. Jerry Brown.

One week after Brown and legislative leaders unveiled the emergency legislation, both houses of the Legislature approved the bill with little resistance. The Assembly passed the bill 65-0, and the Senate sent it to Brown’s desk with only three dissenting votes.(Fresno Bee / Jeremy White)

Now back to your regularly scheduled #TBT.

We’ve been through it all before, and we’ll go through it all again. This is especially true with California’s water. Check out this video, complete with classic fashion:

Referendum fell below required total in manual count

by Brian Leubitz

The good news has been quickly spreading: the referendum to overturn AB 1266, a bill to guarantee equal opportunity for transgender students, has failed to gather enough valid signatures. From the Transgender Law Center’s email just now:

Today, the effort to repeal the School Success and Opportunity Act – California’s new law ensuring that all children have a fair opportunity to succeed in school – failed to qualify for the ballot.

California’s School Success and Opportunity Act – also known as AB 1266 – went into effect on January 1st ensuring that schools have the guidance they need to make sure all students, including those who are transgender, have the opportunity to do well in school and graduate. The law is modeled on policies and practices that are already working well in schools across the state, and gives important guidance to educators so they can work with students and families on a case-by-case basis.(Transgender Law Center)

The latest county by county count is available here (PDF). At the time of that document, supporters of the referendum were about 17,000 valid signatures short of the required total.

The proponents have indicated that they will investigate the invalid signatures, but the invalidity rate of 21.3% wasn’t that much higher than the typical 19-20% invalidity rate. They may try to challenge something or other in the courts, but it looks like there will be no fight on this particular issue in November.

In the end, the failure avoids what could have been a harsh battle for the transgender community. Asm. Tom Ammiano, who authored the bill, is always one to find a silver lining:

The good thing that comes out of this misguided referendum effort is that we were able to continue to educate people. It’s important that we begin to understand what transgender students are going through. I wish it was just a matter of ignorance. The forces putting this referendum together included the people that make money off promoting hate and professional fear mongers, who took advantage of what other people didn’t understand. Although it’s clear that California is moving in the direction of equality and respect, this does not mean the struggle is over. For every child like Pat Cordova – accepted on her Azusa High school’s softball team last week – there is another child living with a secret because of bullying. The people who belittle the rights of transgender students should know their efforts encourage the bullies. It is their intolerance that allows the violence to continue, and that violence affects every child, not just transgender students. They should be ashamed.