All posts by Brian Leubitz

Steve Glazer to Run for Assembly

Brown adviser to seek open AD-16 in East Bay

by Brian Leubitz

Steve GlazerWell, this is interesting news: Steve Glazer, Gov. Brown’s top campaign strategist and a long time local politician in Orinda, is looking to replace the termed out Joan Buchanan.

Gov. Jerry Brown’s political adviser, Steve Glazer, will run for a state Assembly seat in 2014, Glazer announced this morning. The Orinda councilman will seek election in the Democratic-leaning Assembly District 16, the East Bay district from which Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan, D-Alamo, will be termed out.

Glazer cast himself as a moderate in a prepared statement, criticizing a legislative process he said is captive to “the extremes of both political parties.” (SacBee)

Glazer just started his third term on the Orinda council, so he has the local connections that are often the key to the endorsements that make races in the low turnout June off-year elections.

The district is a fairly moderate district, so it hardly shocks to see him to go moderate. Brown, for his part, has been called the “most powerful conservative in Sacramento.” Glazer’s campaign would fit right in on both levels.

The top-2 format will treat such a “moderate” campaign well, and his name ID and connections to money should put him as a favorite to at least get in that top 2.  However, there are a long list of viable candidates for this district, so there is more to shake out before next June.

The Failure of 3 Strikes: Disparate Outcomes

Counties differed widely on strike offenses

by Brian Leubitz

Prop 36 made some pretty logical tweaks to California’s Three Strike policy, and will hopefully eliminate some of the worst injustices that have resulted. But it is worth a look back to see how that policy went awry. The Chronicle took a look at the SF Bay Area counties for some background:

Of Bay Area counties, Santa Clara County had by far the most inmates become eligible for more lenient terms because their most recent convictions were for offenses that weren’t serious or violent. San Francisco, by contrast, had three.

It’s an indication that the three strikes law that California voters originally approved in 1994 hasn’t been enforced evenly among counties in the Bay Area or throughout the state. In some places, defendants whose third strikes were minor – in extreme examples, for stealing a bicycle or even a pizza – were more likely to have the book thrown at them. (SF Chronicle)

They also have a nice graphic if you go to that link, but the bottom line was that Santa Clara had 120 non-violent three strikes prisoners, while San Francisco, Alameda, and Contra Costa didn’t even hit 20. The original measure and the associated criminal justice processes gave prosecutors some discretion on how to charge, and whether an offense would count as a strike. And, rather unsurprisingly, they came away with very different results.

Steve Cooley, the now retired LA County DA that strongly supported Prop 36’s passage pointed out just this issue. Santa Clara wasn’t particularly special, there was a large variance between the counties across the state, not just the Bay Area.  And new Santa Clara DA Jeff Rosen endorsed the measure. But the disparity was a perverse outcome of the law, and hardly compatible with the fair administration of justice.

Prop 36 just passed a few months ago, and the process to review the sentences is just playing out now. And the Chronicle article has a good description of how that’s proceeding for the time being in Santa Clara. Prop 36 was a good start and, with time, we should get a better idea of how the system is going to work out.

California still has a lot of work left to do on the more general question of sentencing reform. (Take a look at a recent report from the Sentencing Project to see how 2012 broke down nationally on that subject.) But maybe the people of California are ready to lead the way.

The End of Class Size Reduction

Funding Levels Unlikely to Reach 90s Levels Again

by Brian Leubitz

The AP’s Lisa Leff has a great story today about the rise and fall of the class size reduction program for grades K-3. During the boom times in the 1990s, the state invested heavily to reduce class sizes down to 20-1. In the successive busts since then, funding has been eliminated for CSR, and seems unlikely to return:

California embarked on an ambitious experiment in 1996 to improve its public schools by putting its youngest students in smaller classes. Nearly 17 years later, the goal of maintaining classrooms of no more than 20 pupils in the earliest grades has been all but discarded– a casualty of unproven results, dismal economic times and the sometimes-fleeting nature of education reform.

To save money on teacher salaries amid drastic cutbacks in state funding, many school districts throughout the state have enlarged their first-, second- and third-grade classes to an average of 30 children, the maximum allowed under a 1964 law, state finance officials and education experts said. Hundreds more have sought — and been granted — waivers authorizing them to push enrollment in individual kindergarten and primary grade classrooms to 35 and above. (AP)

California’s overall K-12 teacher to student ratio, 24-1, is the highest in the nation. That shouldn’t be that surprising considering our rank in the bottom 20% of per pupil funding. Combine that with relatively (but still undervalued) high teacher salaries, and you have a recipe for large classrooms.

The research is mixed on the effectiveness of class size reduction as an educational policy. But it can hardly be argued that such large classrooms, 35 or more, are the best situation for learning.

CA GOP Looking Back to the Future: Rove Edition

PhotobucketRove to headline CRP convention

by Brian Leubitz

The California Republican Party (CRP) may love the old Michael J. Fox movies, but, if they are interested in returning to electoral viability, this doesn’t seem quite the ticket. It seems they loved the Bush years, and his “Ohio outburst” so much, that Karl Rove will be they keynote for the CRP convention in March.

The California Republican Party is turning to GOP strategist Karl Rove, the “architect” of former President George W. Bush’s political campaigns, as it works to rebuild its own brand in the Golden State.

The party has tapped Rove as the keynote speaker for its spring convention in Sacramento, which will take place the first weekend in March. He’ll address members at a Saturday night banquet at the Hyatt Regency.(SacBee)

Perhaps Rove and his “unskewed” numbers are a way that the CRP thinks it can move forward. However, his politics of divisiveness have never worked here in California.  While he has been something of a moderate on immigration issues, the underlying tactics of divide and conquer do not suit California’s voter patterns or demographics.

Jim Brulte, who recently announced that he is running for CRP Chair, has a lot of work in front of him if he is successful. Forgetting about the rather large debt that the CRP is already laboring under, fundraising for a party with no hands on governmental levers is a monumental task. However, a party that is completely beholden to a fringe that has been thoroughly rejected on a statewide level cannot succeed.  I have respect for Brulte as a politician, but this may even be a big ask for a magician.

And looking to Rove, and an era that never really took hold in California, doesn’t seem a good path forward.

State of the State: Brown Strikes Optimistic Tone

Jerry Brown 3113Brown looks to the future in annual speech to legislature, outlines plans for water, education, and jobs

by Brian Leubitz

State of the State speeches are always remarkable, if only for the purpose of marking another new cycle of budget disputes, legislation and strife. Yet, with last year’s passage of Prop 30, giving the government some breathing room on the budget, perhaps we’ll be in for something new. Like some optimism? Well, yes:

The message this year is clear: California has once again confounded our critics. We have wrought in just two years a solid and enduring budget. And, by God, we will persevere and keep it that way for years to come.

After pointing out the big success of Prop 30, and those who made that success possible, labor, business and the people of California, Governor Brown moved on to outline some of his plans for the future. Like his prison realignment plan, he is pushing for greater local control throughout government. In particular, he called for a streamlining of governmental regulations on educators and empowering local districts.

The speech is fairly short, and you can read the whole thing over the flip. It’s definitely worth the quick read, but you probably won’t be shocked by anything that you read. He still wants to do something about the delta, mainly by building massive tunnels around the delta. The governor is trying his best to work some sort of compromise with environmentalists on this one, but this is a tough sell. Southern California just doesn’t have the resources to maintain such a large water load, and the balance to sustain that won’t make anybody happy. The billion dollar question that remains is whether the tunnels will allow enough water to flow to the delta to maintain its viability. Oh, and funding, and … In other words, there are a lot of questions remaining about California’s water situation.

But Gov. Brown also recommitted himself to fighting climate change and pursuing the dream of high speed rail. Brown admits the difficulty in getting as far as we have, and knows there is a lot of work to be done, but posits that the state will be in a better position for the future with rail travel in place.

And so, we come back to where we started, whether in 1978 or 2013, Brown is looking to the future.

This is my 11th year in the job and I have never been more excited. Two years ago, they were writing our obituary. Well it didn’t happen. California is back, its budget is balanced, and we are on the move. Let’s go out and get it done.

Full text over the flip. Photo by Randy Bayne.

The message this year is clear: California has once again confounded our critics. We have wrought in just two years a solid and enduring budget. And, by God, we will persevere and keep it that way for years to come.

Against those who take pleasure, singing of our demise, California did the impossible.

You, the California legislature, did it. You cast difficult votes to cut billions from the state budget. You curbed prison spending through an historic realignment and you reformed and reduced the state’s long term pension liabilities.

Then, the citizens of California, using their inherent political power under the Constitution, finished the task. They embraced the new taxes of Proposition 30 by a healthy margin of 55% to 44%.

Members of the legislature, I salute you for your courage, for wholeheartedly throwing yourself into the cause.

I salute the unions–their members and their leaders. You showed what ordinary people can do when they are united and organized.

I salute those leaders of California business and the individual citizens who proudly stood with us.

I salute the teachers and the students, the parents and the college presidents, the whole school community. As the great jurist, Oliver Wendell Holmes, once said when describing what stirs people to action: “Feeling begets feeling and great feeling begets great feeling.” You were alarmed, you stirred yourselves to action and victory was the outcome.

That was 2012 and what a year!

In fact, both 2011 and 2012 were remarkable.

You did great things: Your 1/3 renewable energy mandate; the reform of workers compensation; the reorganization of state government; protecting our forests and strengthening our timber industry; reforming our welfare system; and launching the nation’s first high speed rail system.

But, of course, governing never ends. We have promises to keep. And the most important is the one we made to the voters if Proposition 30 passed: that we would guard jealously the money temporarily made available.

This means living within our means and not spending what we don’t have. Fiscal discipline is not the enemy of our good intentions but the basis for realizing them. It is cruel to lead people on by expanding good programs, only to cut them back when the funding disappears. That is not progress; it is not even progressive. It is illusion. That stop and go, boom and bust, serves no one. We are not going back there.

The budget is balanced but great risks and uncertainties lie ahead. The federal government, the courts or changes in the economy all could cost us billions and drive a hole in the budget. The ultimate costs of expanding our health care system under the Affordable Care Act are unknown. Ignoring such known unknowns would be folly, just as it would be to not pay down our wall of debt. That is how we plunged into a decade of deficits.

Recall the story of Genesis and Pharaoh’s dream of seven cows, fatfleshed and well favored, which came out of the river, followed by seven other cows leanfleshed and ill favored. Then the lean cows ate up the fat cows. The Pharaoh could not interpret his dream until Joseph explained to him that the seven fat cows were seven years of great plenty and the seven lean cows were seven years of famine that would immediately follow. The Pharaoh took the advice of Joseph and stored up great quantities of grain during the years of plenty. When famine came, Egypt was ready.

The people have given us seven years of extra taxes. Let us follow the wisdom of Joseph, pay down our debts and store up reserves against the leaner times that will surely come.

In the midst of the Great Depression, Franklin Roosevelt said: “There is a mysterious cycle in human events. To some generations much is given. Of other generations much is expected. This generation has a rendezvous with destiny.”

We –right here in California– have such a rendezvous with destiny. All around us we see doubt and skepticism about our future and that of America’s. But what we have accomplished together these last two years, indeed, the whole history of California, belies such pessimism.

Remember how California began.

In 1769, under King Charles III, orders were issued to Jose de Galvez, the Visitor General of Baja California, to: “Occupy and fortify San Diego and Monterey for God and the King of Spain.´

Gaspar Portola and a small band of brave men made their way slowly north, along an uncharted path. Eventually, they reached Monterey but they could not recognize the Bay in the dense fog. With their supplies failing, they marched back to San Diego, forced to eat the flesh of emaciated pack mules just to stay alive. Undaunted, Portola sent for provisions from Baja California and promptly organized a second expedition. He retraced his steps northward, along what was to become El Camino Real, the Kings Highway. This time, Father Serra joined the expedition by sea. The rest is history, a spectacular history of bold pioneers meeting every failure with even greater success.

The founding of the Missions, secularized and sold off in little more than 50 years, the displacement and devastation of the native people, the discovery of Gold, the coming of the Forty-Niners and adventurers from every continent, first by the thousands and then by the hundreds of thousands. Then during the Civil War under President Lincoln came the Transcontinental Railroad and Land Grant Colleges, followed by the founding of the University of California. And oil production, movies, an aircraft industry, the longest suspension bridge in the world, aerospace, the first freeways, grand water projects, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Venture Capital, Silicon Valley, Hewlett Packard, Apple, Qualcomm, Google and countless others, existing and still just imagined.

What is this but the most diverse, creative and longest standing mass migration in the history of the world. That is California. And we are her sons and daughters.

This special destiny never ends. It slows. It falters. It goes off track in ignorance and prejudice but soon resumes again–more vibrant and more stunning in its boldness.

The rest of the country looks to California. Not for what is conventional, but for what is necessary–necessary to keep faith with our courageous forebears.

What we have done together and what we must do in the coming years is big, but it pales in comparison to the indomitable courage of those who discovered and each decade thereafter built a more abundant California.

As Legislators, It is your duty and privilege to pass laws. But what we need to do for our future will require more than producing hundreds of new laws each year. Montaigne, the great French writer of the 16th Century, in his Essay on Experience, wisely wrote: “There is little relation between our actions, which are in perpetual mutation, and fixed and immutable laws. The most desirable laws are those that are the rarest, simplest, and most general; and I even think that it would be better to have none at all than to have them in such numbers as we have.”

Constantly expanding the coercive power of government by adding each year so many minute prescriptions to our already detailed and turgid legal system overshadows other aspects of public service. Individual creativity and direct leadership must also play a part. We do this, not by commanding thou shalt or thou shalt not through a new law but by tapping into the persuasive power that can inspire and organize people. Lay the Ten Commandments next to the California Education code and you will see how far we have diverged in approach and in content from that which forms the basis of our legal system.

Education

In the right order of things, education–the early fashioning of character and the formation of conscience–comes before legislation. Nothing is more determinative of our future than how we teach our children. If we fail at this, we will sow growing social chaos and inequality that no law can rectify.

In California’s public schools, there are six million students, 300,000 teachers–all subject to tens of thousands of laws and regulations. In addition to the teacher in the classroom, we have a principal in every school, a superintendent and governing board for each school district. Then we have the State Superintendent and the State Board of Education, which makes rules and approves endless waivers–often of laws which you just passed. Then there is the Congress which passes laws like “No Child Left Behind,” and finally the Federal Department of Education, whose rules, audits and fines reach into every classroom in America, where sixty million children study, not six million.

Add to this the fact that three million California school age children speak a language at home other than English and more than two million children live in poverty. And we have a funding system that is overly complex, bureaucratically driven and deeply inequitable. That is the state of affairs today.

The laws that are in fashion demand tightly constrained curricula and reams of accountability data. All the better if it requires quiz-bits of information, regurgitated at regular intervals and stored in vast computers. Performance metrics, of course, are invoked like talismans. Distant authorities crack the whip, demanding quantitative measures and a stark, single number to encapsulate the precise achievement level of every child.

We seem to think that education is a thing–like a vaccine–that can be designed from afar and simply injected into our children. But as the Irish poet, William Butler Yeats said, “Education is not the filling of a pail but the lighting of a fire.”

This year, as you consider new education laws, I ask you to consider the principle of Subsidiarity. Subsidiarity is the idea that a central authority should only perform those tasks which cannot be performed at a more immediate or local level. In other words, higher or more remote levels of government, like the state, should render assistance to local school districts, but always respect their primary jurisdiction and the dignity and freedom of teachers and students.

Subsidiarity is offended when distant authorities prescribe in minute detail what is taught, how it is taught and how it is to be measured. I would prefer to trust our teachers who are in the classroom each day, doing the real work – lighting fires in young minds.

My 2013 Budget Summary lays out the case for cutting categorical programs and putting maximum authority and discretion back at the local level–with school boards. I am asking you to approve a brand new Local Control Funding Formula which would distribute supplemental funds — over an extended period of time — to school districts based on the real world problems they face. This formula recognizes the fact that a child in a family making $20,000 a year or speaking a language different from English or living in a foster home requires more help. Equal treatment for children in unequal situations is not justice.

With respect to higher education, cost pressures are relentless and many students cannot get the classes they need. A half million fewer students this year enrolled in the community colleges than in 2008. Graduation in four years is the exception and transition from one segment to the other is difficult. The University of California, the Cal State system and the community colleges are all working on this. The key here is thoughtful change, working with the faculty and the college presidents. But tuition increases are not the answer. I will not let the students become the default financiers of our colleges and universities.

Health Care

California was the first in the nation to pass laws to implement President Obama’s historic Affordable Care Act. Our health benefit exchange, called Covered California, will begin next year providing insurance to nearly one million Californians. Over the rest of this decade, California will steadily reduce the number of the uninsured.

Today I am calling for a special session to deal with those issues that must be decided quickly if California is to get the Affordable Care Act started by next January. The broader expansion of Medi-Cal that the Act calls for is incredibly complex and will take more time. Working out the right relationship with the counties will test our ingenuity and will not be achieved overnight. Given the costs involved, great prudence should guide every step of the way.

Jobs

California lost 1.3 million jobs in the great Recession but we are coming back at a faster pace than the national average. The new Office of Business and Economic Development — GoBiz –directly assisted more than 5,000 companies this past year.

One of those companies was Samsung Semiconductor Inc. headquartered in Korea. Working with the City of San Jose and Santa Clara County, GoBiz persuaded Samsung to locate their only research and development facility in the world here in California. The new facility in San Jose will place at least 2,500 people in high skill, high wage jobs. We also leveled the field on internet sales taxes, paving the way for over 1,000 new jobs at new Amazon distribution centers in Patterson and San Bernardino and now Tracy.

This year, we should change both the Enterprise Zone Program and the Jobs Hiring Credit. They aren’t working. We also need to rethink and streamline our regulatory procedures, particularly the California Environmental Quality Act. Our approach needs to be based more on consistent standards that provide greater certainty and cut needless delays.

California’s exports are booming and our place in the world economy has never been stronger. Our ties with The People’s Republic of China in particular are deep–from the Chinese immigrants crossing the Pacific in 1848 to hosting China’s next President in Los Angeles last February. This year we will take another step to strengthen the ties between the world’s second and ninth largest economies. In April, I will lead a trade and investment mission to China with help from the Bay Area Council and officially open California’s new trade and investment office in Shanghai.

Water

Central to the life of our state is water and one sixth of that water flows through the San Joaquin Delta.

Silicon Valley, the Livermore Valley, farmers on the East side of the San Joaquin Valley between Fresno and Kern County and farmers on the West side between Tracy and Los Banos, urban Southern California and Northern Contra Costa, all are critically dependent on the Delta for Water.

If because of an earthquake, a hundred year storm or sea level rise, the Delta fails, the disaster would be comparable to Hurricane Katrina or Superstorm Sandy: losses of at least $100 billion and 40,000 jobs. I am going to do whatever I can to make sure that does not happen. My proposed plan is two tunnels 30 miles long and 40 feet wide, designed to improve the ecology of the Delta, with almost 100 square miles of habitat restoration. Yes, that is big but so is the problem.

The London Olympics lasted a short while and cost $14 billion, about the same cost as this project. But this project will serve California for hundreds of years.

Climate Change

When we think about California’s future, no long term liability presents as great a danger to our wellbeing as the buildup of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

According to the latest report from the World Bank, carbon dioxide emissions are the highest in 15 million years. At today’s emissions rate, the planet could warm by more than 7 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the century, an event unknown in human experience. California is extremely vulnerable because of our Mediterranean climate, long coastline and reliance on snowpack for so much of our water supply.

Tipping points can be reached before we even know we have passed them. This is a different kind of challenge than we ever faced. It requires acting now even though the worst consequences are perhaps decades in the future.

Again California is leading the way. We are reducing emissions as required by AB 32 and we will meet our goal of getting carbon emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.

Key to our efforts is reducing electricity consumption through efficiency standards for buildings and appliances. Over the last three decades, these pioneering efforts have saved Californians $65 billion dollars. And we are not through yet.

We are also meeting our renewable energy goals: more than 20% renewable energy this year. By 2020, we will get at least a third of our electricity from the sun and the wind and other renewable sources–and probably more.

Transportation and High Speed Rail

In the years following World War II, California embarked on a vast program to build highway, bridges and roads.

Today, California’s highways are asked to accommodate more vehicle traffic than any other state in the nation. Most were constructed before we knew about climate change and the lethal effects of dirty air. We now expect more.

I have directed our Transportation Agency to review thoroughly our current priorities and explore long-term funding options.

Last year, you authorized another big project: High Speed Rail. Yes, it is bold but so is everything else about California.

Electrified trains are part of the future. China already has 5000 miles of high speed rail and intends to double that. Spain has 1600 miles and is building more. More than a dozen other countries have their own successful high speed rail systems. Even Morocco is building one.

The first phase will get us from Madera to Bakersfield. Then we will take it through the Tehachapi Mountains to Palmdale, constructing 30 miles of tunnels and bridges. The first rail line through those mountains was built in 1874 and its top speed over the crest is still 24 miles an hour. Then we will build another 33 miles of tunnels and bridges before we get the train to its destination at Union Station in the heart of Los Angeles.

It has taken great perseverance to get us this far. I signed the original high speed rail Authority in 1982–over 30 years ago. In 2013, we will finally break ground and start construction.

Conclusion

This is my 11th year in the job and I have never been more excited. Two years ago, they were writing our obituary. Well it didn’t happen. California is back, its budget is balanced, and we are on the move. Let’s go out and get it done. (Gov’s Website)

Plastic Bag Ban Returns for Consideration

Bill was defeated last session

by Brian Leubitz

Asm. Mark Levine, the upstart challenger from Marin County who was elected to the Assembly, is now carrying the plastic bag bill that former Asm. (Now Congresswoman) Julia Brownley carried in the previous session.  The bill would start in 2015 with a gradual process:

Under the proposal, most grocery retailers could no longer provide thin plastic bags for customers starting in 2015. For 18 months, retailers could offer paper bags made of recycled materials or reusable plastic bags for customers to bag their milk, eggs and other groceries.

Starting in July 2016, grocery retailers could only provide reusable plastic bags, which many stores already offer at a fee. The new proposal, Assembly Bill 158, also leaves room for stores to provide recycled paper bags at a charge.(SacBee)

Plastic bags are really bad for the oceans, there really isn’t any disputing that.  In fact, in some areas of the ocean, plastic trash is far more present that plankton and other small animals that the ocean depends on as the basic building block of marine life.

Yet paper bags really aren’t much better. They also live for a long time in our landfills, as biodegrading takes a really, really long time in landfills that do not provide air and water flow. Recycling paper bags is a better option, but even that ignores the high cost of energy and transportation of the paper bags. It turns out that paper bags require a lot of energy to produce.

In the end, we really need to adjust to using less resources. Bags are a small part of this. Reusable bags are by far the best option, and Californians especially, with our long coastline, need to adapt to that reality. However, it should be pointed out that bags are a smaller percentage of waste than the packaging that our food gets dressed up in at the grocery store. But hey, you know what doesn’t come in a lot of packaging: fresh food! Good for you and the environment, double winner!

Asm. Levine’s bill is a good start. The plastic and chemical lobbies are sure to bring their forces to bear against it, as they did in the last session. Hopefully this time will be more successful than the last time this bill died in the Senate.

Revenue Beats Expectations, Sacramento Plays the Long Game

by Brian Leubitz

In a bit of good news, tax receipts for the end of 2012 came in substantially higher than expected.  But there’s a caveat:

The state is poised to finish January about $4 billion ahead of what forecasters expected in income taxes, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office – the biggest one-month overage that state fiscal experts can recall in recent memory.

*** **** ***

The one-month boom likely comes from a perfect storm of tax changes at the state and federal level, and budget experts urge restraint because a dollar received today could simply mean a dollar less tomorrow. This comes on top of an already volatile tax system that relies heavily on wealthy residents whose income is hard to predict. (SacBee)

The Legislative Analyst’s Office expects a bit over $95 billion for the year, so this isn’t exactly chump change. However, given the debacle that was the fiscal cliff negotiations, many companies paid workers and stockholders in December rather than January. A wait and see attitude is probably very reasonable at this point.

That being said, by the time we get the May revise, we’ll have a lot more data about revenue to mull over. Excess revenues simply can’t be ignored at that point. However, Sen Steinberg takes a more holistic view of the situation:

Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg has said earlier that any extra money the state receives should be split between a rainy-day reserve, paying off debt and expanding state programs. The Senate leader has talked specifically about restoring dental benefits for low-income adults, which were cut during the recession.

“There’s no question that California is back in the black, and this is all good news,” Steinberg, D-Sacramento, said. “I think the question is how good is this news? My reaction, on behalf of my caucus, is to still be relatively cautious until we get more information.”  (SacBee)

I think after passing Prop 30, many will simply want to maintain status quo. The problem with that is that the status quo prior to Prop 30 was pretty desperate. We needed Prop 30 to simply maintain our schools and a semblance of a working government. Now, after the passage of Prop 30, we are able to afford a somewhat adequate level of school funding. I say somewhat adequate because it is not adequate at all, and we are still among the lowest funding levels in money spent per student.  

But even without the massive layoffs at schools that the failure of Prop 30 would have brought, we still have a social safety net that has been slashed beyond the bone.  Services to the poor and disabled are meager, if existent at all. In the end, we are only hurting ourselves with the long-term starvation of the safety net. The failure of the safety net, especially with respect to our mentally ill and disabled, simply leads to higher long term costs.

Wait and see, for the time being, but we cannot move forward without a proper balance.

SF Looking to Rename SFO “Harvey Milk International Airport”

PhotobucketSup. David Campos plans to put measure on ballot

by Brian Leubitz

Sometimes there are some legislative ideas that just make sense. SF Supervisor David Campos hit upon one such idea when he suggested renaming San Francisco’s International airport “Harvey Milk San Francisco International Airport.”

Now, the idea is not without its detractors. In an editorial against the change, the SF Chronicle actually gives a fairly reasonable argument against.

“San Francisco” is a name with meaning and magic. It stands alone as a place of natural and architectural beauty that attracts and accepts people of uncommon imagination and unconventional lives, like Harvey Milk, in pursuit of dreams that can take flight only here.

It should stand alone, simply and proudly, on the name of San Francisco International Airport. (SF Chronicle)

As a San Franciscan for nearly ten years, I don’t necessarily disagree with the sentiment. Just the name San Francisco has some outstanding connotations as a place of freedom. Heck, we’ve been a bastion of progressiveness (in both good and obnoxious forms) for over a century.

And I get their point elsewhere in the editorial that Milk wasn’t involved in the construction of the airport. But, as we’ve seen with John Wayne in Orange County and others, that hardly seems important. But while the Chronicle dismisses that point, I think it is actually more important. They argue that Milk has received plenty of attention. And perhaps that is true, but the airport has a greater level of acclaim. It is more noticeable in random lives. Or, as Sup. Campos said:

“There are already a number of things honoring Harvey Milk, including schools, but nothing of this national and international scale,” said Campos, who is gay. “It’s time to send a message that members of the LGBT community are treated with dignity and respect. … In places all over the world, including Europe and Asia, people of all walks of life look up to Harvey Milk.”(SF Chronicle)

Now, there will be haters. Jon Fleischman of the FlashReport has dubbed him the “FlashReport Idiot of the Week.” Honestly, if I were Campos, I would consider that a pretty big honor. Apparently Fleischman doesn’t like that it “takes up time” or some such nonsense. He throws out some nonsense about waste of money as well, but the fairly minimal expense should be pretty easy to cover through private contributions.

Interestingly, I don’t recall Fleischman calling out Sen. Mark Wyland (R-San Diego) or Asm. Martin Garrick (R-Carlsbad) for the rather similar concept of renaming the Coronado bridge the “Ronald Reagan Coronado Bridge” back in 2011. Wonder why that is?

Rep. Lofgren Introduces Legislation In Response to Death of Aaron Swartz

Aaron SwartzAims to define crimes more narrowly

by Brian Leubitz

You’ve likely heard the tragic story of Aaron Swartz, the co-founder of Reddit and something of a legend as an internet activist. He helped found DemandProgress, and also worked with Lawrence Lessig’s RootStrikers. And all this before he turned 27. He committed suicide last week under mounting pressure that he would serve many years behind bars for his online exploits involving JSTOR, a journal database.

JSTOR ultimately declined to press any charges against Swartz, but the federal prosecutor thought otherwise. The case was fairly far along in the process, and plea talks had been going poorly before he took his life. Leaders like Mr. Lessig and others have called for changes to law and prosecutorial practice to avoid a similar situation in the future.

Yesterday Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose) introduced legislation that would at least make clear that terms of service violations (ToS) aren’t the stuff of 30 year prison sentences.

As Swartz’s family and friends were grieving in Chicago, several Capitol Hill lawmakers expressed sadness and confusion over his death. One prominent U.S. lawmaker, Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), said she would introduce reforms to change the federal law at the heart of the case.

In a bill called “Aaron’s Law,” Lofgren aims to amend the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), which Massachusetts prosecutors used to charge Swartz with over 30 years in prison. Swartz’s family has accused the Massachusetts U.S. Attorney’s office with hounding the young activist over what they call a “victimless crime.” Specifically, Lofrgen’s bill would amend the existing law to distinguish between a terms of service violation and a federal data theft crime. (Time)

Bill Text here.

At the same time another California Congress member, Rep. Darrell Issa has said that his House Oversight Committee would be reviewing the case.

“I’m not condoning his hacking, but he’s certainly someone who worked very hard,” Issa said. “Had he been a journalist and taken that same material that he gained from MIT, he would have been praised for it. It would have been like the Pentagon Papers.”

Issa said he didn’t have enough information to say whether the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Massachusetts overprosecuted Swartz. He said he had dispatched an investigator to gather more facts.

The death of Aaron Swartz is a loss for the internet community, for innovation, and for our country.

Skelton Joins Chorus Pushing for Lowering Vote Thresholds

Sen. Mark Leno’s bill would lower vote requirement for tax increases to 55%

by Brian Leubitz

The lowering of the vote threshold for local taxes has been an early subject of conversation since the Democratic supermajority appeared on the horizon. Sen. Mark Leno’s bill was introduced in early December to do just that.

Today, George Skelton, joins the call to do just that:

Gov. Jerry Brown wants to help inner-city schools at the expense of suburbanites. But there must be a better way to assist the disadvantaged than to trigger class warfare.

And there is. It is to give school districts a better opportunity to raise their own tax revenue.

That could involve reducing the voter threshold needed for levying parcel taxes from two-thirds to 55%. … California needs all types of school reform, including how we generate money for classrooms – without starting an education civil war.

The idea is certainly getting a lot of attention, but it seems anything but certain that Sen. Leno will be able to muster the 2/3 of both houses to get the measure to the ballot. Both Gov. Brown and the legislative leaders are a bit worried about putting anything else on the statewide ballot that smells of tax increase after the success of Prop 30. But, in the end, the measure just evens out taxes with bond measures and allows communities the right to self-govern.

It just seems like common sense to allow communities to choose their own tax rates.