Poll: Republican gubernatorial candidates would perform well behind Democrat Newsom

Good morning. Happy Hump Day. Good news for California Republicans: In a field of nine candidates for the 2018 gubernatorial race, they have two of the top three names, according to a poll released Tuesday.

San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer and Ashley Swearengin, the termed-out mayor of Fresno, placed just behind Democratic Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom in a poll of registered voters taken prior to last week’s presidential election, conducted by The Field Poll and the Institute of Governmental Studies at UC Berkeley. 

Newsom drew 23 percent to Faulconer’s 16 percent and Swearengin’s 11 percent, with six prominent Democrats trailing in the single digits. Although anything can change in politics, Faulconer said early this year that he won’t run for governor, and Tim Clark, a political consultant to Swearengin, told CalWatchdog on Tuesday he didn’t “expect her to run.”

CalWatchdog has more. 

In other news:

• “After weeks of fearing the worst, relief washed over vulnerable Republicans hoping to remain part of California’s congressional delegation. Despite a dogged effort by Democrats hoping to capitalize on Donald Trump’s unpopularity in the Golden State, their challengers fell short, leaving most — if not all — of the GOP’s few seats in incumbent hands.” CalWatchdog has more. 

• “Members of California’s largest public employee union have voted 92 percent in favor of a strike vote as its members seek new labor contracts with the state, the union announced Tuesday,” reports The San Jose Mercury News/AP. 

• “Four members of the Erotic Service Providers Union are asking to meet with Gov. Jerry Brown to deliver a petition with 24,000 signatures in support of decriminalizing sex work,” reports the Los Angeles Times. 

• Republican Assemblyman Eric Linder has been defeated by Democratic challenger Sabrina Cervantes, giving Democrats an expected supermajority in the California Assembly. Linder was one of at least two GOP incumbents who lost after last week’s election. Assemblyman David Hadley of Torrance also was defeated,” reports The San Jose Mercury News/AP. 

Legislature:

• Gone till December. 

Gov. Brown:

• No public events announced. 

Tips: matt@calwatchdog.com

Follow us: @calwatchdog @mflemingterp

New follower: @MaraMara002

San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer and Ashley Swearengin, the termed-out mayor of Fresno, placed just behind Democratic Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom in a poll of registered voters taken prior to last week’s presidential election, conducted by The Field Poll and the Institute of Governmental Studies at UC Berkeley. 

Newsom drew 23 percent to Faulconer’s 16 percent and Swearengin’s 11 percent, with six prominent Democrats trailing in the single digits. Although anything can change in politics, Faulconer said early this year that he won’t run for governor, and Tim Clark, a political consultant to Swearengin, told CalWatchdog on Tuesday he didn’t “expect her to run.”

Why it matters

Having been shut out of the U.S. Senate race after the June primary, thanks in part to the state’s relatively new system where the top two candidates advance regardless of party, Republicans will need to field a strong candidate at the top of the ticket in 2018 to help with fundraising and turnout for down ballot races and to show they can still compete in statewide elections. 

In addition to legislative races, where Republicans will either be fighting off a Democratic supermajority by the narrowest of margins or trying to add a little bit of a buffer — the few races from last week that the Democratic supermajority hinges on have not yet been decided as the votes are still being counted — the 2018 gubernatorial election will elect statewide officers.

CA GOP Chairman Jim Brulte told CalWatchdog on Tuesday that the party was still focused on the outcome of last week’s election, but added the party was beginning to turn to 2018. 

“I believe we will have strong candidates for a number of statewide offices,” Brulte said. 

Challenges for Republicans

Both parties have struggled with a decline in voter registration for years, although the trend has been much more severe for Republicans, dropping from 36.4 percent of the electorate in 1996 to 26 percent late last month. Democrats in that time declined from 47.9 percent to 44.9 percent, but enjoyed a surge in registration over this campaign cycle that led to a slight uptick.

Whichever Republican candidates decide to jump into the race, they will be starting way behind Newsom and state Treasurer John Chiang, who have both been running and fundraising for awhile. As of September, Newsom had $6.3 million in his campaign account, while Chiang had $2.2 million as of August.

Both Faulconer and Swearengin benefited heavily in the poll from party identification — both dropped to single digits when polled on just name ID alone. But it’s still very early in the race, said John J. Pitney, Jr., a Roy P. Crocker professor of politics at Claremont McKenna College. 

“These results reflect name recognition and partisan identification more than serious evaluation of the candidates,” Pitney said. “The good news for Republicans is that, although Faulconer and Swearengin are not running ahead, they have a chance of making the top two. The bad news is that the Democrats will be able to run well-funded campaigns.”

Money plays the odds 

Pitney pointed to the 2014 Republican gubernatorial candidate, Neel Kashkari, who struggled with fundraising despite having contacts throughout the business and financial community from his time as an investment banker and top Treasury Department official.

In 2014, Kashkari raised only slightly more than Newsom has now two years out, largely due to being seen as not having a strong shot of winning (although he was running against a popular incumbent, Gov. Jerry Brown).

“Look at Kashkari,” Pitney said. “He had extensive contacts in the business/financial community, but could not fill his warchest because nobody thought he could win.”

Other candidates

Antonio Villaraigosa, the former mayor of Los Angeles, and Delaine Eastin, the former state superintendent of public instruction, have both announced their intentions to run. Eastin was not included in Tuesday’s poll, while Villaraigosa drew 6 percent. Chiang was near the bottom at 2 percent.  

Problems were first publicly revealed in January after public complaints about discolored water. This led Fresno officials to review how the city dealt with complaints and whether it had complied with laws requiring water issues be reported to state regulators.

This review led to a grim discovery: A former city water official kept hidden several hundred complaints from about 2004 to 2011, raising the prospect that thousands of young Fresno residents among the city’s half-million population may have been exposed to lead poisoning growing up, which can cause cognitive problems that persist for a lifetime.

Mayor Ashley Swearengin, City Manager Bruce Rudd and public utilities director Thomas Esqueda outlined what they had found at a grim news conference last week. They said Robert Moorhead — who ran the water plant in the northeast part of Fresno where water complaints have been most common — had kept complaints to himself on his private computer and personal cellphone.

By law, Moorhead was required to pass along the complaints to the State Water Resources Control Board. City officials said he was also supposed to inform his boss, at the least. Instead, he kept quiet about an estimated 150-200 annual complaints for seven years until his firing for undisclosed reasons in 2011. The reason for his silence may have been his apparent failure to make repairs to his water plant in 2005 despite direction to do so from his boss.

Moorhead, however, told local media that he was being made a “scapegoat” for decisions made above his pay grade. He said he was responsible for the water plant, not water distribution, and that he had done his job well.

Lead contamination in 18% of examined homes

The revelations have triggered alarm in the city’s northeast neighborhoods. So far, the city has found evidence of lead contamination in 51 of the 280 homes it had inspected as of late July — about 18 percent. The problem has been fixed in 11 homes.

Problems in Flint appear far worse. A federal state of emergency was lifted Sunday for the Michigan city, but problems with water supplies remain, and there is vast public anger over a contamination problem that began in April 2014 when local officials began using cheaper water from the polluted Flint River instead of water from Lake Huron delivered by the city of Detroit’s water department 70 miles to the south. Up to 45 percent of households in the city of 100,000 had water with dangerously high levels of lead. There are also concerns about children exposed to lead in water at local schools. Nine officials face criminal charges for not disclosing the problem.

The state of emergency was lifted after Virginia Tech researchers reported considerable improvement.

One of those researchers, Marc Edwards, along with Vernon Snoeyink of the University of Illinois are leading the independent investigation of Fresno’s water woes.

The opening Boxer will create in 2016 has attracted frenetic attention in California. So far Attorney General Kamala Harris successfully has kept competitors in her own party from declaring candidacies of their own. Nevertheless, challengers are expected — especially Latinos from Southern California — and the Republicans to step forward so far face a decidedly uphill climb.

Top Republicans, the Daily Caller reported, have shown an interest in Rice since at least January. In what some interpreted as a politician’s act of being coy, Rice permitted her staff to say in mid-February she was staying put in academia. “The poll doesn’t change her position about running for Senate,” Chief of staff Georgia Godfrey said at the time via email. “She plans to stay at Stanford.”

In another disavowal, Godfrey used even sharper language. “It’s not even a consideration,” he emailed The Hill. “She’s happy here at Stanford!”

But in late February, The Hill reported, the Black Conservatives Fund tried to nudge her toward the race anyway, distributing a fundraising email to back up the polling with donated cash. The email itself enthused:

“Condi is a true American success story. Her father was a minister. She’s an accomplished pianist, diplomat, and a role model for millions. But the best news of all is that if she runs, she can steal California’s U.S. Senate seat from the Democrats.”

A former provost of Stanford University, Rice has taken on what are now three concurrent titles: Denning Professor in Global Business and the Economy at the Stanford Graduate School of Business; Thomas and Barbara Stephenson Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution; and professor of political science.

Hopes dashed

As Reuters reported, a Field Poll released last month showed Rice with a somewhat surprising lead against the entire field of possible candidates to replace Boxer. Rice sat atop the pack with 49 percent support. At the time, the poll listed 18 possible candidates, including some who have since bowed out, such as former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

But it raised hopes for California Republicans. In several election cycles past, they have put their party’s statewide fortunes in the hands of big-name would-be saviors, including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman, the former eBay CEO who now heads Hewlett-Packard.

An unclear path

On the other hand, enthusiasm for Rice could have been tempered by the state GOP’s track record with star candidates lacking in political experience. Although former HP chief Carly Fiorina has gone on to indicate she might seek the Republican nomination for president, she floundered in her own 2010 Senate bid in California. Whitman’s failed campaign cost her $140 million that same year.

And Schwarzenegger’s tenure in Sacramento was ultimately judged by many in the party to have been more trouble than it was worth. Some insiders viewed it as a squandered opportunity to rebuild the party and anoint a political heir — two items that seemed not to top Schwarzenegger’s own agenda.

With Rice gone, however, the fact remains that the current crop of would-be GOP challengers ranked at the bottom of the Field Poll. Although one poll cannot decide a race before it begins, the results reinforced a solidifying perception that someone of great stature was required to beat Harris.

The Field Poll’s results, for instance, did not even place Fresno Mayor Ashley Swearengin, who last November lost a race for state controller, in the lead among Republicans not named Rice. Swearengin finished with 22 percent “inclined” to support her, just after former state Sen. Phil Wyman, at 24 percent.

Here’s the full list from the Field Poll:

Yesterday in Fresno the California High-Speed Rail Authority officially conducted the groundbreaking ceremony for its bullet-train project – but no dirt actually was turned.

After an hour of speeches, a “ceremonial signing” of a railroad tie was conducted by dignitaries from the federal, state and local governments. Not a shovel was in sight. The ceremony is online here.

Speaking first was Fresno Mayor Ashley Swearengin, a Republican and major project supporter, who two months ago lost a campaign to become the state’s controller. “This is the day we officially commemorate the beginning of the nation’s first high-speed rail project,” she said. “A project that promises to connect Northern, Central and Southern California together like never before. This project establishes Fresno as the Central Cog, the essential connection point for Northern and Southern California. This day has been in the making for 30 years.”

Next spoke CHSRA Chair Dan Richard, the master of ceremonies:

“Today we’re gathered here to celebrate a demarcation, a new phase for the high-speed rail program for California. The conceptualization, the environmental analysis, the appropriations, the litigation, the planning, the site preparation, and the demolition…. They’re all behind us. Now we build. We’re entering a period of sustained construction on the nation’s first true high-speed rail system and for the next five years here in the Central valley and for the decade beyond that we will be building across California.”

Gov. Brown

Gov. Jerry Brown spoke last and dug into his dictionary to call project opponents “pusillanimous,” which Merriam-Webster defines as, “weak and afraid of danger; lacking courage and resolution; marked by contemptible timidity.”

But he did concede a question, “Where the hell are we going to get the rest of the money?” To which he quickly replied, “Don’t worry about it, we’re going to get it.” More detailed answers may come Friday when he releases his state budget proposal for fiscal year 2015-16, which begins on July 1.

The shovel-less groundbreaking was for the initial segment, 29 miles between Madera and Fresno. But even for this initial segment, many obstacles remain across the tracks.

As CalWatchdog.com reported two weeks ago, although Bakersfield dropped its lawsuit against the project, six other lawsuits remain.

The CHSRA has not finished an environmental analysis on all the required segments to build the initial operating segment.

And the CHSRA has obtained only about 20 percent of the properties needed for the first segment. It still needs to get 80 percent of the properties, then demolish any structures on them.

Appearance

Several attorneys CalWatchdog.com talked to said the groundbreaking ceremony was more appearance than reality.

Stuart Flashman is an attorney for Kings County and two local citizens opposing the high-speed rail project. He said:

“My clients understand that the Authority, having promised the Federal Railroad Administration that construction would start in 2012, are feeling that they need to put a spade in the ground, at least for show. That is all this groundbreaking is. It is certainly not earth shattering, or even ‘groundbreaking’ in terms of actual progress of the Authority’s plans.”

Said his colleague, Mike Brady:

“Instead of a groundbreaking, this should be called a ‘breaking of faith’ with Central Valley residents, who are being treated very shoddily. Only a fraction of the land value is being offered to landowners, despite past promises; their rights are being stepped on.  Overall, the Authority is two years behind in its critical schedule. Very little ‘contiguous’ land has been acquired. That has not allowed the Authority to make real progress in laying track. The groundbreaking is a charade.”

The Sacramento Bee reported another irony:

“Despite the downtown Fresno setting for Tuesday’s ceremony, the first major construction on the Madera-Fresno segment is anticipated to be at the eastern edge of Madera, where an elevated bridge will be built to span the Fresno River, Highway 145 and Raymond Road just west of the existing BNSF Railway freight tracks.”

Another problem is the clock is ticking rapidly on the expiration of President Obama’s 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which provided money nationally only for “shovel-ready” projects.

Those federal funds of $3.3 billion must be spent by Sept.  30, 2017. An accounting of the spending is due 6 months prior to that deadline.

Kathy Hamilton is the Ralph Nader of high-speed rail, continually uncovering hidden aspects of the project and revealing them to the public.  She started writing in order to tell local communities how the project affects them and her reach grew statewide.  She has written more than 225 articles on high-speed rail and attended hundreds of state and local meetings. She is a board member of the Community Coalition on High-Speed Rail; has testified at government hearings; has provided public testimony and court declarations on public records act requests; has given public testimony; and has provided transcripts for the validation of court cases.

In the fictional town of Lake Woebegon, all of the children are above average. But in the real world of California, all of the counties are disadvantaged.

Or so it seemed at a recent California Air Resources Board meeting as officials from all over the state poor-mouthed their districts to gain a share of cap-and-trade funds set aside for “disadvantaged communities.”

Cap and trade is one of the main greenhouse-gas-reduction components in the implementation of AB32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. It’s projected to raise $832 million in the current fiscal year that will be doled out to various state agencies.

Senate Bill 535, passed in 2012, mandates at least 25 percent of cap-and-trade spending must benefit disadvantaged communities, with at least 10 percent going to projects located in those communities.

CARB, which implemented and administers the cap-and-trade program, identifies “disadvantaged communities” based on their California Environmental Protection Agency CalEnviroScreen score. Each of the state’s 8,000 census tracts are scored from 0 (least disadvantaged) to 100 (most disadvantaged), based on 12 pollution and environmental factors and seven population characteristics and socioeconomic factors.

The most disadvantaged communities are generally those with the highest levels of pollution and the poorest population. They are predominantly in the agricultural Central Valley from Sacramento to Bakersfield, along with urban pockets in the Bay Area, Los Angeles and San Diego.

“CalEnviroScreen shows clearly what we in the San Joaquin Valley know all too well: that many of our communities are among the most disadvantaged in the state,” said Fresno Mayor Ashley Swearengin,  as quoted in a CalEPA press release. “By reinvesting funds in areas of the state with high pollution levels, California is demonstrating its commitment to a cleaner and more prosperous future for all.”

In the November election, she is running for state controller as a Republican against Democrat Betty Yee, a member of the state Board of Equalization.

Angry

But not so fast, said numerous officials and advocates who spoke at CARB’s recent hearing on the issue. Particularly angry was CARB member and San Diego County Supervisor Ron Roberts, who produced a map:

Color code:

• White indicates an area is not that disadvantaged
• Dark purple marks the more disadvantaged areas.
• Light purple indicates intermediate areas.

Roberts didn’t like the CalEnviroScreen white coloration on the southern end of his county near the Mexican border. “Where those two freeways come together in that white zone is the busiest border crossing in the world,” he said.

Interruption

As Roberts was talking, CARB Chairwoman Mary Nichols interrupted, “You don’t have a hard time convincing me. You need to go take this argument to CalEPA.”

“The fact that’s not a bright purple, it is disadvantaged in every way, shape, or form,” said Roberts.

Nichols again interrupted, “All I can tell you is –“

“Let me finish,” said Roberts. “The EnviroScreen may be good for some things, but this is being missed. That whole area should be bright purple, not just the white. The fact that it’s not, should signal somebody that the model we have is not accounting for what’s happening on the ground. There is no way that I can support something that basically ignores the situation like this.

“That’s one of our most impacted areas in the whole county, for certain, and it’s one of our lowest income areas. This is a miscarriage of justice. And you talk about environmental justice, and there is none in that map right there.”

Northern California

There is also disadvantaged disgruntlement from officials at the other end of the state. Alan Abbs, the Tehama County air pollution control officer, is concerned  his county’s census tracts are in the 25-30 percent most disadvantaged ranking, although the cutoff for funding might be at the 20 percent most disadvantaged level.

“Tehama County as a whole has a population with a median household income 33 percent below the state median,” Abbs told the board. “We have the highest asthma rates in the north state. And like any county in California, we have pockets that are significantly less well off than other pockets. So at the outset, I would urge the board to consider going beyond the 20 percent level when you’re looking at disadvantaged communities.

“When we look in the future about how rural areas of California are going to be receiving funds through cap and trade, especially when fuels get added into cap and trade [starting in 2015], I think we’ll find out a lot of rural areas of California are going to be [left] out, even though the residents in those areas are going to be paying into the program through higher fuel costs.”

Also concerned that the CalEnviroScreen rankings may not provide the whole picture, particularly in rural areas not in the Central Valley, was Tehama County Supervisor Bob Williams, representing the Rural County Representatives of California.

“CalEnviroScreen multiplies pollution burdens by the social and economic characteristics of the community, basically eliminating areas of the state with good air quality from being defined as disadvantaged communities, no matter their socioeconomic status,” said Williams.

“Using strictly the CalEnviroScreen as a source for recognition could potentially eliminate a minimum of counties from consideration, including counties such as Lake, Modoc, Plumas, and Lassen. If you’ve been to those counties, you would be hard pressed to deny they have disadvantaged areas.

“RCRC recommends that additional flexibility be allowed so local jurisdictions can demonstrate that a community smaller than a census tract can meet the definition of a disadvantaged community. Rural areas cannot compete in many AB32 programs because projects usually cost more to complete in more remote areas. Being excluded from the disadvantaged community designation all but eliminates these counties from access to funds.”’

Sympathetic

Nichols was sympathetic to their concerns. “We do understand this issue about rural areas, which undoubtedly are among the poorest of areas within the state of California, but are not the ones that fit the criteria of being impacted the most in terms of multiple sources of pollution,” she said.

“And we agree that it’s not just an issue of fairness. It’s an issue of addressing opportunities that are there to do things that could ultimately benefit all of us when it comes to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. So we want to make sure that there is a way to appropriately recognize and make sure there are funds flowing to rural communities in the overall AB32 cap-and-trade spending program.”

But advocates for poor urban areas aren’t keen on spreading the disadvantaged money around to less disadvantaged areas. They want the most disadvantaged communities, particularly those with minority populations, to get most of the money.

“I think all of us here understand that historically low-income communities of color have been disproportionately burdened with pollution, which remains true today,” said Bill Magavern with the Coalition for Clean Air. “So we have the opportunity now to go a little ways towards redressing that inequity, that environmental injustice, with some of the funds that are available.”

Monika Shankar, representing Physicians for Social Responsibility-Los Angeles, argued for “a ranking system to prioritize investments in communities with the greatest needs. For example, many of the census tracts in the top 5 percent score markedly worse than the next set of census tracts in the top 6 to 25 percent. And we need to be cognizant of that.”

Also in favor of concentrating the money where it’s needed most was Marybelle Nzegwu, a Public Advocates attorney representing the SB535 Coalition.

“We would like to see the guidelines at least provide guidance that scoring and ranking should prioritize certain types of projects, should prioritize projects that benefit the most disadvantaged communities, should also prioritize projects that provide the most benefits in the most significant way,” she said.

CARB voted 9-1 (with Roberts voting no) to adopt the disadvantaged communities spending guidelines outlined in their staff report. They also agreed to send a message to CalEPA that they feel there are some discrepancies in the CalEnviroScreen map ratings they would like addressed.

Races have attracted attention for offices that exercise direct influence over the institutions that set pension policy. Cities and municipalities, meanwhile, have taken this election year as an opportunity to change laws placing restrictions on their ability to renegotiate certain pension contracts.

Rising GOP star Ashley Swearengin has wound up at the center of the statewide controversy over pension policy. As the mayor of Fresno, she shielded her city from bankruptcy — by braving the kinds of reductions in city staff and services that raise alarms among defenders of unchanged public pension plans. Instead of throwing Fresno into chaos, however, Swearengin’s moves traded short-term pain for longer-term stability, including a balanced budget for the current fiscal year.

The experience lent Swearengin credibility in her candidacy for the state controller’s office. She is running against Democrat Betty Yee, a member of the state Board of Equalization.

Hopes

That has buoyed Republican hopes for a high-profile win this election season. But a Swearengin win could have a substantial impact on policy, not just politics.

Although the controller typically has been seen as an official with oversight over California’s balance sheet, the position includes another responsibility with increased significance: a seat on “dozens of boards that oversee public pensions,” as the Bakersfield Californian recently stressed. “Swearengin says as controller, she would advocate for reducing the state’s long-term liabilities, roughly $300 billion by official estimates, and for improving the business climate with an annual ‘competitiveness audit.'”

The issue of pension oversight was sharpened recently when Gov. Jerry Brown ordered the incumbent controller, John Chiang, to launch an inquiry into how to prevent future instances of “pension spiking.” That’s a practice where union members game the benefits system in order to maximize eligible work hours that count when calculating pension sizes.

Chiang’s office had failed to detect pension spiking earlier in the year, leading the California Public Employees Retirement System to deny it had done anything wrong. Now running for state treasurer, Chiang’s campaign has touted his efforts to bring pensions to heel. His Republican opponent, Greg Conlon, also has outlined a pension-reform plan.

Showdown in San Jose

At the municipal level, voters themselves now have a chance to impact pension policy. On this front, San Jose has emerged as the ground zero of high-stakes initiatives.

Measure G has attracted attention as a model for what a California city can do to renegotiate pension contracts without running afoul of the state’s embattled but stubborn interpretive framework shielding those contracts by law. Supported by outgoing Democratic Mayor Chuck Reed, Measure G would reform San Jose’s two pension boards by enabling them to hire their own executives — presumably cutting down on patronage appointments and insider dealing.

Although Reed has developed a reputation among union supporters as a “nemesis,” the San Jose Mercury News explained Measure G also has the backing of the San Jose City Council.

Meanwhile, re-entering the debate is Measure B, a pension reform city voters passed in 2012. If Reed and his allies fail to ensure that pension-reform candidates secure office in November, Reed’s opponents, including labor-supported mayoral candidate Dave Cortese, likely would settle union suits against Measure B.

Unions alleged Measure B skirted California’s pension-shielding approach in a way that threatened the basic public safety of San Jose. In echoes of the debate that swirled around Ashley Swearengin’s efforts to evade Fresno bankruptcy, unions maintained pension cuts caused San Jose’s cash-strapped police force to plummet from 1,400 street-ready officers to 900.

With the election just three weeks away, pension reform is the issue that, even when not immediately noticed, is the part of the iceberg under the surface of state and municipal finance.

During the June primary campaign, the Democratic candidate for state controller opposed Gov. Jerry Brown’s plan to build a faster rail connection between San Francisco and Los Angeles by the year 2029.

A June 2014 primary questionnaire for the influential Harvey Milk LGBT Democratic Club asked Yee, “Do you support California’s high speed rail plans?”

Despite potential backlash from San Francisco’s largest Democratic club, Yee answered, “No.”

Yee now backs high-speed rail

Just when her rail opposition could pay off politically, Yee has changed her position for her tough general election contest against Republican Ashley Swearengin.

“While always supportive of the concept of high-speed rail, I was initially opposed to the project because of its governance and cost challenges,” said Yee, who barely beat out former Democratic Assembly Speaker John A. Perez for the second spot in the state controller runoff. “Since Gov. Brown directed the cap-and-trade funds to the project, I now support the project as it has the benefit of a funding source consistent with the goal of the project: reducing greenhouse gases.”

In June, state lawmakers acquiesced to the governor’s budget proposal to use $250 million in cap-and-trade program revenue for the state’s $68 billion bullet train. Although providing a short-term revenue boost, the one-time cash infusion is unlikely to solve the plan’s long-term financial problems.

CalWatchdog.com contributor Chris Reed, who has provided the state’s most comprehensive coverage of the high-speed rail project, has taken the California High-Speed Rail Authority to task for blatantly disregarding the “taxpayer protections” demanded by voters.

“Six years ago voters approved a referendum authorizing $9 billion in bonds for high-speed rail construction, including language with stringent ‘taxpayer protections,'” Reed recently wrote.  “A California appellate court has effectively done away with both by ruling that the legal requirements of a bond measure approved by voters for the state’s bullet train are merely ‘guidance.'”

Political Inconvenience: Yee picks losing position in each campaign

Don’t blame Yee’s change of heart on political convenience. If anything, Yee has staked out the worst political position for each election.

In the June primary, Yee’s opposition to the state’s high-speed rail likely hurt her standing with some Democratic primary voters and activists, who largely support the governor’s legacy project. The Harvey Milk LGBT Democratic Club, which supplied the questionnaire, ultimately endorsed Perez.

In the general election, Yee could have used the issue to differentiate herself from Swearengin, who supports the plan. A February Probolsky Research survey showed 54 percent of voters opposed to the plan. GOP gubernatorial nominee Neel Kashkari has made opposition to high-speed rail, which he dubs “Jerry Brown’s crazy train,” a central part of his campaign.

“Republicans remain confident that opposition to high-speed rail is a winning position — one that might shift the momentum in races across the state,” Real Clear Politics’ Adam O’Neal observed in July. “Politicians have ready answers and they tread carefully in this election year when discussing the state of the bullet train.”

Earlier this year, Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat waiting in the wings for the 2018 governor’s race, publicly opposed the plan.

“I am not the only Democrat that feels this way. And I’ve got to tell you, I am one of the few that just said it publicly,” Newsom said in a February appearance on KTTH’s the Ben Shapiro Show. “Most are now saying it privately.”

“We were selling a $32 billion project then, and we were going to get roughly one-third from the federal government and the private sector,” Newsom added. “We’re not even close to the timeline [for the project], we’re not close to the total cost estimates, and the private sector money and the federal dollars are questionable.”

Swearengin supports high-speed rail

Yet, the state’s most ardent rail critics are unlikely to rush to support Yee’s controller opponent. The Republican mayor of Fresno has never changed her position: she’s a high-profile supporter of the state’s union-backed high-speed rail plan.

Her support for high-speed rail includes backing a highly controversial project labor agreement, or PLA, in the first segment of the project’s construction.

In 2013, the Coalition for Fair Employment in Construction obtained documents through a public records request, which show that Swearengin “inexplicably played a pivotal role in seeking approval from the Obama administration for the union Project Labor Agreement on the first segment of California High-Speed Rail.”

“The Mayor of Fresno is orchestrating union control of it, without any oversight and accountability of the public,” Eric Christen, executive director of the Coalition for Fair Employment in Construction, said in a May 2013 press release. “The backroom wheeling and dealing that led to the union monopoly on California High-Speed Rail construction has remained a mystery up to this point. We were looking in the wrong place.”

“It was apparently the Fresno mayor and not the California High-Speed Rail Authority that was engineering this sweetheart deal,” he said.

High-Speed rail’s high-profile problems

Last year, the California High-Speed Rail Authority awarded a billion-dollar design-build contract to a joint venture headed by Tutor Perini Corporation. The contract, valued at approximately $985 million, was initially stalled in court.

In January, Brown asked the California Supreme Court for an expedited review – and reversal – of two lower court rulings that temporarily halted the high-speed rail project. Just three days prior to that request, Brown’s campaign accepted $27,200, the maximum campaign contribution, from Tutor Perini.

A controversial choice for the state’s high-speed rail project, Tutor Perini “had the lowest technical and safety rating of all the bidding companies, and the Authority board changed the rules to give Tutor the winning bid,” according to the Hanford Sentinel.

The state’s chief financial officer announced Monday a new open-data website that provides Californians with more than a decade’s worth of financial data for local governments.

The site, ByTheNumbers.sco.ca.gov, includes more than 13 million fields of financial data for 450 incorporated cities and 58 counties.

For example, click on: the 2013 City Revenues.

“We’re moving government accountability and transparency out of the analog dark ages into the digital era where information about how much your city or county is spending and borrowing is available with a keystroke,” Chiang said in a press release announcing the website’s launch. “By providing balance sheet details for every California municipality on one website and allowing users to slice and dice the information to spot trends and analyze spending, I hope to empower communities to become more involved in civic decision-making.”

Tool for citizen activists, government watchdogs

Since 1911, the Controller’s Office has been required by state law to track financial data and budget allocations for local government bodies. However, that important data largely has been kept away from meaningful public access — left in nearly unusuable paper documents.

The controller believes the new website will make it easier for citizens to look up data, download raw numbers, create charts and search for other financial data. Among the data at citizens’ fingertips: local government revenues, expenditures, liabilities, assets and even fund balances.

The immense amount of data will allow citizen activists and government watchdogs to peruse data for their hometown and, in turn, question how their government officials are spending public funds.

Praise from local governments

Even local government leaders, who will face increased scrutiny about their finances with the website’s creation, have praised the open-data effort.

“The State Controller’s new open-data website is a significant step in enhancing transparency in government at all levels,” said Matt Cate, executive director of the California State Association of Counties. “It provides the public with the tools to better understand and engage in our government process. We applaud the Controller for utilizing state-of-the-art technology to develop a tool that puts valuable public information right at the fingertips of our residents.”

That sentiment was echoed by his counterpart at the League of California Cities. “We commend the Controller for finding an effective way to make key city financial data much more accessible and useful to taxpayers and local agencies alike,” said Chris McKenzie, the LCC’s executive director.

Chiang’s open government track record

This isn’t the only open-data website published by the state controller.

Last December, CalWatchdog.com reported on the success of publicpay.ca.gov, which tracks public employee payroll data for hundreds of thousands of public employees in California. Chiang built that website with no additional state budget funds or expanded statutory authority. By comparison, it took 55 government contractors and $394 million in taxpayer funds to build President Obama’s online health-insurance marketplace.

In 2010, following the high-profile corruption case at the City of Bell, Chiang didn’t wait around for local governments to clean up their acts. He ordered cities, counties and special districts, under Government Code sections 12463 and 53892, to share salary and other wage information with his office. Initially, some local governments balked, then dragged their feet in disclosing the payroll data. In the years since, the State Controller’s office has boosted the compliance rate to 99 percent.

Taxpayers can expect more transparency. Later this fall, Chiang’s office plans to introduce further upgrades to the website that will provide data for each of California’s approximately 130 pension systems.

That pension data can’t come soon enough. This week, an audit by Chiang of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System found that taxpayers are responsible for nearly $800 million in obligations from “legal” pension spiking.

With more citizen watchdogs analyzing data provided by the controller’s office, taxpayers will be better positioned to combat pension abuses.

Treasurer’s race

Chiang, a Democrat, is term-limited out of the controller’s office and is running for state treasurer. His Republican opponent in November is Greg Conlon, an accountant and former president of the California Public Utilities Commission.

Conlon is campaigning to advance pro-growth tax strategies, reduce the state’s pension-fund debt and improve the state’s bond ratings.

The campaign to replace Chiang as controller pits Democrat Betty Yee, a member of the Board of Equalization, against Republican Ashley Swearengin, the mayor of Fresno.

Essentially, the Fresno establishment bought the idea of the project as economic salvation for a struggling region — even as evidence emerged that undercut the happy talk.

But now — even as the project allegedly gains momentum because of new state funding from cap-and-trade fees — the Fresno consensus has vanished.

On Tuesday, county supervisors voted 3-2 to drop their support for the project and to file legal briefs supporting  pending lawsuits vs. the project. This is from the Bee:

The Fresno County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday switched tracks in its position on California’s proposed high-speed rail project, voting 3-2 to oppose it.

Supervisors Andreas Borgeas, Debbie Poochigian and Phil Larson supported Poochigian’s resolution to oppose California’s bullet-train plans. Supervisors Judy Case McNairy and Henry R. Perea voted against the motion.

The action rescinds earlier county votes dating to at least 2009 to support high-speed rail, and asks that the state Legislature place the issue back on the ballot. California voters originally approved Proposition 1A, a $9.9 billion high-speed rail bond measure, in 2008.

The Bee editorial board will not be happy

You can expect a Fresno Bee editorial criticizing Fresno County supervisors before long. On July 14, the Bee’s editorial board ripped supervisors for even considering ending support for the bullet train:

The supervisors have supported high-speed rail for seven years. Now the board majority is teetering. Shame on them if they lack the backbone to remain united so that Fresno County finally can break free from the shackles of double-digit unemployment and overreliance on bountiful rains to power its agriculture-based economy.

We agree with critics that the California High-Speed Rail Authority has made mistakes. But to those who contend that current plans aren’t what originally was passed by voters, we answer: Some of the changes, such as blending high-speed rail with commuter trains, came in response to critics’ concerns about escalating costs. Moreover, all major infrastructure projects change during planning and construction. Ideas are refined and adjustments are made in response to real-world challenges. …

Should the majority of supervisors bend in the wind and oppose high-speed rail, they should be called out for what they are — job-killing politicians.

Silicon Valley, Central CA both off the bandwagon

But this hectoring won’t change the political realities for Gov. Jerry Brown and the California High-Speed Rail Authority.

Local governments in Silicon Valley don’t like the bullet train no matter what its configuration and haven’t for years — and they have deep pockets for NIMBY lawsuits tying up construction for decades. Now another region — Central California — is unifying behind the idea that it’s time for the project to go away, as the Bee notes:

The vote aligns Fresno County with other San Joaquin Valley counties that have taken formal positions opposing the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s plans. Madera, Merced, Kings, Tulare and Kern counties are on record with opposition resolutions, and Kings and Kern are going to court with the rail authority.

The Bee coverage includes no comment from top bullet train officials, including Dan Richard, the board chair who’s been on a media blitz of late.

On Monday, he responded in Fox & Hounds to a Cal Watchdog story that F&H picked up ridiculing the idea floated by the rail authority that potential multinational contractors on the project are tantamount to potential investors.

On Saturday, he responded to a U-T San Diego editorial questioning whether the rail authority was meeting its legal obligations with an unusual rebuttal that focused much of its criticism on former state Sen. Quentin Kopp.

He’s also wrote a piece for James Fallows of The Atlantic earlier this month rebutting a CalWatchdog post knocking Fallows for his glossing over of bullet-train problems.