Perceived as the most vulnerable of the legislative Democrats who passed Gov. Jerry Brown’s gas and vehicle tax package by a razor-thin margin, freshman state Sen. Josh Newman, D-Fullerton, faced an intensifying campaign to turn him out of office, potentially depriving his party of the two-thirds majority that allowed them to pass Brown’s infrastructure bill in the first place. 

Targeted politics

“State election officials formally approved the recall campaign against Sen. Josh Newman of Fullerton on [May 8]. The recall is promoted by radio hosts Karl DeMaio of KOGO in San Diego and John and Ken of KFI in Los Angeles,” noted the Associated Press. “Recall organizers have until Oct. 16 to collect signatures from 63,593 voters.” 

Newman was singled out thanks to his narrow victory last year, in a district Republicans held before and believe they can reclaim with voter frustration on their side.” After besting favored Democrat Sukhee Kang last June, Newman squeaked out a surprise 3,185-vote win over Republican Assemblywoman Ling Ling Chang in November,” the Orange County Register reported.

“The seat had been held by termed-out Republican Bob Huff and the win gave Democrats the two-thirds majority they needed to pass tax increases without a single GOP vote. They took advantage of that on April 6, passing a $52-billion transportation package to be paid for by increased gas and vehicle registration fees. While there was one Democratic defection in the Senate, Democrats picked up the support of Sen. Anthony Cannella, R-Modesto, in exchange for $500 million in projects for his district.”

High stakes, big names

Although sinking Newman would be victory enough, DeMaio set his sights on breaking the two-thirds supermajority in Sacramento with room to spare. “After Newman is gone, DeMaio and his allies hope to pick off other Democrats, even those in rock-solid Democratic districts,” wrote Steven Greenhut at the Register. “He’s more than happy to help replace tax-supporting Democrats with those who oppose these transportation-tax increases. In fact, he doesn’t see this as a partisan issue at all, but as a ‘working-class families’ issue. And he doesn’t care who replaces Newman or others, as long as the new legislator opposes these increases.”

“No doubt, if Newman is bounced and the political lions start circling another vulnerable legislator, we might see a change in strategy within the Capitol herd. For now, Democrats and their interest groups are trying to protect Newman, as evidenced by recent comments by Senate President Pro Tempore Kevin de Leon. This is an important seat for them given the implications for their supermajority, which is why even former President Barack Obama endorsed Newman in the November race.”

Lending an additional hand was Gov. Jerry Brown himself, who helped shore up Newman’s shaky fortunes by throwing a special event for the lawmaker. Brown “thinks it is unfair that some activists are trying to recall Newman for his vote favoring an increase in gas taxes to pay for road repairs,” the Los Angeles Times reported, citing top aide Nancy McFadden. “The Brown camp also is skeptical that opponents of the gas tax bill will be able to carry out their threat of qualifying an initiative to repeal Senate Bill 1 but are prepared to do battle if it makes the ballot.”

“It is unusual for him to do an individual legislator’s fundraiser because if he did one he would have do to lots, but Josh is under unfair attack and so the governor wants to make sure he knows that he’s got his back – that’s why he is stepping out and doing this for him,” McFadden said.

“Assemblyman Travis Allen, R-Huntington Beach, filed paperwork last week seeking a 2018 ballot measure to overturn SB1, a 10-year, $52.4 billion transportation funding bill narrowly passed by the Legislature in April,” the San Gabriel Valley Tribune reported. “The bill, also known as the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017, raises the state’s gas tax by 12 cents a gallon, boosts taxes on diesel fuel and imposes new annual fees on vehicles to tackle a road repair backlog exceeding $130 billion.”

Passion and pacing

“Jerry Brown’s decision to push through the largest gas tax increase in California’s history without the approval of voters demonstrated a complete disregard for ordinary Californians,” said Allen, the Los Angeles Times noted. “This ballot initiative will correct Brown’s failure and allow the people of California to decide for themselves if they want to raise their taxes.”

Hoping for an enduring grassroots reaction against the package, the assemblyman turned to disaffected state voters for support. “Allen launched a website asking for contributions of $5 to help him gather the 365,880 signatures from registered voters to place the repeal before voters. Allen can begin to gather signatures once the state attorney general issues a title and summary for his repeal,” according to the Sacramento Bee. “Allen is proposing a diverse stream of possible funding sources, including tribal gambling revenue, to replace the tax.” In addition to Allen, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association has considered moving forward with an initiative proposal, according to the Los Angeles Times. 

One potential limitation to Allen’s ambitions would be a relative inability to capitalize on the heat of the political moment. Because of the electoral calendar, the Bee observed, “the earliest the tax could be repealed is after the November 2018 election. Referendums, which allow the law in question to be halted until voters pass judgment on the repeal, cannot be used to repeal tax levies or measures that lawmakers passed with an urgency clause, such as the gas tax increase.”

The long game

Yet a series of retaliatory moves against lawmakers who voted for Brown’s infrastructure bill could keep the issue simmering as Allen forges ahead. “In Fullerton, three Southern California radio talk show hosts kicked off a campaign Thursday to recall state Sen. Josh Newman, a first-term Democratic legislator who barely edged out his Republican opponent in November, in retaliation for his vote,” the Washington Times noted. “The Los Angeles hosts, joined by Carl DeMaio of KOGO-AM in San Diego, drove home the point by launching their recall campaign at an Arco gas station.”

“They were backed by Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, who announced the formation Thursday of Californians Against Car and Gas Tax Hikes in order to target Mr. Newman, whose Senate District 29 is based in Brea.”

Even a successful bid to remove Newman could be enough to upset the precarious balance around the tax law. “The loss of one Democratic senator would cost Democrats their two-thirds senate supermajority, making it much easier for Republicans to fight tax hikes,” as the Tribune noted. But it would also damage the legitimacy of the tax deal, which would have faced an even steeper hurdle to passage without Newman’s vote. 

As Gov. Jerry Brown’s administration turns toward tidying up California’s complex and still-unsettled marijuana laws, the massive market for money made from the plant’s products has begun to attract attention from financial services companies that want to take advantage without taking on too much risk. 

“Though federally prohibited, marijuana is now legal in some form in 28 states and Washington, D.C. But most banks remain loath to accept pot business accounts out of fear of federal money laundering laws that can consider such deposits as illegal transactions,” the Sacramento Bee reported. “Efforts in 2014 by the United States Treasury Department to ease rules for financial institutions wanting to service state-licensed marijuana businesses largely failed to diminish the uncertainty.”

From meetings to markets

“Now California officials, led by state Treasurer John Chiang, are hosting an ongoing series of ‘Cannabis Banking Working Group’ meetings that look to identify policies under which ‘the cannabis industry may fully avail itself of banking services … that every other business in California enjoys,’ Chiang said,” according to the paper. “California’s marijuana industry, valued at more than $6 billion, is expected to produce as much as $1 billion in state taxes after 2018, when recreational pot dispensaries open to the general public. But a lack of accessible financial services – including the ability to deposit funds or handle credit card transactions – continue to be the norm for marijuana businesses.”

Businesses and bankers have been leery of the gap between state and federal marijuana law. “Federal crimes often conjure images of ‘interstate’ activity, but with regard to marijuana, the Supreme Court has clearly spoken that even purely intrastate marijuana is subject to federal criminal regulation,” as California Lawyer recalled. “In Gonzales v. Raich, the Supreme Court held that because of its ‘aggregate’ effect on the interstate market, even purely intrastate activity is subject to regulation under the commerce clause of the Constitution.” At the same time, the White House and Attorney General’s office have continued to suggest that enforcement of federal marijuana law could be strengthened from where the Obama administration left it. 

Reconciling rules

The proposed changes would streamline environmental policies, standardize the more liberal of the state’s licensing regimes, formalize background check and disclosure requirements for cannabis-based business owners, and eliminate a provision that would have required continuous California residency for those affected by the rules since the first day of 2015.

Accrediting workers

At the same time, the cannabis industry has seen its workers brought into the state’s regulatory mainstream. So-called budtenders at the River City Phoenix dispensary in North Sacramento have become among the state’s first state-certified cannabis pharmacy technicians, a certificate program “spearheaded by the United Food and Commercial Workers union, which represents 1.3 million members and began reaching out to dispensary workers about four years ago,” according to the Los Angeles Times. “The apprenticeship program is yet another measure of how cannabis is professionalizing at a breakneck pace. Another sign: the unionization of the cannabis workforce. The UFCW, which represents workers at River City Phoenix, has organized thousands of them in eight states.”

“The California Legislature passed Senate Bill 1 on Thursday night, raising gas taxes and vehicle fees in hopes of generating tens of billions of dollars to fix the state’s roads,” the Desert Sun reported. “The tax increases will take effect November 1 and new vehicle registration fees will begin Jan. 1, 2018. Fees on zero-emission vehicles will take effect July 1, 2020, according to the text of the bill.”

“Gov. Jerry Brown, who stumped for the bill in Riverside this week, said its language had been in the works for years. It squeaked through the Senate and Assembly on Thursday night, barely earning the required two-thirds votes in both houses.”

Getting to yes

To get there, Brown resorted to an uncommon amount of bargaining in close negotiations. “It wasn’t the sort of vote any politician likes to cast. So the measure’s success on Thursday relied on a collection of eleventh-hour sweeteners offered by Gov. Jerry Brown and Democratic legislative leaders to reach the necessary two-thirds super-majority,” the Sacramento Bee observed. “Now that the dust has settled, it’s clear they doled out nearly $1 billion in district-specific transportation projects, with a popular commuter train system linking the valley and Bay Area headed to new locales. It also appears architects could get legal indemnity in construction lawsuits, and four Riverside County cities could see a budget boost. […] Rumors of other SB 1 vote-getting arrangements lingered in the Capitol this week.”

In risking criticism, Brown signaled a sharp judgment that last week’s deal was the best — perhaps the only — shot at getting a substantial tax-funded infrastructure package passed into law. “Similar proposals have languished for years, but Brown and legislative leaders set a quick-turn April 6 deadline for action, hoping to pressure a compromise before the Legislature’s spring break — ahead of big debates to come in 2017 on the state budget and hundreds of bills,” according to the San Francisco Examiner. “The side deals, which still require legislative approval, showed up in two changes to the budget bill language, with most of it made public at 4 a.m. on the day of the vote.”

Costly neglect

One reason for Brown’s sense of urgency was familiar to residents across the state: California has fallen woefully behind on infrastructure repairs and improvements. “Most of the money, about $33.7 billion, will pay for a backlog of infrastructure repair projects that has grown to $130 billion,” as The Hill reported on the deal. “The American Society of Civil Engineers estimates that half the state’s roads are in poor conditions.” And, in a familiar pattern, Sacramento’s choice to proceed with the gas tax fueled speculation that other states in similar straits could quickly follow suit. “As infrastructure maintenance costs pile up, several other states are debating whether to raise gas taxes to deal with local projects,” The Hill added. “Louisiana legislators will debate a proposal to raise gas taxes in a special session beginning next week. The Republican-led Montana state House voted to raise taxes by eight cents per gallon in March, and the state Senate will take up the proposal this month.”

The impending change leaves Republicans on the outs — and residents unhappy with the prospect of even higher taxes on one of life’s staples in California. “If voters don’t like the tax, he says they can start a petition to get a referendum on the ballot, but that would require a lot of money and more than 1 million signatures. But supporters say it’s not worth it, so long as the 10-year, $52 billion measure goes to California’s ruined roads,”,” CBS Sacramento noted. “Either side you’re on, energy analysts say the tax will leave California with the highest fuel tax in the nation.”

Still reeling from a wild weather season, California chalked up a fourth request for federal disaster aid, as Gov. Jerry Brown lodged the request en route to Washington earlier this month.

“Putting the price tag of California’s brutal winter storms at $569 million, Gov. Jerry Brown asked President Trump […] for a fourth federal disaster declaration to help speed up recovery and repairs across the state,” the Los Angeles Times noted. “The estimate of damages, a number calculated jointly by state and federal teams, was accompanied in Brown’s letter by a long list of storm damage that left Californians fleeing flood waters and a number of roadways damaged by slipping hillsides and erosion.”

Despite some friction between Brown and Trump over changes to federal law that could cut against the grain of state Democrats’ priorities, the president hasn’t hesitated to grant the governor’s wishes for relief. “Brown’s request for a federal disaster declaration follows three similar requests this winter amid widespread weather-related damage. The three earlier appeals were granted, expediting assistance for flooding, problems on roads and bridges and other issues,” the San Francisco Chronicle recalled. “The Governor’s Office of Emergency Services has also requested assistance from the U.S. Small Business Administration for individuals in Colusa, Lake, Lassen, Plumas, Santa Clara and Santa Cruz counties, where the flooding from February storms damaged more than 200 homes and businesses.”

The most recent grant came mid-month, in the midst of Brown’s latest request. “President Donald J. Trump declared a major disaster exists in the state of California and ordered federal assistance to supplement state, tribal and local recovery efforts in the areas affected by severe winter storms, flooding and mudslides from January 18 to January 23, 2017,” the White House announced.

Careful politics

Visiting FEMA acting administrator Bob Fenton in D.C., Brown struck a conciliatory tone, but limited it sharply. “Brown, who put the storm damage at well over $500 million, said he came away from the meeting feeling positive after being told that Trump is ‘very concerned’ about disaster relief for California,” according to the Sacramento Bee. “But Brown also stood by his recent denouncement of the Trump administration’s decision to review federal greenhouse gas standards, a move the governor recently characterized as “an unconscionable gift to polluters.”

Brown’s posture chimed closely with public sentiment in the Golden State. “Fifty-three percent of California voters say state leaders should try to work with Trump on areas of disagreement, even if it requires compromises, while 47 percent of voters say California leaders should oppose the president even if it risks losing federal funding to the state,” according to a poll conducted by the Institute of Governmental Studies at UC Berkeley and reported by Politico. “The preference for compromise comes despite Trump’s deep unpopularity in California,” the site added. “Yet in two major areas — the economy and jobs and improving roads and infrastructure — more Californians say Trump administration policies will have a positive than negative effect.”

A cracked mirror

Previously, the administration joined a broader effort in Washington to reckon with the consequences of California’s sometimes crumbling infrastructure. “Trump declared a presidential emergency during last month’s crisis at Oroville Dam,” the Sacramento bee noted. Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, lawmakers broadened their view of similar challenges nationwide. “The recent events at the Oroville dam in California, together with ice jam flooding on other major waterways and other flooding events, has forced the Environment and Public Works Committee to take up the status of U.S. dam, levee and other flood control infrastructure,” the Washington Examiner reported. “The new chairman of the committee, Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyoming, has made infrastructure development a top issue for the panel this Congress, in light of President Trump’s focus on infrastructure and job development.”

The saga of Gov. Jerry Brown’s budgetary labors has taken an unexpected twist, potentially triggering an all-but-forgotten provision designed to funnel money back to taxpayers. 

In 1979, taxpayer advocate Paul Gann spearheaded a ballot measure designed to place a curb on Sacramento spending by requiring rebates at a certain level of state spending. “Subsequent voter-approved changes to the limit have made it a fiscal afterthought for the past quarter-century,” as the Sacramento Bee noted. “Yet a recent report by the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office contained breaking news in the complex world of government budgets: Brown’s January proposed budget wrongly excludes $22 billion from total spending subject to the limit, and after accounting for the money, state government is as close as it’s been in decades to exceeding the threshold.

“The report creates the prospect of upended spending priorities or even the first taxpayer rebates in 30 years. And if lawmakers stick with the governor’s methodology, the state would be ‘highly vulnerable’ to a lawsuit, in the analyst’s view.”

Entangled budgets

The new administration in Washington, D.C., has added another hurdle to California’s already difficult road to high-speed rail.

Drawing fire from Democrats and cheers from Republicans, the Department of Transportation “has deferred a decision on a $647-million grant that would help Caltrain electrify a section of track between San Jose and San Francisco, a project crucial to California’s struggling high-speed rail project,” as the Los Angeles Times noted. “The decision not to approve the grant by a key Friday deadline may be an early sign of the Trump administration’s view of the bullet train project. The line is already under construction and will need significant federal funding moving forward.” 

That funding has been coveted because of the additional grants it triggers if approved. “The federal grant, if it is ultimately awarded, would be matched by another $1.3 billion in local, state and regional investment, including funds from the high-speed rail agency,” the Fresno Bee reported. 

An ongoing struggle

Although the rail effort has been hamstrung by ballooning costs and time projections and repeated downward revisions of its original ambitions, Gov. Jerry Brown and his allies have labored to portray opposition as anti-innovation. With Democrats and Republicans at the federal level both making overtures to infrastructure reform, the governor swiftly sought to criticize the Transportation Department move accordingly. “If you’re not for that, you’re really not for infrastructure,” Brown told Dan Morain of the Sacramento Bee. “The only thing you can say for that is it’s scoring political points by politicians that know better.” 

“The move follows directly on the heels of a letter from 14 California Republicans, who pleaded with Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao to block the federal grants and argued that the money would be wasted,” the site added. “The letter was spearheaded by Rep. Jeff Denham, R-Calif., who chairs the House Transportation and Infrastructure subcommittee that oversees railroads.”

Staunch opposition

State and Congressional GOP have held a firm line against the bullet train, one of a relative few of big-ticket policies pushed by ruling Democrats that hasn’t tapped a very deep reservoir of public support. “Killing the project entirely before larger amounts of money are poured into it is probably the best taxpayers could hope for,” wrote Baruch Feigenbaum of the Reason Foundation, summing up the standpoint of Golden State conservatives and libertarians.

“But that’s not likely to happen on Gov. Jerry Brown’s watch. Brown has been committed to creatively diverting money to the rail system and will continue to do so. So California should take a cue from President Trump, who has called for increased private-sector investment in infrastructure projects, and explore whether or not there are standalone sections of a high-speed rail system that make financial sense for private companies.”

Although the Department of Transportation did not put a timeline on how long its deferral of a decision on the train would last, it may also have to first decide whether to grant Republicans’ wish for tighter oversight over the project altogether. “Members of California’s GOP delegation had asked the Transportation Department to block approval of the grant to electrify a Caltrain line between San Jose and San Francisco until an audit of the bullet train’s finances is completed,” as the Bee reported. “They said that providing additional funding to help the $64 billion high-speed rail project would be an irresponsible use of taxpayer dollars.”

Dams aren’t the only part of California infrastructure on the hot seat. Following a big-ticket Sacramento request for federal building funds, a new report has concluded that the number of state bridges in dangerously inadequate condition reaches into the thousands. 

“Of the 55,000 bridges across the U.S. that were deemed structurally deficient in a report published by the American Road and Transportation Builders Association, more than 1,300 California bridges fall under that category,” KCRA and the Associated Press reported. “That means that of the 25,431 bridges in the state, 5 percent have one or more key bridge elements – deck, superstructure or substructure – that are considered to be in ‘poor’ or worse condition, the analysis found.”

Although the bridges haven’t been labeled near collapse, the numbers threw the sheer scale of California’s infrastructure woes – amid heavy costs on marquee projects like high-speed rail – into stark relief. “The state has already identified 4,075 bridges that need repair, which comes with a price tag of $12 billion,” the channel continued. “Across the country, ARBTA noted that deficient bridges are crossed about 185 million times a day. The top 14 most-traveled deficient bridges are in California.”

Hat in hand

A near-catastrophe surrounding the potential failure of the state’s Oroville Dam has thrown additional light onto what California gets for its spending and doesn’t. “Shock over the emergency evacuation downriver from the Oroville Dam has given way to serious questions about how California is coping with its aging infrastructure – which the American Society of Civil Engineers says would cost the state a staggering $65 billion per year to fix and maintain after years of neglect,” the San Jose Mercury News observed.

Residents and officials are divided over where that kind of money should come from. “Gov. Jerry Brown has proposed investing $43 billion in infrastructure over the next five years, with the vast majority of the money going to transportation,” the paper added. “California voters approved a $7.5 billion water bond in 2014 for a range of needs from flood control to water storage, but that falls far short of needs for flood control and increasing the water supply.”

Wishes and hopes

In fact, the state has drafted up a bid for $100 billion of federal infrastructure funding on over 50 projects, itemized in a letter from Gov. Brown to the National Governors Association. “Brown’s administration has pledged $4.3 billion of the state’s budget to go toward the repairs on the list, and has given legislative leaders a deadline of April 6 to submit candidates for any transportation funding,” the San Francisco Business Times reported. “Other projects on the state’s list for federal funds include levees, reservoirs, bridges, ports, recycling centers, public transit upgrades and more veterans services operations.”

Oroville Dam wasn’t mentioned on the list; California’s stop-and-start high speed rail project, projected to run well over the budget authorized by voters, was. “The state said Saturday that repairs to the primary spillway at Oroville Dam — the nation’s tallest earthen dam — could run as much as $200 million but that was before critical damage to the emergency spillway,” CNBC noted. “Repairs to both spillways are likely to run much higher than the rough estimate provided by the California Department of Water Resources.”

Although California’s once-cozy relationship with the White House, forged between leading state Democrats and Barack Obama’s administration, may be history, officials have made reassurances that their focus on infrastructure — a priority shared with president Trump — will not be in vain. “State Transportation Agency Secretary Brian Kelly told reporters he plans to meet soon with new federal Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao to discuss the wish list,” the Los Angeles Times reported. Chao, wife of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, won confirmation to the position as one of the most experienced and established members of Trump’s cabinet. 

The House of Representatives voted to axe California’s planned retirement savings program, throwing the future of it and similar efforts around the country into serious doubt.

“Despite a plea from California Gov. Jerry Brown, the state’s GOP representatives voted unanimously [last week] on a resolution to block California and other states from setting up 401-K-type plans for private-sector workers who lack retirement benefits – a measure that sailed through the U.S. House of Representatives on a party-line vote,” the San Jose Mercury News reported.

Because the Labor Department enacted rules designed to enable those plans to be formed late in former President Obama’s last term, lawmakers are able to act to undo them. “The House passed the resolutions largely along party lines under a legislative mechanism known as the Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to kill regulations rolled out during the final months of the previous administration,” as the Wall Street Journal explained. 

California pleading

In a letter to the California congressional delegation, Gov. Brown had admitted the plan would direct money away from the financial services industry, but pled for the broader menu of retirement options he said it would provide. “Brown, who signed legislation last year establishing the ‘Secure Choice’ program, called the retirement savings opportunity modest, but important,” according to the Sacramento Bee. “He said the labor department issued its rule to ensure the retirement schemes were financially and legally sound. Efforts to wipe away the Obama administration regulations could spur legal challenges to state programs like the one in California, and imperil future moves to enact the benefit in other states.”

Secure Choice promised to offer “automatic payroll deductions for as many as 7 million low- and middle-income workers whose employers don’t offer 401-k plans or other benefits,” the Mercury news noted. “Illinois, Connecticut, Maryland and Oregon have passed similar initiatives.”

Risky choices

The party-line split on the controversy has sharpened a debate over the distribution of retirement costs fueled by challenges on both sides. Republican lawmakers oppose the prospect of even greater public pension problems nationwide, while Democrats argue that private-sector pensions no longer cover the needs of retired workers to the degree they did in a different economic era. “Studies show that employees are 15 times more likely to save for retirement if they have a plan at work. But roughly half of American workers, many of whom are employed by small businesses, don’t have access to one,” AARP noted in a review critical of the Republican position.

Some state governments, already troubled by the prospect of public pensions crises, have found themselves torn between risking a private sector retirement crisis on the one hand and a funding crisis for private sector employee pensions on the other. The posture of many state officials has suggested that struggling with the latter may seem to them to be the safer political bet. “Fifteen state treasurers, including Republicans in Indiana, Idaho, Utah and Louisiana, wrote Congress on Tuesday opposing the effort to roll back the Obama-era rule, which they said ‘provides important flexibility to states and large municipalities as they seek to address the growing retirement crisis facing this country,'” according to The Hill. “The National Conference of State Legislatures also urged Congress to keep the rule in place.” 

At the same time, powerful private-sector interests have lined up an in-depth defense against supporters of the state pension plans, driven not only by self-interest but a concern that states’ track records on public pensions do not inspire confidence in their ability to successfully manage a broad new expansion of retiree benefit management into the private sector. “If Congress rolls back the rule, it would likely open retirement programs run by states to legal challenges,” The Hill added. 

Drought-busting levels of rain and snow have put pressure to lift emergency restrictions on usage, but California regulators declined to ease up on the longstanding curbs.

“Amid the ongoing succession of storms, water managers up and down the state are urging regulators in Sacramento to permanently cancel historic, emergency drought rules that have been in place for 18 months,” U-T San Diego reported late last month. “It’s an escalation of their ongoing opposition to these restrictions, which already have been eased considerably since homeowners and businesses were first forced to cut consumption by a statewide average of 25 percent. California doesn’t have an official definition for statewide drought, leaving it up to the governor’s discretion on when to announce an end to that designation.”

Swift, uneven progress

But in a new report, the State Water Resources Control Board insisted that the drought’s persistent impact had to be mitigated further before any changes could be considered. “Some reservoirs remain critically low and groundwater storage remains depleted in many areas due to the continued impact of prolonged drought,” they concluded, according to the Sacramento Bee. “Precipitation cannot be counted on to continue, and snowpack levels, while above average for the current time of year, are subject to rapid reductions as seen in 2016 and before.” While the extraordinary rules imposed to conserve water were on track to expire at the end of this month, the board planned to extend them 270 days into the future.

The caution struck a contrast to the swiftness of California’s transformation from dry to wet. “According to the U.S. drought monitor website,” HotAir noted, “there are no areas of exceptional drought left in the state.” Updated data, the site observed, “indicates that one year ago 64 percent of the state was considered to be under either extreme or exceptional drought conditions, the two highest categories. Now, largely thanks to the storms over the past month, that figure has dropped to 2 percent.”

Continued challenges

Water districts have now had to scramble to figure out how to store what could be excess water if the new trends continue. Although the pathway to new storage initiatives has been cleared and funded, the state’s bureaucratic process will add extra time. “In 2014, voters approved a $7.5 billion water bond, including $2.7 billion for storage projects, to provide funding to water projects and programs throughout the state,” KXTV recalled. “Since then, government agencies across the state have been developing the process for accepting proposals.” This month, the station added, “the Water Commission will consider bids on numerous water storage projects across the state.”

And milder drought conditions have persisted. “Overall, the monitor … showed 51 percent of California remains in some form of drought, but that’s down from just over 57 percent last week and compares with 81 percent three months ago,” CNBC reported. And in a twist adding an unexpected layer of politics to the fraught question of resource management in the most beleaguered parts of the state, some Central Valley water officials became the focus of a misspending scandal. “An irrigation district in Central California’s prime farming region gave its employees free housing, interest-free loans and credit cards that the workers used to buy tickets for concerts and professional sports games, possibly breaking the law,” said state officials according to NBC Bay Area. “Employees at Panoche Water District based in Firebaugh used the credit cards to buy season tickets to Raiders and Oakland A’s games and attend a Katy Perry concert, officials said.”

The long view

Meanwhile, Gov. Jerry Brown has kept a focus on what regulatory framework will persist even after all drought conditions have been adequately mitigated. “Brown has asked the state agency to design new conservation rules for water districts that will stay in place regardless of whether California is in drought,” according to U-T San Diego. “In the long run, the governor and state regulators are moving forward with their plan to establish permanent usage budgets tailored to each water district, as well as a suite of other regulations governing water consumption. The new rules are expected to include caps for both indoor use and outdoor water use, taking into consideration differences in weather patterns and other factors from one geographic region to another.”