It’s no secret that the state’s legislative leadership is less than thrilled about an open-government initiative that California voters passed in the November election, and are doing what they can to undermine its clear intent.

Yet, it’s a testament to the measure’s importance that the Legislature painstakingly followed its dictates as they passed last week a controversial bill to increase gas taxes and vehicle-license fees to fund $52.4 billion in transportation upgrades over the next decade.

Had they not followed the timelines detailed in the measure, the transportation bill would be subject to legal challenge. That reality showcases the “teeth” in Proposition 54, which passed statewide with 65 percent of the vote – and even had the rare virtue of receiving voter approval in every one of California’s 58 counties.

The proposition is simple, though arcane sounding. It mainly requires that all bills be printed in final form – and published online –72 hours prior to a final vote in either house of the Legislature. Good-government reformers had for years tried to get the Legislature to approve such a measure, but were consistently stymied.

That’s because legislators love to rush through those “gut and amend” measures at the last moments of a legislative session. That’s when the guts of a bill are stripped away and an entirely new piece of legislation is dropped into its shell. In these rush situations, most legislators are unaware of the details of what they are voting on and the public and media can’t see what’s in the bills. This situation breeds cynicism and contempt for the legislative process.

By contrast, the vote over Senate Bill 1, the transportation measure, was a model of openness, according to many observers. As observers have noted, there’s plenty of reason for criticism of the bill and other parts of the process – the size of the tax increases, the pork-barrel projects, the lack of reforms for current transportation programs – but there’s no doubt the voter-approved proposition made it easier to see what was in it, warts and all.

Prior to SB 1’s passage, an ideologically diverse group of Prop. 54 supporters, including the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and California Common Cause, sent a letter to legislative leaders expressing their “concerns with the Legislature’s implementation to date, which could inadvertently result in the invalidation of bills that the Legislature wishes to pass.”

The bill seemed like a warning: The Legislature better follow the details of Prop. 54 in its consideration of SB 1 or potentially face legal efforts to overturn the measure if it passes. Indeed, the Legislature reportedly followed the 72-hour rule with nine minutes to spare.

But the warning was timely. As the San Francisco Chronicle’s John Diaz explained in an April 7 editorial, “Of particular concern was the Assembly’s attempt to interpret the 72-hour rule more narrowly than was presented to voters.” Assembly leaders interpreted the measure – which its authors say applies to all bills – “only to bills that had previously passed the Senate and were on their last stop before the governor.” That interpretation could eventually be challenged in court.

As the letter writers explained, “Each member of the Legislature is constitutionally guaranteed the right to have at least 72 hours to review the final version of any bill prior to a floor vote, regardless of the bill’s house of origin, and your constituents have the same right. We believe the Legislature’s rules should unambiguously reflect that right.”

The proposition also allows the public to record public meetings and requires the Legislature, beginning in 2018, to post videos of all such meetings online within 24 hours. The letter argues that the Legislature, however, is improperly adopting rules regarding such recordings.

“If the Legislature wishes to regulate the placement and use of recording or broadcasting equipment, it must adopt those rules in compliance with the Constitution’s requirements: that is, by a two-thirds vote concurring in each house, or by statute,” the signers explained.

As Diaz argued, the Legislature had for years “rejected any and all such reforms.” Supporters of the status quo had maintained imposing these “sunshine” rules would restrict the ability of legislators to get things done. But with the passage of SB 1, the Legislature passed one of its major and controversial priorities, despite having to operate with a new level of openness.

Legislators still are resisting the new rules, but they face grave risks if they push their recalcitrance too far. “If the Legislature does not adopt rules consistent with Proposition 54, there is a risk that the Legislature may schedule votes in violation of the Constitution’s 72-hour notice requirements,” according to the coalition letter. “Any such vote for passage will be invalid, and that bill will be ineligible to become a law.”

Ultimately, the Legislature understood what was at risk, which is why they apparently didn’t take any chances with their transportation bill.

Steven Greenhut is Western region director for the R Street Institute. Write to him at sgreenhut@rstreet.org.

What to watch for in Sacramento this month

Good morning, and welcome to August, which is sure to be a busy month in Sacramento as legislators fight to get their priorities passed before the legislative session ends on August 31. 

While a large number of bills will be debated, there are four major things to watch for: Environment, transportation, affordable housing and overtime for farmworkers.

CalWatchdog has more. 

In other news:

• The Los Angeles city attorney is warning three area (crisis pregnancy centers) that they’re breaking a new state reproductive disclosure law and could face fines of $500 if they don’t comply,” which represents the first time steps have been taken to enforce the seven-month-old Reproductive Freedom, Accountability, Comprehensive Care, and Transparency Act. Rewire has more. 

• A bill in Sacramento looks to cap environmental lawsuits against large development projects at nine months, which supporters see as a big boost for development around the state, reports the Los Angeles Times.

• Why experts say drone education isn’t working, reports the San Bernardino County Sun.  

• Oops: “A half century after building the largest water-delivery system in America, California officials say they now realize they put their giant straws to capture Delta water in the wrong place.” The San Jose Mercury News has more. 

Assembly:

• In at 1 p.m.

Senate: 

• In at 2 p.m.

Gov. Brown: 

• No public events announced.

Tips: matt@calwatchdog.com

Follow us: @calwatchdog @mflemingterp

New followers: @LABJnews

• Women stand to make only modest gains in Legislature in November
• Gavin Newsom has habit of plagiarism
• Housing solution: Building units in back yards?
• Local governments to further restrict new development
• “Where did California’s savings from reducing drug penalties go?” 

Good morning! Welcome to Tuesday. 

Women make up more than half of California’s population, but only about one-fourth of the Legislature. 

And in November, that’s unlikely to change too much, according to a CalWatchdog analysis.

While an October surprise, outside factor or just particularly good or bad campaigning could change the course of race that appears to be a sure thing, primary results, incumbency advantages, voting trends and partisan makeup of a district can be useful in making educated guesses.

Currently, out of 120 legislative seats, there are 30 held by women — an additional seat is vacant now, having been held by the late Republican Senator Sharon Runner, who died unexpectedly earlier this month.   

There could be as many as 49 women in the Legislature next year, but it is likely that they’ll hover around the same amount as this year.

CalWatchdog has more.  

In other news:

• Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom “has a pattern of posting other people’s work without credit,” reports The Sacramento Bee. 
• To ease the housing crisis, legislators are considering easing restrictions on homeowners building small units in backyards. The Los Angeles Times has more. 
• And yet, as state lawmakers consider many ideas for increasing affordable housing, local governments are considering proposals to restrict new development. The Voice of San Diego has more.
• “Proposition 47, which passed in 2014, reduced drug possession and some crimes of petty theft, check forgery and receiving stolen property from felonies to misdemeanors. The initiative mandated that savings from downgrading these offenses be spent on mental health and substance abuse treatment, victim services and truancy prevention. Voters were told the shift in emphasis from prison to rehabilitation could result in savings in ‘the low hundreds of millions.’ Yet the final savings figure to pay for prevention and treatment – reached after months of tense disagreements and accusations of betrayal – is far below the original estimate.” The Sacramento Bee has more. 

Legislature:

• Gone ’til August.

Gov. Brown:

• Attending the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia. 

Tips: matt@calwatchdog.com

Follow us: @calwatchdog @mflemingterp

New followers: @MahaYoga_LA

Sen. Sharon Runner died Thursday morning, ending a longtime battle with scleroderma — a condition that forced the Lancaster Republican from office in 2012 and required a double lung transplant that same year. Voters sent Runner back to the Senate in 2015 in a special election, but she decided not to run again in 2016.

Senate Democrats are one seat away from being in a supermajority — a two-thirds majority that would allow them to approve tax increases, gubernatorial veto overrides and constitutional amendments without Republican votes.

But staff of Senate President Pro Tempore Kevin de Leon, who also chairs the Rules Committee, confirmed that the threshold is a fixed number of votes (27) based on the number of seats (40), not the number of sitting senators (39). There are currently 26 Democratic senators.

The governor has 14 days to call an election to fill a vacancy, and the Elections Code allows for the special election to be scheduled at the same time as the next regularly scheduled election if it’s within 180 days, which the Nov. 8 general election is. 

Since Runner had already decided to step down, there’s an election underway for the seat. Republican Assemblyman Scott Wilk of Santa Clarita and Democrat Johnathon Levar Ervin, an engineer and Air Force reservist advanced from the primary as the top two.

Because of Democrats’ closeness to a supermajority, this seat is seen as a must hold for Republicans.

Legislators and experts have long called for some type of reform to the costly and cumbersome special election process. Runner championed a measure this session that would mitigate the cost of special elections by allowing the governor to declare a winner if there was only one candidate on the ballot.

The bill is sitting on Gov. Jerry Brown’s desk awaiting a decision.

Law enforcement accountability measures stalling in Sacramento

Good morning! Happy Hump Day. 

“Against a national backdrop of discord over police killings of black men and deadly anti-police violence, state lawmakers who back law enforcement conduct and transparency reforms are making little progress in Sacramento.”

One bill that would have increased public access to documents regarding police conduct died in committee without a vote. Another, which would require a conviction before law enforcement could seize private property, is near the finish line but has struggled to find enough support. 

CalWatchdog has more. 

In other news:

• Californians continue to approve of the job Gov. Jerry Brown is doing, with 56 percent in support, according to a new poll. The Sacramento Bee has more.
• Today’s palace intrigue comes from the Los Angeles Times: “In a surprising move, the leader of the state Senate endorsed a Democratic assemblywoman Tuesday whose re-election is opposed by some of California’s leading environmental groups. But the announcement also revealed fractures within the top echelons of Senate leadership.” 
• UC Berkeley’s chancellor is under an internal investigation for the “alleged misuse of public funds for travel and the personal use of a campus athletic trainer without payment,” writes the Los Angeles Times.
• San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer plans to lead the opposition to Gov. Jerry Brown’s early-release ballot measure, giving him — one of the most prominent Republicans in the state — the chance to raise his profile throughout the state. The Sacramento Bee has more.  
• “In advance of a political showdown in the state Legislature, Gov. Jerry Brown’s administration made its first formal effort Tuesday to extend the life of the program central to California’s bid to combat climate change. The California Air Resources Board, which is controlled by the governor, released a plan that would continue the state’s cap-and-trade program to cut carbon emissions beyond 2020, the date when the program currently expires,” writes the Los Angeles Times.

Legislature:

• Gone ’til August.

Gov. Brown:

• On vacation.

Tips: matt@calwatchdog.com

Follow us: @calwatchdog @mflemingterp

New followers: @soledadobrien @DP_Shea

November ballot fills out with 17 measures…

Good morning, happy Friday and welcome to July!

Voters have been warned for a while to be prepared for a seemingly never-ending series of ballot measures, and on Thursday the secretary of state released the final list of what initiatives qualified.

Seventeen total. And while voters will read and learn more as the campaigns unfold between now and Election Day, we put together a quick reference guide for your reading and learning pleasure.

The guide includes an increased tobacco tax, a repeal of the death penalty, a sped-up death penalty process, gun control, Legislature transparency, plastic-bag ban referendum, and so much more.

CalWatchog has more. 

In other news:

• Lawmakers can still get measures on the November ballot, which one senator is hoping to do with a $3 billion bond for low-income housing. The Los Angeles Times has more. 
• The Legislature sent 12 gun-control bills to Gov. Jerry Brown today, where it’s unclear how many he’ll sign. But we’ll know shortly as he’s headed out on vacation afterwards. The Sacramento Bee has more. 
• The state’s controversial vaccination law takes effect today, and it’s causing some people to move away, writes The San Jose Mercury News. 
• The San Bernardino County Sun explains why CA regulators want more money to improve air quality.

Assembly:

• Gone ’til August.

Senate: 

• Gone ’til August.

Gov. Brown:

• Headed for a European vacation.

Tips: matt@calwatchdog.com

Follow us: @calwatchdog @mflemingterp

New followers: @michaelkapp @ethnicphysician

Is Issa really in trouble?

Is Congressman Darrell Issa really in trouble after squeaking through the primary election earlier this month?

Just two and a half years after being on top of the political world, Issa is in one of the toughest political fights of his 15-year career, according to his hometown paper, after advancing to the general election with just 51.5 percent of the vote.

Political handicappers have downgraded his race from Safe Republican to Likely Republican and Republican’s voter registration advantage in the district has dipped with the rise of Trump (who Issa endorsed).

But Issa’s camp isn’t worried, noting that while the race was close, it still ended with Issa on top — a forecast of what’s to come.

“While the election night number was what it was, I think a longer look at the whole story shows that we withstood — rather than were walloped by — the registration surge, heavy Dem turnout and no competitive GOP race,” said Issa spokesman Jonathan Wilcox.

CalWatchdog has more. 

In other news:

• About that Trump endorsement: At an event in San Diego yesterday, Issa said he’d like to have a “re-do” of the entire primary process where Trump wasn’t the nominee. The San Diego Union-Tribune has more. 

• The Dalai Lama brought a message of peace to Sacramento on Monday, telling lawmakers: “The best way to take care of one’s self is to take care of others.” The Los Angeles Times has more. 

• Even though they haven’t officially qualified for the November ballot yet, 10 would-be initiatives are stockpiling money and preparing for war. The Sacramento Bee has more. 

• “California lawmakers are putting the finishing touches on a plan to provide up to $2 billion to help cities build permanent shelters to get mentally ill people off the street,” writes the AP/Capital Public Radio.

Assembly:

• Full slate of committee hearings. 

Senate:

• Full slate of committee hearings.

Gov. Brown: 

• No public events scheduled.

Tips: matt@calwatchdog.com

Follow us: @calwatchdog @mflemingterp

New followers: @grahamdude @nwconservative

But advocates of Senate Bill 676, a new bill that would ban police from fining or arresting people for sleeping outdoors, is facing a tough reception.

Sen. Carol Liu, a La Cañada Flintridge Democrat who is a sponsor of the bill, depicts it as being about human rights. The language of the measure says it “would afford persons experiencing homelessness the right to use public spaces without discrimination based on their housing status and describe basic human and civil rights that may be exercised without being subject to criminal or civil sanctions, including the right to use and to move freely in public spaces, the right to rest in public spaces and to protect oneself from the elements.”

It would also allow homeless people to sue authorities if these rights were abrograted and would mandate that all local communities take steps to minimize the “criminalization of homelessness.”

Bill called counterproductive, poorly conceived

However, the administration of Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson and local business groups in the state capital call the proposal poorly conceived and warn it could have huge potential unintended consequences.

The Downtown Sacramento Partnership, a community assessment district of Sacramento merchants, approaches the issue from an entirely different direction.

 

Allowing people to sleep inside cities not only creates a public safety hazard, but it undermines current efforts to permanently house people because it signals that a city is comfortable with people sleeping on the sidewalk, said Dion Dwyer, who oversees homeless outreach efforts for the partnership.

 

“I want to provide a social safety net that can lift up that person off the sidewalk and into services and ultimately into sustainable housing,” said Dwyer.

That is from an article in the Sacramento Business Journal.

Mayor Johnson has won backing from Sacramento Councilman Jay Schenirer. “We fully recognize the good intent of this measure; however, we do not feel that it will make a positive impact in the effort to reduce and address chronic homelessness,” he wrote last month in a formal letter of opposition to Liu’s measure.

Is Sacramento really ‘criminalizing the homeless’?

Meanwhile, Sacramento Bee metro columnist Marcos Breton is pushing back against some of the tactics and generalizations of those who feel Sacramento is callous toward the homeless. On Jan. 9, he wrote that it was a great misconception that …

… the city is “criminalizing the homeless.” This is a claim often made by people with political agendas. Some are seeking to abolish Sacramento’s anti-camping ordinance, which is designed to prevent people from setting up camps anywhere they wish.

 

The ordinance is about protecting people and property within the city limits. Protesters camped at City Hall for more than a month, however, are challenging the law, saying it unfairly discriminates against the homeless.

 

This being Sacramento, where political slogans are hatched and exported statewide, the “criminalizing” concept is being aggressively promoted, an incomplete narrative spread around a liberal city often flummoxed by its homeless problems.

The tension between the views of Liu and those of Breton and the Sacramento establishment appears to be one more example of the intractability of the homeless debate. Those who argue in an abstract that governments should do much more to help the homeless are countered by those who have been on the front lines of trying to directly address the problem. Many of the latter group maintain that because so many homeless people are mentally ill, the problem isn’t open to simple solutions involving using more government resources.

Liu’s bill is likely to showcase this argument and launch a statewide debate over whether local laws against sleeping in public areas are reasonable attempts to promote public safety and public health or are tantamount to criminalizing the behavior of some of the poorest, most troubled people in California.

The bill has yet to be subjected to a Senate committee vote. Liu has already amended the measure once to address concerns its language was unnecesarily broad.

Currently, anyone who spends $5,000 or more to influence legislative or administrative action is required quarterly to disclose payments to lobbying firms, payments to lobbyists, activity expenses and other payments to influence legislative or administrative action.

The regulation, which will go into effect July 1 — meaning it’ll start showing up in October just before the election — makes it so the fourth category “other payments to influence” will be itemized. As it stands now, that fourth category has become a catchall with no accountability.

This “other payments” classification could include hiring consultants — such as former politicians who aren’t registered lobbyists — or the cost of advertising, hiring a public affairs firm, media consulting firm, or even something simple like paying rent.

But no one really knows on a case-by-case basis, since up until now it’s just reported as a top line amount with no specificity.

And groups are more regularly relying on this ambiguous classification. For example, the 10 interest groups that regularly spend the most on lobbying have gone from 52 percent of their total amount reported as “other payments” in 2000 to 69 percent in 2014, according to the Fair Political Practices Commission report.

Total spending has increased as well, up 34 percent over that same period of time among the top 10.

“There are two main goals behind the regulation, to increase transparency and promote compliance,” said FPPC Chair Jodi Remke in a statement. “As for transparency, the public is entitled to know who is trying to influence public officials and how they are doing it. As for compliance, lobbying is largely a self-regulated industry and requiring more detailed reporting is the most effective tool to promote compliance and facilitate enforcement against improper activity.”

The threshold for itemization will be $2,500 per expense, broken out into multiple categories, including salary, lobbyist expenses, legislative-related services, consultants and government relations, public affairs, advertising, research, lobbying events and other. Disclosing the name and address of the payee will also be required.

Critics say because the $2,500 threshold is so low, the new law imposes cumbersome reporting requirements on filers, particularly now in the middle of an election cycle, and the privacy of employees whose names will be published will be violated with little value to the public.

“These are individuals within many organizations who are not registered lobbyists, and while they may engage in some direct lobbying communications, they do not qualify as lobbyists,” wrote Diane M. Fishburn and Richard R. Rios of the law firm Olson, Hagel and Fishburn, in a letter to the FPPC.

“We ask that the commission recognize that there is little if any value to the public in the disclosure of the individual names and addresses or the salaries paid to these individuals,” continued Fishburn and Rios, whose firm represents the California State Council of Service Employees, an SEIU affiliate.

Photo Credit: abc7.com

With a cautiously optimistic tone, Gov. Jerry Brown preached prudence on Thursday morning during his annual State of the State address.

The speech — courteous in its brevity, clocking in at under 20 minutes — touted accomplishments and initiatives, like a budget surplus, several credit upgrades, a rainy-day fund, increased education spending and a raise in the minimum wage. However, it was most notable for its call to pay down existing obligations before creating new ones.

“The challenge is to solve today’s problems without making those of tomorrow even worse,” Brown told a packed Assembly floor, arguing the need for preparedness for life’s uncertainty. “In that spirit, you are not going to hear me talk today about new programs. Rather, I am going to focus on how we pay for the commitments we have already made.”

On the budget — Brown released his version earlier this month — the popular Democratic governor said that state economists predict that the next recession, if only of average intensity, “would cut our revenues by $55 billion over three years.”

“That is why it is imperative to build up the rainy-day fund, which was recently overwhelmingly approved by the voters, and invest our temporary surpluses in badly needed infrastructure or in other ways that will not lock in future spending,” Brown said.

Brown’s budget had revenue exceeding expectations by $3.6 billion, with most of the money being tucked into the rainy-day fund, according the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

While all the talk of fiscal restraint is likely to appease some concerns from the right, there was plenty to like for those on the left. On inequality, Brown touted a raise in the minimum wage, an Earned Income Tax Credit, paid sick leave and other traditionally Democratic priorities, including expanded access to health care under the Affordable Care Act.

“Most importantly – and this is truly monumental – we have wholeheartedly embraced the Affordable Care Act,” Brown said. “This is an historic achievement. It will provide health security to so many who could not otherwise afford it.”

Brown asked that legislators consider the revised managed care organization tax, a greater explanation of which can be found here on the California Chamber of Commerce website.

Brown applauded the 51 percent increase in education spending since 2011 and spoke of the need for increased funding for roads. He touted the Paris climate agreement and the Prop. 1 water bond, noting the bond’s passage as one of the “bright spots in our contentious politics.”

The transcript can be found here.

The proposed budget can be found here.

The LAO’s analysis of the budget can be found here.