The current MID – which allows taxpayers to deduct interest on up to the first $1 million of mortgage debt – has been a boon to the state’s homeowners. The median price of a California home is home nearly $510,000, according to Zillow. In Los Angeles County and Orange County, it’s even more: $574,400 and $691,600, respectively. However, the median price in the booming Inland Empire remains significantly lower: $347,700 for Riverside County and $314,000 for San Bernardino County.

The state and local tax deduction disproportionately benefits those with higher incomes in states with higher tax burdens. According to the Tax Foundation, with an average gross income (AGI) of $73,938, 33.9 percent of filers in California take advantage of the deduction, which amounts to almost 8 percent of AGI.

Meanwhile, the median value of this deduction is less than 4.5 percent, and, per the Tax Foundation, California, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Texas and Pennsylvania “claim more than half of the value of all state and local tax deductions nationwide.”

As to be expected, many of California’s political representatives have chimed in. Here are a few of their responses:

Jerry Brown penned a letter to Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Vista: “I implore you to vote NO or to ask for more time so that Californians can have a chance to find out about the real impact of this proposal. Getting rid of an individual’s ability to deduct his or her California taxes is a horrible idea, but it is made far worse when you preserve – at the same time – the right of corporations to take those same deductions. Can you tell me how much your neighbors and fellow citizens will have to pay because of this proposal?”

Darrell Issa defended himself and the GOP plan in a letter of his own: “It seemed only fitting to take this opportunity to highlight your expertise on – as your letter states – ‘horrible ideas’ on tax policy. I recognize the role of the state and local tax deduction to reduce the tax burden on many Californians, but let’s be clear: it has only become of such importance as a direct result of the tremendous weight that your misguided policies have put on California taxpayers.” Issa concluded, “Rather than sending contrived letters pretending to care about the burdens placed on taxpayers in our state, I implore you to turn away from the era of ever-increasing taxes that have continued under your administration and instead seek policies that actually lower the tax burden on all Californians.”

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Bakersfield, defended the plan: “Today, we moved closer to enacting reform that will encourage American companies to bring American jobs back to American towns, allow people to spend minutes, not days, doing their taxes, and help increase wages by $4,000 for the average family because of faster economic growth. We’re moving forward at a fast pace because America has so much to gain when we get this done.”

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, in a press release published on Halloween, stated, “The GOP plan to double tax middle class families’ incomes shows the fundamental rottenness at the core of their tax bill. Middle class families get tricked, billionaires get treats. Republicans should abandon their broken middle-class tax hike bill, and work with the Democrats for real bipartisan tax reform that puts the middle class first and delivers A Better Deal to the American people.”

Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Torrance, decried, “The GOP tax plan is absurd. Their proposal to eliminate the state and local tax deduction will lead to a massive tax hike for middle class families in California.” He also “double dare[d]” the state’s moderate Republicans – who “should know better” – to vote for “this ridiculous tax plan.”

“We have a lot of work left to do to build a stronger city, state and nation and I know I can best build on our progress here in L.A.,” he wrote. “I am passionate about my city and my family; both are here in Los Angeles.”

The announcement came as little surprise, as few believed Garcetti would enter the crowded field that includes Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom who has already built a robust campaign war chest and enters the race as the frontrunner. Garcetti’s decision is likely welcome news for former L.A. mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, as the two would have been competing for not only votes in the heavily Latino Southern California region – but donors as well.

Also, the mayor polled relatively poorly last spring in early surveying of the race.

Furthermore, rumors that Garcetti is setting the groundwork for a White House run have swirled for months – rumors fueled by his recent trips to places like New Hampshire and Wisconsin. He is also scheduled to visit the early primary state of South Carolina later this year.

While the mayor has been largely mum on possible aspirations to seek the 2020 Democratic nomination, the 46-year-old Garcetti has stressed a need for new blood and fresh energy in a party still reeling from a crushing defeat last November.

“I have a job I love,” Garcetti said at the Democratic National Committee’s annual meeting in Nevada earlier this month.

A jump to the White House would be unprecedented, however, as no politician has ever gone from city hall to Pennsylvania Avenue without other stops in between.

Garcetti finds himself in a unique position within the Democratic Party nationally. While he backed Hillary Clinton and is aligned with the establishment roots of the party, he has also unabashedly backed progressive measures like single-payer health care – policy proposals longtime Democratic figures like Sen. Dianne Feinstein have been hesitant to embrace.

At the same time, he’s taken a less aggressive tone in speaking out against President Trump’s agenda in Washington, largely avoiding the more hyperbolic rhetoric from other California leaders like Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, and Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Calif.

For example, in his second inaugural address in July, Garcetti didn’t mention President Trump by name, and instead struck a more unifying and pragmatic tone.

While those words sufficed after he was overwhelmingly elected as mayor, if he decides to run, Garcetti may be required to pivot towards appealing to an audience eager to hear a tougher anti-Trump message – especially coming from a state that has positioned itself at the center of the so-called “resistance” against the GOP agenda.

“I think all the rules are off,” Garcetti told a Wisconsin TV station this summer. “No African American could be president until one was. No reality star could be president until one is.”

The reasons range from district work, to disdain for Trump, to responding to Twitter polls. In all, more than 50 House Democrats are planning on skipping the event.

Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi will attend, however, out of a sense of “responsibility” and to honor the “peaceful transition of power.” The two remaining undecided Californians are: Senator Dianne Feinstein and Rep. Xavier Becerra of Los Angeles. Feinstein had a pacemaker installed last week, while Becerra is going through the confirmation process to become California’s next attorney general.

While critics are already panning the boycotts, attending the inauguration is not a requirement; skipping it in protest is uncommon but not unprecedented. Around 80 Democrats skipped the ceremony for Richard Nixon in 1973 to protest a military strike in North Vietnam. 

The only real requirement surrounding the inauguration is the oath of office being administered; everything else is a matter of “custom and tradition.” But that in itself creates a problem for Trump, said John J. Pitney, Jr., a Roy P. Crocker professor of politics at Claremont McKenna College. 

“Here is Trump’s problem. He proclaims that he is a disrupter and takes pride in flouting customs and traditions. … Accordingly, he and his defenders cannot turn around and fault the other side for flouting customs and traditions,” Pitney said. “If he wants a disruptive tenure, he’s going to get it, and he won’t like all of the results.”

CA sales tax dips, tax burden rises

Good morning! It’s Friday. Let’s get down to business. 

“Four years ago, voters approved Proposition 30, which raised the income tax significantly on the wealthiest Californians and raised the sales tax a tiny bit on everyone,” Capital Public Radio recently recalled. “That quarter-of-a-cent increase equated to paying an additional $0.01 on a $4 coffee; $1 on a $400 television; and $100 on a $40,000 car.” 

But on Election Day 2016, that changed. “Voters extended Proposition 30’s income tax increases in [November’s] presidential election with Proposition 55 — but that initiative allowed the Prop. 30 sales tax hike to expire.”

The shift means California’s sales tax is the state’s only tax to be decreased this year, from 7.5 percent to 7.25 percent.

As the U-T reported, “Some local jurisdictions tack on their own assessments, so residents in certain areas will still pay more than the statewide rate.” In certain parts of the state, like the San Francisco Bay Area, voters allowed substantial increases. 

CalWatchdog has more. 

In other news:

• Health Care: “As Washington grapples with health care policy again, the head of the 185,000-member National Nurses United is turning her attention to a seemingly unlikely advocate for a single-payer system. ‘The one I’m counting on the most is Trump,’ RoseAnn DeMoro said. DeMoro, who serves as executive director of both the Oakland-based National Nurses United and the California Nurses Association, told POLITICO California on Thursday that she is ‘disgusted’ with Democrats like House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and believes that the president-elect may actually get action.” Politico has more. 

• Minimum wage: “San Diego is cracking down on several restaurants that city officials say are adding surcharges in misleading and illegal ways to help cover increased labor costs from the minimum wage hike that took effect Jan. 1.” The San Diego Union-Tribune has more. 

• Budget: “But recent events in California and the nation suggest the fiscal proposal Brown unveils next week could be his most circumspect to date, even after voters in November approved billions of dollars in additional taxes,” reports the Los Angeles Times. 

• Obamacare: “House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy has written to Gov. Jerry Brown and the leaders of other states soliciting their input for replacing Obamacare.” The Sacramento Bee has more. 

Legislature:

• Back on Monday. 

Gov. Brown:

• On vacation in Hawaii until Sunday, according to The Sacramento Bee. 

Tips: matt@calwatchdog.com

Follow us: @calwatchdog @mflemingterp

New follower: @hilljobs

Becerra, who would need to be confirmed by the Legislature, would fill the impending vacancy left by Kamala Harris, who was elected to the U.S. Senate last month. The nomination will not be official until Harris resigns. 

“Xavier has been an outstanding public servant – in the state Legislature, the U.S. Congress and as a deputy attorney general,” Gov. Brown said in a statement. “I’m confident he will be a champion for all Californians and help our state aggressively combat climate change.”

Prior to being elected to Congress in 1992, Becerra served one term in the state Assembly. He also served several years as deputy attorney general.

“Governor Jerry Brown has presented me with an opportunity I cannot refuse,” Becerra tweeted. 

What it means for the state

The pick breaks up the Bay Area’s stranglehold on statewide offices – only two of the eight statewide elective office holders are from outside the Bay Area. Becerra, from Los Angeles, will be the third.

The pick also ends months of speculation, which at times suggested Brown would pick his wife, Anne Brown Gust (Brown dismissed those rumors). Becerra’s name had not been previously mentioned, but the timing coincides with House Democrats’ leadership elections earlier this week.

Glass ceiling in Congress

Becerra, the fourth highest ranking Democrat in the House, for years has been limited by leadership’s glass ceiling and Nancy Pelosi’s re-election as minority leader this week only reaffirmed that Becerra had limited options.

Becerra was set to be forced out of leadership, having served his two terms. He had been seeking the top Democratic spot on the House Ways and Means Committee.

Musical chairs

If confirmed, Becerra leaves his own vacancy and shakes up the 2018 statewide elections.

Becerra has not announced any intentions beyond accepting the appointment, but as a statewide officeholder, he would have a bigger platform to run for the attorney general (of which he’d be a frontrunner as the incumbent) and possibly governor or Senate, should incumbent Dianne Feinstein decide to step down. 

CQ Roll Call reported that soon after Brown’s announcement, former Assembly Speaker John A. Perez announced his intention to run for Beccara’s spot in Congress. The seat is safely Democratic — Becerra had just been re-elected with 77.2 percent of the vote against a fellow Democrat. 

“In the aftermath of November’s election nationwide, two facts are clearer than ever,” Perez said in a statement, according to CQ Roll Call. “The first is that we need to fight harder than ever to protect the progress we’ve made. The second is that California is the one place in the country where Democrats know how to win, and the one place in the country where government is working.”

Earlier this week, Perez had told Politico he was mulling a run for chairman of the Democratic National Committee.

Confirmation

Becerra should face an easy confirmation in the Legislature, which is overwhelmingly run by Democrats. Following Brown’s announcement, Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon sent his support.

“With his long record of public service in the Attorney General’s office, the Assembly, and Congress, Xavier Becerra clearly has the experience to step into this vital role,” the Paramount Democrat said in a statement. “Just as important, he has great tenacity and he respects the rights of all Californians — much-needed qualities for an Attorney General given the troubling times ahead. I applaud Governor Brown for making this bold and inspired choice.”

All eyes on SoCal state Senate race

Good morning! TGIT. Just to piggy back on one thing we wrote yesterday, the only thing standing in the way of a Democratic supermajority in the Legislature is one Southern California Senate seat. 

Democrats are halfway there as the last barrier between them and a two-thirds majority in the Assembly officially crumbled on Tuesday, after the Associated Press determined Democrat Sabrina Cervantes had knocked off Republican incumbent Eric Linder in the Inland Empire.

But to completely enjoy the benefits of a supermajority, Democrats will have to win one more seat in the Senate as well, which means Democrat Josh Newman has to overcome a few thousand vote deficit against Republican Assemblywoman Ling Ling Chang.

Currently, Chang leads Newman by about 2,600 votes, a number that changes daily as ballots are still being counted. On Wednesday, Chang’s lead was around 5,000 votes.

The district is split between Los Angeles, Orange and San Bernardino counties, with Orange having the largest swath of voters. 

Orange County estimates that there are still 162,778 ballots left uncounted countywide out of 374,397 post-Election Day. 

CalWatchdog has more. 

In other news:

• “Federal election officials on Wednesday released an accounting from GOP Rep. Duncan Hunter itemizing dozens of apparently personal outlays by the congressman’s campaign — expenses he has now reimbursed to the tune of $60,000. The list resembles a suburban family budget including utilities, a dentist, a nail salon, Albertsons, Costco, Walmart, Home Depot, Dick’s Sporting Goods, Trader Joe’s and Abercrombie & Fitch — and also 32 airline transactions, a hotel in Italy and the Arizona Grand Resort.” The San Diego Union-Tribune has more. 

• “When Nancy Pelosi travels from her home in San Francisco to her job in Washington as House Democratic leader, she flies over millions of voters whom Democrats relied on for decades but who rejected the party this year. The Democrats’ shellacking in the election — below-expectations gains in the House plus the White House loss and minimal wins in the Senate — produced party grumbling that the 76-year-old California liberal may not be the best messenger to lead those once-core Democratic voters back into the fold.” The San Jose Mercury News/AP has more. 

• “When the California State Senate convenes next month, Sen. Connie Leyva, D-Chino, says that she plans to introduce legislation to ban all registered sex offenders from school campuses without exception,” reports the Los Angeles Times. 

• “CalPERS on Wednesday declared that the Sierra County town of Loyalton has defaulted on its debt to the giant pension fund, a move that means the state is poised to scale back retirees’ pension benefits,” reports The Sacramento Bee. 

Legislature:

• Gone till December. 

Gov. Brown:

• No public events announced. 

Tips: matt@calwatchdog.com

Follow us: @calwatchdog @mflemingterp

New follower: @ChaseNYurFace

Although former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, waited until the last minute, she sent an unequivocal message to voters and fellow Democrats: It’s okay to mainstream weed. 

On Friday, Pelosi revealed “she plans to vote for California’s Proposition 64, making her one of a small number of high-level politicians to support legalizing the recreational use of marijuana,” according to the Los Angeles Times. 

Political calculations

The influential Democrat wasn’t explicit about the delicate politics involved in judging the best way to catch California’s pro-marijuana wave — or not. “Pelosi told the Los Angeles Times Editorial Board and Times reporters that she has not taken public positions on many of the state ballot measures because she is focused on other races in her fundraising and public appearances.” As the paper explained, Pelosi’s support for Prop. 64 is broadly aligned with her favorable attitude toward many of the Golden State’s other big-ticket ballot initiatives this year, including Proposition 62 (repealing the death penalty), Proposition 51 ($9 billion in school bonds) and Proposition 52 (designating Medi-Cal funds).

“She also said she personally supports Proposition 56 to raise tobacco taxes by $2 per pack. She said she hasn’t gone public with positions for all of the measures because she feels some things should be done by the Legislature.”

The endorsement marked a sea change for Pelosi, auguring a bigger shift among Democrats not only in California but with national offices and profiles. “In 2010 — when, according to Gallup, 46 percent of Americans thought marijuana should be legal, compared to 60 percent today — Pelosi declined to take a position on Proposition 19, the last attempt to legalize marijuana in California,” Reason observed. 

Complicating factors

Although cultural trends in California tend to inflect politics with a taste for liberalization, the bid to legalize pot has come at a time when cross currents in some voter patterns could tap the brakes. “While a surge in Latino voters could help Hillary Clinton on Tuesday, it could hurt efforts to legalize marijuana in nine states,” McClatchy recently concluded. “Hispanics are less likely to back legalization than either white or black voters, according to a poll released last month by the Pew Research Center.”

“Forty-six percent of Hispanics said the drug should be legal, while 49 percent said it should remain illegal, the poll found. By comparison, big majorities of both black and white voters — 59 percent — said it was time to end the federal prohibition on marijuana.”

A cultural revolution 

Nevertheless, voter enthusiasm may turn out to be fairly unimportant relative to the broader trends in business that have smoothed the way for even very well established Californian officials to accede to the idea of recreational marijuana. “New Frontier Data estimates California’s marijuana industry will generate $7.6 billion a year in direct sales to consumers by 2020, and that’s not including sales generated when growers sell to processors and when processors sell to dispensaries,” the San Jose Mercury News noted — a figure exclusive of merchandise and accessories like pot-referencing t-shirts and bongs, according to New Frontier executive vice president of industry analytics John Kagia. 

With Democrats controlling state politics, and some Republicans looking for a new way to shore up their weaker position, bipartisan pressure has been strong to embrace those trends, which have been building so long and so steadily that it has become hard to see how they could be reversed. “At least six other members of California’s congressional delegation, including two Republicans, support this year’s initiative,” as Reason reported. “Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., who opposed legalization in 2010, says she is inclined to vote for it this year.” But many California officials have seemed most willing to accept legalized marijuana after the fact. “Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom has long supported the marijuana ballot measure and has called, mostly without success, for other state elected officials to endorse it,” the Times recalled.

Penalty warning

The current enrollment period, the exchange’s third since the Affordable Care Act began to be implemented, offered its officials — and allied Democrats — an opportunity to breathe a sigh of relief. After a very rocky start, especially through the federal enrollment process, Obamacare found traction as its parallel expansion of Medicaid coverage gained adherents even among some Republican governors. But even though critics have contended that the evidence suggests Obamacare still faces a cloudy future, Covered California has so far managed to rack up the kind of enrollments capable of keeping it going.

At a recent press conference, top California Democrats touted the state exchange’s numbers to date. “Nearly 1.3 million people have received access to vital treatment at top hospitals through the health insurance program known as Covered California since it launched in January 2014, Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi announced this week at a press conference held at UC San Francisco,” the university reported.

On the other hand, Peter Lee, the exchange’s executive director, also used the conference to warn residents that penalties for flouting the individual mandate would go into effect, warning Californians to sign up “rather than send a check to the IRS.”

A full court press

The so-called “tax penalty” referenced by Lee, which the Supreme Court authorized to enforce the implementation of Obamacare, has now been expected to “run into thousands of dollars,” according to the Sacramento Bee. To avoid the lower enrollment numbers, riskier pool of insureds, and bad business and political publicity associated with them, Covered California officials went into overdrive this year to keep signup numbers looking respectable enough to keep off critics’ heat. “They’ve spent $29 million on advertising, opened 500 storefronts, beefed up call centers and trained hundreds of health insurance enrollment counselors who speak 12 languages, from Arabic to Vietnamese,” as the Bee reported. “They’ve also rolled through 21 cities in a statewide bus tour to highlight this year’s open enrollment season, projecting the words ‘Enroll Now’ on iconic buildings such as Sacramento’s Tower Bridge and San Francisco’s Coit Tower.”

Covered California was rewarded with an uptick in signups, which, in an apparent irony, created administrative burdens great enough to force the extension. “Friday’s announcement came after a surge of enrollment, which saw tens of thousands sign up for health care plans this week leaving certified enrollers with more applications to file before the deadline Sunday,” the Orange County Register noted. “The extension will help prevent consumers from getting turned away just because they got ‘caught up in a wave of last-minute shoppers,'” as Lee described the situation.

Technical difficulties

Although the federal government did not offer a similar extension through its own web portal for signups, analysts surmised that California faced some problems similar to those that have plagued Obamacare’s online registration process in the past. “In previous years, the federal government was forced to extend the open enrollment deadline because of glitches with its website, long wait times for customers and other technical issues with the enrollment process,” the International Business Times noted.

“This year, California likely faced similar issues, as the California Health Care Foundation found in an analysis that customers frequently struggled to complete online applications, even if they spent hours trying to figure them out.”

Whereas Maryland, another state to extend its deadline, had to contend with customers impacted by the massive blizzard that recently hit the eastern seaboard, California didn’t put forward weather as an excuse, the IBTimes added.

Recent curbs on access to firearms and limitations on certain gun features appeared to have made little or no impact on the terrorists’ ability to obtain and use their arsenal. The closure of the so-called “gun show loophole,” for instance, didn’t stop legal guns from illegally winding up in their hands. Enrique Marquez, neighbor of killer Syed Rizwan Farook, “bought the two semiautomatic rifles legally, authorities say. But the weapons were later given to Farook without a recording by a federally licensed firearms dealer, as required under California law,” the Los Angeles Times reported.

California’s special protections against arming the mentally unwell did not come into play either. “The FBI said Farook legally bought the two handguns used in the attack — purchases that would have required a background check. And there is no indication he or Malik had any criminal record or history of mental illness that would have triggered California’s unique law allowing authorities to seize weapons from those who aren’t allowed to own them,” noted ABC News.

Golden State gun laws fell short of expectations in another way as well. “While California laws typically forbid the sale and possession of rifles of the sort used by the shooters, the assault-style rifles in Wednesday’s attack had a button mechanism to release their ammunition magazines, which made them legal to possess in California — an exception sometimes referred to as the ‘bullet button loophole,'” according to the Huffington Post. ” Some gun makers in California specialize in manufacturing assault-style rifles that comply with California state law,” added HuffPost. “But even if the bullet button loophole did not exist and possessing assault-style rifles of any kind had been illegal from the get-go, the shooters could have saved themselves the trouble of trying to modify their weapons by simply traveling to a different state.”

Across state lines

That dynamic quickly became a point of contention between California and Arizona officials. In France for the Paris climate talks, Gov. Jerry Brown slammed Nevada and Arizona lawmakers for creating a “gigantic back door through which any terrorist can walk” with “wide open” gun laws. “Because guns used in the attack were purchased legally in California, Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey immediately shot back, calling Brown’s comments an ‘out of bounds’ attempt ‘to politicize a tragedy,'” the Phoenix New Times noted. “Not only will we be ignoring Brown’s advice, but I call on him to retract his incredibly thoughtless and ill-advised comments,” said Ducey. Although the number of so-called “crime guns” flowing into California from neighboring states has doubled in a decade, “the vast majority of guns used to commit crimes in California originate in the state,” the Huffington Post observed.

Constituencies on both sides of the gun debate have responded true to type. While supporters of light or moderate restrictions suggested that the facts of the San Bernardino shootings underscored the fruitlessness of tougher rules, advocates of stronger gun controls pushed for more federal regulations. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., told PBS that “we need a national gun law so that there is no thought that even though one state may have good laws you can buy guns in another place.”

Self defense

Meanwhile, gun purchases have risen among Southern California residents themselves. “As politicians and gun-control advocates have seized on the San Bernardino shooting as a reason to restrict firearm access, many of those on the front lines of the tragedy are seeking to arm themselves,” the Times reported.

“San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Deputy Adam Cervantes said 75 applications for concealed-weapons permits were submitted last weekend, about seven times the department’s normal application volume. Orange County Sheriff’s Department Lt. Jeff Hallock said his office saw 130 applications for concealed-weapons permits last weekend, up from the roughly 30 applications that typically come in.”

The move to get a new accreditation plan in place could take a decade, while the state’s 2.1 million community college students look for guidance in a complex system.

The fatal action for the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges was its challenge to City College of San Francisco. The commission in 2012 began raising concerns about financial and governance practices at the college and at one point threatened to revoke the college’s accreditation, landing the two parties in court.

City College has acknowledged its precarious financial position and its revolving door of administrators. The school has pruned expenses and tightened its finances, according to a bond filing issued earlier this year.

Which leaves the state with a black eye in terms of accreditation of community colleges. Is the accreditation commission being punished for doing its job? Or was it unfairly severe in its application of standards?

Need for Accreditation

Accreditation is crucial for most institutions as it is required to access federal student loan money.

The state’s community colleges have seen a decline in enrollment over the past five years and faced an $18 million revenue decline in 2014, although state legislation propped up the San Francisco Community College District — of which the City College is part of — through additional funding last year.

The commission has been on the radar of the California Community Colleges Board of Governors for over a year.

In a report issued by a review committee from the community colleges board, the fate of the accreditation board was sealed.

From the report:

“Between 2009 and 2013 the ACCJC issued 143 sanctions out of the 269 accreditation actions it took. This sanction rate is approximately 53 percent, compared to approximately 12 percent sanction rates within the other six regional accreditors. The quantity and frequency of sanctions issued by the ACCJC, in conjunction with other controversial actions and practices of this accreditor, have led to frequent calls for reform of the accrediting process from member institutions of the ACCJC.”

The accreditation commission responded with a four–page announcement of new practices and noted that as of 2014, there were 30 percent fewer benchmarks required for approval.

“The new standards will be the basis for comprehensive institutional evaluations for reaffirmation of accreditation beginning spring, 2016,” a spokesman for the commission said.

The commission also announced it would host annual conferences for schools to receive input and answer questions about the accreditation process. The first conference is to be held in October 2016.

RELATED – State agency struggling to police for-profit colleges

The commission is part of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges, one of six regional groups in the U.S. that are charged with ensuring higher education institutions adhere to standards that begin at the federal level. The accreditors are overseen by administrators at the U.S. Department of Education and a board called the National Advisory Committee on Accreditation and Institutional Eligibility.

In addition to angering the state community college board of governors, the accreditation commission in California has drawn the ire of teachers unions and their powerful allies. The California Federation of Teachers filed a lawsuit against the commission to keep the San Francisco City College open and registered a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education against the commission.

The American Federation of Teachers said the commission has “failed to focus on improving learning and academic achievement.”

Democratic U.S. Reps. Nancy Pelosi, Jackie Speier and Anna Eshoo called the ACCJC’s actions “outrageous.”

The commission is accused in one complaint of “extensive financial and political relationships with advocacy organizations and private foundations representing for‐profit colleges and powerful student lender interests.”

The commission accepted a $450,000 grant from the Lumina Foundation for Education, a group that has endeavored to change community college education and create a more universal accreditation system. Some onlookers have noted what they call the libertarian roots of Lumina.

But the practice of accreditation stems from federal regulation, which has increased in recent years. Community colleges in the U.S. collectively spend up to $6 billion to keep in compliance, according to a Vanderbilt University study. The study also listed 29 categories that colleges and universities are subject to monitoring and reporting.

Community colleges are subject to review every six years.

Steve Miller can be reached at 517-775-9952 and avalanche50@hotmail.com.