topnav

Home Issues & Campaigns Agency Members Community News Contact Us

Community News

Open dialogue among community members is an important part of successful advocacy. Take Action California believes that the more information and discussion we have about what's important to us, the more empowered we all are to make change.

Wednesday, December 31, 2014

Brown, Legislature study ways to avoid UC, Cal State tuition hikes


By MELANIE MASONPATRICK MCGREEVY AND LARRY GORDON

December 11, 2014

The fate of the proposed tuition increase at University of California campuses now rests in the hands of the governor and state lawmakers, who are aligned in opposition to it but divided over how to scrap it.
The UC regents voted in November to increase tuition by as much as 28% over the next five years, triggering student protests and a chorus of political bellowing, and promised to make higher education funding one of the Capitol's hottest policy debates in the coming year.

The leaders of the state Assembly and Senate have offered plans to defeat the proposed increase and raise government funding for California's public universities.

Brown, a member of the UC Board of Regents, has proposed an annual 4% increase in state funding for the 10 University of California campuses if the current three-year tuition freeze remains in place. He also is pressing the regents to consider cost-saving changes such as offering more online courses and consolidating academic programs that are now duplicated at multiple campuses. Administration officials said the governor will address UC's financial well-being in his budget, to be released in January, but offered no details.

UC President Janet Napolitano has expressed support for some plans offered by legislators and she said she is open to studying Brown's proposals. However, she has said that the governor's proposed 4% increase is not enough to pay UC's payroll and retirement costs or to cover its plans to hire more faculty and enroll 5,000 more California undergraduates over five years.

UC received $2.64 billion in state general fund revenue this year, $460 million less than seven years ago. More than 166,000 undergraduates attend the UC campuses, and tuition is currently about $12,200 for in-state students. Here's a breakdown of the proposal to increase tuition and the alternatives being offered:

The tuition increase

A 14-7 vote by the regents gave Napolitano the authority to raise tuition each year for the next five years, with the amount dependent on state funding. The annual increase could be as high as 5% — which by 2019 could add up to a cumulative 28% increase over the current tuition.

•A third of the money raised by the increase would go toward financial aid programs.

•By 2019-20, tuition could be as high as $15,564 a year if the state does not increase funding.

•The cost of a UC education — tuition, room and board, books and other expenses — currently can total $30,000 for state residents. Students from other states and countries pay a $23,000 premium in addition to tuition.

The Assembly proposal

Speaker Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) proposed an additional $50 million in state funding for the UC system to avoid tuition increases; the California State University colleges would get extra money as well.
The plan also would:

•Increase Cal Grant financial aid for lower-income families and require UC to maintain existing aid.

•Speed up the Middle Class Scholarship program to cut fees for qualifying families by more than 20% in the 2015-2016 school year.

•Increase UC enrollment of California students by 10,000 over five years and cap enrollment of out-of-state students at 2014-2015 levels.

•Increase the tuition premium for out-of-state students by $5,000, which would raise an additional $100 million annually.

Atkins also vowed to take a "zero-based" approach to crafting the UC budget next year. That would build the system's budget from zero, rather than from previous years' spending, and would mean scrutinizing each line item in the proposed plan. Assembly Republican Leader Kristin Olsen of Modesto supports the zero-based budgeting. Also, Assembly member Young Kim (R-Fullerton) has proposed legislation that would freeze tuition at the state's public colleges and universities as long as the temporary state tax increase under Proposition 30, approved by voters in 2012, remains in effect.

The Senate proposal

Democrats have offered a plan to eliminate the tuition increase, expand enrollment at the UC and Cal State systems and provide grants as incentives to Cal State students who stay on track to complete their degrees in four years. The plan was proposed by Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles).

It would cost the state $342 million next year, rising to $434 million. Money would come from taking $580 million over three years from the Middle Class Scholarship program, instituting a 17% increase in the premium charged to out-of-state students and siphoning $156 million from the general fund the first year, dropping to $66 million in the third year.

The plan would also:

•Increase UC enrollment by 5,000 students and Cal State enrollment by 10,500 students next year, at an additional total cost of $113 million per year.

•Provide $75 million each to UC and Cal State annually to pay for more courses and counseling services so students can graduate on time.

•Provide up to $4,500 in "completion incentive grants" to motivate Cal State students to carry a full load of at least 15 credits so that they can graduate in four years, rather than the current average of six years. Students would get a $1,000 grant for completing 30 units by the first year, an additional $1,500 for completing 60 units by the second year and an additional $2,000 for completing 90 units by the third year.

•Fund 7,500 additional Cal Grant competitive awards for older, nontraditional students.

•Repeal this year's scheduled 11% cut to Cal Grants for about 29,000 students attending private and nonprofit universities.

•Encourage corporations and individuals to invest in the College Access Tax Credit Fund, which provides $500 million in tax credits for charitable donations to the fund. The money would go to double funding of Cal Grant Access Awards for community college students.

•Phase out the Middle Class Scholarship program, which in its first year provided tuition credits for 73,000 students from families with incomes between $80,000 and $150,000. Current recipients would continue to get funds until they graduate, but no other students would be allowed into the program. The credits average $1,112 for those enrolled at UC and $628 at Cal State.

Neither the governor nor the California Legislature has the authority to force the UC regents to rescind the tuition increase. However, they do have power over state funding provided to the university system, giving them political leverage.


via: http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-pol-uc-tuition-explainer-20141211-story.html#page=1

Monday, December 29, 2014

Brown picks aide to lead troubled California utility board

Gov. Jerry Brown named a former adviser on Tuesday to be the next head of California's troubled utilities commission, replacing a regulatory chief accused of back-channel dealings with utilities.

Michael Picker, a former adviser to Brown on renewable energy and a former board member of a California utility, was Brown's pick to lead the California Public Utilities Commission, the governor's office said in a statement.

The appointment requires state lawmakers' approval.

Picker would replace Michael Peevey

as commission president. Peevey announced in October he would not seek reappointment when his term expires at the end of December, after 12 years on the board.

Emails made public this year by Pacific Gas & Electric Co., California's largest power utility, described Peevey and PG&E officials holding repeated private discussions on rate cases, penalties and other PG&E regulatory matters before the commission, as well as Peevey soliciting donations from the utility for a commission celebration and for a political campaign backed by the governor. Peevey has made no public comment on the conversations contained in the emails.

The email disclosures stemmed from federal investigations and public criticism over a 2010 PG&E pipeline blast that killed eight people in a San Francisco suburb. The National Transportation Safety Board said lax oversight by the state utilities commission was one reason for the disaster.

Federal prosecutors have indicted PG&E for alleged obstruction of justice in that investigation. PG&E says federal and state prosecutors have since informed the utility that they are also examining private communications between state utility regulators and PG&E.

Mark Toney, head of The Utility Reform Network, a public-advocacy group that has been critical of the CPUC and PG&E, said he welcomed Picker's nomination as the board's leader.

"We expect that he's going to stop the backroom deals and start making the decisions based on actual evidence," Toney said.

A Brown aide, Evan Westrup, did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Brown's expectations of board transparency under Picker. Brown has publicly defended Peevey, describing him this summer as a man who gets things done.

In a separate interview with The Associated Press this summer, Brown described the emails as "troubling."

Brown noted then that state and federal prosecutors were looking into the communications, and added, "I can tell you, based on my own experience, there are conversations that go on in all these regulatory bodies. It's different than courts. There are rules on it and the rules should be enforced."

Brown first appointed Picker as a commission member earlier this year. Brown on Tuesday also appointed Liane Randolph, a staffer at the state Natural Resources Agency, to the commission.

via: http://www.scpr.org/news/2014/12/23/48869/brown-picks-aide-to-lead-troubled-california-utili/


Friday, December 12, 2014

County supervisors vote to create sheriff's civilian oversight panel

Los Angeles County supervisors voted Tuesday to set up a civilian oversight commission to oversee the Sheriff’s Department, marking a major milestone for the troubled law enforcement agency. 
Advocates of the move have long called for such a panel to oversee a department that has been beset in recent years by allegations of widespread abuses in the jails.

A divided board voted down a similar proposal in August, with then-Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky casting the swing vote against the proposal.

But with Yaroslavsky termed out of office last week, his successor, Sheila Kuehl, voted with the 3-2 majority in favor of the civilian oversight panel.

Kuehl, along with supervisors Mark Ridley-Thomas and Hilda Solis, said a civilian commission would help monitor and restore public trust in the department. They said the move is particularly important in light of the growing national controversy about police practices stemming from incidents in Ferguson, Mo., and elsewhere. Ridley-Thomas said there should be a "clear signal from the largest county in the nation with respect to reform."

Kuehl said the commission will provide a needed public forum to air issues in the department before crises develop.

"The public really doesn’t feel that they knew – or knew in time – what was going on," she said.

Advocates praised the decision to create a civilian oversight body.

"This is a historic moment," said Kim McGill, organizer of the Youth Justice Coalition. She asked members of the audience to stand up and remind the board of the county’s oft-cited mission to take care of the most vulnerable members of the community. "We are the people that have been in your jails and the people that buried our family members when they’ve been killed by the sheriffs."

Patrisse Cullors, founder of Dignity and Power Now, which has advocated for a civilian commission for the last two years, said the commission needs to be "legally empowered, community centered and independent." The commission should have subpoena power and should oversee the inspector general, she said.

Advocates also said they do not want the commission to include any current or former law enforcement officials.

Supervisors Michael Antonovich and Don Knabe voted against creating the civilian oversight commission. Antonovich said creating a separate oversight body would be "a step backwards" from efforts to focus on setting up an office of inspector general as a watchdog for the department.

Richard Drooyan, an attorney who oversaw implementation of reforms proposed by a panel that studied the issue of jail violence, argued that a new civilian commission would "dilute" the supervisors' ability to influence the Sheriff's Department. He said the most effective means of oversight would be a strong inspector general reporting to the board.

Inspector General Max Huntsman did not give an opinion on whether the board should create a new civilian commission, but said his office is still having problems getting access to documents from the Sheriff's Department. Without full access, he said, "I do not think this will succeed."

Key details of how the panel will operate remain to be worked out. Over the coming weeks, a panel of county attorneys and representatives of the sheriff, inspector general and supervisors will recommend a structure for the new commission, as well as what powers it would be granted.

Representatives of the deputies’ union said they want to ensure that their members have a representative on the panel that will figure out the powers and structure of the commission.

New Sheriff Jim McDonnell, who inherited a department facing a likely federal consent decree over poor conditions for mentally ill jail inmates, has also voiced support for civilian oversight.

The sheriff was out of town Tuesday, but said in a statement that civilian oversight "can provide an invaluable forum for transparency and accountability, while also restoring and rebuilding the community's trust."

McDonnell also offered some preliminary recommendations for structuring the commission. They include: The panel should be made up of seven to nine members, appointed by the board and other community or law enforcement representatives; the members should be appointed for a set term and removable only for cause; the commission should oversee the work of the inspector general.

For the full article click here. 

Via: http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-sheriff-oversight-20141209-story.html




Wednesday, December 3, 2014

California Assembly announces committee chairs

BY JEREMY B. WHITE

A new California Assembly class has been sworn in – and now members have begun to receive the committee assignments that will guide the fate of legislation and shape the power dynamics of the Democratic caucus.

Committee assignments, and particularly committee chairmanships, matter for a variety of reasons. Committee leaders have substantial sway over which bills get hearings and which bills perish quietly. Most significant bills must pass through the Assembly Appropriations Committee, for instance, and the Budget Committee chair has a key role in shaping the annual budget bill. Campaign contributions often flow to members who sit on committees overseeing powerful industries.

And with Assembly Speaker Toni Atkins, D-San Diego, holding power only through 2015, committee assignments are sure to prompt speculation about who is in position to next seek the leadership mantle.

Atkins’ office announced committee chairs for the new session Wednesday morning – the list is below. Last session’s committee leaders are in parentheses. An asterisk (*) next to former chairs indicates that the member no longer serves in the Assembly.

Accountability and Administrative Review: Assemblyman Rudy Salas, D-Bakersfield (Assemblyman Jim Frazier)

Aging And Long-Term Care Assemblywoman Cheryl Brown, D-San Bernardino (Assemblywoman Mariko Yamada,*)

Agriculture: Assemblyman Henry Perea, D-Fresno (Assemblywoman Susan Eggman)

Appropriations: Assemblyman Jimmy Gomez, D-Los Angeles (Assemblyman Mike Gatto)

Arts, Entertainment, Sports, Tourism, and Internet Media:Assemblyman Ian Calderon, D-Whittier (was Calderon)

Banking and Finance: Assemblyman Matthew Dababneh, D-Los Angeles (Assemblyman Roger Dickinson*)

Budget: Assemblywoman Shirley Weber, D-San Diego (Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner*)

Business, Professions and Consumer Protection: Assemblywoman Susan Bonilla, D-Concord (Bonilla)

Education: Assemblyman Patrick O’Donnell, D-Long Beach(Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan*)

Elections and Redistricting: Assemblyman Sebastian Ridley-Thomas, D-Culver City (Assemblyman Paul Fong*)

Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials: Assemblyman Luis Alejo, D-Watsonville (Alejo)

Governmental Organization: Assemblyman Adam Gray, D-Merced (Assemblyman Isadore Hall*)

Health: Assemblyman Rob Bonta, D-Oakland (Assemblyman Richard Pan*)

Higher Education: Assemblyman Jose Medina, D-Riverside (Assemblyman Das Williams)

Housing and Community Development: Assemblyman Ed Chau, D-Monterey Park (Chau)

Human Services: Assemblyman Kansen Chu, D-San Jose (Assemblyman Mark Stone)

Insurance: Assemblyman Tom Daly, D-Anaheim (Assemblyman Henry Perea)

Jobs, Economic Development, and the Economy: Assemblyman Eduardo Garcia, D-Riverside (Assemblyman Jose Medina)

Judiciary: Assemblyman Mark Stone, D-Scotts Valley (Assemblyman Bob Wieckoswki*)

Labor and Employment: Assemblyman Roger Hernández, D-West Covina (Hernández)

Local Government: Assembly members Brian Maienschein (chair) and Lorena Gonzalez (vice chair) (Assembly members Katcho Achadjian and Marc Levine)

Natural Resources: Assemblyman Das Williams, D-Santa Barbara (Assemblyman Wes Chesbro*)

Privacy and Consumer Protection: Assemblyman Mike Gatto (D-Glendale), Chair (new committee)

Public Employees, Retirement and Social Security: Bonta (Bonta)

Public Safety: Assemblyman Bill Quirk, D-Hayward (Assemblyman Tom Ammiano*)

Revenue and Taxation: Assemblyman Phil Ting, D-San Francisco (Assemblyman Raul Bocanegra*)

Rules: Assemblyman Richard Gordon, D-Menlo Park (Gordon)

Transportation: Assemblyman Jim Frazier, D-Oakley (Assemblywoman Bonnie Lowenthal*)

Utilities and Commerce: Assemblyman Anthony Rendon, D-Lakewood (Assemblyman Steven Bradford*)

Veterans Affairs: Assemblywoman Jacqui Irwin, D-Thousand Oaks (Assemblywoman Sharon Quirk-Silva*)

Water, Parks and Wildlife: Assemblyman Marc Levine, D-San Rafael (Rendon)

Call Jeremy B. White, Bee Capitol Bureau, (916) 326-5543.