Steinberg plan would dedicate California cap-and-trade dollars to housing, transit

In an effort to more closely manage how California spends revenue from its fledgling cap-and-trade program, Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, on Monday unveiled a plan to dedicate ongoing money to affordable housing, mass transit and high-speed rail.

"National and international experts say that the climate problem grows worse, that we have no time to sit back and wait and think about an investment strategy year-to-year or just short-term. Now is the time to grab the moment and create these permanent sources," Steinberg said, adding that his plan would avoid an annual legislative fight over "who's in the front of the line, where is the need seemingly the greatest."

The proposal differs from Steinberg's previous proposal to change the state's system for curtailing carbon emissions. That plan, which the Democratic leader unveiled in February, would have imposed a gasoline tax rather than have industry purchase allowances for greenhouse gases emitted from "non-stationary fuels," a category that includes gas sold at the pump.

Now Steinberg has abandoned that change, shifting his attention from how California prices greenhouse gases to how the state allows levies on carbon emitters to be used. His new plan focuses on funding affordable housing, public transportation projects and the state's divisive high-speed rail project.

The gas tax plan was hit from the left and right. On Monday, by contrast, Steinberg spoke amid a phalanx of backers, including groups representing local government, (the League of California Cities) labor (the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California) and environmental (the Natural Resources Defense Council.)

"We stoked a debate a couple months ago, and a lot of consternation and controversy, and I understand it. But now many of us stand together," Steinberg said.

Under AB 32, the 2006 law that created California's cap-and-trade program, industry must purchase permits for generating the type of emissions blamed for global climate change. After six auctions, the program has generated $663 million for the state so far, according to the California Air Resources Board. Steinberg's office projects the permits could soon bring in $3 billion to $5 billion a year.
Current law dictates that the revenue will flow into a Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. From there, entities like local governments and transit systems can apply for some of the proceeds by explaining how they will use the money to reduce overall emissions. One quarter of the money must go to disadvantaged communities, an acknowledgment that some of California's poorest places are choking on poor air quality.

Housing and public transportation sit at the center of Steinberg's proposal. Forty percent of the cap-and-trade revenue would go to affordable housing, including communities built around transit options; 30 percent would subsidize transit projects and 10 percent would fund basic transportation infrastructure like road and highway maintenance, with all three administered through competitive grants.

"Permanent sources of funding for mass transit and affordable housing are key if we are committed to long-term change," Steinberg said on Monday, noting that the two areas "face a catastrophic funding crisis in California" after years of cutbacks.
In addition to those outlays, $200 million a year would go to water efficiency projects, to fuel-related outlays that include rebates on monthly fuel bills, and to accommodating the use of electric vehicles.
California's proposed bullet train would get 20 percent of the money, channeled through a continuous appropriation that would not require year-to-year approval by the Legislature.

Already, Gov. Jerry Brown's has stirred controversy by proposing in his budget for this year spending $250 million from emissions permit sales to fund his financially precarious high-speed rail project, whose funding plan faces legal uncertainty. Some environmentalists have called high-speed rail an inappropriate use of the carbon auction funds.

But Steinberg's blueprint embraces high-speed rail as a tool for reducing emissions — provided, Steinberg said, it is one element of a larger strategy.

"I understand that high-speed rail is controversial," Steinberg said. "If it were the only thing that we were talking about or the only thing on the table I think that would be problematic. I think this is a better approach."

PHOTO: The union oil company refinery in Rodeo, Tuesday, December 17, 2002. The Sacramento Bee Michael A. Jones.

Inland Empire has greatest need for community college expansion, report says

A California budget proposal to increase community college enrollment with an emphasis on the neediest districts should focus on the Inland Empire, the Central Valley and Los Angeles,according to California Competes.

A new report from the Oakland-based higher education policy institute argues that these regions should receive the vast majority of a proposed $155.2 million in new funding for enrollment growth next year, which Gov. Jerry Brown has prioritized for districts with "the greatest unmet need in adequately serving their community's higher educational needs."

The report examined factors such as the number of adults without a college degree, unemployment ratesand levels of poverty in a community college district to determine where California had the greatest number of underserved students that could benefit from furthering their education.

It concluded that, of an estimated 40,000 classroom seats the new funding would support, nearly 15,000 should be created in the Inland Empire, with about 10,500 in the Central Valley and more than 9,000 in Los Angeles. The report also suggested about 2,300 new seats in greater Sacramento.

"There are definitely areas in the state where enrolling the needy population is not easy," California Competes executive director Robert Shireman said on a conference call.

Community colleges must figure out what additional programs and courses would attract and most benefit those students, he added. "Those decisions determine whether a needy student is really served and whether they are served well."

The California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office condemned the report's conclusions, saying it would deny community college access in other parts of the state.

"California community colleges were forced to turn away 500,000 students from every corner of the state during the economic downturn," spokesman Paul Feist said in a statement. "To continue rationing education in some parts of the state but not others would not be equitable and would harm California's ability to increase the number of college educated workers that our economy is demanding."

PHOTO: Eduardo Ramos, center, has his photo id picture taken on the first day of school at Los Rios Community College District expansion in Elk Grove on August 26, 2013. The Sacramento Bee/Hector Amezcua

via: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/04/inland-empire-has-greatest-need-for-community-college-expansion-report-says.html

Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/04/inland-empire-has-greatest-need-for-community-college-expansion-report-says.html#storylink=cpy

Judges appoint prison population oversight chief

A panel of three federal judges on Wednesday appointed Elwood Lui, a former associate justice of the California Court of Appeal, as the “compliance officer” empowered to begin releasing state prison inmates if California fails to meet court ordered deadlines to reduce its prisoner population.

Lui was one of two candidates for the position suggested by lawyers representing the state. He has agreed to serve without compensation but to have reasonable expenses reimbursed, according to the order from the panel issued Wednesday afternoon.

The compliance officer position was created through a Feb. 10 order by the court, which comprises 9th U.S. Circuit Court Judge Stephen Reinhardt, Judge Thelton E. Henderson of the San Francisco-based Northern District of California and Judge Lawrence K. Karlton of the Sacramento-based Eastern District of California.

The judges originally ordered California in 2009 to cut its inmate population to 137.5 percent of capacity, but appeals delayed that and resulted in the Feb. 10 order giving the state two more years to comply.

The February order also gave the compliance officer authority to release the necessary number of inmates to ensure that California meets the court-ordered deadlines.

The compliance officer now has the authority to release inmates if the prison population is not cut to 143 percent of capacity by June 30 (or 116,651 inmates); to 141.5 percent by Feb. 28, 2015 (115,427 inmates); and to 137.5 percent a year after that (112,164 inmates).

Last month, the state told the court that its prison population is about 502 inmates above the June 30 benchmark. The state indicated that it expected to get below the 143 percent mark before the deadline by using some contract prison cells.

Attorneys for the state and the inmates met and tried to agree on who should be appointed to the position, but their talks failed and both sides filed documents with the three-judge court on March 12 suggesting candidates for the position.

The state recommended two candidates: Lui and Curtis J. Hill, a former San Benito County sheriff.

Attorneys for the inmates recommended the appointment of Wendy Still, a Roseville resident who is the chief adult probation officer for the city and county of San Francisco, or Starr Babcock, the former general counsel for the State Bar of California.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2014/04/09/6311041/judges-appoint-prison-population.html#storylink=cpy

California still holds 4th place in state-local tax burdens

Californians carried the nation's fourth highest state and local tax burden in 2011, the Tax Foundation says in a new report, largely because its personal incomes are markedly lower than those of other high-tax states.

The Washington-based Tax Foundation annually calculates state and local tax burdens as a percentage of personal incomes and California has traditionally been in the top tier. But the data are always several years old and 2011 was the last year before a temporary, voter-approved increase in sales and personal income taxes went into effect. Therefore, the 2012 rankings a year from now could push California higher.

For 2011, the Tax Foundation calculated that California's tax burden was 11.4 percent of its average per capita income of $45,354, or $5,136. New York was the highest at 12.6 percent, followed by New Jersey at 12.3 percent and Connecticut at 11.9 percent. Wyoming residents had the lowest tax burden, 6.9 percent, and the national average was 9.8 percent.

One reason for California's high rank was that while its per capita tax burden was, indeed, relatively high, its per capita personal income was only slightly above the national average of $42,473, while other high-tax states also had markedly higher incomes.

Connecticut had the highest per capita income at $60,287 while California's was 15th highest. Texas, with which California is often compared, had the nation's fourth lowest tax burden of 7.5 percent of personal income which, at $41,269 per capita, was 23rd highest.

New York, New Jersey and Connecticut have occupied the top three places for a number of years. California was fourth in 2010 and fifth in 2009.

The state's 2011 tax burden of 11.4 percent was slightly lower than 2010's percentage but has been fairly consistent for decades, ranging from a high of 12 percent in 1977 to a low of 10.4 percent in 2005.

In 2012, voters approved a fractional increase in the state sales tax and a sharp boost income taxes on the state's highest-income families, raising about $6 billion more a year temporarily to balance the state's budget.

With Californians' personal income totaling about $1.7 trillion a year and state and local taxes approximating $200 billion, that would add perhaps a third of a percentage point to the overall burden. And it means California could challenge Connecticut for third place — especially if a spate of recent local sales tax increases continues.

PHOTO: Yolanda Odell of Sacramento dances to get the attention of last minute tax filers on the corner of Truxel Road and W. El Camino Ave. for Liberty Tax Service in 2011. The Sacramento Bee/Renee C. Byer 

Affirmative action non-action still causing waves in Sacramento

SACRAMENTO — When the state Senate took up the issue of affirmative action in late January, it was a relatively tepid affair. 

After 20 minutes of polite debate, senators passed a measure that, if approved by voters, would overturn California's ban on affirmative action in public higher education.

But within weeks, the debate turned fractious. Backlash arose among some Asian Americans who feared their children could lose access to the state's universities if more places were granted to students from other minority groups.

The measure is now shelved, derailed by the sudden opposition and the majority Democrats' slow-footed defense of it.

But political ramifications remain.

The controversy has caused unusual friction among the Capitol's ruling Democrats as lawmakers differ over how to control the fallout. Several legislators cited hard feelings among the party's Latinos, African Americans and Asian Americans.

State Sen. Holly Mitchell (D-Los Angeles), chairwoman of the Legislative Black Caucus, said she had "deep concerns" about how some of her colleagues backed off the legislation.

The Democrats, who passed the proposal on party lines, are now trying to redirect a debate that threatens their "big tent" of ethnic and racial alliances. Republicans, sensing an inroad to an increasingly powerful group of voters, are keeping the spotlight on the issue.

The debate is rooted in a law voters passed in 1996 that forbids the state to consider race, ethnicity or gender in hiring, contracting or admissions to public institutions of higher education.

A 2003 report by the University of California found that implementing race-neutral admissions policies led to a "substantial decline" in the proportion of black, Latino and American Indian students entering the system's most selective institutions.

David A. Lehrer, president of Community Advocates, a Los Angeles public affairs group that opposes affirmative action, said that if admissions are meant to more closely reflect the state's demographics, Asian Americans are the one group that is "obviously disproportionately represented."

Asians make up 14% of California's population, according to 2012 data from the U.S. Census Bureau. Last year, Asian Americans were 30% of the University of California's total enrollment, although supporters of affirmative action say the proportion of Asian American students increased by only a few points after the race-neutral admissions policy took effect.

News of the proposal to reinstate affirmative action spread mostly among the Chinese community through social networking sites such as WeChat, a Chinese version of Facebook.

An online group called the 80-20 Initiative, run by S.B. Woo, a former Democratic lieutenant governor of Delaware who now has no party affiliation, was particularly adept at harnessing its email list to exert pressure on Asian American lawmakers.

It worked. Three Chinese American senators — Sen. Ted Lieu (D-Torrance), Sen. Leland Yee (D-San Francisco) and Sen. Carol Liu (D-La Cañada Flintridge) — who had voted for the measure sent a public letter to its author, Sen. Ed Hernandez (D-West Covina), urging him to delay it to ensure that Asian Americans' concerns were heard.

In the Assembly, several lawmakers, such as Ed Chau (D-Monterey Park), said they'd oppose the proposal in its existing form, sinking its prospects.

Sen. Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens), chairman of the Latino caucus, said he was "disheartened" by that response.

But within weeks, Hernandez — who said his Facebook page had attracted so much invective about the hot-button issue that he had to shut it down — withdrew his measure.

In the past, he had introduced a number of proposals to roll back the anti-affirmative-action law, none of which were enacted. He said he had never heard objections from Asian Americans worried that they would be harmed.

"I hadn't thought that would be a constituency that would have a concern," Hernandez said.

http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-affirmative-action-20140331,0,2270777.story#ixzz2yLJdoie6

Dianne Feinstein recasts California water bill

In a move designed to lure Republican support, Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein has introduced a revised California water bill that could move lawmakers closer to meaningful negotiation.

The new bill drops spending proposals that had been included in the original California water bill introduced by Feinstein and Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer on Feb. 11. The $300 million in spending, in turn, had stuck in the craw of some Senate Republicans.

"It was a problem on the Republican side," Feinstein acknowledged at a Senate subcommittee hearing Wednesday.

By cutting the bill's costs, and tweaking other elements, Feinstein hopes the bill reintroduced this week can secure the 60 Senate votes needed to avoid going through the standard committee review.

Speedier Senate consideration under what's called Rule 14, in turn, is designed to pass something that can form the basis of a compromise with a far different California water bill passed in early February by the Republican-controlled House.

The redrawn Senate bill mandates that federal agencies operate California water projects with "maximum flexibility" to boost irrigation deliveries, among other provisions. It also takes a number of technical steps, some going beyond California, but unlike the House bill it does not specifically authorize big new water projects and it leaves intact the current San Joaquin River restoration program.

PHOTO: Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., left, talks with Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Oct. 2, 2013.Associated Press/ Evan Vucci.

Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/04/feinstein-recasts-california-water-bill.html#storylink=cpy

Website allows tracking of Prop. 30 money to schools

Proposition 30, enacted by voters in 2012 to temporarily raise sales taxes and income taxes on the wealthy, was touted by Gov. Jerry Brown and other proponents as an alternative to making billions of dollars in cuts to state school spending due to state budget deficits.

Since its enactment, state Controller John Chiang reported Wednesday, Proposition 30 has pumped about $13 billion into local school district coffers. Chiang unveiled a new website, entitled Track Prop. 30, that allows users to plug in their local school districts and see their total budgets and the portions being financed through Prop. 30.

As large as the $13 billion may be, it's still a relatively small portion of K-12 and community college finances, which approach $70 billion a year from all sources. The website reveals, for instance, that during the 2012-13 fiscal year, the latest for which complete data are available, Los Angeles Unified, the state's largest district, had $5.7 billion in revenues from all sources, but Proposition 30 provided just $659.4 million or 12 percent.

Proposition 30, which raised sales taxes fractionally and imposed surtaxes on high-income taxpayers, generates about $6 billion a year and by long-standing constitutional law, a large chunk of the revenue stream must go to schools.

The tax hikes will begin expiring in 2017-18, however, and whether - and how - their revenues to schools will be replaced is still uncertain. Tom Torlakson, the state superintendent of public instruction, has called for making the tax increases permanent, but that would take another ballot measure or two-thirds votes in both houses of the Legislature, plus Brown's signature.

PHOTO: Students, dignitaries and supporters cheer on Gov. Jerry Brown who holds up a campaign sign and encourages students to vote yes for Proposition 30 at Sacramento City College. Thursday, October 18, 2012. The Sacramento Bee/Randy Pench

Categories: Ballot initiatives, Budget, California by the Numbers, Education, Gov. Jerry Brown

Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/04/website-allows-tracking-of-prop-30-money-to-schools.html#storylink=cpy

via: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/04/website-allows-tracking-of-prop-30-money-to-schools.html