EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT BOARD LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE Friday, May 22, 2020 12:30 P.M

EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT BOARD LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE Friday, May 22, 2020 12:30 p.m.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND STAFF WILL ATTEND VIA TELECONFERENCE

Pursuant to Governor Newsom’s Executive Order No. N-29-20 and the Alameda County Health Officer’s current Shelter in Place Order, effective March 31, 2020, the East Bay Regional Park District (“Park District”) Headquarters will not be open to the public and the Board Legislative Committee and staff will be participating in the meetings via phone/video conferencing.

Members of the public can listen to the meeting in the following way: Via the Park District’s live audio stream, on the Park District’s YouTube channel, which can be found at: https://youtu.be/Pir2VA0DHIQ

Public comments may be submitted one of two ways: 1. Via email to [email protected] , Email must contain in the subject line public comments – not on the agenda or public comments – agenda item #. 2. Via voicemail at 510-544-2002. The caller must start the message by stating public comments – not on the agenda or public comments – agenda item# followed by their name and place of residence, followed by their comments.

Comments received during the meeting and up until the public comment period on the relevant agenda item is closed, will be provided in writing to the Board Legislative Committee, included transcribed voicemails. All comments received by the close of the public comment period will be available after the meeting as supplemental materials and will become part of the official meeting record. However, to ensure that the Board Members will be able to review your comments prior to the close of the meeting, please submit your public comment by no later than 4pm on Thursday, May 21, 2020 Please try to limit your written comments to no more than 300 words. The Park District cannot guarantee that its network and/or the site will be uninterrupted. To ensure that the Park District receives your comments, you are strongly encouraged to submit your comments in writing in advance of the meeting.

For future meetings, the Park District is exploring additional ways for the public to submit comments.

If you have any questions about utilizing the audio stream, please contact the Recording Secretary of the Committee, Yulie Padmore at [email protected] or at 510-544-2002. To ensure the best opportunity for Park District staff to address your question, please contact the Recording Secretary prior to 4:00pm on Thursday, May 21, 2020.

The following agenda items are listed for Committee consideration. In accordance with the Board Operating Guidelines, no official action of the Board will be taken at this meeting; rather, the Committee’s purpose shall be to review the listed items and to consider developing recommendations to the Board of Directors.

A copy of the background materials concerning these agenda items, including any material that may have been submitted less than 72 hours before the meeting, is available for inspection on the District’s website (www. ebparks.org), the Headquarters reception desk, and at the meeting.

Accommodations and Access District facilities and meetings comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. If special accommodations are needed for you to participate, please contact the Clerk of the Board at 510-544-2020 as soon as possible, but preferably at least three working days prior to the meeting.

AGENDA

TIME ITEM STATUS STAFF

12:30 I. STATE LEGISLATION / OTHER MATTERS A. NEW LEGISLATION – RECOMMENDED BILLS FOR R Doyle/Pfuehler SUPPORT 1. AB 1945 (Salas D-Bakersfield) – Reclassification of Public Safety Dispatchers as First Responders 2. AB 3030 (Kalra D-San Jose) – “30 x 30” Protection of Land and Water by 2030 3. AB 3256 (Garcia D-Coachella) – Economic Recovery, Wildfire Prevention, Safe Drinking Water, Drought Preparation, and Flood Protection Bond Act of 2020 4. SB 1060 (Hill D-San Mateo) – Trails as Historical Resources

B. OTHER STATE MATTERS I Doyle/Pfuehler 1. Governor Newsom’s May Budget Revise 2. Other Matters

II. FEDERAL LEGISLATION / OTHER MATTERS A. NEW LEGISLATION – RECOMMENDED BILLS FOR R Doyle/Pfuehler SUPPORT 1. H.R. 5642 Huffman (D-CA) – Active Transportation for Public Lands Act 2. H.R. 5797 (Welch D-VT) – Recreational Trails Program Full Funding Act 3. S. 3263 (Udall D-NM) and H.R. 5845 (Lowenthal D-CA) – Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act 4. S. 3366 (King D-ME) and H.R. 5998 (Golden D-ME) – Free National Parks and Federal Recreational Land Pass for Gold Star Families 5. S, 3391 Markey (D-MA) and H.R. 5696 Pappas (D-NH) – Connecting America's Active Transportation System Act

B. OTHER FEDERAL MATTERS I Doyle/Pfuehler 1. HEROES Act 2. Other Matters

III. ADDITIONAL COVID-19 UPDATES I Doyle/Pfuehler

IV. ARTICLES & OTHER MEDIA

V. OPEN FORUM PUBLIC COMMENT Individuals wishing to address the Committee on a topic not on the agenda may do so by completing a speaker’s form and submitting it to the recording secretary.

VI. BOARD COMMENTS

(R) Recommendation for Future Board Consideration (I) Information Future Meetings: (D) Discussion January 17 July 17 February – NO MTG August 21 Legislative Committee Members March 27 September – NO MTG Dennis Waespi (Chair); Beverly Lane, Elizabeth Echols April 24 (Rescheduled) October 16 Ellen Corbett, Alternate May 22 (Rescheduled) November – NO MTG Erich Pfuehler, Government Affairs Manager June – NO MTG *December 11

TO: Board Legislative Committee (Chair Dennis Waespi, Beverly Lane, Elizabeth Echols, alt. Ellen Corbett)

FROM: Robert E. Doyle, General Manager Erich Pfuehler, Government Affairs Manager

SUBJECT: Board Legislative Committee Meeting WHEN: Friday, May 22, 2020 12:30 PM

WHERE: Members of the public can listen to the meeting in the following way: Via the Park District’s live audio stream, on the Park District’s YouTube channel, which can be found at: https://youtu.be/Pir2VA0DHIQ

Items to be discussed:

I. STATE LEGISLATION / OTHER MATTERS A. NEW LEGISLATION – RECOMMENDED BILLS FOR SUPPORT 1. AB 1945 (Salas D-Bakersfield) – Reclassification of Public Safety Dispatchers as First Responders This bill would recognize the work of public safety dispatchers by classifying them as first responders. Currently, dispatchers are described as an “administrative” occupation. Dispatchers, however, undergo extensive training and their work can mean the difference between life and death. Public safety dispatchers or public safety telecommunicators play a important role in emergency response. These individuals routinely communicate with members of the public in great distress, harm, fear or injury, including during active shooter situations. Dispatchers are trained to coach callers through first aid, collect vital information for officers and navagate a variety of hostile situations. There are currently over 6,000 dispatchers employed in California who responded to over 27 million 9-1-1 calls in 2018 alone. During the same year, dispatchers responded to 28,014 emergency text messages which is up 10,000 from 2017. This bill would apply to District Public Safety Dispatchers.

2. AB 3030 (Kalra D-San Jose) – “30 x 30” Protection of Land and Water by 2030 This bill sets a goal of conserving at least 30 percent of the land and 30 percent of the ocean within California by 2030. It also sets the goal of the state to support regional, national and international efforts to protect at least 30 percent of the world’s land and water areas by 2030. At this time, approximately 27% of California’s land (14.7% of which is natural areas) and 4.7% of the world’s are preserved. This aspirational legislation seeks to achieve these goals through twelve criteria including: • Working with the Federal government, local communities, Native American tribes, other countries and private landowners to conserve natural places and resources. • Improving access to nature for all people in the state, including a specific emphasis on increasing access for communities of color and those economically disadvantaged. • Preventing extinction by recovering and restoring biodiversity, including species listed under the California Endangered Species Act.

• Sequestering carbon and greenhouse gas emissions naturally through the land and water of the state. • Aligning the state’s economic and purchasing power with efforts to protect ecosystems and threatened biodiversity. • Ensuring protected areas within the state are effectively managed.

3. AB 3256 (Garcia D-Coachella) – Economic Recovery, Wildfire Prevention, Safe Drinking Water, Drought Preparation and Flood Protection Bond Act of 2020 This bill, similar to SB 45, provides a portfolio of investments to implement natural infrastructure projects which adapt to climate change and build more resiliency in nature. The proposed $6.98 billion bond allocates funding as follows: • $1.625 billion for wilfire prevention • $1.1 billion for coastal protection • $1.355 billion for water supply protection • $1.3 billion for maintaining biodiversity of working lands • $1.6 billion largely for regional climate resilience

AB 3256 is seen as the lead Assembly Bill for a possible natural resource bond to be placed on the November ballot. It was introduced with seven other Assembly Members, including Rob Bonta and Kevin Mullin from the Bay Area. A climate bond was in the Governor’s January budget, but was removed from the May revise. It is unclear if the Governor would support AB 3256 should it advance, but it appears clear the bond would need to be seen as benefiting the economy and creating jobs. Staff and Advocate Houston will provide additional verbal background.

4. SB 1060 (Hill D-San Mateo) – Trails as Historical Resources This bill would require the California Department of Parks and Recreation to consider registering eligible trails as important historcical resources, similar to state historical landmarks or points of historical interest. This would add trails to the list of landmarks, buildings, structures, sites, etc. considered by the State Historical Resources Commission and the California Register of Historical Resources. The Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail and the East Bay Skyline National Recreation Trail would be candidates for designation. The Iron Horse Trail and San Francisco Bay Trail could also be considered.

B. OTHER STATE MATTERS 1. Governor Newsom’s May Budget Revise The Governor’s revised budget seeks to address a projected $54 billion deficit. Overall, the state expects income tax revenue to decrease by $33 million and sales tax to drop another $10 million. This is on top of the millions in unanticipated COVID-19 related spending. As of early May, more than 4.6 million Californians have filed for unemployment and rates could reach as high as 25%.

To address the deficit, $14 billion in cuts are triggered to additional Federal assistance dollars: a 10% across the Board pay cut for all state employees, $30 million cut to the Department of Parks and Recreation and $33 million cut to the Dpeartment of Fish and Wildlife. The cuts will be triggered if the Federal government does not adopt approximately $1 trillion more in state and local assistance – as is included in the House HEROES Act.

The revise eliminates $20 million for a new Outdoor Equity Grants Program aimed at community access (AB 209 of 2019), reduces funding for a new state park from $20 million to $5 million and redirects Habitat Conservation Fund proceeds to the General Fund with a 50% pass thru to Fish and Game for operations. The Revise omits the $4.75 billion climate bond as proposed in the January 10th version of the budget.

Cuts in other areas include: $14 billion from K-12 schools and colleges, $10.4 billion from budget manuavering (borrowing and transferring from special funds earmarked for specific programs) and $8.4 billion in cancelling new programs proposed in January (such as increasing health care eligibility). The budget includes $8.3 billion in Federal CARES Act funding and $4.4 billion from capping the amount of tax credits for corporations. The rainy day fund is also tapped for $8 billion.

The Governor’s revised budget maintains $85.6 million in CAL FIRE surge funding. It also maintains some Prop. 68 expenditures: $4.6 million to expand parks by purchasing inholdings, $6.1 million for urban park infrastructure and $8.8 million to expand access. The revise also includes $4 million for the Department of Fish and Wildlife’s “cutting the green tape” initiative to make permitting more efficient.

Negotiations with the legislature have begun for a final budget required by June 15th. Federal negotiations about additional state and local funding may slip past the July 1st deadline for the triggers. The General Manger, District staff and Advocate Houston will provide additional verbal updates.

2. Other Matters

II. FEDERAL LEGISLATION / OTHER MATTERS A. NEW LEGISLATION - RECOMMENDED BILLS FOR SUPPORT 1. H.R. 5642 Huffman (D-CA) – Active Transportation for Public Lands Act This bill seeks to address the need for safe bicycling and walking paths on Federal public lands. The bill would dedicate 5% of Federal Lands Transportation Program funds for construction of pedestrian and bicycle trails, as well as other non-motorized transportation infrastructure. Currently, the Federal Lands Transportation Program does not require allocation of funding for active transportation (walking, cycling and other non-motorized transportation). A 2018 survey report by People for Bikes found 51% of U.S. adults want to ride more often and 47% would be more likely to do so if bike pathways were safer. Bicycle and pedestrian fatalities have increased 38% from 2010 to 2018, with 2018 the deadliest year for cyclists and pedestrians on American roads since 1990.

The bill is endorsed by the National Parks Conservation Association, the League of American Bicyclists, the PeopleForBikes Coalition and the International Mountain Bicycling Association. The bill is cosponsored by Bay Area Reps. Mark DeSaulnier and John Garamendi.

2. H.R. 5797 (Welch D-VT) – Recreational Trails Program Full Funding Act This bill would more than double the Recreational Trails Program (RTP) funding to at least $250 million. The program is modeled after the Highway Trust Fund. It is funded

through taxes paid on gasoline used to fuel snowmobiles, all-terrain and other recreational vehicles which do not use highways. The program is currently funded at $84 million annually – substantially less than is collected in taxes on fuel used by these vehicles. The following are key eliments: • Requires the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to estimate the amount of gas taxes paid by non-highway recreational users. The current estimate is more than a decade old, but suggests those users pay more than $270 million. • Increases RTP funding to $250 million or the mandated new FHWA estimate, whichever is higher. • Increases the transparency of the programs funded. Not only is the funding related to this bill important, but this effort also helps to decouple the RTP program from active transportation funding.

3. S. 3263 (Udall D-NM) and H.R. 5845 (Lowenthal D-CA) – Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act This bill develops a 10-cent nationwide container deposit system, essentially a national “bottle bill.” It places a temporary moratorium on new plastic production facilities while the health and environmental impacts of existing facilities and plastic products are investigated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The bill would also ban the export of plastics to developing nations lacking capability and technology to safely manage the waste. It bans numerous non-recyclable plastic items including carryout bags (and a fee for non-plastic bags), styrofoam food service items and shipping materials, plastic utensils, single-use bottles for hotel toiletries, and non-compostable produce stickers. Plastic straws would be limited and only available upon request. It requires a 25% minimum post-consumer recycled content for plastic containers which will increase over time to reach 80% by 2040. It is very similar to efforts at the state level which the District supports.

4. S. 3366 (King D-ME) and H.R. 5998 (Golden D-ME) – Free National Parks and Federal Recreational Land Pass for Gold Star Families This bipartisan legislation would provide Gold Star Families with free access to National Parks and other Federally managed public lands. Gold Star Families are the immediate family members of those who have died while serving. Specifically, the legislation would make the National Parks and Federal Recreational Lands Pass Program free for Gold Star Families. The pass covers entrance fees at National Parks and National Wildlife Refuges, as well as standard amenity fees at national forests and grasslands, and at lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management and Bureau of Reclamation.

5. S. 3391 Markey (D-MA) and H.R. 5696 Pappas (D-NH) – Connecting America's Active Transportation System Act This bill provides $500 million in funding for each of the fiscal years 2020 through 2024 aimed at a Federal grant program to help build connected active transportation routes including trails, sidewalks and bikeways which support community health. This bill could be incorporated into the reauthorization of Federal transportation bill. It could also be included in an infrastructure / stimulus bill. This legislation is supported by the Rails-to- Trails Conservancy.

B. OTHER FEDERAL MATTERS 1. HEROES Act On May 15, the House of Representatives passed the Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions Act – the HEROES Act – which includes $3 trillion to follow the $2.2 trillion relief package signed into law in March. The bill passed the House on a vote of 208 to 199. One Republican crossed party lines to support the measure and 14 Democrats opposed the bill.

The HEROES Act includes $1 trillion to state and local governments facing revenue shortfalls. The funding is roughly spilt in half to states and locals. The District, Advocate Peter Umhofer and the California Special Districts Association are working hard to ensure special district eligibility for the local assistance. Additional provisions include: • $200 billion hazard pay fund for essential workers • Funds for virus testing and tracing, and medical equipment • Funds for supplemental nutrition assistance program • Small business Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans • Cash payments for individuals ($1,200) and families ($6,000) • Extension of unemployment insurance benefits • Student debt relief

Senate Republicans are beginning to formulate their own set of policy ideas for the next bill, looking to present alternatives to the House Democrats’ package. The Senate Republicans are expected to take their time developing a bill, but are under growing pressure to act soon from state and local officials, as well as small businesses. The Senate is in session and the House is scheduled to return on May 27 and 28.

2. Other Matters

III. ADDITIONAL COVID-19 UPDATES

IV. ARTICLES

V. OPEN FORUM PUBLIC COMMENT

VI. BOARD COMMENTS

Article - Board Legislative Committee

OPINION // LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Full funding needed

San Francisco Chronicle April 23, 2020 The East Bay Regional Park District applauds “Good for jobs and environment” (Editorial, April 18) about the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund. The Land and Water Conservation Fund is a landmark, bipartisan national commitment to parks, public lands and trails that has been good for jobs and the environment. Since the initial COVID-19 shelter-in-place orders were issued, parks in the East Bay, Bay Area and elsewhere have seen an overwhelming surge in visitation and have been essential for the public’s physical and mental health.

Full funding of the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), which comes from revenue paid by energy companies, needs to be part of the economic recovery plan. Parks and trails will be important to the country’s healing as state and local health departments revise stay-at-home orders.

In parks across the country — national, state, and local — there exist roads and infrastructure, some built as early as the 1930s, that are in need of modernization to accommodate the current level of public access. These needs will only continue to increase during and after the current health crises. What will people do when other activities are still restricted in the future? Parks truly are the only game in town.

LWCF dollars can provide much-needed jobs and access to essential outdoor activity. Over the past 50 years, the LWCF has provided over $16 million in funding for various parks and trails in the East Bay Regional Park District.

As for state and local governments, the LWCF has provided over 40,000 grants in its 50-plus years, totaling over $16.7 billion.

Whether as part of an infrastructure bill or independent legislation, Washington should act now to permanently fully fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund.

Robert E. Doyle, Walnut Creek, General Manager, East Bay Regional Park District

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

OPINION // EDITORIALS Editorial: Why Congress still hasn’t spent enough on the coronavirus rescue

Chronicle Editorial Board May 19, 2020

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, at the Capitol last week. Photo: Olivier Douliery / AFP via Getty Images

Republicans last week accused House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s Democrats of throwing every partisan priority at hand into a kitchen-sink stimulus bill. But if they persist in rejecting the legislation’s dramatic expansion of federal aid to state and local governments, they will be speeding the economy’s journey down the drain.

About a third of the House’s $3 trillion package would go to state, local and tribal governments, matching what Gavin Newsom and four other Western governors recently urged Congress to provide. It’s a justifiable request given the depth of the coronavirus crisis, the relatively paltry assistance granted to governments to date, the federal government’s unmatched power to support them and the risks of not doing so.

Opposition by President Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell cut state and local assistance out of last month’s nearly half-trillion-dollar stimulus. The previous month’s $2 trillion package included $150 billion for the purpose but restricted it to pandemic-related spending rather than shoring up devastated revenues. Even if that money were freed up for other uses, it amounts to about a twentieth of state and local revenues; California’s budget deficit through the summer alone would consume roughly a third of the allocation.

With unemployment as high as 25% forecast in California and nationwide, a level not seen since the Great Depression, the federal government has spent about 15% of gross domestic product to shore up the economy so far. That’s more than twice the stimulus passed in response to the 2008 financial crisis but less than half the spending enacted under the New Deal as a share of the economy. State and local aid to date, moreover, is roughly equivalent to what was provided by the much smaller Great Recession stimulus.

Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell took the rare step last week of urging Congress to spend more to support state and local governments as well as laid-off workers to answer “the biggest shock our economy has felt in modern times.” He also warned of the economic damage a resurgence of the pandemic could wreak, underscoring the danger of relying on a premature resumption of regular commerce to stem the fallout.

Despite McConnell’s disparagement of “blue-state bailouts,” California had a $22 billion surplus before the pandemic and its consequences replaced it with what’s expected to be a $54 billion shortfall. Governors across the country and political spectrum have sought assistance because almost all of them, unlike the federal government, must balance their budgets. Downstream of the states’ fiscal wreckage sit cities such as San Francisco, which is expecting a $1.7 billion deficit, and schools.

Forcing these governments, which employ 1 in 7 American workers, to cut their way to solvency will hobble their capacity to deal with the pandemic — a job the federal government has largely outsourced to them — while further swelling the ranks of the unemployed. Congress doesn’t have to bail out blue states so much as it does the United States.

This commentary is from The Chronicle’s editorial board. We invite you to express your views in a letter to the editor. Please submit your letter via our online form: SFChronicle.com/letters.

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

13 Report: Coronavirus crisis could leave tens of thousands of Californians homeless State’s homeless population could grow by 19%

By MARISA KENDALL | [email protected] | Bay Area News Group PUBLISHED: May 15, 2020 at 4:27 p.m. | UPDATED: May 16, 2020 at 4:00 p.m.

Nearly 30,000 Californians could end up homeless in the midst of the unprecedented COVID- 19 economic crisis, according to a new report — a potentially catastrophic spike for a state that already was grappling with massive numbers of people living on the streets and in shelters.

That would mean an increase in the state’s homeless population of about 19% over last year, according to calculations by Columbia University economics professor Brendan O’Flaherty, which were published online by the nonprofit Community Solutions. Across the country, homelessness could surge by as much as 45%.

“If things go the way they have in the past, it will be a big increase,” said O’Flaherty, who based his projections on an analysis of increases in homelessness during the last recession.

An estimated 4.6 million Californians have filed for unemployment as the state’s shelter-in- place order has kept hem home from work. Gov. Gavin Newsom expects the state’s unemployment rate to peak at around 25% — about twice what it was during the Great Recession.

For weeks, homeless service providers throughout the Bay Area have been worrying about a coronavirus-spurred surge in homelessness overwhelming resources that are already stretched thin. It’s not a matter of if such a surge will happen, they agree — but when, and how bad it will be.

San Francisco already has reported a massive increase in the number of people without shelter. During its most recent quarterly tent count, conducted in April, the city reported a 71% increase in the number of tents and make-shift structures on its streets. In the beleaguered Tenderloin neighborhood, there was a 285% increase. Activists in other cities say they haven’t been able to quantify such a spike yet, but they’re worried. Bay Area cities, particularly Oakland, San Jose and San Francisco, have seen their homeless populations increase dramatically in recent years. Statewide, about 151,000 people had nowhere to call home as of last year, according to the most recent data available.

“I think we’re going to see a huge rise in displacement, homelessness, evictions — people who are already on the border, who are going to be stretched to the limit,” said Andrea Henson, lead organizer with the homeless outreach group Where do we go? Berkeley.

She’s already seeing the signs. People living in shared housing situations are having to move out over fears of spreading COVID-19 within the household, and are resorting to couch surfing. Inmates getting released from jail early to prevent overcrowding and reduce the chance of a coronavirus outbreak are ending up in the homeless encampments she serves.

To make matters worse, those who are most likely to end up out of work during the pandemic are low-wage workers in the service and hospitality industries who can least afford to miss paychecks, according to reporting by the Kaiser Family Foundation. Many of those families were one financial emergency away from homelessness even before the coronavirus crisis began. In a region like the Bay Area, with punishingly high housing prices, it can be impossible for families to get back on their feet once they stumble. Cities around the Bay Area have enacted eviction moratoriums to prevent those families from ending up on the street. But when the protections expire, tenants will be on the hook for what could be months of back rent — an insurmountable financial hurdle for many.

California legislators have proposed relief plans to help renters stuck in that impossible situation, including allowing tenants to pay back rent payments to the state over a period of 10 years, but the measures have yet to be approved. The federal government also has beefed up unemployment benefits, but not all out-of-work workers qualify. And once those protections dry up, some workers won’t have jobs to return to, as experts predict many businesses closed during the pandemic will never reopen. Despite the dire projections, there’s a lot that can be done to prevent Californians from ending up on the streets, including providing flexible rental assistance and holding landlords accountable for violating eviction moratoriums, said Jennifer Friedenbach, executive director of the Coalition on Homelessness.

“If we fail in this endeavor,” she said, “we’re going to see a disaster around this issue that I don’t think many of us can even begin to imagine at this point.”

O’Flaherty based his projections on an analysis of what happened during the last recession. Between 2007 and 2009, for every 1% increase in the country’s unemployment rate, another 0.65 people out of every 10,000 became homeless. His analysis doesn’t take into account the various relief programs cities, counties, states and the federal government have put in place during the pandemic. But, the economist pointed out, relief programs also were enacted during the Great Recession — and any impact those had has been baked into his calculations.

The local, state and federal governments need to do more to help those at risk of becoming homeless, said Andrea Urton, CEO of HomeFirst, which runs homeless shelters throughout Santa Clara County. The county reported more than 9,700 homeless residents as of January 2019. “I know the city and the county are trying to prepare for this,” she said, “but I think we are woefully unprepared for an event like this.”

Marisa Kendall | Housing reporter Marisa Kendall covers homelessness as part of the Bay Area News Group's housing team. She previously covered litigation for The Recorder in San Francisco, and started her career reporting on crime and breaking news for The News-Press in Southwest Florida. [email protected] Follow Marisa Kendall @MarisaKendall

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

5Walters: California has a budget problem — but how big? Some budget experts say the real deficit may only be a fraction of Newsom’s seemingly inflated deficit number

(AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli, Pool) The deficit number in Gov. Gavin Newsom’s revised budget may be inflated. Some budget experts say the real deficit may only be a third of what Newsom is projecting. By DAN WALTERS, CALMATTERS | May 17, 2020 at 12:01 a.m. The first step to effectively deal with any problem is defining it accurately — and the recession-battered state budget is a case in point.

There’s no doubt that the pandemic-induced recession is one of the worst in California history and that its negative fiscal effects — both increased spending and reduced revenues — are many billions of dollars.

There is, however, much uncertainty about the dimensions of the budget crisis, and therefore what might be required to “meet the moment,” to use one of Gov. Gavin Newsom’s favorite phrases.

The revised budget that Newsom released last week appears to maximize the gap between income and outgo during the fiscal year that ends on June 30 and the 2020-21 fiscal year that begins on July 1. He pegs the gap at $54.3 billion and is proposing a potpourri of spending reductions, particularly in education, as well as deferrals, new revenues, allocations from the state’s rainy-day reserve fund, and federal aid to cover it.

That daunting number, however, is based on his initial budget proposal unveiled in January. At the time, everything appeared to be economically rosy, so Newsom proposed many billions of dollars in new programs and expansions of old ones. The revision oddly assumes that the inability to spend more in the forthcoming year represents a chunk of the deficit.

Moreover, it does not entirely account for federal disaster relief that would offset, in large measure, an estimated $7 billion in spending directly on the pandemic that Newsom counts as a negative component of his deficit projection.

When those and other factors are added to the calculations, the potential deficit shrinks to more manageable levels, as the Legislature’s budget analyst, Gabe Petek, points out. As Petek sees it, were the economy to recover relatively quickly, the state would have a net $18 billion problem to solve, and even if recovery were slower, it might rise to about $31 billion.

“In effect, the administration’s estimates largely reflect gross changes in the budget’s bottom line while our estimate includes the net effects of current law,” Petek wrote.

So why would Newsom maximize the deficit and thus the spending reductions — especially in education — that his budget would impose to cover them? He indirectly told us why during his presentation to reporters on Thursday: to provide political ammunition for his plea, and that of other state and local officials across the nation, for trillions of dollars in new federal relief.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats in the House are pushing for a $3 trillion relief package, including about $1 trillion for state governments that could mean $100 billion for California. So far, it’s been dead-on-arrival in the Republican-controlled Senate.

Accordingly, Newsom’s budget, if adopted by the Legislature, specifically and automatically rescinds the cuts to education and other popular services if what Pelosi has dubbed the Heroes Act becomes reality and California gets the hoped-for money.

“The Heroes Act is the best approach,” Newsom said. “We need the federal government. We need that support.”

There’s no doubt that the recession is serious. Our unemployment rate, which topped out at just over 12% during the Great Recession a decade ago, could easily reach twice that level. The state, indeed, faces a very serious budget problem but how serious is by no means a settled fact.

It now falls to legislative leaders to either go along with Newsom’s seemingly inflated deficit number or take the advice of their own budget experts that the real deficit may only be a third as large and deal with it accordingly.

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

OPINION // EDITORIALS Editorial: Gavin Newsom’s cut-and-pray California budget

Chronicle Editorial Board May 15, 2020 Updated: May 16, 2020 6:30 p.m.

Gov. Gavin Newsom Photo: Santiago Mejia / The Chronicle 2019

California’s getting a first-blush look at its public finances, and the picture isn’t pleasing. Gov. Gavin Newsom is cutting back on schools and services, plugging holes with reserves and praying for a federal bailout. San Francisco, once as flush as the state, is hinting at much the same.

Newsom is outlining his budget plans a week after California got the crushing news that’s swung from a $22 billion surplus to a $54.3 billion hole. In San Francisco’s case, it’s looking at a $1.7 billion shortfall after steadily boosting spending during a boom-times economy. In Sacramento, Newsom is proposing fixes designed to handle the near-overnight damage wrought by the coronavirus pandemic. Not only is the state paying for extra health coverage and billions more in jobless benefits, but the economic hit has driven down the three main tax sources —personal income, corporate and sales levies — by 22%.

No one is happy as lawmakers and interest groups line up to complain about the fiscal wreckage. But Newsom is offering a balance of options that may help the state get by if all his bets go right.

He’s tapping a $16 billion rainy-day fund and spreading it over three years, a sign that no one thinks the state’s economy will quickly recover. He’s dumping a handful of childhood and health programs he rolled out in January. Like past governors, he’s not above raiding special reserves, something he wryly noted he would never do. Also, he made no mention of tax increases, though he alluded to ending unspecified tax loopholes and speeding up revenue collections.

The largest gamble is the governor’s hope for federal help, which he called “a moral obligation.” The wish is embodied in a $3 trillion package pushed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the San Francisco Democrat who will need Republican help to achieve her goal. That huge sum — or a lesser one — is anything but guaranteed.

With the rest of the plan, the governor will need to negotiate with a wary legislature, whose members have watched their roles diminish while Newsom grabbed the limelight during the outbreak. The scale of the budget rewrite work should give them a much larger role. One example: a proposal this week from state Senate leaders to give renters a decade to pay off overdue bills.

San Francisco is not as far along in solving its similar problems. One in eight city residents has applied for jobless aid, and the shrinking tax stream is leading to a near $2 billion hit in its two-year budget cycle.

Mayor London Breed isn’t denying the consequences.

“We are in for a long, hard road,” she said in releasing the bleak numbers. She and the rest of City Hall need to move quickly to provide specifics and prepare the city for the worst. San Francisco, long a case study in surging wealth, can show how to deal with a sudden drop from its golden status.

For the state, the sharp downturn once again highlights the need for a less volatile tax structure. The time to make those reforms was when the state was swimming in revenue. Now the governor and legislators are stuck with the amplified effects of a downturn. It would have been even worse if not for Gov. Jerry Brown’s frugality during his final eight years. He should be getting “thank you” notes from Sacramento.

This commentary is from The Chronicle’s editorial board. We invite you to express your views in a letter to the editor. Please submit your letter via our online form: SFChronicle.com/letters.

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

LOCAL // BAY AREA & STATE Stress-free Bay Area park outings? There’s a website for that

John King May 15, 2020 Updated: May 15, 2020 3:39 p.m.4

A sign posted in March informs visitors of coronavirus precautions at Tilden Regional Park.Photo: Carlos Avila Gonzalez / The Chronicle

Before the era of social distancing and government edicts to shelter in place, a walk in the park was as easy as, you know, a walk in the park.

These days, not so much. Which is why a regional open space alliance has put together an entire website devoted to the goal of — hashtag, please — #LoveYourParks6feetApart.

Part encouragement, part resource, and very much a product of these cautionary times, www.bayareaoutdoors.org debuted this week. The aim is to create a site where people can get all the information they need on what their local park district offers — coupled with suggestions on how to make such outings as stress-free as possible.

Some pointers are timeless, such as “Exercise! Walk, hike, run, bike.” Others reflect the tensions sparked by people descending on some prime spaces that have been closed for fear of spreading the coronavirus because of too-close and too-casual contact.

“Be prepared with a Plan B park if your Plan A park is crowded,” is one tip in the list of 16 bullet points. At the very least, “Park only in designated parking lots. If they are full, wait for a spot to open up.”

There are links to park districts in all nine Bay Area counties. Another set of links directs you to each county’s COVID-19 resource page — a convenient spot to try and make sense of what seems to be a constantly shifting set of rules.

“Restrictions are different for each park or preserve,” cautions one bullet point. “Please check before you go.”

The website was put together and is managed by Together Bay Area, the successor to the Bay Area Open Space Council. Funding was provided by the Peninsula Open Space Trust.

“We’re trying to respond to the moment,” said Annie Burke, executive director of Together Bay Area. As for the mix of district-scale links and punchy reminders, “the site needs to work for public agencies, but also for people who just want to go into the parks.”

And if the idea of meticulously plotting a walk in the park seems exhausting, one bullet point offers a hint on how to chill out once you are on the scene.

“Sit in designated areas to read, write, listen to music, draw,” we’re told. “Relax!”

John King is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: [email protected] Twitter: @johnkingsfchron

Follow John on: https://www.facebook.com/johnkingSFChron/JohnKingSFChron

John King is The San Francisco Chronicle’s urban design critic, taking stock of everything from Salesforce Tower to public spaces and homeless navigation centers. A two-time Pulitzer Prize finalist and author of two books on San Francisco architecture, King joined The Chronicle in 1992 and covered City Hall before creating his current post in 2001. He spent the spring of 2018 as a Mellon Fellow in Urban Landscape Studies at Dumbarton Oaks in Washington, D.C.

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

PUBLIC LANDS Heinrich says permanent LWCF funding on the horizon Jennifer Yachnin, E&E News reporter Published: Friday, May 15, 2020

New Mexico Sen. Martin Heinrich (D) predicted yesterday that Congress is on the "verge" of approving permanent funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund even as it works to address economic fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Heinrich asserted that a proposal to ensure minimum annual funding for the popular public lands program could soon see a Senate vote, regaining momentum the legislation had claimed before the novel coronavirus outbreak largely brought activity on Capitol Hill to a halt (E&E Daily, April 27).

"We are on the verge of getting this done. This is not pie in the sky," Heinrich said during an online event hosted by Trust for Public Land national board member Lucas St. Clair. The discussion also featured Outdoor Industry Association Executive Director Lise Aangeenbrug.

"I base that on conversations that I've had with some of my Republican colleagues, who have had this very conversation with [Senate Majority Leader] Mitch McConnell, who've had this very conversation with the chief of staff to the president and the president himself," Heinrich said. "This is one scheduled vote from being on its way to the president's desk, effectively."

Heinrich noted that S. 3422, the "Great American Outdoors Act," claims support from a majority of senators. The bill has 58 co- sponsors, including 15 Republican lawmakers.

The New Mexico senator touted the measure as a potentially unifying piece of legislation amid debate over how to address the pandemic.

"I really do think this is something we can do this year, and I think it's going to be really important for the American people to see that there are issues that bring all Americans together and our public lands are one of the greatest legacies of our country's history," Heinrich said.

The LWCF relies on proceeds from offshore oil and gas drilling to fund grants for states to preserve and maintain parks, forests, recreation areas and cultural sites. The program is also used to acquire land and water for the federal estate.

At the same time, Aangeenbrug said her organization continues to urge its members to reach out to their congressional representatives, particularly in Arizona, Colorado, Montana, North Carolina and Maine.

Those states include GOP Sens. Cory Gardner of Colorado and Steve Daines of Montana, both co-sponsors of the legislation who have touted their support for the LWCF as they face competitive reelection bids.

"Love of public lands from neighborhood parks to national parks is a bipartisan issue," Aangeenbrug said. "We're working hard and really hoping that even listeners on this call will reach out to their senators." Military weighs in

A coalition of retired military leaders also joined the chorus urging Congress to secure permanent LWCF funding, whether through stand-alone legislation or the next pandemic aid package.

"As Americans, we all share access to our public lands and the healing properties that come along with them," states a letter written by retired Army Brig. Gens. Nolen Bivens and Steve Anderson; Army Maj. Gens. Paul Eaton, Eric Olson and Gale Pollock; and Marine Corps Brig. Gens. Leif Hendrickson and Stephen Cheney. The May 5 letter was released yesterday by the veterans advocacy group Vet Voice Foundation, which has lobbied Congress to fund the conservation program (E&E Daily, Feb. 26).

The letter notes that military veterans have used outdoor recreation to address past traumatic experiences.

"Time spent outdoors is healing. The feeling of the sun on one's face, the swift current of a river, coming around a bend in the trail and being awe-struck by an incredible vista — these are unforgettable moments, and for many, therapeutic ones," the letter states, suggesting that similar therapy may prove helpful for Americans enduring the pandemic.

"We're all going through an unprecedented and challenging experience right now due to COVID-19," the letter states. "We're writing this letter with the sincere hope that when federal, state, and local officials determine it's safe and following the shelter- in-place orders in response to COVID-19, individuals from around the country will be able to take a page from our handbook and use the power of public lands and time outdoors to heal and adjust to post COVID-19 life. It works."

Twitter: @jenniferyachninEmail: [email protected]

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

Obstacles loom for fed relief Newsom wants to fill coronavirus budget gap $3 trillion aid package proposed by Democratic-led House of Representatives already faces staunch opposition from the White House; economists say federal debt concerns should be shelved to ensure there’s an economy left to rebuild

Gov. Gavin Newsom, second from left, meets with Senate President pro Tempore Toni Atkins, left,, Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, right, Senate Budget Chair Holly Mitchell, second from right, and Assembly Budget Chair Phil Ting to discuss efforts to enact a balanced budget by July 1. (State of California)

By ROBERT SALONGA | [email protected] and JOHN WOOLFOLK | [email protected] | Bay Area News Group PUBLISHED: May 15, 2020 at 5:50 p.m. | UPDATED: May 16, 2020 at 4:01 p.m.

As California stares down a coronavirus-fueled $54 billion deficit, the life preserver Gov. Gavin Newsom needs to help keep his state budget afloat is encountering choppy waters.

Under Newsom’s May budget revision released Thursday, about $14 billion of the shortfall would be handled with “trigger cuts” that would slash funding to state-funded schools and colleges, parks, courts, environmental conservation programs and an array of safety-net services for children and seniors. But those cuts could be avoided through another trigger: A hoped-for federal windfall for states that the House of Representatives passed 208-199 Friday night but that still has imposing obstacles to overcome before anyone gets any money. In a move that punctuates the urgency of the situation, Newsom on Friday took the rare step of dispensing with his daily weekday press briefing — heavily relied on across California for the latest news in the state’s fight against the virus and the gradual re-opening of the economy — to discuss with state legislative leaders how to have a balanced budget by the end of June.

Figures compiled by the Bay Area News Group showed that more than 76,000 people have contracted the novel coronavirus in California through Friday, a one-day increase of more than 1,500. The numbers of deaths from the virus have now topped 3,100.

As Newsom pitched his revised budget to state lawmakers, the House took up a Democrat- fashioned coronavirus relief package totaling some $3 trillion in aid, including $500 billion to state governments.

“A crisis of this magnitude requires bold legislative actions, and this bill will provide relief for American workers, families, students, small businesses, and healthcare systems,” Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, said in a statement.

But the White House Office of Management and Budget raised a number of concerns about the “Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions” or “HEROES Act,” and said it would recommend a veto of the bill as drafted.

“This legislation,” the office said in a memorandum, “is more concerned with delivering on longstanding partisan and ideological wishlists than with enhancing the ability of our Nation to deal with the public health and economic challenges we face.”

Among the concerns the White House outlined were that the bill “would provide a windfall to wealthy taxpayers in high-tax states” and “raise taxes on struggling small businesses by limiting deductibility of losses.”

The White House also objected to a proposed $25 billion “bailout” of the U.S. Postal Service without requiring “much-needed long-term reforms” and criticized vote-by-mail “election mandates” it said would encroach upon state election authority and “invite voter fraud.”

One thing the administration did not balk at was the $3 trillion price tag, coming on the heels of $2.5 trillion in aid approved in March as part of the CARES Act. Many economists agree that austerity should be shelved to ensure there’s an economy left to rebuild.

Alan J. Auerbach, an economics professor at UC Berkeley and director of its Burch Center for Tax Policy and Public Finance, said global investors still see the U.S. dollar as sound. He noted that Japan has an even higher debt level than the U.S. and has shown similar resiliency, while countries such as Venezuela whose economies do not inspire confidence have been rocked with runaway inflation.

“In the world of economists, I’m someone who’s pretty concerned about government debt and fiscal trajectory. But this is not the time to be focused on that,” Auerbach said. “If we destroy the economy, then dealing with the federal budget is going to be the least of our concerns.” That next round of federal aid can’t come soon enough, especially for the state agencies facing drastic cuts if no help comes from Washington.

The University of California and California State University systems, and the California Community Colleges — already struggling with how to continue instruction amid the pandemic — are each set to absorb 10% funding reductions that can be “triggered off” with federal relief dollars. The same goes for much of the K-12 system.

Some areas were left relatively unscathed: State corrections got a 0.7% haircut from its $13.4 billion budget from last year. But Newsom did announce intentions to close one state prison in the 2021-22 fiscal year and begin the closure of another prison the following year, drawing wide praise from criminal-justice reform advocates.

“The governor’s revised budget proposal reflects what California voters have known for a long time — that continued wasteful spending on failed prisons is bad for safety and our budgets,” Jay Jordan, executive director of Californians for Safety and Justice, said in a statement. “Hospitals, schools, housing, trauma recovery services, reentry support, and jobs are the things that will help California get back on track, not prisons.”

Newsom also outlined plans for the state to cease housing new juvenile inmates as part of a broader goal to shift responsibility for juvenile detention and rehabilitation to state health services and county probation departments. But that plan has its doubters.

“This structure and the resources provided are simply not enough to make this work,” Brian Richart, president of the Chief Probation Officers of California, said in a statement.

Amid the budgetary pain, Newsom’s spending plan did elicit some sighs of relief, if only because things weren’t as bad as some thought they were going to be.

The new budget proposal eliminated the ambitious $750 million state fund for homeless housing and services the governor had proposed in January but articulated plans to replace it dollar-for-dollar with existing federal funds to buy hotels and motels across California that are being used as temporary homeless housing during the pandemic. Newsom also retained his plan to finance affordable housing construction with $500 million in low-income housing tax credits. But he proposed a cut of $565 million for mixed-income developments, infill infrastructure grants and other housing programs.

Staff writers Marisa Kendall, Julia Prodis Sulek and Joseph Geha contributed to this report.

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

LOCAL // BAY AREA & STATE Oakland and SF’s ‘slow streets’ aren’t going away — that’s a good thing

John King May 15, 2020 Updated: May 16, 2020 11:44 a.m.

People exercise on 42th St., between Shafter and Webster, in Oakland, Calif., on Tuesday, May 12, 2020. Oakland has closed a number of streets to through traffic, the idea being that this will provide options for outdoor space to people with plenty of room for social distance and less need to be worried about cars hitting them.Photo: Yalonda M. James / The Chronicle

In the month since Oakland began closing some neighborhood streets to through traffic, a move replicated by other cities across the country, a core truth of the “slow streets” movement has become clear — the more exuberant claims for the program might be overstated, but its benefit to nearby residents is very, very real. Nor will it vanish on the day — next month? — when shelter-in-place orders end. Instead, slow streets fit into a larger rethinking of the role that pavement can play in large American cities.

“We’ve opened a lot of Oaklanders to the idea that people can use streets in all sorts of ways,” said Ryan Russo, director of the city’s Department of Transportation. “Where things go from here, we’ll have to figure out.”

Since Oakland put its first barriers up, similar initiatives have been launched in San Francisco, Alameda and Redwood City. San Mateo, Berkeley and San Jose are all exploring the idea of letting restaurants place seating on closed-off asphalt. Urban centers from New York to Seattle have restricted access to streets large and small.

Still, Oakland’s initial move to provide protected space stands out.

Efforts spreading

Information on Bay Area “slow streets” pilot efforts, including maps, are available at:

San Francisco: www.sfmta.com/projects/slow-streets-program

Oakland: www.oaklandca.gov/projects/oakland-slow-streets

Alameda: www.alamedaca.gov/ALERTS-COVID-19/Slow-Streets-Alameda

Redwood City: www.redwoodcity.org/about-the-city/slow-streets-pilot-program

The program launched on April 11 with the closure of 4.5 miles of streets around the clock to nearly all traffic except for people heading to or from their homes, emergency vehicles and delivery vans. Several expansions later, 20 miles of residential blocks are now tucked behind temporary barriers.

This is far short of the 74 miles announced as the city’s overall plan — a number so big it attracted nationwide attention at a time when people were being ordered to stay close to home. But that number was always a target, and the city expects to add more segments by the end of May.

In terms of providing a relief valve — thinning out crowded “official” public spaces so people can exercise or seek fresh air with enough room to maintain social distancing — there’s a gap between reality and hype.

Last Saturday, on a pleasant spring afternoon, I rode my bicycle past Lake Merritt and saw no shortage of people filling portions of the sidewalk or dotting the lawns. But on Alice Street, a cordoned-off “slow street” within three compact blocks of the lake’s western edge, I had the asphalt to myself. The same was true of a car-free corridor leading from Wayne Avenue to East 19th St. on the east side of the lake.

“In terms of (counterbalancing) the popularity of the lake and parks, we’re realizing there’s still work to be done,” Russo admitted this week. “In terms of people being able to go outside in their neighborhood and feel comfortable, feel safe in the roadbed, the slow streets are serving their purpose.”

A man crosses without worrying about automobile traffic at Alice and 14th streets where Oakland Slow Streets signs are posted. Photo: Yalonda M. James / The Chronicle

That was evident a few days later, when I revisited the streets set aside in North Oakland. The scenes weren’t festive so much as relaxed: couples walking hand in hand, parents with young children piloting bikes and scooters even smaller than they were. One couple was jogging — the mother behind a baby stroller, the father gripping the leash of a large white dog.

“I love it,” grinned Yvonne McGrew, who has lived on Howe Street since 1973. It’s a street that seems bucolic. It’s also near enough to the Rockridge BART Station that impatient commuters would cut through the tangle of small blocks to shave a few moments off their drive.

“You would never have seen that — kids on bikes,” McGrew said, pointing to one pair of helmeted adventurers. “You’d see adults and their dogs, but not the kids. And I’m catching up with neighbors I’d hardly ever see.”

There was a similar mood late Wednesday afternoon in San Francisco, which is trying out several “slow streets” as well.

Page Street was empty except for the stray passer-through, perhaps because Golden Gate Park’s Panhandle is a block to the north. But Lake Street in the Richmond District was another story, a widely spaced promenade of families getting fresh air at the end of the day, joggers loping past mansions, even a pair of surfers on their bicycles, boards attached securely on the side.

On Kirkham Street in the Inner Sunset, meanwhile, there’s now a basketball hoop outside one home near Funston Avenue. Kids from the neighborhood use the gently sloped blocks as an elongated chill-out zone.

“It’s kind of free-range out here,” offered Sebastian Haas, a ninth-grader who lives near 15th Avenue. He had a skateboard; his younger brother had a go-cart the pair had built in their garage.

I asked if there was much traffic in this quiet-looking area before restrictions came down in March. “Actually, yeah. This gives you a chance to get outside and not think about it.”

Seattle has now gone so far as to announce that 20 miles of its streets will remain closed permanently to through traffic. Neither Oakland nor San Francisco are prepared to take such an emphatic step, at least not yet.

“Before anything is made permanent, we need to have a conversation as a whole community,” Russo said. As he points out, traffic diverted from one street in usual times is likely to head to others — “but we don’t have that right now.”

People exercise near the intersection of Webster Street and 42nd Street in Oakland. Photo: Yalonda M. James / The Chronicle

What we do have is a glum but growing awareness that the path ahead is murky. There won’t be some magic day where every adult is back in the office and all the kids are at school.

“It’s becoming increasingly clear that crisis recovery is a slow road,” said Jamie Parks, director of the Livable Streets program at San Francisco’s Municipal Transportation Agency. In fact, he promised additions next week to the four protected street segments now in place: “Slow streets will be in place for as long as they’re needed.”

This is as it should be.

The impacts of the slow streets initiatives are modest, not sweeping. But they offer another alternative to neighborhoods that in recent years have come to feel increasingly constrained — even before the pandemic arrived.

John King is The San Francisco Chronicle’s urban design critic. Email: [email protected] Twitter: @johnkingsfchron

Follow John on: https://www.facebook.com/johnkingSFChron/JohnKingSFChron

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

POLITICS Calif. Gov. Newsom lays out plan to tackle dual threats of coronavirus and wildfire

Kurtis Alexander May 13, 2020 Updated: May 13, 2020 8:23 p.m.

Gov. Gavin Newsom discusses California's plan to fight fires r during a news conference in Cameron Park. His state budget will include $86 Photo: Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press Gov. Gavin Newsom pledged Wednesday to hire hundreds of new firefighters and increase oversight of troubled utility PG&E in hopes of weathering a potentially tough fire season complicated by the financial and health challenges of the coronavirus. But he acknowledged the difficulties that lie ahead.

The state is coming out of a dry winter, which promises a more flammable landscape, while firefighters have been limited in how much they have been able to prepare for the increased threat. Fire crews also face the risk of contracting the virus in a job that invariably means working, traveling and living in large groups. A sickened workforce could undermine the state’s ability to head off the danger.

The state budget that Newsom is scheduled to propose Thursday, the governor said, will include $86 million for the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection to boost its firefighting response, including hiring 600 employees, and $127 million for the Department of Emergency Services to address such disasters.

The proposed budget will also fund the creation of a new 106-person wildfire safety division to oversee Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and other utilities. Many of the big fires in recent years, including the 2018 Camp Fire in Butte County that killed more than 80 people, were caused by faulty, fire-prone power equipment.

“We have been preparing for the upcoming wildfire season and we are not stepping back our efforts. In fact, we are stepping them up,” Newsom said at a media briefing on the coronavirus at a Cal Fire station in Cameron Park (El Dorado County).

The governor has made fire safety a top priority of his administration. He took office just months after the town of Paradise was wiped out in the Camp Fire and outlined an ambitious agenda to reduce the threat. But in calling for more money for firefighters this year, Newsom also said that Cal Fire and the Department of Emergency Services would face cuts in some areas, owing to the expected $54 billion deficit at the hands of the coronavirus.

“We did pull back in certain areas,” he said. “We couldn’t do everything we proposed.”

The governor did not elaborate on what reductions would be made, saying only that the details of the proposed budget for the coming fiscal year, beginning in July, would be announced Thursday.

The state’s firefighting plan also includes strategic changes aimed at navigating a world where the risk of infection remains a constant. Mirroring guidelines recently published by federal fire managers, California will try to keep firefighters apart or in small groups as much as possible and will work to prevent wildfires from getting too big so they don’t require massive deployments of staff.

“If we keep fires small at the beginning, with these extra resources we’re going to have we’re going to protect our firefighters and the public,” said Cal Fire Director Thom Porter, who was with Newsom on Wednesday.

The push for a more aggressive attack on wildfires comes in contrast to recent guidance calling for firefighters to let low-risk blazes burn to get rid of the combustible vegetation. While the new tactic could slow efforts to increase forest resiliency and reduce the long-term risk of fire, Porter emphasized the need to get through the short term.

Early this month, federal fire officials worked with local and state officials across the country to design regional Wildland Fire Response Plans to address health issues posed by the coronavirus.

In addition to recommending a slew of social distancing measures, the sprawling plans offered a stern warning about the seriousness of the contagion. “In the event of a high disease-spread scenario with a high rate of infection, the associated loss of individuals from service will severely tax the ability to maintain an adequate wildfire response, even during a moderately active fire season,” reads the plan for California.

Mike Mohler, a deputy director at Cal Fire, said the state has been modeling what reductions in staffing might look like. “Could we function with the loss of 50% of our work force? We could, but no one would be going home,” he said. “And we may have to begin triaging fires, deciding which ones are priorities.”

The state also expects a decline in prison inmates who help fight fires. Many have been released to reduce jail populations in an effort to prevent the spread of the coronavirus. In the past, inmate crews have sometimes made up half of the staffing on wildfires.

The addition of new Cal Fire employees as well as aid from the U.S. National Guard and the California State Guard, Mohler said, would help keep firefighter numbers high.

He added that new social distancing policies, like spreading out the large fire camps where firefighters often work, sleep and eat for weeks on end would go a long way to making sure staff stay healthy.

Mark Ghilarducci, director of the Office of Emergency Services, said similar distancing measures would apply to how communities evacuate during wildfires. His agency would work to get more hotel rooms for those forced to leave, and when that isn’t possible, emergency officials would make use of partitions and air purifiers to keep crowded evacuation centers safe.

“This is not a perfect solution,” he said. “We’re obviously going to be working through these in real time and assessing each individual case.”

Firefighters also are still playing catch-up after the coronavirus lockdown put a lot of their prevention activities on hold this spring. The U.S. Forest Service, the nation’s largest wildland firefighting force, halted all prescribed burning for several weeks while Cal Fire has been more cautious — and sometimes more sparing — with vegetation management programs.

Recent wet weather has helped delay the start of the high fire season. But the arid winter means that when spring rains do finish, California’s hills and valleys will dry out more quickly.

On lands managed by state firefighters, there have already been 60% more wildfires this year compared to last year, according to Cal Fire.

“The fuel conditions are drying out, the grasses are starting to cure and that is when we tend to see more fires,” said Cal Fire spokeswoman Amy Head.

Chronicle Staff Writer Alejandro Serrano contributed to this report.

Kurtis Alexander is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: [email protected] Twitter: @kurtisalexander

Follow Kurtis on: https://www.facebook.com/kurtis.alexander.92kurtisalexander

Kurtis Alexander is a general assignment reporter for The San Francisco Chronicle, frequently writing about water, wildfire, climate and the American West. His recent work has focused on the impacts of drought, the widening rural-urban divide and state and federal environmental policy.

Before joining the Chronicle, Alexander worked as a freelance writer and as a staff reporter for several media organizations, including The Fresno Bee and Bay Area News Group, writing about government, politics and the environment.

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

Pelosi says Americans are ‘worth it’ as she pushes $3 trillion coronavirus aid package Trump says the House plan is ‘dead on arrival’

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of Calif., speaks during an interview with The Associated Press on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, May 13, 2020. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

By ASSOCIATED PRESS | PUBLISHED: May 13, 2020 at 3:32 p.m. | UPDATED: May 14, 2020 at 3:45 a.m. By LISA MASCARO and PADMANANDA RAMA

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Wednesday defended the stunning $3 trillion price tag on Democrats’ pandemic relief package as what is needed to confront the “villainous virus” and economic collapse.

“The American people are worth it,” Pelosi told The Associated Press.

In an interview with the AP, Pelosi acknowledged that the proposal is a starting point in negotiations with President Donald Trump and Republicans, who have flatly rejected the coronavirus relief bill headed for a House vote Friday.

“DOA,” Trump said during an event at the White House. “Dead on arrival.” As wary Americans wait on Washington, the stakes are enormous for all sides. The virus outbreak threatens the health and economic security of Americans, posing a generational test of political leadership on par with the Great Depression. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell warned Wednesday that without intervention, the U.S. risks a prolonged recession.

House lawmakers are set to return to Washington for Friday’s vote, but prospects are dim in the Senate, where leaders say they won’t consider another relief package until June.

Trump has insisted any future coronavirus aid “must prioritize Americans’ health and the nation’s economic prosperity,” said White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany in a tweet. She called the Democrats’ proposal “unserious.”

The bill provides nearly $1 trillion to states and cities to avert layoffs of police, firefighters and other essential workers as tax revenues tank during the shutdown. It boosts another round of $1,200 direct cash payments to Americans, extends unemployment benefits and launches a rent and mortgage relief fund. It provides $75 billion for more virus testing.

As the pandemic rages, Pelosi had just one message for Trump: “Tell the truth.”

“This is the biggest disaster that our country has ever faced,” Pelosi said.

“The president calls it a war — we’re all warriors, that people are dying in the war. No, these are family, and people are dying in the family,” she said.

“We have to address in a big way,” she said. “The American people are worth it.”

The speaker and the president don’t talk much anymore. But Pelosi remains in contact with Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, who led negotiations on past virus aid packages, and expects to begin talks with him on the next bill from Congress.

With Congress still partly shuttered, lawmakers face life-and-death decisions ahead. They are weighing whether it is safe for communities to reopen during the pandemic, perhaps with new restrictions on businesses and gatherings, or whether it is better to stay hunkered down until the U.S. can ramp up testing and prevent a second wave of COVID-19 cases, with deaths now beyond 83,000.

The president says the country can’t stay closed indefinitely. But Pelosi warned that schools, businesses and large gatherings, including the Democrats’ presidential nominating convention, will not be business as usual.

“You just can’t say because people want to go to work, we should just take every risk,” she said. “In order to turn the economy around, we have to get rid of the pandemic.”

The virus outbreak is rewriting the rules of the fall elections, and Pelosi acknowledged that voter turnout will be key as Democrats push alternatives to in-person ballots.

As the party’s presumptive presidential nominee Joe Biden shelters at home, campaigning via video from his basement, Pelosi said he’s doing “just fine” in the new normal of an election year. “It’s not as if he’s missing a big crowd someplace,” she said.

“We’re in a whole new world, and I think he’s doing just fine,” she said.

She expects Democrats will retain control of the House and flip the Senate — “which I very much think we can do.”

Pelosi is often seen as the de facto leader of the Democratic Party, the highest-ranking elected official, setting the agenda and message. But now she says of Biden: “He is the leader of the Democratic Party.”

As Republicans on Capitol Hill join the Trump administration to investigate China’s role in the virus outbreak, she calls it a “diversion” from the more immediate problems of stemming the health crisis and salvaging the U.S. economy.

“Yes, we want to know the source of this pandemic, but let’s focus on why we are not testing, how we can help people,” she said.

Pelosi, 80, shows up for work most days, masked in a scarf at the U.S. Capitol, and said she is reminded that “life is fragile.”

She repeatedly washes her hands and covers herself to protect others, she said.

“Let’s take it one giant step at a time as we go forward because what we’ve been doing before has been helpful but not enough,” she said, noting that some House Democrats wanted an even bigger bill.

She said that she has been “dismayed, frankly,” by the way Trump is encouraging people to avoid the stay-home guidelines but that she “can’t dwell” on the president’s leadership.

“I mean, injecting Lysol, ‘magically go away,’ ‘hoax,’” she said, repeating some of Trump’s comments on the coronavirus.

“I believe in miracles. I believe in prayer. But again, we have to pray — and work — for the solutions to it all,” she said.

___

Associated Press writer Kevin Freking in Washington contributed to this report.

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

Stunning Poppies: Photo Of The Day

Here's another hike to put on your list: Garin Regional Park in Hayward. This local photographer sells her photos at an online store.

By Bea Karnes, Patch Staff

May 12, 2020 5:02 pm PT | Updated May 12, 2020 5:04 pm PT

Poppies at Garin Park, Hayward, Calif. (Kathy Anselmo)

HAYWARD, CA — Local artist and photographer Anselmo snapped this photo a few years ago at Garin Park in Hayward, part of the East Bay Regional Park District. After staring at your walls for two months, you may have reached the conclusion that they need some added beauty. Kathy sells her photos online.

Thank you for sharing your photo and news of your business!

If you have an awesome photo of nature, breath-taking scenery, kids caught being kids, a pet doing something funny or something unusual you happen to catch with your camera, we'd love to feature it on Patch.

We're looking for high-resolution images that reflect the beauty and fun that is Northern California, and that show off your unique talents.

Email it to [email protected]

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

POLITICS Bay Area, California would reap billions under House Democrats’ coronavirus bill

Tal Kopan May 12, 2020 Updated: May 12, 2020 5:55 p.m.

*** BESTPIX *** WASHINGTON, DC - MAY 07: U.S. Speaker of the House Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) speaks during a weekly news conference at the U.S. Capitol May 7, 2020 in Washington, DC. Speaker Pelosi spoke on the latest regarding the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images) Photo: Alex Wong / Getty Images

WASHINGTON — Facing dire budget shortfalls because of the coronavirus pandemic, California and the Bay Area could get more than $50 billion from the federal government to help — if House Democrats have their way.

The House is scheduled to vote on its latest coronavirus relief bill Friday, and with Democrats in the majority, the measure is expected to pass. But a showdown is expected with the Republican-controlled Senate and President Trump, who say any further coronavirus relief should wait for a clearer picture of how previous measures have affected the economy.

And when the time comes to pass something, Republicans say they will resist giving money to states and localities if they do not use it directly for coronavirus needs. They are also insisting on liability protections for businesses, which Democrats oppose.

“Not acting is the most expensive course,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, said as she introduced the bill Tuesday. “We are presenting a plan to do what is necessary to deal with the corona crisis and make sure we can get the country back to work and school safely.”

The bill includes $3 trillion in coronavirus relief, with nearly $1 trillion of that going to state and local governments.

That money is divvied up based on formulas factoring in need and population size, and would be released over two years. According to an estimate done by the Congressional Research Service, which was provided to The Chronicle by the House Appropriations Committee, California and the Bay Area would receive a large chunk of change.

The state would directly receive an estimated nearly $21.5 billion this year and $26 billion next year. Cities and counties in the state would directly receive a cumulative $30.5 billion this year and $15 billion next year.

Another windfall to California residents would be the repeal of the cap on state and local tax deductions on federal taxes. The bill would eliminate the cap for 2020 and 2021, repealing the $10,000 limit for joint filers that Republicans passed in their 2017 tax bill. The GOP has rejected the idea in the past. An analysis by California’s tax board in 2018 estimated that loss of the full deduction cost state taxpayers $12 billion.

San Francisco would get more than $1.2 billion in federal relief this year and $600 million next year under the Democrats’ bill. San Jose would get $428 million this year and $214 million next year, and Oakland would get $368 million this year and $184 million next year.

Smaller cities would not be left out. Walnut Creek, for example, would get a total of $24.5 million over the two years. San Rafael would get almost $30 million. And Burlingame would get $15 million.

The state is facing a budget deficit of $54 billion, the state Department of Finance projects, amid mounting demand for social services and plummeting tax revenue. San Francisco’s shortfall alone could near $2 billion. Actual allocations could vary not only based on what Congress ultimately passes, but also changing circumstances. One of the variables is the local unemployment level, which could remain stubbornly high in the state.

Governors and local officials of both parties have called on Congress to allocate money for their hurting budgets. The combination of revenue decimated by stay-at-home orders and expenses related to the pandemic have put enormous pressure on state and local governments, most of which are required to balance their budgets.

While Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has backtracked from rhetoric suggesting states could be allowed to go bankrupt, he and other Republicans have said they do not want any federal money being used to supplement states that have mismanaged their budgets. Republicans resisted money for state and local governments in an interim bill, but Congress’ first relief package included $150 billion for states and localities.

The Democrats say the need is now, and have labeled the legislation the “Heroes Act” to evoke the local workers and first responders whose jobs could be saved with the stimulus money.

“There are those who said, ‘Let’s just pause,’” Pelosi said. “Well, the families who are suffering know that hunger doesn’t take a pause, the rent doesn’t take a pause, bills don’t take a pause, the hardship of losing a job or tragically losing a loved one doesn’t take a pause.”

Tal Kopan is The San Francisco Chronicle’s Washington correspondent. Email: [email protected] Twitter: @talkopan

Follow Tal on: https://www.facebook.com/SFChronicle/TalKopan

Tal Kopan is the Washington Correspondent for The San Francisco Chronicle. Previously, she was a political reporter for CNN Politics, where she covered immigration, cybersecurity and other hot-button issues in Washington, including the 2016 presidential election.

Prior to joining the network, Kopan was a reporter for POLITICO in Washington, D.C., where she reported for their breaking news team and policy verticals, including a special focus on the Department of Justice, courts and cybersecurity.

Kopan started her career working in Chicago with local media outlets ABC7 Chicago and Fox Chicago News.

Her work has earned her awards and fellowships from the Atlanta Press Club; National Press Foundation; Loyola Law School, Los Angeles; and the National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences.

Kopan graduated with honors from the University of Chicago with a bachelor's degree in “law, letters and society.”

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

CALIFORNIA California considers unprecedented $25-billion economy recovery fund, rental relief

By JOHN MYERSSACRAMENTO BUREAU CHIEF MAY 12, 2020 3 AM

SACRAMENTO —

Two unprecedented proposals to help Californians weather the fiscal storm unleashed by the coronavirus crisis are expected to be unveiled Tuesday by Democrats in the state Senate — one to help struggling renters, the other to create a $25-billion economic recovery fund by issuing long-term vouchers to those willing to prepay their future state income taxes.

Taken together, the ideas suggest lawmakers are willing to launch never-before-tried experiments to avoid the unpaid debts and deep cuts to government services that resulted from the Great Recession more than a decade ago. “We need some short-term assistance,” said Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) in an interview with The Times on Monday. “But we’ve got to be thinking long term on how to do this in a very strategic way.”

The proposals are scheduled to be formally unveiled Tuesday morning in Sacramento, two days before Gov. Gavin Newsom sends lawmakers a plan to erase a short-term budget deficit that could total more than $54 billion.

Neither the renter-assistance program nor the economic recovery fund would have a direct effect on the state budget in the coming weeks and months. Still, lawmakers believe both ideas could boost California’s shattered economy.

The unconventional effort to help renters would ask landlords to forgive rent payments in exchange for equally sized tax credits spread out over a 10-year period starting in 2024. The tax credits would be transferable, meaning the property owner could sell them to an outside investor and get cash immediately.

“This is a substantive proposal that protects those who are struggling to afford their rent and also keeps rental properties from going into foreclosure,” state Sen. Steven Bradford (D- Gardena) said. “This equitable strategy will keep people housed.”

Some local governments have already stepped up to address concerns about renters being evicted during the public health crisis, promoting a variety of rental assistance programs. Pending legislation at the state Capitol also seeks to prevent evictions during the coronavirus state of emergency, which was declared by Newsom in March and has no targeted end date.

The exact number of troubled renters is unclear. As of 2018, there were 17 million renters in California, and more than half of them were rent-burdened.

Under the Senate proposal, tenants would agree to reimburse the state for the rent payments and would have 10 years to do so. Some who could prove financial hardship could have the total amount forgiven — in effect, their rent would be covered by the state.

The idea will hinge on the willingness of rental property owners to cooperate, and whether they see the long-term tax break as worth the loss of short-term rental income. Atkins said she is optimistic, arguing that landlords benefit by keeping their properties occupied.

“When you have to find a new tenant, that’s not an easy process,” she said.

The economic stabilization plan crafted by Senate Democrats in response to the COVID-19 pandemic is even more ambitious. It would offer any California taxpayer, from individuals to large corporations, a chance to prepay a decade’s worth of income taxes for a slight discount. In total, the state would offer $30 billion in long-term tax credits for $25 billion in upfront cash.

In essence, it would be a cash advance on long-term state tax revenues, using the money to fund short-term economic relief programs, which could include small-business assistance and relief for local governments.

“It’s really a 21st-century New Deal,” state Sen. Bob Hertzberg (D-Van Nuys) said. “We’ve got to get money into the system.”

Taxpayers could use the vouchers to cover taxes owed in those future years or sell them sooner to investors. That could make the documents valuable to a variety of investors, said John C. Carson Jr., the president of Raymond James Financial.

“If the state were to issue such a security that could be bought and sold in the secondary market, we expect that there would be strong interest from institutions and other investors,” he said in a statement.

By accelerating the collection of tax revenues that would otherwise be paid more slowly, the program would mean less government cash for future lawmakers to spend. Senate budget staffers estimate a $3-billion-a-year decrease in available revenues from 2024 through 2033.

They do not believe the program would affect tax dollars that are constitutionally guaranteed for public schools, because the vouchers would be counted as part of annual tax proceeds when cashed in. Such a calculation could, however, direct a larger amount of actual tax revenue toward schools in those years and away from other programs.

Other key questions will need to be addressed. It’s likely that it will be easier to create the $25 billion economic recovery fund — envisioned as being collected over as much as two years — than determining which of the state’s many needs should get the help and which ones would be left out. A document provided to The Times by Senate Democrats offers an early set of suggestions, including worker retraining, expedited infrastructure projects, wildfire prevention and homelessness assistance.

Atkins insisted the priorities would be clear. “It’s got to be tied to the economy and the critical needs,” she said.

It is also unknown how the two relief proposals will play either with Newsom or in the state Assembly. To have an immediate effect, both will have to be considered alongside a budget deficit plan that must be approved by the Legislature no later than June 15. Democrats hold a supermajority of seats in both houses and could, in theory, approve both plans without Republican votes.

For those legislators who were in office during the last recession or whose service began in its immediate aftermath, the idea of thinking outside the conventional world of government might hold a special appeal.

“You have to think differently,” Atkins said. “You have to rethink, reshape and be willing to adjust and consider new options, because the world is different. The world has been upended.”

John Myers joined the Los Angeles Times as Sacramento bureau chief in 2015 and has spent more than two decades covering California politics, state government and elections.

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

Skelton: Newsom’s high ratings in crisis may drop in budget deficit fight Gov. Gavin Newsom faces the certainty of whacking California government services while raising taxes

(AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli, Pool, File)

By GEORGE SKELTON | Los Angeles Times PUBLISHED: May 11, 2020 at 11:40 a.m. | UPDATED: May 11, 2020 at 12:04 p.m.

The job is about to get a lot tougher for Gov. Gavin Newsom. He faces the certainty of whacking government services while raising taxes.

Newsom hasn’t uttered the feared “T” word publicly that I know of. But jacking state taxes even higher in infamously tax-burdened California is inevitable.

Every governor who has faced a significant budget deficit for the last 60 years has reluctantly hiked taxes.

The COVID-19 pandemic — and the collapsed economy it created when many businesses were ordered closed and people told to stay home — will also force the governor and Legislature to cut services. It’s at the very time that increasing numbers of afflicted or laid-off Californians need assistance most. Until now, Newsom has flourished politically in the crisis. His performances in daily online briefings have portrayed him as a leader in the public’s eyes. In a recent poll of California voters, his job approval rating had climbed to an astonishing 70%.

Now comes the hard part. He’s facing a budget deficit that his Finance Department estimates at $54.3 billion. That’s a colossal hole of red ink. In January he proposed a $222-billion budget for the fiscal year starting July 1.

That initial budget “is no longer operational,” Newsom says. Like, no kidding. He’ll offer a revised one on Thursday.

Steep taxes and deep cuts are the two main tools available to repair a bleeding state budget. There also are other tools, none of which can do the job by themselves.

Fortunately there’s roughly $22 billion stashed as a reserve and surplus, but it won’t last long.

Newsom and other governors are pleading for more federal help. President Trump doesn’t sound enthusiastic. But Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco has been pressing for $1 trillion to send states and local governments.

The governor could cut the pay of top state administrators. That wouldn’t save a ton, but it would show that the Newsom administration is willing to share in the financial sacrifice.

“There’s always a line of people standing up to be a department director,” says David Doerr, chief tax consultant for the California Taxpayers Assn. For decades, he was chief consultant for the state Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee and is generally considered Sacramento’s top tax guru.

In a budget balancing brawl, Doerr says, “the first thing you look for is accounting ‘reform,’ which is a nice way to say ‘gimmicks.’ [Gov.] Jerry Brown reversed most of them. So use them again.”

Money can be “borrowed” or pilfered from special funds — such as truck weight fee and fishing license stashes — to help bolster the general fund, the state’s main checking account.

“It’s not a good policy move,” Doerr concedes. “But what are you going to do in this kind of situation? You can’t let the state go under.”

Doerr says he would offer a tax amnesty program. There’s bound to be lots of people who owe the state back taxes with mounting stiff penalties they can’t afford to pay. Forgive the penalties for a short period and entice them to pay merely the delinquent taxes.

“Use the slogan, ‘Get to us before we get to you,’” the Cal Tax consultant says.

“There also are probably some programs around that were good once upon a time, but things have changed in the last 50 years,” Doerr says. Bury them.

That’s no doubt correct. But everybody who opposes tax hikes — and that’s practically anyone who’d have to pay the levies themselves — bellows about fabled “waste, fraud and abuse.” In 2004, new Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger announced he would “blow up the boxes” of bureaucracy. But his fuse fizzled. He appointed a task force that recommended eliminating more than 100 boards and commissions and abolishing 12,000 state jobs. Little came of it.

Doerr’s formula for digging out of a deficit hole: “One-third revenue, one-third cuts, one-third accounting reform/gimmicks….

“You have to have taxes…. It takes leadership.”

Attorney Steve Merksamer, who runs a successful law and lobbying firm in Sacramento and was Gov. George Deukmejian’s chief of staff, says: “Every governor who had a fiscal crisis has raised taxes. That’s what we did, but we got lucky.”

In 1983, Republican Deukmejian agreed to a “trigger tax.” If the economy continued to slump, that would trigger a sales tax hike. But it rebounded and the tax wasn’t needed.

Brown’s father, Democrat Pat Brown, also faced a deficit in 1959 and raised taxes a record amount his first year as governor.

Pat Brown gimmicked the accounting system to escape raising taxes again before Republican Ronald Reagan ousted him in 1966. But Reagan then was drenched in red ink and had to raise taxes steeply.

Freshman Republican Gov. Pete Wilson faced a monstrous black hole one-third the size of his general fund in 1991. He filled the gap half with spending cuts, half with tax hikes and lectured Republican lawmakers that they were bleeping “irrelevant” if they didn’t vote for the taxes.

Schwarzenegger finally agreed to a huge tax increase in 2009 as the Great Recession shredded the budget. But voters repealed half of it.

Then Brown, facing a $27-billion deficit, went to the ballot with an initiative to tax mainly rich people. That sounded good to the middle class.

Newsom and legislators must choose their poison by June 15, the constitutional deadline for budget passage.

Get ready for howls of public protest, political demagoguery and falling Newsom job ratings.

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

LOCAL // BAY AREA & STATE Report: State could lose $1.3 billion in gas tax revenue during coronavirus shutdown

Rachel Swan May 5, 2020 Updated: May 5, 2020 7:24 p.m.

Traffic seen on highway 101 near South San Francisco on Tuesday, June 26, 2018 in South San Francisco, Calif. National and state Republicans are using the state gas tax repeal on November's ballot to get Republican voters to the polls. Photo: Liz Hafalia / The Chronicle

California may lose $1.3 billion in gas tax revenue during the coronavirus shelter-in-place period, a side effect of the decline in driving, according to a scientist at UC Davis.

The numbers appear in a new report from the university’s Road Ecology Center, which shows that drivers consumed 85.8 million gallons of gas during the second week of April, a steep drop from the 349 million gallons pumped in the first week of March.

The dip in fuel consumption has tremendous benefits for the environment, said Fraser Shilling, co- director of the Road Ecology Center and author of the report. But on the flip side, it means less tax money flowing into state coffers. At the estimated tax rate of 61 cents a gallon, revenue may have plunged by $161 million a week, the report said.

“The economic impacts are harsh,” Shilling said. He calculated the losses by dividing the reduction in vehicle miles traveled by the number of miles per gallon of fuel in an average car. Shilling then applied the 61 cent tax rate, based on past reports from the American Petroleum Institute that combine state excise taxes and local sales taxes.

His figures are rough, and open for debate, though they illustrate a trend that most transportation experts acknowledge: Less travel means fewer people buying gas, which has repercussions for the economy.

The slide comes at a time when state lawmakers expected a gas tax windfall, owing to SB1 a 17.6 cent- per-gallon increase approved in 2017. Legislators anticipated the bill would generate $53 billion over 10 years, money they hoped would fill a gaping backlog in highway and bridge repairs while also beefing up public transportation.

Officials at the state Finance Department said that California collects 47.3 cents in excise taxes from every gallon of gas sold, and on top of that, cities reap a 2.25% local sales tax. Sales tax losses could be exacerbated by the collapse in California gas prices, which tumbled from $3.43 in March to $2.74 today for a gallon of regular gas, a price chart from the American Automobile Association shows.

Finance Department spokesman H.D. Palmer expects to get an official estimate of how much gas tax revenue the state has lost by next week, when Gov. Gavin Newsom submits his May budget revision. It will examine the impact of COVID-19 on all aspects of the state’s economy.

At this point, the state hasn’t announced cuts for any specific transportation projects. However, the slump in sales taxes could hurt transit agencies, many of which are already seeking government bailouts.

Last week, the Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission released its own report, projecting that Bay Area nonfederal transportation revenue — a mix of fuel taxes, sales taxes, bridge and road tolls, transit fares and parking fees — could plummet by 47% — or $3.5 billion — through December. By next summer, losses could grow to $4.6 billion, the report said, at which point they would likely settle at recession levels.

“This funding shortfall threatens the nearly 250,000 people employed in the surface transportation sector and threatens the Bay Area’s ability to operate and maintain our transportation network,” the report said. The shortfall could halt everything from routine bridge, road and transit maintenance to major capital projects.

Despite the projected losses, the stay-at-home orders have also yielded positive results, Shilling concluded. Traffic is light, roads and freeways are quieter, crashes are down and fewer animals are getting hit by cars. And, most notably, greenhouse gas emissions are falling.

The 75% decline in road travel and fuel use set California on track to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 40% if the trend were to stick for a year, according to the report. That’s halfway toward the state’s ambitious target of a 80% greenhouse gas reduction by 2050. Shilling acknowledged, however, that all the gains from the stay-at-home rules could evaporate after scientists release a vaccine or treatment for the coronavirus. Some transportation experts predict, further, that once the economy reopens, people will get back in their cars.

Rachel Swan is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: [email protected] Twitter: @rachelswan

Rachel Swan Follow Rachel on: https://www.facebook.com/SFChronicle/rachelswan

Rachel Swan covers transportation for The Chronicle. She joined the paper in 2015 and has also reported on politics in Oakland and San Francisco.

Previously, Rachel held staff positions at the SF Weekly and the East Bay Express, where she covered technology, law and the arts. She holds a Bachelor’s degree in rhetoric from the University of California, Berkeley.

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

Fate of Alameda County’s Measure C remains uncertain Group vows to take legal action, saying vote fell short

By PETER HEGARTY | [email protected] | Bay Area News Group PUBLISHED: May 8, 2020 at 3:19 p.m. | UPDATED: May 9, 2020 at 5:23 p.m. OAKLAND — Opponents of an Alameda County sales tax ballot measure to support children’s health care have signaled they will try to legally stop it from going into effect, arguing that the measure fell short of the votes needed to pass.

Measure C calls for a half-cent sales tax increase to pay for pediatric health care and to raise child care workers’ wages.

The half-cent sales tax measure received a majority of votes when it appeared on the March 3 primary ballot. But opponents say the state constitution requires that two-thirds of voters must approve a tax increase, which the measure did not get.

Measure C is projected to generate about $150 million annually, money that will subsidize preschool slots for low-income children, as well as expand emergency services at UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospital in Oakland — the main backer of the effort to get the initiative passed.

The measure received 287,027 yes votes, or 64.35 percent of the ballots cast, according to the Alameda County Registrar of Voters. The no votes totaled 159,046, or 35.65 percent.

The measure’s supporters argue initiatives placed on the ballot through signature-gathering, such as Measure C, need a simple majority to pass.

Legal issues around the dispute, currently pending in the state Court of Appeals, center on the interpretation of ambiguous language in a 2017 state Supreme Court ruling.

“We shall oppose the board’s brazenly illegal action to impose this $150 million per year tax hike,” said Jason Bezis, a Lafayette attorney who represents the Alameda County Taxpayers’ Association, which according to its Facebook page promotes “efficient and effective stewardship of taxpayer dollars.”

On April 21, Alameda County supervisors voted unanimously to certify the election results, including passage of Measure C.

Supervisor Wilma Chan, a prominent Measure C supporter, put the resolution to certify the results on the board’s agenda. Her resolution said, however, that the county administrator could not collect taxes from Measure C until “a final and non-appealable decision affirming the decision of the board” has been decided in the courts.

“It’s not the county’s intent to collect the tax at this time because it’s waiting for a court resolution,” Chan said during the meeting. “We don’t know exactly when we will be collecting.”

On Wednesday, Chan also said via a text that “the county doesn’t know what it might incur (financially in court costs) regarding Measure C.”

The dispute over Measure C follows a similar 2018 Alameda County measure, also aimed at supporting early childhood education, narrowly falling short of the two-thirds majority needed for approval — it got roughly 64 percent of the vote.

County supervisors had voted unanimously to place that measure on the ballot after holding community meetings and appointing a child care advisory panel.

Chan said this year’s Measure C was done as an initiative because that was how the coalition of child care providers and UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospital wanted to approach the electorate. The hospital spent $1.2 million on the campaign, including paying for signature gatherers.

The measure’s opponents maintain supervisors should not have certified that it was approved.

“The Alameda County Board of Supervisors willfully violated their official oaths when they certified passage of the Measure C sales tax increase,” Bezis said in an email. “The California constitution, through Propositions 13 and 218, requires two-thirds voter approval, which Measure C failed to attain.”

Proposition 13, backed by voters in 1978, allows a property to be reassessed for tax purposes only when it’s sold or changes hands. Among the proposition’s features is a requirement that taxes raised by local governments for a designated or special purpose be approved by two- thirds of the voters.

Proposition 218, passed in 1996, also requires any tax designated for a specific need to secure two-thirds of the vote to pass.

Measure C opponents note that the half-cent sales tax would increase the levy in much of Alameda County to 9.75 percent. It would push the tax to 10.25 percent in Alameda, Albany, Hayward, Newark, San Leandro and Union City.

Measure C would add at least $165 million to the cost of goods in Alameda County, an average of about $100 per county resident, according to a review by this news organization.

Last July, a San Francisco judge held that local taxes imposed by voter initiatives are not subject to two-thirds voter approval, a decision that Measure C supporters point to.

That case involved a 2018 initiative to increase taxes on businesses to fund homelessness services. It passed with just over 61 percent of the vote. But judges in Alameda and Fresno counties have said the Supreme Court ruling continues to require that two-thirds voter approval is needed on initiative tax measures for specific purposes.

The current Alameda County measure did not draw any organized opposition and no ballot argument against it was submitted during the March election.

If the measure is eventually successful, First 5 Alameda County would distribute the tax funds.

“Now more than ever you are seeing the importance of health care, child care, to support our families, our workforce, or communities, and to position, our children for life-long success,” Kristin Spanos, the agency’s chief executive officer, told supervisors before their unanimous vote to certify the election results.

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

LOCAL // BAY AREA & STATE Bay Area cities face grim financial outlook amid budget slashing. Here’s what they are planning to cut

Dominic Fracassa and Rachel Swan May 10, 2020 Updated: May 10, 2020 3:43 p.m.

A near empty Fourth Street retail district which is usually bustling during this lunch hour is seen on Thursday, May 7, 2020, in Berkeley, Calif. Photo: Liz Hafalia / The Chronicle

The economic fallout from the coronavirus pandemic is leaving deep scars on the budgets of Bay Area cities.

While the newest round of health orders that took effect last week across much of the region relaxed restrictions for some businesses, efforts to stop the spread of the virus by sheltering in place and shuttering most commercial activity have walloped cities across the board. Sales tax revenues have plunged, as have hotel tax receipts, and income from parking, tourism and other funding sources. That has forced cities to confront difficult, complex spending choices while dealing with a still-unfolding pandemic as pressure mounts to reopen.

Most city officials aren’t yet ready to say publicly just how deeply they’ll need to cut. But most said they’re already contemplating hiring freezes and shunting money away from nonessential capital projects to make up for the losses.

But while most city budgets are in bad shape, the effects won’t be felt equally.

In the months ahead, the downturn will exacerbate divisions between large cities and small, and between the poor and the prosperous, creating what could be a more balkanized region.

San Francisco and San Jose, bigger and wealthier, will see revenue losses that rival the worst periods of the great recession. Cities that rely more heavily on property taxes for their operating budgets will likely manage with fewer bruises. Mid-size cities like Oakland and Richmond are contemplating deep cuts that would be most harmful to working-class residents.

Before the pandemic Bay Area policymakers were taking steps to address a severe regional housing shortage. But the pandemic has spun the area back to where it was in the 2008-09 recession, shifting the focus to jobs.

And cities with fewer than 500,000 people — most Bay Area cities — are not eligible for direct aid from the federal government. In most areas stimulus money is filtered through the counties, though some counties don’t even meet the population threshold.

“It’s not clear how the money is going to flow from the counties to the cities,” said Jesse Arreguin, the mayor of Berkeley and president of the Association of Bay Area Governments, noting that the mayors of Alameda County cities recently sent a letter to the Board of Supervisors, asking for emergency funding to pay for coronavirus testing, contact tracing, protective equipment and services for the homeless.

ABAG will lobby for direct financial aid in Sacramento and Washington, D.C. Its members also have the authority to collect and distribute money from the state and federal government or from private philanthropists, and hand it over to cities.

Additionally, some officials have pitched unusual solutions, such as Alameda County Supervisor Scott Haggerty’s idea that cities could merge with their neighbors, cutting down on government bureacracy and providing a larger safety net for cities on the verge of bankruptcy. This suggestion hit resistance from leaders of small cities who would rather not be gobbled up by a larger one.

Coronavirus Pandemic

Whatever strategies the region pursue, “the economic impact is going to be felt for years,” Arreguin said.

Across the region, cities are contemplating painful service cuts through a fog of ambiguity about when the region will fully reopen. Opening too soon to rescue the collapsing economy risks a resurgence of COVID- 19 cases, adding more financial stress because many local governments would be forced to tap into reserves.

“A lot of folks are saying, ‘Open up as quickly as possible for economic reasons, for people’s jobs and tax revenue.’ But if you go too quickly, you have a second wave that could be worse in the long run for all concerned,” said Michael Coleman, an economist and expert in California municipal finance policy.

Coleman estimates California cities are already on track to lose around $7 billion in revenue, a forecast that doesn’t factor in a second wave of infections.

Getting out from under a growing ocean of red ink, Coleman said, will probably require assistance from the federal government since the state, despite its reserves, will have deficit issues of its own to contend with.

“And the state, unlike the federal government, cannot print money,” he said. “It can’t run that kind of deficit spending. It’s just a different animal.”

Window display seen at Molly B, apparel and accessories shop, with a reflection of street view on a near empty Fourth Street retail district which is usually bustling during this lunch hour on Thursday, May 7, 2020, in Berkeley, Calif. Photo: Liz Hafalia / The Chronicle Here is a rundown of 11 cities weathering the crisis:

San Francisco Even before the pandemic hit, San Francisco was staring down a $420 million budget deficit over the next two fiscal years, thanks to slowing revenue growth and rising expenses, which include salary and pension costs. But the economic effects of the shutdown have deepened the shortfall considerably. Plunging sales and hotel tax revenues have punched a hole in the budget that could grow to nearly $2 billion. The city has received $154 million from the federal CARES Act to help pay for COVID-19 testing and contact tracing, but the money can’t be used to offset revenue losses. The costs of the city’s response to the pandemic will significantly exceed that amount, officials said.

The city has already instituted a broad hiring freeze and paused nonessential capital projects like building maintenance, nonemergency tree pruning and street repaving. Deeper cuts are likely on the way, though they’re still being decided. Following the economic collapse of 2008-09, the city took similar steps: reducing services like street cleaning, and implementing hiring freezes and furloughs, and even slashing funding to HIV programs. Yet again, “everything is going to be on the table as we go through this process,” said Jeff Cretan, a spokesman for the mayor’s office.

Annual budget: $12.3 billion

Projected shortfall: $1.1 billion to $1.7 billion over its two-year budget cycle

Possible cuts: hiring freeze, service reductions

San Jose

With an annual budget of $4.5 billion, San Jose considers itself one of the financially leanest big cities in the country. “We’re on a thin margin as it is,” City Manager Dave Sykes said. “There’s not a lot of fluff in our budget, so we’ve had to learn to be efficient just for our own fiscal survival one year to the next.” Sales tax revenue has evaporated because of the economic drain that’s followed weeks of sheltering in place — the biggest hit to the city’s budget so far, Sykes said. San Jose, he said, is committed to preserving public safety services. So officials plan to hold off filling citywide vacancies as a first step to save cash. Up until the pandemic, San Jose was in the midst of a “major workforce attraction and retention strategy,” Sykes said, with a vacancy rate of more than 10% within city government.

Annual budget: $4.5 billion

Projected shortfall: $45 million in current fiscal year, $65 million in next fiscal year

Possible cuts: hiring freeze

UPS delivery notices dot the windows of a beauty shop on a near-empty Fourth Street in Berkeley, normally a bustling area during lunch hour. Photo: Liz Hafalia / The Chronicle

Redwood City

As a bedroom community where 40% of the city’s operating revenue comes from property taxes, Redwood City is fairly well positioned to weather the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite an anticipated $6 million shortfall, Redwood City officials expect to close out the fiscal year with a balanced budget, City Manager Melissa Stevenson Diaz said. To do that, the city had to postpone filling some vacant city jobs and pushed off some planned capital projects, including improvements to transportation infrastructure. While the city is still refining its projections for next fiscal year’s shortfall, Stevenson Diaz said current estimates are hovering around $10 million.

Annual budget: $158 million

Projected shortfall: $6 million loss attributable to COVID-19, but budget will be balanced this year; anticipated gap next year of $10 million

Possible cuts: hiring freeze, holding off on $2 million in transportation capital projects Sausalito

Spring marks the start of Sausalito’s tourism season, a critical time of year for the waterfront city’s economy, where sales, hotel and business taxes and parking fees account for nearly half of revenue in the $19 million general fund. But the long shadow cast by the coronavirus has crippled Sausalito’s restaurants and waterfront businesses and discouraged visitors trekking across the Golden Gate Bridge for day trips. Tourism-based revenues are projected to decline 40% in the coming fiscal year and three of the 10 largest employers in the city are restaurants. With a population of around 7,200, city officials aren’t relying on federal stimulus aid to balance the books.

Tough choices are ahead, said Mayor Susan Cleveland-Knowles.

“There is going to be pain,” she said. “A budget is inherently a document that reflects your values as a city, and we’re going to be working hard to spread the pain evenly and apply as balanced an approach as we can.” In addition to tapping reserves, Cleveland-Knowles said city residents should brace for “some reductions in programs and levels of service,” though what those will be are still being decided.

Annual budget: Adopted at $19 million; adjusted to $17.4 million

Projected shortfall: $1.6 million in current fiscal year (ending June 30), $4.9 million in next fiscal year

Possible cuts: service reductions; sharing government employees with Marin County and nearby cities, such as Mill Valley

Oakland

Faced with a revenue shortfall of roughly $120 million through the end of the next fiscal year, Oakland has instituted a hiring freeze and cut part-time, temporary employees. About 400 people were not assigned hours during the shutdown, including library aides, crossing guards and referees for sports matches, said city spokeswoman Karen Boyd. She added that the city “hopes this is temporary,” and that none of the workers have been removed from Oakland’s payroll. Tax revenues from sales, businesses, hotels and real estate transfers are expected to drop significantly, prompting the city to consider eliminating any travel and education expenses that aren’t directly related to the COVID-19 emergency. Oakland will also suffer from losses of restricted funds, such as the state gas tax, which goes to transportation projects.

“The size and scale of these revenue shortfalls is like nothing Oakland has ever before experienced,” Finance Director Adam Benson wrote in a budget report on April 21. “The point is that — absent an unexpected state or federal bailout — this problem will not be easily resolved, and it will not be fixed by tinkering at the margins. It will require significant action by city leaders.”

Annual budget: $1.6 billion

Projected shortfall: $24 million this year, $54 million next year, $42 million restricted funds

Possible cuts: travel expenses, part-time employees, hiring freeze, possible furloughs

West BerkeleyÍs sculpture named Pablo sits in front of the empty Fourth Street retail district which is usually bustling during this lunch hour on Thursday, May 7, 2020, in Berkeley, Calif. Photo: Liz Hafalia / The Chronicle

Vallejo

Before the coronavirus set in, Vallejo was on the rise. The Solano County city had clawed its way out of bankruptcy a decade ago to become an attractive nesting place for families priced out of San Francisco. Home values were appreciating, the Planning Commission was approving new development and the ferry terminal offered commuter boat service to the Financial District. The coronavirus may freeze all that progress, at least temporarily. Vallejo is staring at a $13 million shortfall in its $110 million general fund next year. Sales tax revenue has declined 12% during the shutdown and, according to a city tax consultant, may hover there for 18 months. The city has stopped hiring for all nonessential positions and may defer some infrastructure projects.

Annual budget: $110 million

Projected shortfall: $13 million

Possible cuts: hiring freeze, deferring some capital improvement projects

Berkeley Berkeley, a hippie haven dotted with million-dollar craftsman homes, sustains itself largely on property taxes. But it also relies on hotel and sales tax revenue and fees reaped from parking citations, all of which have taken a nosedive. From March through next year the city stands to lose $27.8 million, with estimated shortfalls of $2.6 million this year and $25.2 million next year. That’s 12.6% of Berkeley’s annual $200 million budget. The City Council has built up reserves over the years, and Berkeley is in a better position to weather the crisis than its neighbors, Richmond and Oakland. Nonetheless, its restaurants, shops and hotels will remain closed through May. Gas stations won’t see much business as people avoid car travel, and the city will extract little money from parking fines, since officials decided early on not to enforce parking violations other than red curbs. The city of roughly 121,000 people also has a significant homeless population of 1,108, according to last year’s count, and those street- or tent- dwellers will need additional services during the crisis, Deputy City Manager David White said.

Annual budget: $200 million

Projected shortfall: $2.6 million this year, $25.2 million next year

Possible cuts: hiring freeze, some capital projects may be deferred

Richmond

A working-class city with a Chevron petroleum refinery in its backyard, Richmond may take a harder beating than many of its larger peers. With a population of 110,00, it’s well under the 500,000 benchmark to receive funding from most federal stimulus programs. Normally, the city’s budget hovers at $176 million, but it’s facing a $7 million deficit this year and a $27 million hole next year, accounting for the projected dip in sales tax revenue, the rising cost of pensions and inflation in goods and services, said Mayor Tom Butt. He’s formed an ad hoc budget committee with two City Council members that is looking at 49 potential cuts, including closures of branch libraries, fire stations or community centers, and slashing of recreation programs. They’re trying to minimize layoffs and look closely at what services residents would lose. “When we make cuts, it has a much greater impact than in a (more prosperous) city like Orinda or Walnut Creek — and that makes it particularly painful,” Butt said. The median household income in Richmond is $64,575, and residents rely heavily on city services.

Annual budget: $176 million

Projected shortfall: $7 million this year and $27 million next year

Possible cuts: branch libraries, fire stations, recreation programs

One of the few open stores in the Fourth St. retail district included Peets coffee where barista Benjamin Kandel is seen taking orders during this lunch hour on Thursday, May 7, 2020, in Berkeley, Calif. Photo: Liz Hafalia / The Chronicle

Walnut Creek

Known for its downtown theater and shopping centers, this Contra Costa city of 70,000 residents took a big sales tax hit when the coronavirus swept in. The city normally has $92 million in its general fund, and officials had anticipated a $3.5 million surplus before the virus. When the shelter-in-place clamped down the city faced a shortfall of up to $10 million, which it patched up by cutting travel and hourly workers, and freezing vacant positions. Next year’s losses could balloon to $12 million, mostly stemming from the drop in sales tax revenue and a decline in arts and recreation — no one is renting sports fields, and the Dean Lesher Regional Center for the Arts has canceled all performances. “There’s going to be an incredibly complicated and painful discussion that we have to put together before June,” said Mayor Loella Haskew, adding that no one can quite predict how the virus will change people’s shopping habits or affect stage productions.

Annual budget: $92 million

Projected shortfall: $13 million this year but staff cuts were made to balance budget; approximately $12 million next year

Possible cuts: Hiring freeze, hourly workers cut, travel and unnecessary purchases stopped Santa Rosa

The coronavirus is the latest in a string of catastrophes to hit Santa Rosa, a North Bay city of 180,000 people, already walloped by wildfires and an acute homelessness crisis. It’s looking at losses of $74 million over six years — a significant drain for a city with an annual budget of $171 million. This year alone the city bled $12 million, and projections now show it gushing up to $20 million next year if officials don’t do something. Santa Rosa also faces other complications. Three quarter-cent sales tax measures — all aimed at generating money for public safety and keeping the city operating after wildfires — are due to expire in 2025 and 2027. And officials are struggling to prevent the spread of the coronavirus among 1,600 homeless people, many of whom are camped beneath Highway 101. Placing them in motels costs up to $250 per person, per day, according to Mayor Tom Schwedhelm, and there’s no guarantee the federal government will reimburse that money. Then there’s the likelihood of power shutoffs during the fall fire season, which could stall business for days and drain sales taxes even more. The city has a hiring freeze in effect, and its budget staff is re-examining $39 million for projects that have been approved, but not yet paid for.

Annual budget: $171 million

Projected shortfall: $12 million this year, but the city will use reserves to balance the budget; approximately $20 million next year

Possible cuts: hiring freeze, some projects stalled

Napa

Tourist season generally picks up during spring and summer in Napa, but it’s sputtered during the pandemic. Losses of $8.3 million in revenue from hotel taxes and $2.2 million from sales taxes forced the city to dip into its reserves. Next year Napa officials expect to lose between $15 million and $20 million, a sizable portion of a roughly $100 million annual budget. They have proposed cuts that include elimination of part-time employees, cancellation of community events and sports programs, new limits on police overtime, and consolidating city offices to break free from two building leases. The city would also delay buying equipment for traffic signals, storm drain inlets, building maintenance, downtown cleaning and even fire engines. In all, the city will lay off 39 people and freeze 31 vacant positions.

Annual budget: $100 million

Projected shortfall: $10 million this year, $15 million-$20 million next year

Possible cuts: hiring freeze, layoffs, sport programs and events cut, equipment purchases delayed, office leases ended

Dominic Fracassa and Rachel Swan are San Francisco Chronicle staff writers. Email: [email protected], [email protected] Twitter: @dominicfracassa, @rachelswan

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

OPINION // EDITORIALS Editorial: The pandemic is creating a $54 billion hole in state’s budget

Chronicle Editorial Board May 8, 2020 Updated: May 8, 2020 4 a.m.

After signing the 2019-2020 California state budget that included historic investments to combat the housing and affordability crises, Gov. Gavin Newsom tours an under-construction affordable housing develpment on Tuesday, July 2, 2019 in Emeryville, Calif.Photo: Liz Hafalia / The Chronicle Four months ago, California lawmakers had the enviable problem of what to do with a $21 billion surplus. Now that decision has become a nightmare as a shattered economy and emergency spending is producing a predicted shortfall of $54.3 billion.

The future may be even more bleak than that best-guess number. A recession approaching the Great Depression may linger for years. Huge outlays on virus suppression and treatment will grow. An anxious workforce may not find the same jobs offered again. A restless, cooped up population is in no mood for higher taxes.

The math behind the shortfall numbers isn’t hard to understand. Last month, the state legislators got a glimpse at the falling income when financial experts hinted at a $35 billion shortfall that’s now exploded. A cratering economy is churning out less tax revenue. At the same time, the state is obliged to spend freely on medical and jobless claims. The January budget blueprint of $222 billion now has a huge hole.

California has a hard times playbook. A decade ago it borrowed billions in the face of a recession. That debt combined with layoffs, dropped services and budget tweaks allowed the state to get by. Eventually, California voters raised taxes on the wealthy and set up a rainy day fund to handle an infamous “Wall of Debt” that ran up to $30 billion. Still, the scale and severity back then was nothing compared with a new reality: an 18% jobless rate, a choked-off business world and a cure-less virus that is still spreading.

On Thursday, Gov. Gavin Newsom begged off providing specific solutions, pledging to safeguard the state’s most vulnerable and putting out a call for more federal money as other governors have. He’s due to discuss the budget next week when fuller answers should be expected. It’s essential that he and state lawmakers get moving on an answer.

For now, his January agenda for more school money, early childhood classes and an expanded social services safety net is in tatters. Basics such as health coverage, medical equipment and unemployment costs are the inarguable top priorities.

It’s double whammy for Sacramento. As government steps in to handle an enormous crisis, it has less money to do the job. Adding to the peril is California’s top-heavy tax system that rakes in extra money in good times from the wealthy but tails off sharply when the economy slows and top earners don’t pay as much.

There are glimmers of hope. As Newsom prays, a pending federal stimulus bill could send tens of billions to California. That package is tied up in a partisan debate with Democrats urging more state level aid and Republicans concerned about the bill.

State income tax payments, postponed in April, aren’t fully counted and not due until July 15. The full tax take for better or worse won’t be known before Sacramento lawmakers finish next year’s budget by June 15.

A Democratic supermajority in the Legislature could produce quicker spending solutions. With Republicans on the sidelines, there could still be disagreements between liberal coastal lawmakers and moderates from less populated and blue collar areas. Any proposals for higher taxes could set off a party battle. California has plowed its way out of financial trouble before. It took years of recovery at enormous cost to education, services and public confidence. A terrifying pandemic is jeopardizing every resident’s health. Now it’s the state budget that’s reeling from impacts that will be hard to rein in.

This commentary is from The Chronicle’s editorial board. We invite you to express your views in a letter to the editor. Please submit your letter via our online form: SFChronicle.com/letters.

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

Coronavirus blows a $54 billion hole in California’s budget. Here are the “jaw-dropping” numbers Projected deficit nearly three times Rainy Day Fund

(AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli, Pool) FILE – In this April 9, 2020, file photo, California Gov. Gavin Newsom listens to a reporter’s question during his daily news briefing in Rancho Cordova, Calif. California’s major deal for hundreds of millions of N95 respirator masks hit a delay in its federal certification process, Gov. Gavin Newsom said Wednesday, May 6, 2020, as he promised details of the contract would soon be made public. (AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli, Pool)

By JOHN WOOLFOLK | [email protected] | Bay Area News Group PUBLISHED: May 7, 2020 at 9:26 a.m. | UPDATED: May 7, 2020 at 10:01 p.m. California’s finance department on Thursday put the economic damage of the coronavirus pandemic in stark relief, forecasting a staggering $54.3 billion hole in the state budget that’s nearly three and a half times the size of California’s “rainy day” emergency reserves.

The massive deficit marks a historic turnaround from the multi-billion dollar surplus expected at the beginning of the year, when California and the rest of the country rode high in an economy firing on all cylinders.

Gov. Gavin Newsom, who ordered the country’s first statewide stay-home order March 19 to slow the virus’ spread, hinted Wednesday at the mounting economic toll of shutting all but essential businesses.

“These numbers are jaw-dropping, and it is alarming,” Newsom said in his daily news briefing, recalling that it was just January when he announced a $6 billion budget surplus. Just how alarming? The projected $54.3 billion deficit is almost as much as the $57.1 billion California spent on K-12 schools and community colleges last year. Newsom said it approaches the $60 billion shortfall faced in 2009 with the Great Recession. Among other financial hits:

• General fund revenues, which pay for schools and colleges, health programs, prisons and other basic services, are expected to plummet by $41.2 billion below January projections. • Personal income taxes — two-thirds of general fund revenue — are expected to fall by 25.5%. Sales taxes will drop 27.2%. Corporation taxes will shrink 22.7%. • The state projects the 2020 unemployment rate will be a staggering 18% percent, 50% more than the Great Recession. • Required funding for K-12 schools and community colleges will shrink by $18.3 billion, under Proposition 98’s constitutional calculation. That’s more than twice the $8.3 billion California spent out of its general fund last year on its university systems. The report comes a week before Newsom introduces a revision from his January spending plan. The state’s 3.9% unemployment rate at the beginning of the year was one-third of the 12.3% it had sunk to at the depths of the Great Recession that followed the 2008 mortgage meltdown. The state budget was so flush it began making supplemental payments to its underfunded employee retirement plans.

The 2020-21 budget had reflected a $5.6 billion surplus, with a record level of reserves of $21 billion, including $18 billion projected in the state’s Rainy Day Fund.

The state had “hit a milestone of 120 consecutive days of job growth,” in January, Newsom said, with the “lowest unemployment in modern California history.”

“People were feeling a great amount of optimism,” Newsom said Thursday. “That was 90 days ago. Here we are today.”

The state’s projected $41.2 billion revenue drop, combined with $7.1 billion in increases for health and human services programs and other coronavirus costs totaling some $6 billion, add up to “an overall budget deficit of approximately $54.3 billion,” the report said. However, the report concludes that the projected deficit as a percent of general fund spending “is modestly smaller than the budget deficits faced by the state in 2003 and in 2009,” which it attributes to “the state’s prudent fiscal management and strong economic recovery since 2011.”

Newsom stressed that the state’s ability to patch the gaping budget holes will depend on federal aid, noting that unlike the federal government, states are required to balance their budgets and don’t have a “printing press” for dollar bills”.

“This moment requires a historic partnership between states and our federal government,” Newsom said. “We are very grateful for the support we’ve already received. … But sadly, the enormity of this situation requires even more support.”

UC Berkeley labor economist Sylvia A. Allegretto agreed and said President Trump’s recent tweet suggesting that states such as California align with his policies before they qualify for aid could worsen the economic damage by making it hard to keep law enforcement, firefighters, teachers and others on the payroll. “I think the narrative out of Washington, D.C., is unfortunate and wrong,” Allegretto said. “We did bail out bad actors during the Great Recession — banks and those on Wall Street — and that wasn’t a problem. Now we aren’t going to save state budgets?”

But Senate Republican Leader Shannon Grove, R-Bakersfield, said “this devastating budget forecast is an unfortunate consequence” of Newsom’s “one size-fits-all” stay-home order “that strangled businesses throughout California.”

Economists note that the coronavirus pandemic is a very different hit to the economy than the Great Recession or dot-com bust.

Christopher Thornberg, founding partner of Beacon Economics, is more bullish on a quick recovery, noting that businesses were simply told to temporarily stop operating and are not slashing their workforces because they are failing.

“In no way, shape or form is the Great Recession a metaphor for what’s happening today,” Thornberg said, noting that in recent months personal savings rates have soared, suggesting “enormous” pent-up demand to spend and re-launch the economy. “It’s not going to be that bad. I think it’s going to be short, but sharp. We’re coming back strong and we’re all going to be fine.”

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

PUBLIC LANDS Could outdoors bills get an inside track in stimulus? Jennifer Yachnin, E&E News reporter Published: Thursday, May 7, 2020

Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) on Capitol Hill earlier this year. He's looking to add natural resources legislation to future stimulus or infrastructure legislation. Francis Chung/E&E News

Advocacy groups are pushing Congress to incorporate a variety of public lands bills into the next iteration of stimulus funds aimed at curbing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

A host of state and local officials, along with industry groups and environmental advocates, fired off public pleas to congressional leaders yesterday, hoping to roll legislation addressing issues including public lands maintenance and outdoor access into stimulus legislation.

Several of the missives targeted S. 3422, the main conservation package that has been sidelined by the public health crisis.

The "Great American Outdoors Act," sponsored by Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo) and Energy and Natural Resources ranking member Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), would fully fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund and address the maintenance backlog at national parks and on public lands. Among those pushing is a group of more than 100 local elected officials organized by the Mountain Pact. The organization focuses on economic and environmental issues in Western communities.

"In the weeks and months to come, our nation's parks, trails, and outdoor spaces will be integral to our nation's coping and recovery. Great parks and green spaces make stronger, healthier communities," the mayors and other officials wrote in their letter.

"Everyone deserves access to the outdoors and the countless benefits parks provide. America's public lands bring us peace of mind and generate economic revenue — both will be critically needed to recover from the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak," they continued.

The Outdoor Recreation Roundtable, which represents the outdoor recreation industry, authored a similar letter, asserting that the bill's adoption would help keep small businesses afloat and benefit rural communities that serve as gateways to many public lands units (E&E Daily, May 6).

The Outdoor Alliance for Kids, an umbrella organization that includes the Sierra Club, the Trust for Public Land and the North Face among its membership, said the legislation could also help to alleviate potential crowding on public lands as quarantine restrictions are loosened across the nation.

"We urge you to prioritize federal programs that connect children, youth and families with the outdoors and provide relief to state and local governments to enable them to provide essential services like access to nature and the outdoors," OAK's membership wrote in its appeal. The umbrella group also endorsed H.R. 4273, the "Transit to Trails Act," to improve outdoor access, and "H.R. 4512, the "Outdoors for All Act."

A spokeswoman for Montana Sen. Steve Daines (R), who co-sponsored the Gardner-Manchin package, said the lawmaker is working to include the measure in the next round of stimulus, or will attempt to move it as a stand-alone bill.

"Senator Daines is pushing to get his bipartisan bill, the 'Great American Outdoors Act,' on the Senate floor as stand-alone or part of phase four — whatever avenue opens and moves the fastest," said Daines spokeswoman Katie Schoettler.

In remarks on the Senate floor yesterday, Gardner likewise called for the passage of the legislation as a way to address fallout from the coronavirus pandemic.

"We should fully and permanently fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund and put funding toward our deferred maintenance projects across our federal lands that we all cherish so much," Gardner said.

"That would create immediate jobs, building roads and maintaining trails, and creating the kind of job opportunities that many of our high-mountain towns desperately need as a result of this health emergency and now economic emergency."

Both Republicans and Democrats had talked about infrastructure provisions in the next stimulus, but leaders then talked down that idea, leaving it for down the road. House Democrats also appear to be setting aside their green wish list for more pressing priorities, like aid to states (E&E Daily, May 6).

But a flurry of letters from numerous companies, trade groups and advocates this week alone shows everything may be in play.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said yesterday that there have been "numerous discussions" among leaders, Democratic committee chairs and outside interest groups about policies for inclusion in a recovery package under assembly.

"We've been hard at work on this for a number of weeks," he told reporters on a conference call. Pressed on timing, Hoyer said, "It could be as early as next week."

Reporter Geof Koss contributed. Twitter: @jenniferyachninEmail: [email protected]

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

Capitol Alert California can’t cope with its budget deficit without federal help, Gavin Newsom says

BY ANDREW SHEELER

MAY 07, 2020 02:40 PM , UPDATED MAY 07, 2020 02:55 PM

Newsom announces many stores can reopen from coronavirus lockdown this week

California Governor Gavin Newsom said at a press conference on May 4, 2020 that some stores will be able to reopen from coronavirus restrictions on Friday, with modifications. BY CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR

California Governor Gavin Newsom said at a press conference on May 4, 2020 that some stores will be able to reopen from coronavirus restrictions on Friday, with modifications. BY CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR California Gov. Gavin Newsom said he was confident Thursday that the state will work through a state budget deficit now estimated at $54.3 billion. But he said his optimistic outlook is conditioned on one thing: “More federal support.”

The governor said additional federal spending will be critical for California to pull its way out of the recession’s effect on the state’s spending plan.

“It is absolutely incumbent upon our federal partners to recognize, as many do ... the magnitude of this moment and how it’s directly related to COVID-19, not mismanagement,” Newsom said.

On Tuesday, President Donald Trump tweeted that “well run States should not be bailing out poorly run States, using CoronaVirus as the excuse! The elimination of Sanctuary Cities, Payroll Taxes, and perhaps Capital Gains Taxes, must be put on the table. Also lawsuit indemnification & business deductions for restaurants...”

Newsom sought to make that case that California had managed its finances well until the coronavirus hit.

The governor pointed out that just 90 days ago, he was projecting a budget surplus of $6 billion.

Newsom said that 4.3 million people have filed for unemployment insurance since March 12, with almost $12 billion worth of unemployment checks sent since March 15.

“Because of this pandemic, because of what it has done, these revenue shortfalls are bigger even than the state of California,” he said. “We need the federal government to recognize this.”

Newsom said he is very grateful for the bipartisan support that California has already received, “but sadly, the enormity of this moment requires even more support.”

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

May. 6, 2020 2:53 PM EDT Emerging Virus Aid Bill Aims To Help Cities, Postal Service

By ANDREW TAYLOR Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Although timing for the House's return isn't set, the outlines are emerging for a Democratic-driven bill to aid states and local governments, the Postal Service, and boost contact tracing to track the coronavirus.

Democratic leaders promise that the House will deliver legislation to help state and local governments through the COVID-19 crisis as early as next week, though the measure is still being drafted by committee chairs and party leaders like Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. No. 2 House Democrat Steny Hoyer said Wednesday that party leadership is hoping for bipartisan backing for the upcoming bill, the fifth effort to respond to the devastation COVID-19 has delivered to the economy and U.S. life. Ultimately, it'll take arduous bipartisan negotiations to produce a bill but the right dynamic hasn't caught fire yet.

Hoyer said he backs $500 billion in aid to state and local governments with a supplemental aid package for smaller cites left out of previous aid bills. He said the measure would bail out the Postal Service, contain funding for absentee voting this fall, and other priorities like advanced tracing to monitor the virus as states try to open up without sparking a second wave.

Hoyer said the House won't return to Washington until there is a vote on the next coronavirus bill, saying “it could be as early as next week.”

For now, the House is staying away because of the pandemic, although the GOP-controlled Senate is open. Republicans there face internal divisions over spending and how ambitious to be in the upcoming round to respond to Depression-era jobless levels.

Some Republicans such as Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah and a group of GOP governors want to be more generous to states confronting furloughs and cuts to services as revenues plummet and unemployment insurance and other costs spike.

But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Tuesday it's time to push “pause” on more aid legislation — even as he repeated a “red line” demand that any new aid package include liability protections for hospitals, health care providers and businesses operating and reopening.

Senate Republicans also dislike President Donald Trump's demand for a cut to Social Security payroll taxes as a salve for the economy. Many lawmakers think the payroll tax cut is a bad idea because it only boosts paychecks but doesn't help people thrown out of a job.

“We haven’t had any discussion of that” on the tax-writing Finance Committee, panel Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said Wednesday. “And I think I better wait till I talk to my colleagues.”

Trump is encouraging states to reopen and Republicans hope the gradual comeback will kick-start the economy, reducing the pressure for more pricey aid.

Trump took to Twitter on Tuesday with a repackaged set of demands.

“Well run States should not be bailing out poorly run States, using CoronaVirus as the excuse! The elimination of Sanctuary Cities, Payroll Taxes, and perhaps Capital Gains Taxes, must be put on the table," Trump tweeted.

Romney on Tuesday urged his colleagues to pass additional state aid, with a chart titled “Blue states aren't the only ones who are screwed,” based on Moody's Analytics data showing Louisiana, Missouri, Florida, Kansas, and Kentucky competing with New York and New Jersey and the states facing the worst revenue shortfalls.

Details on the package are a ways away, but it's likely to be anchored by money for state and local governments, including smaller cities. Business interests are pushing hard for additional operating subsidies and relief from COVID-19-related lawsuits. Senate Republicans are frustrated by a negotiating dynamic on previous bills that empowered Democrats and sent costs spiraling. But they’re reluctant to unleash federal funds beyond the nearly $3 trillion Congress has already approved for virus relief.

Grassley, for instance, said that “I don't think we ought to right now decide that there is going to be a phase 4.”

Ultimately, the legislation is likely to be shaped most by a familiar quartet of congressional leaders including Pelosi and McConnell and top Trump administration officials like Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin. But getting talks to critical mass can be a tricky, arduous process given the web of rivalries and internal party considerations involved. Trump's political fortunes and a spate of bad GOP polling adds new uncertainty.

For her part, Pelosi recognizes that any bill drafted by Democrats will need more thorough culling than early Democratic efforts, which came under GOP attack for easy-to-criticize items like aid to Washington, D.C.'s Kennedy Center and material taken from the so-called Green New Deal.

Pelosi advised her colleagues in a caucus-wide call this week to think big — but be realistic, reminding them that Democrats will have to dial things down.

“I think all of us are going to get our papers graded in November based on how we responded. This is going to be the dominant issue in every election in the country," Cornyn said.

A freshman Republican senator, Missouri's Josh Hawley, said: “If we enter a long-term recession or depression, the concerns we have about deficit spending now are going to look like a walk in the park."

One idea gaining traction among Republicans is to allow greater flexibility on $150 billion in aid that's already been delivered to states and larger cities. That money is supposed to be used to pay for COVID-19 response, but governors in some states won't be able to use it all for that purpose and want to use it to make up for revenues lost as the country slides into recession.

___

Associated Press writers Lisa Mascaro and Kevin Freking contributed to this report.

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

Opinion: California faces pensions, budget, fires after COVID-19 Former state Controller Steve Westly says leaders should think now about how to solve post- pandemic challenges By STEVE WESTLY |

PUBLISHED: May 7, 2020 at 6:10 a.m. | UPDATED: May 7, 2020 at 6:15 a.m.

No state is better positioned for success than California. We’ve built world-class universities that made California the global innovation leader. Our companies drive the world’s imagination and have created job growth and the tax base for a $215 billion budget that is the envy of nations.

But as the COVID-19 pandemic drives the global economy into recession, Californians would be smart to start thinking now about how to solve challenging problems looming on our horizon. That includes the state budget, public employee pension costs and fire protection.

Experiencing the longest growth period in stock market history, California lawmakers expanded the state budget at an equally torrid pace, from $146 billion in 2008 to $215 billion in 2020. Yet our health care systems appear understaffed to deal with the coronavirus—just as our firefighters were overwhelmed by the historic fires we faced last fall.

Because of the recession, the state’s budget is likely to drop by 20% next year making it even harder to provide basic social services including health care. Facing a recession, and already having one of the highest state tax rates in the country, new taxes will likely be off the table. It’s clearly time for an honest assessment of our spending priorities.

Nobody likes to think about pensions because they’re complicated, boring and operate on a generational timeline. For legislators and constitutional officers, if things don’t work out, it will likely be someone else’s problem. California’s three main pension funds — CalPERS, CalSTRS and the UC Retirement Plan — manage over $700 billion. But, given the global market downturn, those three funds may soon be short by over 40% of what they should have.

If there is a pension shortfall, local governments and California taxpayers are responsible for paying the obligation. A 40% shortfall is more than the entire annual state budget.

No one is suggesting that the state renege on commitments to retired state workers. But the state should have the ability to reevaluate future accruals for new and current employees to ensure the long-term solvency of the fund. Today, an arcane California Supreme Court ruling called the “California Rule” prevents the state from being able to manage its future pension commitments. The Supreme Court on Tuesday heard arguments in a case that could lead to reevaluation of the California Rule. There are no easy answers here, but the governor and the pension boards need to start making tough decisions now about how to stabilize pensions, while protecting public services in the future.

Deficits and unfunded liabilities are only part of the challenge ahead. While reduced carbon emissions are a silver lining of this pandemic, California is still looking at a serious drought this fall, one that will likely lead to even larger fires this October.

Because this is the new normal in California, we need to readjust our budget priorities to invest more in fire protection technology and staffing, including directing our utilities to place more lines underground, especially in high-risk fire zones. It won’t be cheap — and will almost certainly be passed onto taxpayers, ratepayers or developers.

But San Diego Gas and Electric began doing so in its territory and has largely avoided the size and scope of fires that Southern California Edison and PG&E have faced. As we contemplate a smaller state budget and increasingly pension obligations, we need to remember our commitment to providing safe, stable power to the world’s fifth largest economy.

The COVID-19 virus has created a global crisis, but we know how to solve it. By closing schools, having people work from home and increasing testing, we can slow the virus. But bigger, man-made problems will determine our future. One thing we can learn from the coronavirus is that if we face up to our problems sooner, we can keep them from becoming tragic ones later.

Steve Westly served as California state controller from 2003-7. He is a former vice president with eBay, former Tesla board member and founder of The Westly Group, a sustainability venture capital firm.

Board Legislative Committee May 22, 2020

PUBLIC LANDS Outdoor group bets on conservation bill to spur rural economy Jennifer Yachnin, E&E News reporter Published: Wednesday, May 6, 2020

Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) is sponsoring a conservation package sidelined by pandemic concerns. Francis Chung/E&E News

Outdoor recreation advocates are pressing Congress to take up a major conservation package sidelined by the COVID-19 pandemic, saying the legislation is key to keeping their industry afloat amid continued quarantines nationwide.

The Outdoor Recreation Roundtable released a letter to House and Senate leaders today urging Congress to act on S. 3422, the "Great American Outdoors Act."

The measure, which would fully fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund and address the maintenance backlog at national parks and on public lands, saw its momentum stall this spring as efforts to curb the novel coronavirus pandemic took precedence (E&E Daily, April 27).

But the industry group, which represents 31 national trade associations, asserts the bill is now needed to support small businesses and rural communities that serve as gateways to key public lands.

"Through full funding of the Land and Water Conservation Fund, this bill would provide certainty for communities who are eager to invest in close-to-home park infrastructure, create opportunities for public access to the outdoors, and support the recreation economy," Executive Director Jessica Wahl said in a statement. She added, "This will have a long-term economic impact on rural communities and will increase the outdoor experience tremendously once the worst of the pandemic is over."

The outdoor industry accounts for 2.2% of gross domestic product, generating about $778 billion in output annually.

But the group told Congress that about 90% of outdoor businesses are small companies, "and they have been devastated by this pandemic." The letter cites an industry survey that found 79% of businesses had laid off or furloughed employees.

"Our retailers, apparel and gear manufacturers, outfitters and guides, and outdoor hospitality businesses are experiencing unprecedented downturns and many will never reopen again — particularly if we don't act now," the letter states.

The letter urges lawmakers to take up the legislation as a stand-alone bill or as part of a stimulus package.

Twitter: @jenniferyachninEmail: [email protected]

Board Legislative Committee Attachment III May 22, 2020

POLITICS California legislators return for grim session upended by coronavirus

Dustin Gardiner and Alexei Koseff May 4, 2020 Updated: May 4, 2020 9:46 a.m.

Assemblyman Phil Ting, D-San Francisco, hosts a virtual town hall during the coronavirus pandemic. Ting spoke with constituents April 29 from his home in the Sunset neighborhood. Photo: Courtesy Phil Ting

SACRAMENTO — Legislators return to the state Capitol on Monday for the first time in nearly two months, confronting an urgent need to deal with coronavirus legislation and a formidable budget deficit.

They must handle bills ranging from compensation for sick essential workers to planning for a November election that’s likely to be done mostly by mail. They also must work with Gov. Gavin Newsom to address a shortfall that could total $35 billion. And they don’t have much time to get it all done. They must pass a balanced budget by June 15 or go without pay, and will have only a couple of months after that to consider other bills before the legislative session is scheduled to end.

Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon said he is resisting calls to focus only on coronavirus response. The Assembly returns Monday, while the Senate has extended its recess one more week.

There will be fewer bills, as members triage their legislative platforms and committee chairs pare hearing agendas. But California still faces problems that existed before the pandemic, Rendon said, including the lack of affordable housing, widespread homelessness, climate change and lack of access to clean water in some parts of the state.

The impacts of the coronavirus will be all-encompassing, however, including a budget process likely to extend to the end of the session in August as the Legislature deliberates cuts.

“As a Democrat, I believe in an activist government. As a Democrat, I believe that government can help us solve problems,” said Rendon, D-Lakewood (Los Angeles County). “Californians need us more now than ever.”

Here are the most pressing coronavirus-related problems the Legislature will confront:

Budget deficit: Lawmakers must immediately get to work on a multibillion-dollar deficit the pandemic has created. The surplus and rainy-day reserve that California built up in recent years will help, but won’t eliminate the problem.

Newsom and lawmakers will probably have to abandon many progressive policy goals and pass a placeholder budget in June that continues current spending levels. Then, they’ll have to start cutting.

Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, the San Diego Democrat who chairs the powerful Appropriations Committee, said legislators have been told to be selective in proposing bills.

“We’re got to be realistic about how we look at all the bills coming forward,” she said. “We said, ‘Re-examine what you’re sending,’ for a variety of reasons.”

Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins, D-San Diego, said the pandemic has shifted the focus of the session from the legislative agenda to the budget, which she hopes can “help those who have been devastated and hurt.”

“The budget is the single most important tool that we have in California to impact lives,” she said. “We’ve got a lot of work to do in short order and we want to be focused and we want to be thoughtful.” The legislative analyst warned last month that the pandemic could blow a $35 billion hole in next year’s budget, with additional losses of $85 billion in the years that follow. Newsom must release a revised spending plan this month, and he has warned that numerous cuts are on the table.

Assemblyman Phil Ting, the San Francisco Democrat who chairs the Budget Committee, said lawmakers will consider asking voters to issue bonds to fund infrastructure projects to stimulate the economy.

Otherwise, he said, the state cannot borrow money and is largely dependent on the federal government to fund recovery programs.

“That is the challenge,” Ting said.

Voting by mail: The likelihood that the pandemic will still be here this fall has fueled calls for a vote-by-mail November election to prevent crowding at polling places.

Assemblyman Marc Berman, D-Palo Alto, has led the push. His AB860 would require elections officials to mail a ballot to every registered voter in California.

Most people already vote by mail — about 78% of voters did so in the March primary. Berman’s bill would make that nearly universal, though he said the state should allow for a limited number of polling places, with social distancing guidelines.

“Hopefully, we don’t have a second phase (of the pandemic), but we need to plan as if there will be,” Berman said.

Berman said his effort has drawn no organized opposition, though he expects it could cost the state several million dollars.

Rent and mortgage relief: California judicial officials have halted evictions and some foreclosures until 90 days after Newsom ends the stay-at-home order. But legislators say they want to cement those protections in state law and go further.

Ting has proposed AB828 to freeze evictions and allow courts to set up repayment plans so tenants can stay in their homes. He said he is considering seeking a ban on rent increases during the pandemic.

Assemblyman David Chiu, D-San Francisco, who carried legislation last year that established a statewide cap on rent increases, said “the support for the plight of tenants has only grown” during the pandemic, but that California will “very likely need federal assistance” to pay for any program to prevent mass evictions of those who have fallen behind on their rent. “It has certainly continued to shine a bright light on the precarious situation for tenants in our state,” Chiu said.

Compensation for frontline workers: Employees on the front lines of the pandemic could have an easier time securing workers’ compensation benefits under a proposed bill.

Essential workers who contract the coronavirus now must prove they were infected on the job in order to qualify for workers’ compensation and have their employer pay for costs associated with the illness.

AB664 by Gonzalez and Assemblyman Jim Cooper, D-Elk Grove (Sacramento County), would put the burden on employers to prove a worker wasn’t exposed on the job.

“It would be tough for an individual worker to show that they were infected on the job. Until we’re doing tracing, that would be hard to prove,” Gonzalez said.

The effort is supported by labor unions, but it’s likely to face opposition from businesses that say they’re already under an existential economic strain.

The Workers’ Compensation Insurance Rating Bureau of California, an association of insurance companies, estimates that claims from essential workers with the coronavirus would cost $2.2 billion to $33.6 billion a year if the bill passes.

Expanding paid sick leave: Democratic lawmakers will propose legislation to close loopholes in federal and state law to ensure all workers have at least two weeks of paid sick leave during the pandemic.

Newsom signed an executive order April 16 requiring large companies to give food sector employees such as farmworkers, grocery store clerks and delivery drivers paid time off if they contract the virus or are quarantined.

His order partly closed a loophole in Congress’ coronavirus response, which requires businesses to provide sick leave during the pandemic unless they have more than 500 employees.

California legislators said they want to require two weeks for all workers, not just those covered by Newsom’s order. California law now requires three paid sick days for all employees.

Assemblyman Rob Bonta, D-Oakland, said expanding sick leave could help slow the spread of the virus, by removing the economic incentive for sick workers to show up. “We need to make people comfortable to make public health decisions and not have that pressure to go to work sick,” he said.

Help for farmworkers: Legislators will debate a package of bills to provide relief for agricultural workers and prevent disruption to California’s food supply chain.

The primary bill, AB2915, would provide farmworkers with paid sick leave, hazard pay, child care assistance and temporary housing to prevent overcrowding. Another bill, AB2956, would give farming companies a tax credit to pay overtime in an effort to combat a labor shortage.

Dustin Gardiner and Alexei Koseff are San Francisco Chronicle staff writers. Email: [email protected], [email protected] Twitter: @dustingardin er, @akoseff