DOCSLIB.ORG

Post-Retirement Earnings Limit for Fiscal Year 2002-2003 Was Raised to Yields Findings $24,934

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Post-Retirement Earnings Limit for Fiscal Year 2002-2003 Was Raised to Yields Findings $24,934 winter 2003 SEMIANNUAL NEWSLETTER FOR CALIFORNIA STATE TEACHERS’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM BENEFIT RECIPIENTS Post-Retirement Teachers Earnings Limit Set Health Study on january 1, the post-retirement earnings limit for fiscal year 2002-2003 was raised to Yields Findings $24,934. with help from calstrs, nearly 133,500 female The earnings If you go over the limit in any fiscal teachers from california limit is applied year, your retirement benefit will be have been participating in the to public school reduced dollar for dollar by the ongoing California Teachers employment excess amount. Study. The study, organized by only; there is a consortium of scientists from There are several exemptions to the no earnings the California State Depart- limit. These exemptions have limit for ment of Health Services and various sunset dates, so be sure to employment universities throughout Califor- check the exemptions each year. outside public nia, seeks to enhance under- You may be exempt if you: schools. Keep in mind, however, standing of breast cancer that extra service such as teaching L retired on or before January 1, causes and prevention. summer school and intersession 2000, and teach in grades K–12 In this phase of the study, the started counting toward the limit in or participate in certain teacher research team confirmed: July 2002. preparation programs L Teachers have higher than This change is the result of new retired on or before July 1, 2000, expected rates of breast, legislation. SB 1983 by Senator and provide direct remedial endometrial and ovarian Soto, signed into law in September instruction to students in grades cancers, melanoma, lym- 2000, changed the basis for calcu- 2–12 phoma and leukemia and, lating the post-retirement earnings L return to CalSTRS-covered to an extent, thyroid limit from the All Urban California employment after a break in cancers. Consumer Price Index to the service of 12 or more consecu- increase in the average earnable tive months Teachers have low rates of salary of active members. With L fill an administrative position for cancers of the lung and teacher salaries increasing more up to one-half of the full-time cervix, and they have about quickly than the CCPI, the effect equivalent that is vacant because the same rates of colon will likely be higher post-retirement of an unanticipated emergency cancer as other California earnings caps in the future. situation women. continued on page 10 continued on page 6 CEO Notes BY JACK EHNES, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER contribution retirement plans reason for the most recent stock Who do you because these types of plans depend market decline is lack of investor trust? on the amounts held in each confidence because of scandals and individual’s account. These pension bankruptcies of major companies. calstrs moves forward in the plan benefits are market sensitive In fact, several of those incidences aftermath of corporate scan- and can rise or fall with economic have affected the portfolio. CalSTRS’ dals and financial market cycles. losses in Enron totaled about $47.5 setbacks million and losses in WorldCom Who can you trust? Not an easy Your Benefit is Not Affected about $263 million. While that’s a question to answer these days. Remember that your retirement small part of the $94 billion portfo- Lately our newspapers are filled plan is different from these defined lio, CalSTRS is aggressively pursu- with stories of corporate misdeeds. contribution plans. CalSTRS pro- ing financial market reforms and vides a defined benefit program, actively supporting passage of The impact of recent news is of which provides lifetime benefits federal legislation to ensure corpo- course not just interesting Sunday guaranteed by law and is never rate accountability. reading. Our financial markets have affected by economic cycles. been shaken to their core, and we Trust and integrity must be rebuilt are faced with an aftermath that has Benefit Enhancements are in the marketplace before the stock affected the financial resources of Unlikely market can fully recover. We have millions of Americans. Just as That said—a stock market decline an active voice in Washington to serious, recent events have raised does affect CalSTRS. When pension advocate our financial interests in fundamental questions about trust funds develop assets that exceed these corporate accounting reform in corporate America. their liabilities, benefit enhance- debates. We also unfortunately ments often follow. With pension recognize that there are times that Impacts of Recent Market plans throughout the country now we must litigate to pursue recovery Downturn facing reduced assets, it is unlikely of the system’s funds. In one such It’s not news to you that a market that benefit enhancements can be high profile case, the courts have downturn means that your personal added for some time unless more named CalSTRS as lead plaintiff in investments, such as IRAs, 401(k)s money is contributed to CalSTRS. the class action lawsuit against or 403(b)s, have lost value. This is Homestore.Com, a California-based truly an unfortunate setback to CalSTRS Is Involved in Market company. Recently, the Justice everyone’s overall retirement in- Reforms Department secured guilty pleas come. Most affected are private CalSTRS is doing its part to help the from three key Homestore execu- sector employees who have defined market strengthen again. One continued on page 3 page 2 retired educator CEO NOTES cont. from page 2 We also know that we have no other We will be communicating this motives than to serve you. Our mission loudly throughout tives for their roles in a scheme to products are designed simply and CalSTRS, to our membership and fraudulently inflate the earnings of solely for your retirement benefit our business partners. In these days the company. with no hidden charges. This means of financial insecurity and mis- that we must protect your retirement deeds, we must sustain your trust assets with the utmost care and that CalSTRS will always serve your The CalSTRS Mission diligence. But trust must be earned, interests. Amidst this discussion of trust, I not just talked about. I pledge to you want to take a moment to discuss that all of us at CalSTRS will make CalSTRS’ mission. You might think this mission part of our daily respon- our mission is obvious—it’s to pay sibility in serving you. benefits. That certainly is one of our Jack Ehnes core responsibilities, but we see our relationship to you in much broader terms. The Teachers’ Retirement Board has developed the following mission statement: Who Do You Trust? Securing the financial future A recent USA Today/CNN/Gallup Poll (July 2002) asked, “Which and sustaining the trust of groups do you trust? California’s educators. The answers should be of no surprise to you. Teachers were rated To us at CalSTRS, this is a very very highly with an 84 percent rating. The bottom? Corporate CEOs powerful statement. We see our and HMO execs (23 percent and 20 percent respectively). Here’s responsibility in fulfilling this as the breakdown: advocating, developing, delivering and communicating a variety of More than 500 adults were asked which groups they trusted financial products and services to Catholic priests 45% provide a strong foundation for Teachers 84% your retirement. We will look to People who run Rich people 43% you for guidance as to how we can small businesses 75% continuously improve our service Journalists 38% Military officers 73% and offer new services that meet Government officials 26% your needs in these changing times. Police officers 71% We recognize that some of our Lawyers 25% members prefer face-to-face or Coaches of youth sports 68% Stockbrokers 23% telephone communications while Protestant ministers 66% others would prefer self-service CEOs of large corporations 23% through our Web site. Our mission Doctors 66% Managers of HMOs 20% statement says that no matter the delivery system, you come first, not Accountants 51% what is easier for us. Professional athletes 48% Source USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll, July 5-8, 2002 winter 2003 page 3 New CalSTRS Web Site Makes Its Debut Click on www.calstrs.ca.gov to see the changes Stop by to see the new and improved CalSTRS Web site. You’ll see some dramatic changes as the site takes a leap forward in graphic presentation, navigational ease and readability. Use the drop-down menu to access each section more quickly. And don’t forget to visit the site from time to time to look for future improvements! Here’s the path for information of interest to retired CalSTRS members and benefit recipients. About CalSTRS Members DEFINED BENEFIT PROGRAM • Retirement Benefits • Disability Benefits Forms & Publications • Survivor Benefits • Working After Retirement • Reading Your 1099R • Glossary FAQs HOME LOAN PROGRAM • Program Summary • Approved Lenders • Interest Rates MEDICARE PREMIUM PAYMENT PROGRAM • Program Information • Program Forms • Related Sites TELETALK Need a CalSTRS form? You can now order forms by e-mail. Click on the Forms & Publications link on the Web site, then select the forms ordering button. Type in your name, shipping address and the number of forms you need. Ordering by phone is easy, too. Call 800-228-5453 and select option 3. page 4 retired educator New Law Allows Change to Option 6 and 7 Option Beneficiary when you retired, did you When Can You Change Your • if you get married after your select options 6 or 7? If so, there Option Beneficiary? retirement and had previously is a new law that started January 1 Once you retire, you can only chosen an unmodified allowance you should know about. change your option beneficiary For more information about chang- under the following four circum- Now under Options 6 and 7 if your ing your option beneficiary, listen to stances: option beneficiary dies before you Teletalk messages 369, 370 and do, you can name a new option • if your option beneficiary dies 378 by calling 800-228-5453 and choosing option 3.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Roper Center Archives Update September, 2006
    Roper Center Archives Update September, 2006 Where thinking people go to learn what people are thinking. Roper Center Archives Update September, 2006 Highlights: ¾ Pew Research Center Poll: The Right to Die, II interviews where conducted November 9-27, 2005 by Princeton Survey Research Associates International. ¾ Los Angeles Times California Primary Election Exit Poll on June 6, 2006. ¾ Pew Research Center’s January and February 2006 News Interest Index. ¾ 4 new SRBI/Time Magazine Polls conducted from June to August 2006. Roper Center Archives Update September, 2006 New Studies United States -- National adult samples Study Title: Hart-McInturff/NBC/WSJ Poll # 2005-6053: Politics/News Stories/Schiavo Case/Tax Cuts/Social Security/Iraq/The Pope/Immigration/Steroids Study #: USNBCWSJ2005-6053 Methodology: Survey by: NBC News and The Wall Street Journal Conducted by Hart and McInturff Research Companies, March 31-April 3, 2005, and based on telephone interviews with a National adult sample of 1,002. Variables: 104 Topical Coverage: Direction of the country (1); George W. Bush job performance (3); Congress job performance (1); ranking feelings about public figures (6); Republican Party job performance (1); ; roles Democrats in Congress should play (1); filibuster for judicial nominations (2); federal government role in morals and values (1); congressional action on certain issues (11); subjects in the news (11); Terri Schiavo (8); tax cuts (1); Social Security (9); Social Security vs. Medicare (1); war in Iraq (3); influence of Pope and Catholic Church (4); immigration (4); military threats to the United States (8); baseball fan (1); baseball players using steroids (2); stocks vs. real estate investments (1).
    [Show full text]
  • How Voters Rate the Governor and Props. 74-77
    How voters rate the governor and Props. 74-77 Among likely voters: Q. If the November 2005 special election were being held today, how would you vote for these initiatives? Proposition 74: increases the probationary period for public school Yes 45% teachers from two to five years and modifies the process by which school boards can dismiss a teaching employee who receives two consecutive No 47% unsatisfactory performance evaluations. Fiscal impact: it will have an unknown net effect on school districts' costs for teacher compensation, Don’t know 8% performance evaluations, and other activities. Proposition 75: prohibits public employee unions from using dues for Yes 40% political contributions without each individual employee's prior consent. It excludes contributions benefiting charities or employees. It requires the No 51% unions to maintain and upon request report member political contributions to the Fair Political Practices Commission. Fiscal impact: probably minor Don’t know 9% state and local government implementation costs which may potentially be offset in part by revenues from fines and/or fees. Proposition 76: limits state spending to the prior year's level, plus three Yes 31% previous years' average revenue growth. It changes minimum school funding requirements which were set by Proposition 98. It permits the No 60% governor, under specified circumstances, to reduce budget appropriations of the governor's choosing. Fiscal impact: state spending will likely be Don’t know 9% reduced relative to current law due to additional spending limits and due to new powers granted to the governor. Reductions could apply to schools and could shift costs to other local governments.
    [Show full text]
  • COIN Invites You to Participate in Its COVID Recovery Webinar, a Two
    COIN invites you to participate in its COVID Recovery Webinar, a two-hour online session where we will present six investment opportunities, all of which help vulnerable, under-capitalized communities across California recover from the disproportionate impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. Webinar presentations will be split into two segments of COIN approved Investment Bulletins: one segment on investments that support affordable housing opportunities, and the other on investments that benefit small businesses in underserved communities. COIN COVID Recovery Webinar Topic: Investments to Support Affordable Housing & Small Business Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2021 Time: 10am – 12 noon Pacific Time Listed below, please see the full agenda and speaker bios for further webinar details. To Register for the webinar and receive the virtual event link, please RSVP to COIN at [email protected]. To see the full list of approved COIN Investment Bulletins, all of which provide benefits to underserved communities and the environment, reach out to COIN at [email protected], to request an account on the COIN Impact Investment Marketplace. We look forward to your participation. Best Regards, Sukh Randhawa Chief, California Organized Investment Network COIN Webinar: Environmental & Infrastructure Investments September 22, 2021 10:00 am – 1:00 pm PST AGENDA Opening Remarks 10:00 - 10:15 am Sukh Randhawa, Chief, COIN – An update on the status of California Senate Bill, SB 1511 (Rubio), a bill to expand the “Leeway Law” for insurer holdings of COIN-qualified Schedule BA investments Moderator: Ophir Bruck, Senior Specialist, United Nations-supported Principles for Responsible Investments (UNPRI), and Member, COIN Advisory Board – A mission to combat climate change and create a more sustainable future through investments in electric vehicles, renewable energy and infrastructure.
    [Show full text]
  • Statewide Ppic Survey Survey
    PPICPPIC STATEWIDESTATEWIDE SURVEYSURVEY M A Y 2 0 0 6 Special Survey on the California State Budget in collaboration with The James Irvine Foundation Mark Baldassare Research Director & Survey Director Public Policy Institute of California The Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) is a private operating foundation established in 1994 with an endowment from William R. Hewlett. The Institute is dedicated to improving public policy in California through independent, objective, nonpartisan research. PPIC’s research agenda focuses on three program areas: population, economy, and governance and public finance. Studies within these programs are examining the underlying forces shaping California’s future, cutting across a wide range of public policy concerns, including education, health care, immigration, income distribution, welfare, urban growth, and state and local finance. PPIC was created because three concerned citizens – William R. Hewlett, Roger W. Heyns, and Arjay Miller – recognized the need for linking objective research to the realities of California public policy. Their goal was to help the state’s leaders better understand the intricacies and implications of contemporary issues and make informed public policy decisions when confronted with challenges in the future. PPIC does not take or support positions on any ballot measure or on any local, state, or federal legislation, nor does it endorse, support, or oppose any political parties or candidates for public office. David W. Lyon is founding President and Chief Executive Officer of PPIC. Thomas C. Sutton is Chair of the Board of Directors. Public Policy Institute of California 500 Washington Street, Suite 800 • San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: (415) 291-4400 • Fax: (415) 291-4401 [email protected] • www.ppic.org Preface The PPIC Statewide Survey series provides policymakers, the media, and the general public with objective, advocacy-free information on the perceptions, opinions, and public policy preferences of California residents.
    [Show full text]
  • Breaking the Bank Primary Campaign Spending for Governor Since 1978
    Breaking the Bank Primary Campaign Spending for Governor since 1978 California Fair Political Practices Commission • September 2010 Breaking the Bank a report by the California Fair Political Practices Commission September 2010 California Fair Political Practices Commission 428 J Street, Suite 620 Sacramento, CA 95814 Table of Contents Executive Summary 3 Introduction 5 Cost-per-Vote Chart 8 Primary Election Comparisons 10 1978 Gubernatorial Primary Election 11 1982 Gubernatorial Primary Election 13 1986 Gubernatorial Primary Election 15 1990 Gubernatorial Primary Election 16 1994 Gubernatorial Primary Election 18 1998 Gubernatorial Primary Election 20 2002 Gubernatorial Primary Election 22 2006 Gubernatorial Primary Election 24 2010 Gubernatorial Primary Election 26 Methodology 28 Appendix 29 Executive Summary s candidates prepare for the traditional general election campaign kickoff, it is clear Athat the 2010 campaign will shatter all previous records for political spending. While it is not possible to predict how much money will be spent between now and November 2, it may be useful to compare the levels of spending in this year’s primary campaign with that of previous election cycles. In this report, “Breaking the Bank,” staff of the Fair Political Practices Commission determined the spending of each candidate in every California gubernatorial primary since 1978 and calculated the actual spending per vote cast—in 2010 dollars—as candidates sought their party’s nomination. The conclusion: over time, gubernatorial primary elections have become more costly and fewer people turnout at the polls. But that only scratches the surface of what has happened since 19781. Other highlights of the report include: Since 1998, the rise of the self-funded candidate has dramatically increased the cost of running for governor in California.
    [Show full text]
  • California's Political Reforms
    California’s Political Reforms: A Brief History Technical Appendices Contents Appendix A: A Narrative History of the Redistricting Reform Measures Appendix B: A Narrative History of the Primary Reform Measures Appendix C: Additional Data Analysis References Eric McGhee with research support from Daniel Krimm April 2015 Supported with funding from the S. D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation Appendix A: A Narrative History of the Redistricting Reform Measures California’s modern history with redistricting began with a stalemate between Republican Governor Ronald Reagan and the Democrats in the state legislature over the 1970s districts. The stalemate threw the process into the courts, who promptly appointed a commission of retired judges called “Special Masters” to draw the lines in the legislature’s place. Democrats were wary of the Special Masters’ plans, but generally did well under those plans in the ensuing decade, and Republicans also seemed content with the outcome. But in the ensuing decades, Democrats became the clear majority party in the legislature and had no interest in abandoning control, while in future fights Republicans did as well or better when the courts drew the lines. In this way, the involvement of judges in the redistricting process—and even the notion of a commission of any kind—became tainted with partisan implications, at least in the minds of the political class. In the decades to come, the perspective on a commission or any judicial involvement in a redistricting process became a fairly effective shorthand for Democratic and Republican opinions of the process. By the time of the next redistricting, Democrats in the legislature faced a Democratic governor, Jerry Brown.
    [Show full text]
  • Member Handbook
    Member Handbook 2002–2003 The CalSTRS Member Handbook was prepared by the staff of the California State Teachers’ Retirement System to assist CalSTRS Defined Benefit Program members in understanding their member benefits. The summarized data pertain to the Teachers’ Retirement Law and procedures effective January 1, 2003. The Member Handbook is intended as a ready source of information about CalSTRS and not as a legal document or a substitute for the law. If differences appear between the law and the handbook, the law must prevail. The State Teachers’ Retirement Law consists of Part State of California 13, also known as the E. Richard Barnes Act, Part Gray Davis, Governor 13.5 and Part 14 of Division 1 of the California Education Code. The law establishes the State Teachers’ Retirement Board Teachers’ Retirement Plan, which consists of the Gary Lynes, Chairperson CalSTRS Defined Benefit Supplement Program, Paul Krasnow Karen Russell, Vice Chairperson Defined Benefit Program and the CalSTRS Cash Jay Schenirer Balance Benefit Program. Part 13 includes the Carolyn Widener provisions of the CalSTRS Defined Benefit Program B. Timothy Gage, Director, Department of Finance and DBS Program and regulates all activities of the Steve Westly, State Controller California State Teachers’ Retirement System. Part Phil Angelides, State Treasurer 13.5 includes provisions concerning health care Jack O’Connell, Superintendent of Public Instruction benefits for CalSTRS members. Part 14 establishes an alternative plan for part-time educators, known as the Jack Ehnes, Chief Executive Officer Cash Balance Benefit Program. Christopher J. Ailman, Chief Investment Officer Permission is hereby granted to reproduce, copy, or duplicate the information in this booklet, provided credit is given to CalSTRS.
    [Show full text]
  • California Governor's Race
    Celinda Lake President Memorandum Alysia Snell Partner To: Interested Parties From: Lake Research Partners Michael Perry Subject: California Survey Results Partner Date: March 4, 2009 David Mermin Partner The new Lake Research Partners survey1 of likely 2010 California voters shows a deep dissatisfaction with the direction of the state and a real sense of crisis for voters about their Robert G. Meadow, Ph.D. Partner economic future. Our polling shows Attorney General Jerry Brown leading the pack among likely 2010 Democratic primary voters, followed by Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and San Daniel R. Gotoff Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, with over a quarter undecided. In hypothetical 2010 general Partner election matchups, California voters would choose Brown or Newsom over either potential Joshua E. Ulibarri Republican opponents, namely former Ebay CEO Meg Whitman and Insurance Commissioner Partner Steve Poizner, with a large number of undecided voters. Rick A. Johnson Vice President The Context Almost four in five (79%) California voters feel things are pretty seriously off on the wrong track, Tresa Undem Vice President with only 12% saying the state is headed in the right direction. By far the top issue driving this concern is jobs and the economy (38%), followed by balancing the state budget (15%), and Robert X. Hillman education (15%). Chief Financial Officer Alan C. Wolf California’s 2010 Democratic Primary For Governor Chief Operating Officer In a 2010 Democratic Primary for Governor of California including potential candidates John Garamendi, Gavin Newsom, Steve Westly, Jerry Brown, Jack O’Connell and Antonio Villaraigosa, Jerry Brown holds a small lead with just over a quarter of likely voters.
    [Show full text]
  • FRONT Cover Mar06.P65
    PPICPPIC STATEWIDESTATEWIDE SURVEYSURVEY MARCH 2006 Californians and Their Government ○○○○○ Mark Baldassare Research Director & Survey Director Public Policy Institute of California The Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) is a private operating foundation established in 1994 with an endowment from William R. Hewlett. The Institute is dedicated to improving public policy in California through independent, objective, nonpartisan research. PPIC’s research agenda focuses on three program areas: population, economy, and governance and public finance. Studies within these programs are examining the underlying forces shaping California’s future, cutting across a wide range of public policy concerns, including education, health care, immigration, income distribution, welfare, urban growth, and state and local finance. PPIC was created because three concerned citizens – William R. Hewlett, Roger W. Heyns, and Arjay Miller – recognized the need for linking objective research to the realities of California public policy. Their goal was to help the state’s leaders better understand the intricacies and implications of contemporary issues and make informed public policy decisions when confronted with challenges in the future. PPIC does not take or support positions on any ballot measure or on any local, state, or federal legislation, nor does it endorse, support, or oppose any political parties or candidates for public office. David W. Lyon is founding President and Chief Executive Officer of PPIC. Thomas C. Sutton is Chair of the Board of Directors. Public Policy Institute of California 500 Washington Street, Suite 800 • San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: (415) 291-4400 • Fax: (415) 291-4401 [email protected] • www.ppic.org Preface The PPIC Statewide Survey series provides policymakers, the media, and the general public with objective, advocacy-free information on the perceptions, opinions, and public policy preferences of California residents.
    [Show full text]
  • Election Results
    San Bernardino County | Registrar of Voters Page 1 of 28 General Election Held Within San Bernardino County on November 5th 2002 Final results. #PCT: 905 Governor #RPT: 905 %RPT: 100.0% Vote for: 1 BILL SIMON REP 142513 50.3% GRAY DAVIS DEM 116757 41.2% REINHOLD GULKE AIP 6884 2.4% PETER MIGUEL CAMEJO GRN 6754 2.3% GARY DAVID COPELAND LIB 6485 2.2% IRIS ADAM NLP 3751 1.3% #PCT: 905 Lieutenant Governor #RPT: 905 %RPT: 100.0% Vote for: 1 BRUCE MC PHERSON REP 133951 47.6% CRUZ M. BUSTAMANTE DEM 123250 43.8% DONNA J. WARREN GRN 7009 2.4% JIM KING AIP 5520 1.9% PAUL JERRY HANNOSH RFM 4504 1.6% PAT WRIGHT LIB 4389 1.5% KALEE PRZYBYLAK NLP 2667 0.9% #PCT: 905 Secretary Of State #RPT: 905 %RPT: 100.0% Vote for: 1 KEITH OLBERG REP 142663 51.4% KEVIN SHELLEY DEM 106825 38.5% GAIL K. LIGHTFOOT LIB 8049 2.9% LOUISE MARIE ALLISON NLP 7139 2.5% LARRY SHOUP GRN 5876 2.1% http://localhost/rovpast/past_elections/archive/110502/results/results.xml 09/06/2012 San Bernardino County | Registrar of Voters Page 2 of 28 EDWARD C. NOONAN AIP 3773 1.3% VALLI SHARPE-GEISLER RFM 2817 1.0% #PCT: 905 Controller #RPT: 905 %RPT: 100.0% Vote for: 1 TOM MCCLINTOCK REP 144853 52.2% STEVE WESTLY DEM 107444 38.7% LAURA WELLS GRN 11560 4.1% J. CARLOS AGUIRRE NLP 8731 3.1% ERNEST F. VANCE AIP 4650 1.6% #PCT: 905 Treasurer #RPT: 905 %RPT: 100.0% Vote for: 1 GREG CONLON REP 130088 47.7% PHIL ANGELIDES DEM 115468 42.3% J.
    [Show full text]
  • A Quiet Revolution
    A QUIET REVOLUTION The Early Successes of California’s Top Two Nonpartisan Primary August 2015 Authors: Jason D. Olson Director IndependentVoice.org Omar H. Ali, Ph.D. Associate Professor University of North Carolina at Greensboro #CATopTwo Open Primaries 36 West 25th Street 9th Floor New York, NY 10010 (646) 205-0202 openprimaries.org A QUIET REVOLUTION The Early Successes of California’s Top Two Nonpartisan Primary by Jason Olson and Omar Ali August 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS Summary 1 Background 2 Understanding California’s Political Dysfunction Under the Old Partisan System 3 Competitive Top Two Nonpartisan Elections Break the Partisan Gridlock 4 Under Top Two California Boasts Most Competitive Elections in America 4 Record Number of Incumbents Defeated Under Top Two 5 Top Two “Same Party” Races Bring Competition to Formerly Noncompetitive Districts 5 Top Two Allows All Voters to Participate Equally 7 Case Studies: Competitive Elections and Equal Voter Participation Impact Politics 8 2012 Assembly District 10 8 2015 Special Election 8 A Functioning Legislature 9 Governance, Not Partisanship, in the Legislature 9 Legislature’s Public Approval Ratings Rebound 10 Current and Former Legislators See Top Two Change 10 Conclusion 11 Author Biographies 12 Footnotes 13 #CATopTwo Summary The enactment of the Top Two Nonpartisan Primary in California has had three significant consequences since it went into effect in 2012: “California is no longer a national symbol for legislative 1) More competitive elections. California elections are now the most competitive in the nation, with a dysfunction. Members of the record number of incumbents defeated under the new legislature, who must now be system.
    [Show full text]
  • Panel Lifts Freeze on Controversial Dairy Loans Loans Are Meant to Improve the Environment
    Panel lifts freeze on controversial dairy loans Loans are meant to improve the environment By Jake Henshaw, Sacramento Bureau Visalia Times-Delta, Wed., Jan. 26, 2005 SACRAMENTO - Two Tulare County dairies seeking financial aid from a controversial program may soon see work on their stalled applications restarted after a divided state board decided Tuesday to end a moratorium on loans. The applications were filed by the Van Beek Brothers Partnership of Dairyland Farms in Tipton, seeking $4.6 million, and Joe and Diane Airoso of Airoso Dairy in Pixley, for $2.5 million. Work on their applications along with those from three other San Joaquin Valley dairies was frozen when the California Pollution Control Financing Authority decided in October to impose a 90-day moratorium on these loans. The decision was prompted by questions about whether past low-cost financing of solid waste projects by dairies approved by the agency actually improved air and water quality, a requirement of the loans. The financing authority board had expected to receive a report from its advisory committee Tuesday, but that now has been delayed until the March 1 meeting. Given the delay, the board staff Tuesday recommended that the board extend the moratorium for 60 days to allow time for the board to finalize new rules to use in evaluating applications in Tulare County and elsewhere. But dairy industry representatives opposed an additional moratorium as unfair to the existing applicants as well as discriminatory against dairies because other industries seeking loans wouldn't be affected. "We don't think there's a need to continue any moratorium," said Gary Conover, a lobbyist for Western United Dairymen of Modesto.
    [Show full text]