AGENDA BOARD LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE Friday, June 20, 2014 12:45 p.m., Peralta Oaks Board Room 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. AGENDA

STATUS TIME ITEM STAFF

12:45 p.m. 1. STATE LEGISLATION / ISSUES (R) A. NEW LEGISLATION Doyle/Pfuehler Plan Amendment 1. AB 2150 (Rendon) – Establishes a new State Parks Division of Community Initiatives and Park Access

2. SB 1021 (Wolk) – Variable Rate Parcel Taxes for School Districts

(I) B. ISSUES Doyle/Pfuehler 1. State Budget 2. Parks Forward Update 3. Park Bond Update 4. Water Bond Update 5. Other issues

Doyle/Pfuehler (R) II. FEDERAL LEGISLATION / ISSUES

A. NEW LEGISLATION – N/A

(I) B. ISSUES Doyle/Pfuehler 1. Possible Federal grant opportunities

III. PLAN BAY AREA UPDATE Pfuehler/Tong

IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS

V. ARTICLES

(R) Recommendation for Future Board Consideration (I) Information Future 2014 Meetings:

(D) Discussion July 18, 2014 September 19, 2014 November 21, 2014

Legislative Committee Members: August 15, 2014 October 24, 2014 December 19, 2014 Doug Siden, Chair, Ted Radke, John Sutter, Whitney Dotson, Alternate Erich Pfuehler, Staff Coordinator

DRAFT

Distribution/Agenda Only Distribution/Agenda Only Distribution/Full Packet Distribution/Full Packet Distribution/Full Packet District: Public: District: Public: AGMs Judi Bank Director Whitney Dotson Carol Johnson Ann Grodin Yolande Barial Bruce Beyaert Director Beverly Lane Jon King Nancy Kaiser Afton Crooks Director Ted Radke Glenn Kirby Ted Radosevich Robert Follrath, Sr. Director Doug Siden Mona Koa Connie Swisher Stana Hearne Director John Sutter Dr. George Manross Michael Kelley Director Carol Severin Jim O’Connor

Distribution/Agenda Only Distribution/Full Packet Distribution/Full Packet Public: District: Norman LaForce Robert Doyle Allen Pulido Dan Levy Mike Anderson Di Rosario Fred W. Lopez Tim Anderson Carol Victor Peter Rauch Pat O’Brien Bob Nisbet Pete Wilson Dave Collins Tyrone Davis Cliff Rocha – Local 2428 Doug Houston Sharon Corkin – Local 2428

TO: Board Legislative Committee (Chair Doug Siden, Ted Radke, John Sutter and Alternate Whitney Dotson)

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

SUBJECT: Board Legislative Committee Meeting WHEN: Friday, June 20, 2014 - 12:45 p.m. Lunch will be served

WHERE: Board Room, Peralta Oaks ______

Items to be discussed: I. STATE LEGISLATION / ISSUES A. NEW LEGISLATION 1. AB 2150 (Rendon D-Lakewood) – Establishes a new State Parks Division of Community Initiatives and Park Access Assembly Member Anthony Rendon introduced AB 2150 which makes a number of statutory changes to the California State Park system. It specifically calls for the establishment of a new Division of Community Initiatives and Park Access within the Department of Park and Recreation (DPR). The new division would be given the mission of making state parks more relevant to underserved communities. The bill also requires DPR to prioritize its huge backlog of deferred maintenance projects. It requires a modernization of DPR’s fee and data collection systems and extends the moratorium on state park closures for an additional year. The legislation is largely in response to the Parks Forward Commission’s work. Parks Forward commissioned a study by FTI Consulting (formerly Forensic Technologies International) which has a history of working on corporate turnaround, restructuring, bankruptcy and forensic accounting practices – including Enron and WorldCom bankruptcies, and Lehman Brothers and General Motors restructuring. The FTI study found significant reliability issues with DPR’s deferred maintenance database, as well as fee and data collection systems. The legislation seeks to address those issues. Significantly, the legislation also recognizes the segments of California’s population which lack reasonable access to parks and open space – particularly in urban and disadvantaged rural areas. The creation of a new Division is seen as a leadership tool for DPR to work in strategic partnerships and collaborations with others to address this disparity. It is estimated the new Division and other requirements of this bill would increase the annual costs to DPR by between $250,000 and $500,000. The bill has been supported by the California State Parks Foundation and Trust for Public Land.

Staff Recommendation: WATCH

2. SB 1021 (Wolk D-Davis) – Variable Rate Parcel Taxes for School Districts This legislation is similar to AB 59 introduced by Assembly Member Rob Bonta (D-Alameda) in 2013 which sought to clarify that school districts are allowed to assess parcel taxes in accordance with rational classifications among taxpayers or types of property, as long as the taxes are applied uniformly within those classifications. The Bonta legislation actually sought to abrogate the holding in Borikas v. Alameda Unified School District. The California Supreme Court upheld the Borikas case which invalidates parts of Alameda USD’s parcel tax Measure H, which voters passed in 2008. The court struck down Measure H’s differential rate structure for residential and commercial property owners. Measure H imposed a $120 per year (tax) on each parcel of taxable land and 15 cents per square foot for commercial/industrial parcels. In Borikas, the Court eliminated school districts' ability to apply different rates to property based on its classification, or based on whether the property has improvements. School districts want to restore flexibility they thought they had before the Court's decision.

The Wolk legislation applies only to school district parcel taxes imposed in the future; it contains "no inference" language that directs courts to adjudicate cases similar to Borikas v. Alameda Unified School District, 214 Cal. App. 4th 135, under the law in place at the time the district imposed the tax.

District Counsel would like either the Wolk or Bonta legislation to include additional language which references Public Resources Code 5566 which has similar language to the government code section 50079 which was struck down by the Borikas case. As of this writing, legislative staff are reluctant to expand the legislation beyond school districts.

Staff Recommendation: Work to amend

B. ISSUES 1. State Budget Staff expect the budget deal to be finalized by the time of this meeting, but details are not yet available. Advocate Houston will provide an update. One issue of interest is consideration of cap and trade revenue for urban forestry and parks in disadvantaged communities. This notion was considered by the Senate Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, but as of this writing it is not clear if it will make the final cut.

2. Parks Forward Update In the fall of 2014, the Parks Forward Commission will adopt a long-term plan for a State Park system. The independent commission is made up of experts, advocates and thought-leaders (a list of the Commissioners is included as an attachment). They are conducting a wholesale assessment of the park system. They have held a number of meetings throughout the state and seem to be circling in on the idea of creating a resources oversight entity somewhat similar to the California Transportation Commission. The Commission suggests the new privately and publicly funded organization would be a more nimble, nonprofit parks support organizations which would work with state parks, local and regional park agencies, nonprofits, businesses, and community groups. The new support organization would be tasked with providing funding, design and support for deploying state-of-the-art fee collection machines in parks; finding new business development opportunities such as special events and partnerships for parks; raising funds and securing other financing for parks; developing digital tools for communications, marketing, and on-the-ground guides to parks in English and Spanish; and working with organizations focused on providing parks in underserved urban communities.

In the midst of the Parks Forward Commission’s work, Major General Anthony Jackson is departing as Director of the Department of Parks and Recreation after only 18 months of service. The Parks Forward Commission will likely play a role in recommending his replacement.

3. Park Bond Update A hearing on Senator Kevin de Leon’s park bond bill, SB 1086, was held in Southern California on June 6, 2014. It was well attended, but featured mostly non-governmental organizations. There were not many actual park and recreation managers or agencies in attendance. Advocate Houston has subsequently had additional conversations with the Senator’s staff and will provide a verbal update.

4. Water Bond Update It is widely suspected that once a budget deal is reached, the legislature and governor will turn their focus to crafting a new water bond measure with a lower dollar figure attached to it than the current $11.4 billion measure. Advocate Houston will provide a verbal update.

5. Other issues – Please see attached election results memo

II. FEDERAL LEGISLATION / ISSUES A. NEW LEGISLATION – N/A

B. ISSUES 1. Possible Federal grant opportunities Department of Labor Apprenticeships On April 15th the White House announced the $450 million employment, labor and training grant program (funding opportunity number SGA-DFA-PY-13-10). The application deadline is July 7th and grants will be awarded to community colleges in every state. The program is a part of the Trade Adjustment Assistance and Community College and Career Training (TAA-CCCT) competitive grant program. The announcement on the 15th tied the Community College grants to some new criteria including:  Is the job training need and effort scalable nationwide.  Can the student receive a credential based on demonstrated skills through the grant.  The grants encourage further integration of statewide employment and education data systems. If desired, the District would have to work directly with a community college on an application. District Operations and Legislative staff are currently working on meeting with officials at Merritt College and the Peralta Community College District. An inquiry was also made with Ohlone College, but they were not interested. Staff has also reached out to Contra Costa Community College District, but has not received a response.

Centers for Disease Control Partnership to Improve Community Health The Partnerships to Improve Community Health (PICH) grant program (funding opportunity number CDC-RFA-DP14-1417) will fund and support a new 3-year, $50 million/year initiative to improve health and reduce the burden of chronic diseases through evidence and practice-based strategies to create or strengthen healthy environments that make it easier for people to make healthy choices and take charge of their health. An estimated 30 to 40 cooperative agreements will be awarded to governmental agencies and non-governmental organizations to work through multi-sectoral community coalitions consisting of businesses, schools, non-profit organizations, local health departments, health care organizations, community planning agencies, local housing authorities, social service agencies, agricultural extension programs, civic organizations, park and recreation departments, faith-based institutions, and other community-based organizations. Awardees will work to reduce tobacco use and exposure, improve nutrition, increase physical activity, and improve access to chronic disease prevention, risk reduction, and management opportunities. Projects will serve three types of geographic areas: large cities and urban counties, small cities and counties, and American Indian tribes and Alaska Native villages.

Upon reviewing the grant application, District staff and consultants believe we would need to partner with a health agency to be truly competitive. Staff has reached out to both Alameda County and Contra Costa County Health Departments about a possible partnership. The Contra Costa folks seem the most interested at this point. The application deadline is July 22nd.

III. PLAN BAY AREA UPDATE The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Planning Commission (MTC) are in the process of updating their guidelines for determining Priority Conservation Areas (PCAs). Some key issues of concern expressed in the attached correspondence to ABAG President Julie Pierce, are:  Ensuring the District is independently eligible for PCA grants.  Ensuring the District does not need to seek a city or county resolution to either designate a conservation area, or apply and receive a PCA grant.  Making the case that “hard-lining” PCAs can actually undermine the ability to ensure properties are protected for their conservation value in perpetuity.  Working to move urban greening projects out of the PCA funding stream and into the Priority Development Area (PDA) funding pot which had much more money allocated to it than the PCA pot in the last Plan Bay Area effort.

The Park Advisory Committee, under Bruce Kern’s leadership, has formed an ad hoc subcommittee to help District staff approach the PCA and next go around of Plan Bay Area processes. The subcommittee includes Bob Simmons from Walnut Creek City Council, Linda Best former Executive Director of Contra Costa Council, Jeremy Madsen Executive Director of the Greenbelt Alliance and Mona Palacios from Alameda County LAFCo, as well as PAC Chair Glenn Kirby and Vice-Chair John Mercurio. This group provided input into the letter to ABAG and continues to provide support to staff.

IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS

V. ARTICLES a. “Contra Costa Times editorial: Legislators were right to advance ‘third-rail’ bills, Contra Costa Times, June 10. 2014 b. “Viewpoints: Water projects bill shows what bipartisan cooperation can produce”, Sacramento Bee, June 11, 2014 c. “Alameda: Open space advocates welcome commission decision”, Contra Costa Times, June 11, 2014 d. “CA17: Honda and Khanna take their victory laps”, Political Blotter, June 4, 2014 e. “CA15 Swalwell sits pretty as rivals fight for 2nd”, Political Blotter, June 4, 2014 f. “ Open Space Measure AA backers declare victory in $300 million bond measure”, Contra Costa Times, June 9, 2014 g. “Close races remain a week after California primary”, Contra Costa Times, June 12, 2014 h. “ Contra Costa Times editorial: Highest profile Assembly race is far from over”, Contra Costa Times, June 4, 2014 i. “California’s budget deadline looms with a more civil tone in Capitol”, San Jose Mercury News, June 10, 2014 j. “CA`5:Bussell’s lead over Corbett has been halved”, Political Blotter, June 11, 2014 k. “California to add child care, transitional kindergarten slots in budget deal”, Sacramento Bee, June 11, 2014 l. “What Cantor’s defeat means for California Republicans”, SF Gate, June 12, 2014 m. “New report says California parks continue to lag”, Los Angeles Times, June 4, 2014 n. “Dublin adopts citizens’ initiative to create urban limit line on east side of town”, Contra Costa Times, June 4, 2014 o. “Big Wins! Urban limit line in Dublin & Measure AA”, Greenbelt Alliance Update, June 4, 2014 p. “Senate panel to vote on new ethics measure”, SF Gate, May 29, 2014 q. “State Senate scandals inspires new wave of ethics bills”, SF Gate, May 28, 2014 r. “BART strikes a big issue in East Bay Assembly race”, SF Gate, May 25, 2014 s. “Feinstein’s California drought bill passes Senate”, SF Gate, May 23, 2014 t. “Editorial: Jerry Brown needs to find an innovative and energetic parks director, Sacramento Bee, May 23, 2014 u. “New structure proposed to bring state parks up to speed”, SF Gate, April 29, 2014

Attachment I.B.1

Karen Bower Turjanis Tony Norris Michael Haley Dave Finigan Barry Christian Director Ward One Director Ward Two Director Ward Three Director Ward Four Director Ward Five

June 9, 2014

Parks Forward Commission California Natural Resources Agency 1416 Ninth Street Sacramento, CA 95814

RE: Comments on the Parks Forward Commission draft report of April 23, 2014

Dear Commissioners:

As a local public agency that has operated two State Parks since April of 2012, the Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District has considerable interest in the Parks Forward draft report. We have successfully operated these two State Parks for the past two years. When we started, the campground was closed, deferred maintenance was so extensive that a dozen historic and semi- historic buildings had been abandoned, and the park cost two dollars to operate for every one dollar it earned. Today, we have made substantial progress on the huge backlog of deferred maintenance, we’re operating the campground, pool, historic water-driven grist mill, more interpretive programming than had been offered in recent years…and we’re operating without taxpayer subsidies.

The Napa community appreciates the improvements that have been made since we assumed operational responsibility for these two parks, and we often hear local residents express hope that we will continue to care for these parks.

Based on our experiences over the past two years, we would like to provide some thoughts on the draft report.

The draft report does a capable job of covering the history of the State Parks system, and the challenges it faces. In addition, the two principal findings of the report reinforce what many people within and without the system have come to believe: First, California’s parks system is debilitated by an outdated organizational structure, under-investment in innovation and business tools, and a culture that has not rewarded excellence, innovation and leadership. Second, only broad-based, fundamental change will transform the system so that it once again leads the nation in meeting the needs of its residents and visitors.

The vision for State Parks laid out in the report is similar to the vision and goals laid out previously in both adopted State Parks plans and in outside critiques of State Parks. Thus, there is considerable agreement about the big picture need for change.

1195 Third Street, Napa, California 94559 telephone: 707-259-5933 fax: 707-299-4471 www.NapaOutdoors.org Report Recommendations

Most of the recommendations contained in the draft report are straightforward and non- controversial. One exception is the recommendation to eliminate the requirement that managers must be park rangers (e.g., sworn peace officers). This change would align the State Parks management system with that of most other public agencies, very few of whom are run by their police force. We support this recommendation, for the reasons identified in the report.

The other notable recommendation is the creation of a new “support entity”. The Parks Forward Commission has expressed understandable concern about how to reform an agency in trouble, noting that prior reports looking at State Parks have ended up sitting on people’s shelves, and that it is difficult to effect change when the people involved may not want change.

The support entity is the primary solution offered in the draft report for implementing the report’s recommendations.

However, we do not believe the case has been made to justify the central role proposed for the support entity.

First, the proposed support entity appears to duplicate many of the functions of the existing four State Parks Commissions associated with the Department, as well as the State Parks Foundation. What is it about the support entity that would make it more effective than these existing entities? If there is a problem with the existing commissions and foundation, why not reform their structures and roles, rather than create another layer of bureaucracy?

Second, the support entity is supposed to be an agent of change merging inside access with outside expertise. Its goal is to cut out bureaucratic red tape and outdated systems and facilitate local partnerships. How it would do this is unclear. The support entity would arguably be just another appointed state-level body, presumably located in Sacramento, removed from day-to-day operation of any park. If the support entity is to be given the ability to tap into and control public funds, and if it is to be allowed to dictate priorities and control who and what gets funded, as the report recommends, far more explanation is needed for how this would work. How will inserting the support entity into the already cumbersome decision-making process make the process more efficient? What will ensure the support entity’s decision making will be any more understanding of and responsive to on-the-ground park needs than are current systems?

Some Additional Thoughts

We would like to highlight three themes contained within the report that we strongly support:

(1) Budgeting and decision-making authority should be delegated downward as much as possible. State Parks is currently a “command and control” agency, where too many decisions can’t be made without explicit approval from above. What State Parks needs is an “lead and delegate” model of administration, where the role of the central administration is to articulate broad goals and policies, and to delegate most decision- making to the local districts and park units.

(2) State Parks should be reorganized to make it easier to get things done. Currently, State Parks organizationally consists of quasi-independent silos based on function or specialty, as compared to a model where teams are built around each park unit and district Under the current system, for every proposal to improve a park, many people within the Department have the ability to say no, but few have the authority and incentive to say yes.

(3) Local partners to State Parks should be encouraged, supported and delegated authority commensurate with their abilities. When entering into agreements with local partners, State Parks has treated their local partners as concessionaires, even though many local partners are public agencies with extensive independent legal authorities and responsibilities. State Parks has been reluctant to cede any of their review and control authorities to their public agency partners. This has limited the effectiveness of these partnerships.

In addition to the above general principles, we would like to share some of what we have learned at the day-to-day operational level.

(1) Maintenance and operations functions at park units should be merged administratively. Maintenance and operations functions within State Parks are currently organized into separate silos. One of the reasons the Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District has been successful in cutting costs is that its park staff operates as a team. While each member of staff has their own particular expertise, and areas of primary focus, team members shift between operations and maintenance roles as needed, providing more flexibility with work scheduling.

(2) The Service Center is a good concept but it doesn’t work. Several months ago our agency needed to prepare architectural drawings for repairing some abandoned cabins. We obtained three bids, one from the Service Center and two from private architectural firms. The Service Center proposal was twice as expensive as the most expensive of the private firms, and the Service Center could not offer a work schedule or completion date. The Service Center ought to be able to beat the competition, given its easy access to existing plans and data and its knowledge of park practices and policies. Serious attention should be given to reforming the Service Center so that it provides competitive services.

(3) The Project Evaluation Form (PEF) process impedes initiative. Too many routine repair projects get caught up in and delayed by the PEF process. Projects that in most localities would be classified as statutorily or categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act end up requiring detailed plans and often lengthy circulation of documents for sequential approval by various resource specialists. The PEF approval process takes control of project timing away from the project proponent and makes it subject to other people’s (often excessive) workloads.

(4) An essential element in encouraging innovation and entrepreneurship at park units and in districts is to allow them to retain control of any revenues and savings they realize. There are many ways to do this. Local partners with operating agreements with State Parks are able to retain and reinvest earnings into the parks they manage. Cooperating associations also do this to the extent that they sponsor events and programs that generate income. However, State Parks does not have the same flexibility; the use of revenues it generates requires appropriation by the Legislature and Governor. Serious consideration should be given to allowing park units and districts to retain and reinvest entrepreneurial profits, rather than vacuuming up those revenues and depositing them in the State’s General Fund. Unless and until this changes, strengthening and expanding agreements with local partners is the only practical way to ensure that new revenues from park innovations gets reinvested in the parks.

We appreciate your efforts to improve California’s truly special State Parks system. Please feel free to contact our General Manager John Woodbury (707-259-5933) if you have further questions about our experiences as a local partner to State Parks.

Sincerely,

Dave Finigan President Board of Directors

Attachment I.B.2

Meet the Commission

Lance Conn, co-chair. Mr. Conn is a Bay Area businessman and conservationist. He will serve as Parks Forward Commission co-chair. From 2004 to 2009, he was the president of Vulcan Capital, the investment arm of Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen's family office. While at Vulcan, he oversaw the turnaround of the firm's investment portfolio and served as chair of Vulcan Energy Corporation, as well as a director of the Seattle Seahawks, the Portland Trailblazers, Oxygen Media, Makena Capital Management, Plains All American Pipeline, and PAA/Vulcan Gas Storage. Prior to Vulcan, Mr. Conn served for seven years in various senior executive roles in the U.S. and Europe with America Online (AOL). He serves on the boards of directors for Charter Communications and the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, and serves as a member of the advisory council for Truckee Donner Land Trust.

Christine Kehoe, co-chair. Ms. Kehoe is the executive director of the California Plug-in Electric Vehicle Collaborative. She will serve as Parks Forward Commission co-chair. During 25 years of public service, including 19 years in elected office, Kehoe has focused on developing effective policies and programs over a range of issues at the city and state level. From 2000 to 2012, Ms. Kehoe served in the California state legislature as a member of the Assembly and the state Senate where she distinguished herself as a consensus-minded leader and an advocate for strong energy and environmental policy. She held leadership positions in both houses and chaired the Senate Committee on Appropriations for four years. She served as chair of the Senate Committee on Energy, Utilities and Communications for two years. Additionally, Christine served as a member of the transportation committees and the water and resources committees in both the Assembly and the Senate. As a member of the parks, water and resources committees she was a strong advocate for state parks. Her legislation established the San Diego River Conservancy, the first state conservancy in San Diego county. She worked diligently and successfully to protect Anza-Borrego Desert State Park during the planning for Sunrise Powerlink transmission line. Her legislation significantly advanced conservation and efficiency in water and energy use; expanded solar energy programs and the Self Generation Incentive Program; and improved plug-in electric vehicle deployment and advanced renewable energy policy. She chaired the Joint Legislative Committee on Emergency Services for several years where she led initiatives to improve fire prevention planning and reduce land development in high fire hazard zones in California. She was first elected to the San Diego City Council in 1993, and was the first member of the gay community to win public office in the county. She served on the California Coastal Commission from 1997 to 2000.

Carolyn Finney, PhD. Dr. Finney is an assistant professor in the Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management at the UC Berkeley College of Natural Resources. As a geographer, she focuses on exploring how issues of difference influence African Americans’ participation in environmental debate and decision-making. Her research interests revolve around 1 race and resources management, and the aim of her work is to develop greater cultural competency within environmental organizations and institutions, challenge media outlets on the (mis- or non-) representation of “different” folks, and increase awareness of how privilege shapes who gets to speak to environmental issues and determine policy and action. Dr. Finney served on the National Park Service Second Century Commission, is currently chair for the Relevancy Committee on the National Parks Advisory Board, and will soon publish her first book: Black Faces, White Spaces: African Americans and the Great Outdoors.

Caryl Hart, PhD. Dr. Hart is the director of Sonoma County Regional Parks, a system of more than 50 parks and regional trails. She was a member of the California State Parks Commission, appointed by three successive governors and served from 2000 to 2013. She led the commission as chair for seven years. Dr. Hart co-founded the Sonoma County Parks Alliance, which supports innovative management of state parks in Sonoma County, including management of Annadel State Park by Sonoma County Regional Parks during the budget crisis of 2012-13. Dr. Hart received her doctorate from UC Berkeley, where her focus was on the role of California State Parks in addressing the challenges of climate change, and she returned to UC Berkeley in 2010 as a visiting professor to teach a course on the history and challenges of the California State Park system. She currently serves on the UC Berkeley College of Natural Resources Advisory Board. Dr. Hart acted for 15 years as an advisor to the Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District, and was a founding member of LandPaths, an environmental land trust and land management non- profit dedicated to maximizing resource conservation while allowing managed public access.

Stephen Lockhart, MD, PhD. Dr. Lockhart is regional vice president and chief medical officer for Sutter Health, East Bay Region. He currently serves as chair of the NatureBridge board of directors and is a director of REI and the National Parks Conservation Association. As a member of the National Park Service Second Century Commission, he advocated for environmental and science education within the national parks. He is an Eagle Scout, a Rhodes Scholar, and an avid mountain climber. In the aftermath of the devastating 2010 earthquake in Haiti, Dr. Lockhart participated in a 15-member volunteer surgical medical team that traveled to Haiti to care for earthquake victims, a trip conducted in partnership with Partners in Health.

Michael Lynton. Mr. Lynton is the chief executive officer of Sony Entertainment, Inc. He oversees Sony's global entertainment businesses, including Sony Music Entertainment, Sony/ATV Music Publishing and Sony Pictures Entertainment. He is also chair of the board and CEO of Sony Pictures Entertainment. Prior to joining Sony Pictures, Mr. Lynton worked for Time Warner and served as CEO of America Online (AOL) Europe, president of AOL International and president of Time Warner International. From 1996 to 2000, he served as chair of the board and CEO of Pearson plc's Penguin Group, where he oversaw the acquisition of Putnam, Inc. and extended the Penguin brand to music and the Internet. He joined The Walt Disney Company in 1987 and started Disney Publishing, serving as its president. From 1992 to 1996, he served as president of Disney's Hollywood Pictures. Mr. Lynton’s involvement in charitable and civic activities includes membership on the Council on Foreign Relations and service on the boards of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art and the Rand Corporation.

Julie Packard. Ms. Packard is the executive director of the Monterey Bay Aquarium and vice chair of the aquarium's board of trustees. She has directed the organization since it opened in 1984. Her commitment to advancing ocean conservation has been demonstrated through the aquarium and far beyond. She serves on numerous boards including the California Nature Conservancy, the

2

Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute, and the David and Lucile Packard Foundation. She was also a member of the Pew Oceans Commission, which in 2003 issued its recommendations for a comprehensive overhaul of national ocean policy. Ms. Packard was the 1998 recipient of the Audubon Medal for Conservation.

Manuel Pastor, PhD. Dr. Pastor is a professor of American Studies & Ethnicity at the University of Southern California (USC) where he also serves as director of USC's Program for Environmental and Regional Equity (PERE) and co-director of USC's Center for the Study of Immigrant Integration (CSII). In recent years, his research has focused on the economic, environmental and social conditions facing low-income urban communities in the U.S. Dr. Pastor served as a member of the Commission on Regions, appointed by California’s Speaker of the State Assembly, and is a member of the Building Resilient Regions research network sponsored by the MacArthur Foundation.

John Reynolds. Mr. Reynolds served for 39 years in the National Park Service’s Pacific West and Mid-Atlantic regions. Throughout his career, Mr. Reynolds served as deputy director, regional director, director of the Denver Service Center, superintendent of North Cascades National Park, and assistant superintendent of Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area. He was executive vice president of the National Park Foundation from 2005 to 2007. Mr. Reynolds currently serves as a board member of the Presidio Trust and the Student Conservation Association; as a member of the Fort Hancock 21st Century Federal Advisory Commission; as a member of North Cascades Institute Advisory Council; as chair of the Flight 93 National Memorial Federal Advisory Commission and as chair of the Captain John Smith National Historic Trail Advisory Council. He is the Commonwealth of Virginia Citizen Representative on the Chesapeake Bay Commission.

Hawk Rosales. Mr. Rosales is the executive director of the InterTribal Sinkyone Wilderness Council. He has worked with the Sinkyone Council since 1990. The council is a non-profit tribal conservation organization of ten federally recognized Northern California tribes revitalizing traditional tribal stewardship through cultural land conservation, habitat rehabilitation, education, and advocacy. In 1997, the council established the first-ever InterTribal Wilderness on 3,845 acres of ancestral Sinkyone land bordering Sinkyone Wilderness State Park. Mr. Rosales directed the council’s acquisition of this land, which is permanently protected by conservation easements—the first such agreements between a tribal entity and private land trusts. His collaborations with California State Parks led to his receipt of the 2008 DeWitt Award for Partnership in recognition of the council’s cultural-natural resource programs. Since 2009, he has coordinated the council’s involvement with the Marine Life Protection Act Initiative, which led to the state’s 2012 recognition and protection of the traditional gathering and fishing rights of north coast tribes. This process involved developing new policies and negotiating a regulatory solution to ensure binding protections for the tribes’ aboriginal rights and continued cultural usage.

Toby Rosenblatt. Mr. Rosenblatt is president and general partner of Founders Investments, Ltd. He is also a director of BlackRock Equity Liquidity Mutual Funds, Forward Management, and the Pherin Corporation. Mr. Rosenblatt has been active in the civic arena, and a trustee of a number of community organizations, for many years. He served as president of the San Francisco City Planning Commission from 1977 to 1988. He has served on the boards of the San Francisco Art Institute, the San Francisco Arts Commission, the Center for the Arts at Yerba Buena, the California Higher Education Policy Center, Sutter Health, the California Pacific Medical Center, and the

3

Jewish Community Center of San Francisco. Mr. Rosenblatt was founding chair of the Presidio Trust and has also served on the board of the Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy. He currently serves as chair of the Fort Scott Council, a Federal Advisory Committee to the Presidio Trust and as chair of the College Access Foundation of California.

Michael Woo. Mr. Woo is dean of the College of Environmental Design at Cal Poly Pomona. Dean Woo, a Los Angeles native, was the first trained urban planner and the first Asian American elected to serve on the Los Angeles City Council. As the councilman representing the Hollywood area, Woo spearheaded the Hollywood Redevelopment Plan which laid the financial and policy framework for Hollywood’s current revitalization and played a key role choosing the route and station locations for the Metro Red Line subway. During his city council years, Woo initiated action to protect Fryman Canyon from real estate development and turn it into Fryman Canyon Park. He converted surplus Caltrans property in the Silver Lake area of Los Angeles into the “Tommy Lasorda Field of Dreams” baseball playing field. He also settled a long-time neighborhood dispute by establishing the city’s first dog park in Laurel Canyon Park. Woo gave up his council seat in 1993 to become one of 24 candidates for Mayor of Los Angeles, eventually reaching second-place in a hotly-contested, nationally-observed run-off election and receiving 46 percent of the citywide vote. Continuing his commitment to public service, Woo served as a member of the Los Angeles City Planning Commission for over six years. In the nonprofit sector, he chairs the board of directors of Smart Growth America, the national coalition advocating compact development patterns and sustainable transportation choices, and the board of directors of Sustainable Economic Enterprises of Los Angeles (SEE-LA), the organization which runs the Hollywood Farmers Market, the largest certified farmers market in Los Angeles, which he helped to establish 21 years ago when he was a councilman. Prior to assuming his Cal Poly Pomona position, Woo worked as a consultant to Farmlab, an Annenberg Foundation-funded project, developing proposals for alternative uses of the 32-acre “Cornfield” site near downtown Los Angeles now being developed as Los Angeles State Historic Park.

4

Attachment I.B.5 TO: Board of Directors, Robert Doyle FROM: Erich Pfuehler DATE: June 10, 2014 RE: Results from Tuesday, June 2nd Election

Overview: Turnout has been characterized as “embarrassingly low” (22% of registered voters in Alameda County and nearly 30% in Contra Costa County). One summary stated it this way: “Relative contentment + a sense of predestined outcome = little incentive to vote." The low turnout, coupled with few highly contested Democratic races, likely boosted Republican candidates. Republican turnout in midterm primary elections is traditionally high. In California, Republicans make up only 28% of the registered voters, but they made up approximately 37% of primary voters on June 2nd. Although non-Latino whites are only 39% of California’s population, it’s likely that around 75% of the June 2nd voters were white.

These turnout figures played out in a couple of local races. In Congressional District 15 where Eric Swalwell clearly won the primary, Republican Hugh Bussell appears to have edged out State Senator Ellen Corbett to finish second and advance to the general election in the fall. Many expected this to be a Swalwell-Corbett race in November. Another local race that may have benefitted from high Republican turnout was in Assembly District 16 where Republican Catherine Baker won the primary in termed-out Joan Buchanan’s district. Tim Sbranti finished second in an expensive, somewhat negative campaign which beat fellow Democrat Steve Glazer. While Baker “won” the primary, there were nearly double the amount of Democrats voting so this seat is probably now Sbranti’s to lose. Another race where Republican turnout prevented a Democrat vs. Democrat race in the fall was in State Senate District 10 (term-out Corbett’s district). Democrat Bob Wieckowski will face Republican Peter Kuo in the fall with former Assembly Member Mary Hayashi finishing out of the top two.

Three other candidate races of note are Congressional District 17, Superintendent of Public Instruction and Assembly District 15. In CD 17, incumbent Mike Honda captured nearly 50% of the vote and had a 20% margin of separation ahead of challenger Ro Khanna. While Khanna advances to the November election, he would have to make up a lot of ground to defeat Honda. Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson faces a tough challenge in the fall against Marshall Tuck. Tuck and third place finisher Lydia Gutierrez combined to win 200,000 more votes than Torlakson, so expect this to be a competitive statewide race in the fall. Lastly, in term-out Nancy Skinner’s district, two fairly liberal candidates will face of this fall in what is likely to be a close race between Elizabeth Echols and Tony Thurmond.

On the ballot initiative front, Midpeninsula Open Space District’s $300 million Measure AA appears to have squeaked by at 67.8% of the vote. The Alameda County Healthcare Services Sales Tax Measure AA passed with nearly 75% of the vote. The Dublin City Council also approved the urban limit line initiative and opposed a proposed competing initiative which was viewed as pro-development. In Alameda, the City Council ordered a report on the effect of a proposed ballot initiative regarding land adjacent to McKay Avenue and Crown Beach. The initiative would zone the land as open space. The report needs to be presented to the Council within 30 days.

Statewide Propositions: Yes 65.2% No 34.8 % Measure 41 – Veterans Housing & Homeless Bond Act of 2014 Yes 61.9% No 38.1 % Measure 42 – Public Records. Open Meetings. Reimbursements

Statewide Races:

Governor 54.3 % Edmund G. “Jerry” Brown - Dem 19.4 % Neel Kashkari – Rep 14.9% Tim Donnelly - Rep 11.4 % Twelve others

Lt. Governor 49.8% Gavin Newsom – Dem 23.6% Ron Nehring – Rep 26.6% Five others

Secretary of State 30.0% Alex Padilla – Dem 29.9% Pete Peterson – Rep 9.5% Leland Yee – Dem 30.5% Five others

Controller 24.8% Ashley Swearengin – Rep 21.6% John A. Perez – Dem 21.6% Betty T. Yee - Dem 21.2% David Evans - Rep 32.0% Three others

Treasurer 54.8% John Chiang – Dem 38.8% Greg Conion – Rep 6.4% Ellen H. Brown– Grn

Attorney General 52.9% Kamala D. Harris – Dem 12.5% Ronald Gold – Rep 11.6% Phil Wyman – Rep 22.9% Four others

Insurance Commissioner 62.9% Dave Jones – Dem 41.9% Ted Gaines – Rep 5.2% Nathalie Hrizi – P&F

State Superintendent of Public Instruction – Non Partisan 46.8% Tom Torlakson 28.9% Marshall Tuck 24.2% Lydia A. Gutierrez

Board of Equalization, 2nd District 77.46% Fiona Ma 22.14% James E. Theis .40% Other

U.S. Congressional Districts:

District 5 80.7% Mike Thompson - Dem 10.9% James Hinton – NPP 8.5% Other

District 9 50.7% Jerry McNerney – Dem 25.0% Antonio C. “Tony” Amador – Rep 24.3% Two Others

District 11 59.1% Mark DeSailnier – Dem 28.0% Tue Phan – Rep 4.7% Cheryl Sudduth – Dem

District 13 82.2% Barbara Lee – Dem 10.5% Dakin Sundeen – Rep 7.3% Two Others

District 15 49.37% Eric Swalwell – Dem 25.9% Hugh Bussell – Rep 24.9 % Ellen M. Corbett – Dem .22% Other

District 17 48.5% Mike Honda – Dem 27.8% Ro Khanna – Dem 16.9% Vanila Singh – Rep 6.8% Other

State Senate Districts: District 10 35.2% Bob Wieckowski – Dem 26.5% Peter Kuo – Rep 20.6% Mary Hayashi – Dem 177% Other

State Assembly Districts:

District 11 60.8% Jim Frazier – Dem 39.2% Alex Henthron – Rep

District 14 100.0% Susan A. Bonilla – Dem

District 15 31.2% Elizabeth Echols – Dem 24.3% Tony Thurmond – Dem 17.0% Pamela Price – Dem 27.5% 5 Others

District 16 36.7% Catharine Baker – Rep 28.7% Tim Sbranti – Dem 23.0% Steve Glazer – Dem 11.6% Newell Arnerich - Dem 7.16% Write-in

District 18 85.3% Rob Bonta – Dem 14.7% David Erlich – Rep

District 20 65.9% Bill Quirk – Dem 23.7% Jaime Patino – Rep 10.4% Others

District 25 31.0% Kansen Chu – Dem 23.4% Bob Brunton – Rep 17.0% Armando Gomez – Dem 28.6% 2 Others Local Races: Alameda Board of Supervisors, 2nd District – Non Partisan 97.99% Richard Valle 2.01% Write-in

Alameda Board of Supervisors, 3rd District – Non Partisan 97.67% Wilma Chan 2.33% Write-in

Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, 1st District – Non Partisan 97.68% John Gioia 2.32% Write-in

Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, 4th District – Non Partisan 97.74% Karen Mitchoff 226% Write-in

Hayward Mayor 38.16% Barbara Halliday 32.20% Mark Salinas 29.63% 2 Others

Hayward City Council (top 2 win) 22.23% Marvin Peixoto 22.03% Sara Lamnin 19.15% Ryan ‘Rocky’ Fernandez 36.58% 4 Others

Special Districts Members, Board of Directors, Flood Control, Zone 7 (top 4 win) 21.1% Sarah Palmer 19.04% Jim McGrail 16.83% John James Greci Jr. 13.72% Bill Stevens 11.91% A.J. Machaevich Local Propositions: Yes 74.91% No 25.09 % Measure AA – Alameda County Healthcare Services Sales Tax Yes 67.23% No 32.77% Measure C – City of Hayward Public Safety, Library, Roads Sales Tax Yes 67.07% No 38.93% Measure E – Fremont USD Yes 71.89% No 28.11% Measure G – Parcel Tax Livermore Valley Joint Unified School District Yes 45.91% No 54.09% Measure H – West Contra Costa Unified School District Yes 75.54% No 24.46% Measure J – City of Orinda Road and Storm Drain Repair Bond Yes 57.41% No 42.59% Measure E – Contra Costa Community College District Yes 70.75% No 29.25% Measure K – Transactions and Sales Tax – City of San Pablo Yes 48.75% No 51.25% Measure L – Kensington Police Protection and Community Services District

Attachment 5 Board Legislative Committee June 20, 2014

Contra Costa Times editorial: Legislators were right to advance 'third-rail' bills

Contra Costa Times editorial © 2014 Bay Area News Group Posted: 06/10/2014 01:20:45 PM PDT | Updated: a day ago

While members of California's Legislature were mostly busy campaigning for new terms before last Tuesday's primary, they found some time to do some actual legislating.

That's probably an ungenerous description because by advancing two bills in particular, they showed a fair bit of courage.

We're used to hearing hot-button issues described as a political "third rail," meaning it would be suicidal for elected officials to touch the topic, just like the electrified rail that powers some trains. Proposition 13 and the ballot-initiative system are among California's untouchables.

Late last month, lawmakers touched both third rails, advancing a pair of bills before the end-of-May deadline for legislation to be approved by the house in which it originated and sent to the other house. They should be applauded for doing so.

The bills don't do away with either Prop. 13's protections for property owners nor the public's ability to directly change state law via initiative voting. That would be political suicide.

But the bill on Prop. 13 tightens the 36-year-old law, eliminating a flaw that allowed some buyers of commercial real estate to avoid having the property's value reassessed and thus avoid paying higher property taxes.

Commercial property isn't reassessed as long as no individual purchases a 50 percent or higher stake. So partnerships would arrange things so nobody had more than 49 percent.

That's against the spirit of Prop. 13. If big, commercial real-estate owners aren't paying their share, then the tax burden shifts to residential property owners.

Family homes are reassessed when they're sold. Commercial property should be too.

AB2372, authored by Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco calls for reassessments anytime at least 90 percent of a property is sold, no matter who buys how big a financial interest.

Needing a two-thirds vote, it passed the Assembly 56-9, with seven Republicans joining Democrats in support.

Even the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, named for Prop. 13's creator, and most business groups dropped their opposition to AB2372 after amendments to refine its definition of property ownership.

Jarvis Association President Jon Coupal, bristling at the suggestion Prop. 13 had a loophole, wrote that this is a technical change that strengthens the law by removing a legitimate complaint about it. The bill about initiatives is simpler. SB1253, by Sen. Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, would allow for legislative hearings on proposed initiatives early in the process of putting them on the ballot and calls for disclosure of initiative campaigns' top financial backers.

The bill passed the Senate 29-8 and goes to the Assembly. It would be a good, specific improvement for the initiative system.

Prop. 13. The initiative system. Who knows what the Legislature can accomplish if it isn't afraid to touch the touchiest subjects?

Viewpoints: Water projects bill shows what bipartisan cooperation can produce

By Barbara Boxer and Doris Matsui Special to The Bee Published: Wednesday, Jun. 11, 2014 - 12:00 am

Congress came together last month to pass the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 with overwhelming bipartisan support in both houses. The Senate approved it 91-7, and the House vote was 412-4; the entire California delegation supported it. On Tuesday, President Barack Obama signed the act.

Its passage demonstrates the broad support for significant investment in America’s flood protection systems and other water projects. It makes important investments and reforms related to our nation’s ports and waterways, which moved more than 2.3 billion tons of goods in 2012. It provides assistance to communities to become more resilient to extreme weather and natural disasters. And it restores vital ecosystems and provides a boost to our economy by creating jobs.

The act also authorizes flood protection and other projects that are critical to ensuring the safety of millions of Americans. This is especially critical for Sacramento, because our city faces some of the nation’s most severe flood risk. The act includes many of Sacramento’s flood protection priorities, including authorization to finish the Natomas Levee Improvement Project.

The Natomas project is a prime example of why passing this bill was so important. If the Natomas levees were to fail, our region would be devastated. Approximately 100,000 people could risk losing their homes; schools, businesses and Interstates 80 and 5 would close; and the Sacramento International Airport would be underwater.

Local and state governments have paid their share of the project to the tune of more than $350 million. The project has been fully studied and has been awarded a chief’s report by the Army Corps of Engineers, signifying that the project is fully vetted and of critical importance to public safety.

Also included in the act is language addressing the corps’ vegetation on levees policy. Our levees are our first line of defense, so we need to use the best science and smartest funding decisions to make them as reliable as possible. This is a decision that can best be made by stakeholders familiar with our rivers. The act calls for regional variances to the national vegetation policy. This would allow thousands of trees to potentially remain on our levees and provide habitat for a number of threatened species, while also maintaining stringent public safety standards.

Our water resources legislation includes language encouraging state and local initiatives that accelerate flood protection projects by allowing federal crediting for work accomplished by local agencies.

In 2006, California voters passed Proposition 1E, which authorized more than $4 billion in bonds for urgent flood protection projects. Sacramento residents, and other communities, have followed suit by providing a local share of these projects.

The Water Resources Reform and Development Act is an essential step in moving these projects forward, including critical projects in West Sacramento and across the Central Valley. There is no question that this bipartisan congressional action represents a win for Sacramento, California and the nation. It puts our nation’s water resources and flood protection policy on the right track. People in political parties compromised to strengthen our nation’s infrastructure, grow our economy and protect the environment. That represents significant progress.

Sen. Barbara Boxer of California is chairwoman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and was chairwoman of the Senate-House conference committee for the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014. Rep. Doris Matsui of Sacramento serves on the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2014/06/11/6473394/viewpoints-water-projects- bill.html#mi_rss=Opinion#storylink=cpy

Alameda: Open space advocates welcome commission decision

By Peter Hegarty [email protected] Posted: 06/11/2014 06:30:24 PM PDT# Comments | Updated: about 16 hours ago

ALAMEDA -- The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission has moved to initiate legal action against the federal General Services Administration over its decision to use eminent domain to acquire McKay Avenue, the street that leads into Crab Cove Visitor Center and near a site where a developer proposes to build homes.

The commission's decision, which came during a closed session June 5, follows a citizens group who secured enough signatures to place an initiative on the November ballot to rezone the area as open space.

Developer Tim Lewis Communities acquired the approximately 4-acre site during a June 2011 auction of surplus federal property. But the deal remains in escrow because state officials will not grant utility easement rights for McKay Avenue, which prompted the GSA to launch eminent domain proceedings in April.

The commission's decision is aimed at compelling the GSA to show its actions are allowed under the federal Coastal Zone Management Act, which requires federal coastline projects be consistent with state law, or in this case with the commission's San Francisco Bay Plan, according to open space advocates.

The East Bay Regional Park District also bid on the property near McKay Avenue because it wants to expand its Crab Visitor Center under Measure WW, which Alameda and Contra Costa voters approved in November 2008 to protect and expand open space at the district.

"We are gratified that (the commission) decided to take action against the heavy-handed tactics being used by the GSA for the benefit of a private developer of luxury housing," said Karin Lucas of the Friends of Crown Beach, which collected the signatures for the November ballot initiative. "In 2008 Alameda voters decided that this land should be used for expansion of Crown beach."

The developer's winning bid is believed to have been about $3 million.

If the commission can successfully secure a consistency determination, it will temporarily halt the eminent domain proceedings in federal court, Lucas said.

Known as Neptune Pointe, the neighborhood was one of several where the City Council adopted zoning changes in July 2012 to meet the city's affordable housing and other residential needs. The area is no longer included, however, as a possible site for homes in the Housing Element of the city's General Plan.

The park district is currently suing the city over the rezoning, saying it was done without proper notice and without a completed Environmental Impact Report as required by the California Environmental Quality Act.

Reach Peter Hegarty at 510-748-1654 or follow him on Twitter.com/Peter_Hegarty.

CA17: Honda and Khanna take their victory laps

Rep. Mike Honda’s 22-percentage-point lead over insurgent Democratic challenger Ro Khanna in Tuesday’s 17th Congressional District primary has both the party’s establishment and its liberal wing crowing with delight.

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Steve Israel issued a statement praising Honda, D- San Jose, on his “decisive win” and calling him “the ideal leader for the Bay Area” with “an unparalleled record of delivering results in education, innovation and helping to rebuild the middle class.”

Charles Chamberlain, executive director of the liberal grassroots group Democracy for America, used sharper terms, calling Honda “the true grassroots progressive in the race, over the billionaire-backed, Republican-lite Ro Khanna.”

“With the registered Republicans now out of the race, Democracy for America members look forward to continuing to make clear that Mike Honda is the only progressive Democrat in this race — a job we expect to be made considerably easier as Republican-lite Ro Khanna inevitably begins making the same right-wing pitch to voters that he used to ‘win’ the support of fringe-right millionaires and billionaires,” Chamberlain said.

And the Progressive Change Campaign Committee counts Honda among victories in what it “is calling ‘Progressive Super Tuesday’ because ‘Elizabeth Warren wing’ Democrats across the country won their races against Corporate Democrats.”

As I wrote Tuesday night, Honda’s victory margin gives him some room to breathe as he heads for his November showdown with Khanna. They’re about equally matched in money, and Honda – who already has the name recognition that comes with being a seven-term incumbent – has not yet even started advertising on television.

But Khanna – who came out swinging Tuesday night by challenging Honda to swear off negative campaigning, shun independent expenditures and meet for five debates – says he has five months to play catch-up. His campaign issued a lengthy memo Wednesday from consultant Jeremy Bird – who was national field director of President Obama’s re-election camoaign – explaining why Khanna is “in a strong position” looking ahead to November.

Ro KhannaThe memo notes that Khanna has moved from 5 percent in the polls to his 27 percent showing on Tuesday, even with three other candidates in the field, while Honda dropped from 57 percent in his own poll to 49 percent Tuesday. “And any time an incumbent falls below 50% – especially one who started with as strong name ID as Honda – that suggests a highly vulnerable candidate,” Bird wrote.

November will offer a larger, more moderate electorate, the memo says.

“Honda’s best performing group (strong partisan Democrats) is already accounted for in the primary vote,” Bird wrote. “There is no more natural constituency for Rep. Honda to reach out to. Rep. Honda’s worst performing groups, independent Democrats, DTS and Republican voters, make up the vast majority of the up- for-grabs vote pool. He has to win votes from groups outside his core appeal. This will be a formidable challenge because his vote share over the primary shrunk, especially with these groups, while Ro Khanna’s grew.”

Posted on Wednesday, June 4th, 2014 Under: 2014 primary, Mike Honda, U.S. House | 7 Comments

CA15: Swalwell sits pretty as rivals fight for 2nd

As of now, Rep. Eric Swalwell has taken 49.2 percent of the 15th Congressional District’s vote with Republican Hugh Bussell 25.9 percent and state Senate Majority Leader Ellen Corbett at 24.9 percent.

And that looks a recipe for Swalwell’s second term.

Bussell, the Alameda County GOP vice chairman from Livermore, leads Corbett, D-Hayward, by only about 600 votes, too small a margin to call which one of them will make it into the top two. In Alameda County, which includes the lion’s share of the district, the registrar still must review and/or count about 64,000 vote-by-mail ballots plus about 8,000 provisional ballots countywide. Likewise, Contra Costa County has as many as 50,000 more ballots to count.

The district’s voters are 48 percent Democrats, 22 percent Republicans and 21 percent nonpartisans. Swalwell, D-Dublin, built a Democrat-nonpartisan bloc – with a few Republicans too, probably – to dominate the middle of the field and crowd Corbett to one side; by drawing almost half the vote, he left her no room to maneuver beyond her liberal, labor-backed, Democratic base.

Bussell seemed happy Wednesday, and rightly so – his share of the vote slightly exceeded his party’s registration. But he’s probably too smart and well-versed to believe in his heart that if he gets to November, he can win.

Few who voted for Corbett will vote for him; they’ll vote either for Swalwell or not at all. And Bussell can expect no monetary aid from the state GOP, the National Republican Congressional Committee or other party entities, who’ll be focused on winnable races; he had about $3,200 cash on hand to Swalwell’s $697,000 as of mid-May.

“It’s a very steep hill to climb,” he acknowledged Wednesday. “On the other hand, as people take notice that there’s a Republican in the race, they may take a closer look at what I stand for … and Eric might find some of his support falling away as well.”

If Corbett edges out Bussell, it’s hard to imagine Bussell voters pivoting to support her instead of Swalwell – she argues Swalwell isn’t liberal enough for the district. And if her support from labor unions only just barely gets her into the top two this week, it’s hard to see how they can suddenly push her to victory in the larger- turnout, less ideological electorate we’ll see in November.

Corbett was enduring the primary cliffhanger stoically Wednesday.

“I called Mr. Swalwell this morning and wished him well and congratulated him in coming in first,” she said. ut we’re just going to have to wait for the votes to be counted … We’ll see how that goes.”

Bussell agreed. “I’m guardedly optimistic. At some level, it’s just fantastic we’re even at this point.”

Posted on Wednesday, June 4th, 2014

Open Space Measure AA backers declare victory in $300 million bond measure

By Paul Rogers [email protected] Posted: 06/09/2014 01:44:03 PM PDT0 Comments | Updated: 3 days ago

Environmentalists and park lovers declared victory Monday in a closely watched battle over a ballot measure aimed at providing a cash infusion for Silicon Valley open-space projects in the region's race against sprawl.

Measure AA -- a $300 million bond measure that will help the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District build more trails, preserve redwoods and buy more pristine land -- needed a two-thirds majority. And it now appears inevitable that it will squeak through, backers said. It is the second-largest local parks funding measure ever passed in California, behind only a $500 million bond passed in 2008 by voters in Alameda and Contra Costa counties for the East Bay Regional Park District.

"It is terrific to live in a place that puts such a high value on protecting our scarce natural areas for future generations," said Walter Moore, president of the Peninsula Open Space Trust, the nonprofit Palo Alto group that helped fund the $1 million Yes on AA campaign.

Since the election last Tuesday, Measure AA has been a nail-biter, one of the closest races in the Bay Area. On election night, it had only 66.8 percent support -- a few dozen votes over the total needed for passage.

In the days afterward, however, as mail-in ballots received on election day were counted, the total gradually increased. By Monday night, the yes vote stood at 67.8 percent, according to the Santa Clara and San Mateo county registrars' offices. Counties have until July 1 to certify the vote.

Opponents Monday acknowledged the math was not in their favor.

"I'm not quite ready to concede yet that the fat lady has sung, but it isn't looking good," said Mark Hinkle, president of the Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association.

Hinkle said his group opposes not only more taxes, but taking land out of development.

"You can pretty much kiss affordable housing goodbye because of districts like this," he said. "If you can't build on open space, that drives up the price of housing."

If the measure passes, residents who live within the open space district's boundaries -- including much of San Mateo and Santa Clara counties (but not San Jose) and a sliver of Santa Cruz County near Summit Road -- will see taxes rise $3.18 per $100,000 of assessed value on their property. Property owners currently pay $17 per $100,000 of value to fund the district.

The money will be used to acquire between 13,000 and 28,000 more acres, in addition to 62,000 acres already preserved, district officials say. It also would pay to open district properties to the public that currently are closed for lack of funds, including the Bear Creek Redwoods near Los Gatos on the site of the former Alma College; Miramontes Ridge, between Half Moon Bay and Skyline Drive; and the summit of Mount Umunhum, a former Air Force radar station south of San Jose. "We're hitting the ground running, and we look forward to the day in the near future when we come together again to celebrate the completion of the first Measure AA-funded project," said Steve Abbors, the district's general manager.

The measure was being watched by environmentalists and parks aficionados statewide. It offered a dose of good cheer following the loss in 2010 of Proposition 21, a statewide measure that would have boosted state parks funding through an $18 annual vehicle registration fee.

"Because of the recession and the severe budget challenges the state has had, this is our best news in four years," said Darla Guenzler, executive director of the California Council of Land Trusts in Sacramento.

The Yes on AA campaign, which was funded by environmental groups and several large technology industry donors, estimated late Monday that there were about 5,700 ballots that remained to be counted. With 104,383 ballots tallied, the measure was ahead of the two-thirds majority by 1,179 votes. The remaining ballots would have to be more than 60 percent "no" for the measure to fail -- a highly unlikely scenario.

"They felt confident to call it," said Alex Doniach, a spokeswoman for the Yes on AA campaign.

The apparent victory may trigger similar measures. Later this month, the Santa Clara County Open Space Authority is expected to decide whether to place a $24 per parcel tax measure on the November ballot. The measure, which would raise about $8 million a year, would also require a two-thirds vote.

Andrea Mackenzie, the agency's general manager, called the Measure AA vote "a hopeful sign."

The authority's boundaries -- which include San Jose, Milpitas, Morgan Hill, Campbell and other cities -- does not overlap with the Midpeninsula district boundaries.

"A victory for open space anywhere in the South Bay is great news for all of us," Mackenzie said. "We see this as a bellwether of public support for protecting open space in our region."

Paul Rogers covers resources and environmental issues. Contact him at 408-920-5045. Follow him at Twitter.com/paulrogerssjmn.

Close races remain a week after California primary

By JULIET WILLIAMS, Associated Press Posted: 06/12/2014 05:38:40 AM PDT0 Comments | Updated: about 4 hours ago

SACRAMENTO -- The race for state controller, in which two Democrats are vying for second place, remained up in the air on Tuesday along with several other contests, a week after California's statewide primary.

Fresno Mayor Ashley Swearengin, a Republican, sealed the top spot in the controller's contest but does not yet know who she will face in November. Former Assembly Speaker John Perez had only a few hundred votes over Board of Equalization member Betty Yee.

Under California's new primary system, the top two vote-getters advance to the general election regardless of party affiliation.

County clerks estimate that as many as 756,000 ballots remained uncounted statewide.

The challengers for as many as four U.S. House races and up to five state legislative races also remained undetermined, according to reports filed with the secretary of state's office.

It was unclear who will challenge Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell in the 15th Congressional District, where only a few hundred votes separate state Sen. Ellen Corbett, a Democrat from Hayward, and Hugh Bussell, a Republican from Dublin, for second place.

In the 24th Congressional District, incumbent Democrat Lois Capps will likely face a Republican, but only a few hundred votes separate Justin Donald Fareed and Chris Mitchum, son of actor Robert Mitchum, for second place.

In the San Bernardino-area's 31st Congressional District, Democrats were hoping to take control of the seat after the retirement of Republican Rep. Gary Miller. But Iraq War veteran and security consultant Paul Chabot, a Republican, advanced to the runoff, with Democrat Pete Aguilar only a few hundred votes ahead of Republican Lesli Gooch for the second spot on the November ballot.

In the Legislature, the margin in five contests was within 2 percentage points.

The open Southern California seat of Democratic Sen. Ted Lieu, who is running for Congress, will feature two Republicans in November: Jeff Stone, who finished as the top vote-getter, and either former state lawmaker Bonnie Garcia or Glenn A. Miller. Garcia declared victory on Friday but is ahead by only a few hundred votes.

Fewer than 1,000 votes separate a Republican and two Democrats in the Sacramento-area seat being vacated by Assemblywoman Mariko Yamada, a Democrat. Republican Charlie Schaupp was leading in the 4th district, with Democrats Bill Dodd and Dan Wolk close behind.

In the attorney general's race, incumbent Democrat Kamala Harris easily advanced and is likely to face Republican Ronald Gold, who currently has a 32,000-vote lead over fellow Republican Phil Wyman. A secessionist movement in Tehama County passed with about 56 percent of the vote, allowing local officials to begin working with four other counties that are considering forming a new state called Jefferson. Only a few hundred ballots remained to be counted, not enough to change the outcome.

Some of the tight races could be headed for recounts, which can take weeks.

Any registered voter can request a recount but they must be willing to pay the cost, which is refunded if the outcome of the race changes after the tally.

Contra Costa Times editorial: Highest profile Assembly race is far from over

Contra Costa Times editorial © 2014 Bay Area News Group POSTED: 06/04/2014 12:07:28 PM PDT6 COMMENTS | UPDATED: 8 DAYS AGO

Candidate for State Assembly 16th District

As primary elections go, Tuesday's polling was, well, a bore.

At least it seemed to be for much of the East Bay. That assessment was buttressed by the abysmal voter turnout in both Alameda and Contra Costa counties.

Neither county managed to draw 20 percent of its voters to the polls largely because of a dearth of competitive races or interesting issues on the ballot.

Nearly all of the significant offices in both counties that usually provide election fireworks saw incumbents running unopposed. For example, the sheriff, district attorney and assessor in both counties were re-elected without opposition, as were four members of the board of supervisors -- two in each county.

Still, there was one race that provided some interest.

The four-way race for the seat in Assembly District 16, which covers portions of both counties, was the East Bay's highest profile race.

The race essentially was a test of whether an independent Democrat, Steve Glazer, could successfully buck the public-employee union dominance of his party to land a spot in the primary. The answer was no.

In the end, the race came out exactly as most analysts had forecast.

Republican candidate Catharine Baker came in first, which was expected because she is a solid candidate and the only Republican in the race. That left three candidates to battle it out in the Democrat-majority district for the right to face Baker in November's general election. But really the race was between Glazer, Jerry Brown's political strategist, and union-backed Dublin Mayor Tim Sbranti. Newell Arnerich, a Danville Democrat councilman, simply did not have enough name recognition nor the funds to buy it.

Glazer had bucked public-employee unions by vocally opposing last year's two BART strikes and arguing for legislation to ban such strikes. Sbranti, a member of a public-employee union himself, had supported the BART unions during the strikes.

The two campaigns, as well as independent expenditure committees, went to war on the Bay Area's airwaves. Each aired television and radio commercials that took direct aim at the other and largely ignored both Baker and Arnerich. That allowed Baker to keep her advertising powder dry for the general election. But neither she nor Arnerich will be ignored going forward.

Baker has taken similar positions to Glazer on the BART issue, so she can expect Sbranti to turn his media barrage toward her and he can expect her to respond. Meanwhile, the more than 11 percent of the voters who voted for Arnerich will suddenly become a sought-after group, as will Glazer's voters, many of whom voted for him because of his position on transit strikes.

So, clearly, voters should expect to hear much more about this race between now and November.

California's budget deadline looms with a more civil tone in Capitol

By Jessica Calefati [email protected] POSTED: 06/10/2014 06:51:41 PM PDT0 COMMENTS | UPDATED: A DAY AGO

SACRAMENTO -- The knockdown, drag-out partisan fights, stretching on for months, are history. These days, state budget negotiations are downright cordial.

According to Capitol sources briefed on closed-door budget negotiations, the administration of Gov. Jerry Brown and Democratic lawmakers have quietly reached deals on funding prekindergarten, pumping more money into the state's beleaguered court system and funding levels for the state's controversial bullet train.

Suddenly robust state finances and voter-approved measures that made it possible to pass a budget with a simple majority and dock lawmakers' pay if they don't meet the June 15 deadline to pass a budget are responsible for much of the civility. But this year's discussions also showed that Brown and the Democratic-controlled Legislature that some had predicted would want to spend wildly are pretty much on the same page.

"They have a lot of differences, but at the end of the day, the differences are not so great that they can't find a way to compromise and get the budget done on time," said Bill Whalen, a research fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution and top aide to former Republican Gov. Pete Wilson.

Previously, legislative leaders had already struck deals with the Brown administration on some key issues, including a new "rainy day fund" and a plan to fund teacher pensions. And they're expected to spend the rest of the week ironing out several other deals ahead of the midnight Sunday deadline.

Deciding whether to allow home aides who work for the state's In-Home Supportive Services program to earn overtime pay could prove to be the most thorny issue in this year's budget talks. Meetings on the topic have been "heated," said sources with knowledge of the discussions.

New federal rules require America's in-home workers to get overtime pay starting next year, but Brown says it will be too costly for California and instead wants to limit aides to 40-hour work weeks.

After proposing a $160 million increase in spending for California's courts, Brown has reportedly agreed to another modest bump in funding for the judicial system, whose budget was hit hard at the height of the state's financial crisis.

And while the governor would not agree to back Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg's $1 billion plan to enroll all 4-year-olds in "quality preschools," Brown has agreed to support a scaled- down proposal to expand access for many low-income children, according to sources, who declined to offer specifics.

Brown and Democratic legislative leaders have also nailed down a framework for spending the cap-and-trade proceeds now collected annually from the state's worst polluters in the fight against greenhouse gases and climate change.

The governor wanted to allocate a third of the fees -- roughly $850 million in the next fiscal year - - to construction of the bullet train. But that figure may drop to as low as 15 percent, with another 5 percent of proceeds spent on intercity rail projects, said Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, who chairs the Senate's budget and fiscal review committee.

Moving forward, Brown has reportedly agreed to Senate Democrats' pitch to spend a little less than half of the cap-and-trade money generated each year on affordable housing constructed near "green" transit, such as trains and light-rail lines.

"The governor was clear that he wanted some cap-and-trade money spent on high-speed rail, but his comments on what to do with the rest of the money were much more brief," Leno said. "That's where the Senate's plan comes into play."

Another key point of contention is deciding just how much surplus money the state has -- a pleasant reversal from just a few years ago when the state's budget was $26 billion in the red.

Last month, Brown proposed a $107.7 billion general fund spending plan built on conservative estimates for capital gains tax revenue, which came in higher than expected this year but is historically volatile.

The Legislative Analyst's Office projects California will net $2.5 billion more in tax revenue next year compared to Brown's plan. And Democratic leaders say they believe the nonpartisan office.

"The LAO has a long-standing reputation for making revenue projections analytically, not politically," said Rhys Williams, a spokesman for Steinberg.

Despite the differences, political experts say, wrestling with a surplus rather than a deficit makes it a lot easier to please all parties.

"No one will walk away hungry or without something," said Larry Gerston, a political science professor at San Jose State. "But negotiating these last few issues is never a simple task."

Contact Jessica Calefati at 916-441-2101. Follow her at Twitter.com/calefati. Read the Political Blotter at IBAbuzz.com/politics.

CA15: Bussell’s lead over Corbett has been halved

By Josh Richman Wednesday, June 11th, 2014 at 5:43 pm in 2014 primary, Ellen Corbett, Eric Swalwell, U.S. House.

Republican Hugh Bussell’s narrow lead over state Senate Majority Leader Ellen Corbett in the 15th Congressional District was halved by an election-results update posted Wednesday afternoon by the Alameda County Registrar of Voters.

Bussell, of Livermore, and Corbett, D-San Leandro, are vying to finish second in the race; whoever prevails will face Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Dublin, in November’s general election. Swalwell finished first with 49.1 percent of the vote in last Tuesday’s primary.

Since the previous update on Saturday, Bussell had led Corbett by 721 votes, or about 1 percent of all votes cast. But after the update at 4 p.m. Wednesday, his lead is now 323 votes, or about four-tenths of a percent.

However, this might be as close as Corbett gets.

This now Alameda County’s “unofficial final” result, spokesman Guy Ashley said Wednesday afternoon – all ballots have now been scanned, and the county is now starting its one-percent manual tally to audit its results, as required by law.

The district also includes a slice of Contra Costa County, where registrar Joe Canciamilla won’t update his online results until Friday; as of Monday, his county had about 6,000 provisional ballots and about 4,000 exception ballots – damaged or otherwise questionable – left to count.

But Bussell has led Corbett in Contra Costa County all along, so it’s unlikely that further results there will help her.

Corbett could not be reached for comment Friday afternoon.

California to add child care, transitional kindergarten slots in budget deal

By David Siders and Jim Miller [email protected] Published: Wednesday, Jun. 11, 2014 - 10:52 pm Last Modified: Thursday, Jun. 12, 2014 - 8:34 am

California will add thousands of additional transitional kindergarten and child care slots for young children, according to a budget deal taking shape at the Capitol, while falling short of a broader program expansion Democratic lawmakers originally proposed.

The Legislature’s budget-writing committee met late into the night Wednesday, convening for the first time in nearly a week to close out a range of budget issues dealing with education, local government and other subjects. The panel is expected to finish its work Thursday, with legislative leaders and Gov. Jerry Brown on the verge of announcing a final deal for the fiscal year that begins July 1.

The agreement will include $264 million for several new children’s programs, including 11,500 preschool slots for low-income 4-year-olds by June 2015, while another 31,500 slots would be created in future years. In addition, there would be $50 million in grants to preschool programs, $69 million to increase reimbursement rates for early learning and child care providers, and more training. Democrats initially sought much more, including offering transitional kindergarten to all 4-year-olds, regardless of income.

“This is quite a step forward,” Assemblywoman Shirley Weber, D-San Diego, said Wednesday, acknowledging that majority Democrats “had hoped obviously for a lot more.”

Some extra spending depends on higher than expected revenue. There is an additional $200 million in one-time funding for the University of California, California State University and other programs – but only if property tax revenue comes in higher than estimates in Brown’s budget. And the state would pay off more of a $900 million pre-2004 debt to local governments – if general fund revenue exceeds the administration’s estimates.

Lawmakers in the Democratic-controlled Legislature have called for hundreds of millions of dollars more in spending than Brown has proposed. Still unsettled are disagreements over in-home care services and how to spend hundreds of millions of dollars in carbon-reduction funds, including Brown’s proposal to use money from the state’s cap-and-trade program for his high-speed rail project.

The Legislature is expected to vote on the plan Sunday, the constitutional deadline to pass a budget.

Meanwhile, school officials came out against state budget language proposed quietly in recent days to cap the amount of money California school districts may set aside for economic uncertainties.

The language, approved by committee members Wednesday, would limit districts’ future fund balances in most cases to two or three times the minimum required by law, a potential victory for public employee unions resistant to tying money up in reserves. In a letter to Brown administration officials and lawmakers Wednesday, the Education Management Group, which represents school boards, administrators and superintendents, said the bill language is “fiscally irresponsible” and inconsistent with principles of local control.

“For most of the last two decades, California has focused on preventing school district bankruptcies by enacting laws that require multiyear projections, enforcement of strict fiscal standards by county offices of education, early intervention, and even the authority to override the spending decisions of local governing boards,” the letter said. “It is therefore ironic that, at the very time an initiative has been placed on the statewide ballot to strengthen the state’s rainy-day fund, that the Legislature and governor would consider statutory changes that eviscerate provisions at the local school district level that are based on the same premise of fiscal prudence and responsibility.”

The Education Management Group also objected to the last-minute insertion of the language in a months-long budget process.

“People’s jaws are still agape,” said Bob Blattner, an education lobbyist. “At the very last second, it’s such a significant policy issue to drop.”

Brown and lawmakers last month agreed to a major component of the spending plan, a rainy-day fund measure that, if approved by voters, would increase statewide reserves.

Public employee unions had objected to a rainy-day fund measure previously scheduled for the ballot. Kevin Gordon, a longtime education lobbyist, said he suspects “some linkage here to the rainy-day fund and the fact that the California Teachers Association didn’t object” to the new rainy-day fund measure.

“I just wonder if this is a wise thing to do,” said Sen. Loni Hancock, citing the financial problems of some schools in her East Bay district.

The Brown administration said the restriction would only take effect if the rainy-day fund measure passes, and teacher unions said the bill would help ensure school districts don’t hoard money.

“This is all about understanding that school districts really must spend the taxpayers’ dollars that they receive in the classroom,” said Mike Myslinski, a spokesman for CTA.

He said that “may translate into fiscal security for administrators, but it means limiting programs for students.”

As lawmakers took up outstanding issues in committee Wednesday, Republicans complained about receiving deal points without time for review. Sen. Jim Nielsen, R-Gerber, said he had just more than an hour to read and consider “this whole bloody thing.”

“This is no way to do the people’s business,” he said.

Call David Siders, Bee Capitol Bureau, (916) 321-1215. Follow him on Twitter @davidsiders.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2014/06/11/6477263/california-to-add-child-care- transitional.html#mi_rss=Capitol%20and%20California#storylink=cpy

What Cantor's defeat means for California Republicans

Carolyn Lochhead and Carla Marinucci Updated 8:17 am, Thursday, June 12, 2014

Rep. Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield is in running for a leadership spot. Photo: J. Scott Applewhite, Associated Press

Washington -- The upset of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor by a Tea Party insurgent has planted terror in the GOP over immigration reform, left California Republicans who favor an overhaul in an isolated position, and put a Central Valley Republican directly in line for the second-highest job in the House.

Cantor's loss will reverberate in California: The contest for his leadership job pits Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R- Bakersfield, against at least two conservative Texans. Silicon Valley loses an ally in Cantor, who cultivated close ties to the valley's political money. And the party's likely rightward shift on immigration poses dangers to California Republicans in heavily Latino districts.

Immigration reform

The chances for sweeping immigration changes this year were all but buried long before Cantor's primary defeat Tuesday. But challenger David Brat's accusation during the Virginia campaign that Cantor favored amnesty because of his support for piecemeal reforms is widely expected to make most House Republicans even more leery of taking on the issue.

California Republicans, particularly from Central Valley districts with large Latino constituencies, have been among the few in their party to embrace a comprehensive reform of immigration laws along the lines that passed the Senate a year ago. In the wake of Cantor's defeat, Rep. David Valadao, R-Hanford (Kings County), insisted, "Immigration reform is not dead."

Immigration reform advocates point to GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham's easy primary victory in South Carolina on Tuesday as evidence that immigration was not necessarily Cantor's undoing. Graham is a longtime backer of immigration reform.

But even Republicans who think the media are overstating immigration's role in Cantor's loss concede that the party will be even more timid on the matter now.

"It's certainly a come-to-Jesus moment for House Republicans in terms of what's going to happen with the prospects for immigration reform between now and the 2014 elections," said Republican strategist Ford O'Connell. Michael Eggman, the Democratic challenger to GOP Rep. Jeff Denham of Turlock (Stanislaus County), leaped on the immigration angle of Cantor's defeat, accusing the ousted leader of talking "out of both sides of his mouth on immigration reform," and Denham of going along. In the Central Valley, both farmers and Latino voters are strong supporters of an immigration overhaul.

Working the valley

For a Virginia Republican, Cantor had a high profile in California. He frequently visited the state to raise money - $339,000 in the last cycle alone, according to OpenSecrets.org, which tracks political cash.

Much of that came from Silicon Valley, which Cantor and fellow GOP "young gun" Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin cultivated by selling the GOP as the party of entrepreneurial tax breaks and fewer regulations.

In 2011, Cantor visited Facebook in Palo Alto and starred on a panel discussion with the firm's chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg, saying he wanted to tell younger audiences about the GOP's "optimistic message" for the country and business.

In 2012, Cantor took a much publicized ride in Google's driverless car.

He also had regular contacts with TechNet, a regional advocacy group. And it paid off: Donors from the Internet and computer industries gave $131,000 to his campaigns, including political action committees, according to OpenSecrets.

Democrats have been raising money in Silicon Valley since at least the Clinton administration - President Obama will visit Los Altos in July for the second time in three months - and have been far more effective than Republicans in using social media and outreach at the grassroots level in the tech mecca.

Aaron Ginn, a conservative tech insider and GOP activist from San Mateo, said Cantor's fall holds a lesson for the GOP on the tech front.

"This is what happens when your data goes wrong - and this is a classic example of why you need to get serious tech people involved who have done this stuff and test your assumptions," Ginn said. Republicans can't "just assume what it was last year is what it will be this year."

California vs. Texas

While Cantor had eyes on becoming House speaker, he was disliked not only, as it turns out, by his own constituents, but also by a healthy contingent of his fellow Republicans.

Such is not the case for McCarthy, who stands directly behind Cantor in the leadership hierarchy and will try for the majority leader's job.

The Bakersfield Republican already faces challenges from at least two conservative Texans, Reps. Pete Sessions and Jeb Hensarling. Some red state Republicans argue that their blue state brethren are too vulnerable and too moderate to lead a party turning rightward with each election.

That would especially hold true in California, where districts are no longer contorted along party lines to ensure the re-election of incumbents and the top-two primary forces candidates to appeal to other parties' voters.

However, California has its own Tea Party insurgency, led by Assemblyman Tim Donnelly, who finished just out of the running in the June 3 gubernatorial primary despite having almost no campaign funding and facing near-universal opposition from the Republican establishment, which lined up behind former Treasury official Neel Kashkari. Donnelly said Wednesday that the California and Virginia campaigns suggested that "the party has gone to war with its own grass roots" and said his backers were especially angry over attack mailers calling him a divisive fringe candidate.

"They feel it was directed at them personally," Donnelly said. "And they're telling me that if you're pro-life, pro- Second Amendment, pro-family ... that you're in their crosshairs."

McCarthy's seat is safe - he ran unopposed June 3 - but he's had more than his share of stumbles as the GOP's whip, the No. 3 post in the House who is responsible for counting votes.

Republican leaders have repeatedly been caught by surprise on big votes, forced to pull bills from the floor at the last minute, or worse, be embarrassed by relying on House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco to pass legislation with Democratic votes.

Yet while McCarthy may be viewed as weak, he is well liked on both sides of the aisle and can tap a deep fundraising base in California, where - like Cantor - he is a frequent visitor to Silicon Valley.

Cantor was considered a Machiavellian plotter, ready to knife Speaker John Boehner as the occasion demanded. Eventually this reputation proved his undoing, as voters threw him out in part because he was seen as putting his district second to his Washington maneuvering.

"McCarthy is the logical choice" to move into the majority leader post, O'Connell, the Republican strategist, said. "The one thing he has going for him that he's well liked by his House colleagues, and that goes a long way in these fierce leadership battles."

Carolyn Lochhead and Carla Marinucci are San Francisco Chronicle staff writers. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] Twitter: @carolynlochhead, @cmarinucci

New report says California parks continue to lag

The coast of Big Sur in central California looking south near Julia Pfeiffer Burns State Park. A new report says the state could do more to improve parks and green space throughout California. (Joseph Plotz / Los Angeles Times)

CHRIS MEGERIAN ConservationEnvironmental IssuesEconomy, Business and FinanceFinance

SACRAMENTO -- California’s parks are being dragged down by stagnant leadership, inadequate resources and a failure to serve the state’s growing population of young Latinos, according to a draft report from an independent commission created to examine the troubled park system.

The California Department of Parks and Recreation “has not been able to keep pace with the times and now faces significant system-wide financial and organizational challenges,” the report says. “These challenges place at risk the system’s continued viability, as well as the public’s trust and confidence in the Department charged with caring for the state’s natural and cultural resources.”

The report, which will be worked on throughout the year, is scheduled to be presented to the Parks Forward Commission next week.

The parks department has been under close scrutiny since 2012, when it was revealed that agency officials had stockpiled millions of dollars at a time when the state was closing parks because of budget cuts. The department’s director was ousted and a new one appointed with a mandate to refurbish the parks system’s image and operations.

The Parks Forward report, much like others released since the accounting scandal came to light, suggests the department has a long way to go.

"Despite years of well-intentioned external reports and internal strategic plans, the Department has not yet been able to achieve the magnitude or scope of change needed," the report says. Improving the parks system will require “fundamentally transforming its operations and management,” the report states. For example, it says the leadership needs to be more diverse and include more people who are not public safety officers.

The report also says there aren’t enough parks in California’s growing urban areas, where there are increasing numbers of young Latinos. The department should experiment with new types of public spaces that include amenities like soccer fields and picnic areas, as well as improve transportation to parks, according to the report.

“The best way to get more Californians to understand the value of parks is to get more Californians to visit parks,” the report says.

The Parks Forward report says the department needs a permanent source of funding to safeguard the state’s natural resources and pay for more than $1 billion in overdue maintenance. However, the report does not suggest where the money could come from.

In a statement, Resources Secretary John Laird said he looks forward to “carefully reviewing the staff report and recommendations.”

He thanked the commission for “clearly putting a great deal of creative thought and effort into their top-to-bottom review.”

Vicky Waters, a parks spokeswoman, issued a statement saying department officials "will take a very close look at the report and their recommendations, and look forward to engaging the commission as this process moves forward."

Dublin adopts citizens' initiative to create urban limit line on east side of town

By Nate Gartrell Correspondent

POSTED: 06/04/2014 11:50:19 AM PDT0 COMMENTS UPDATED: 06/04/2014 04:33:52 PM PDT

DUBLIN -- The East Bay's fastest growing city has created an urban limit line along the eastern side of town to slow down development in the Doolan and Collier Canyon areas between Dublin and Livermore.

Dublin is also actively opposing a measure that would reserve 40 percent of the Doolan Canyon area for development in the future, which has been scheduled for the Nov. 4 ballot.

Faced with two conflicting citizens' initiatives on Doolan Canyon's future, the council voted unanimously Tuesday to approve the Dublin Open Space initiative and to send the opposing Let Dublin Decide initiative to the ballot.

The council also voiced opposition to the Let Dublin Decide initiative and formed a two-member committee with Mayor Tim Sbranti and Councilman Abe Gupta to draft a ballot argument for the November election to oppose the measure.

"I believe development has to be balanced, and as mentioned by the residents, it has to be based on smart growth," Gupta said.

The Dublin Open Space initiative establishes an urban limit border along the eastern city limits, maintaining the Doolan-Collier Canyon area as agriculturally zoned open space without the potential for large development. Should any development proposals for the area come the city's way, they would require voter approval.

The Let Dublin Decide initiative would have designated some of the land for development and required development proposals go through the area's various planning commissions and the City Council, as is standard.

The council had explored the possibility of building almost 2,000 homes on 1,450 acres in the Doolan Canyon area as recently as 2010, and local environmental groups began collecting signatures for the Dublin Open Space initiative to curb the possibility of development in that area. They say it's important for open space to provide a natural buffer between cities in the Bay Area to avoid urban sprawl.

Meanwhile, a rival group led by former Dublin Mayor Janet Lockhart began collecting signatures to put the Let Dublin Decide initiative on the ballot. They said their initiative was necessary to prevent Livermore from gaining control of the land, since Livermore recently applied to the Alameda County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for control of the land.

"Look, somebody at some point is going to propose something on Doolan Canyon land. We've known that, and we've known it for the last 40 years," Lockhart said. "When that happens, why not let Dublin residents have a voice in what goes there?"

Before the vote, Sbranti read aloud a letter from Livermore Mayor John Marchand that said Livermore isn't planning to develop the space in question and even quoted from the city's LAFCO application, where they mention their desire to preserve the area as "open space."

"It is Livermore's intent, with Dublin's cooperation to secure the area as a permanent greenbelt buffer between the cities so everyone can have equal access to the land. Those are the facts," Marchand wrote.

Because the two initiatives were in competition, the council could have decided against annexing the land or establishing a limit line by voting down both measures. They could have voted to send both to the November ballot, in which case the one with the most votes would have won. Or they could have created likely legal gridlock by enacting both measures.

City Planning Manager Jeff Baker said he's unsure what will happen if the Let Dublin Decide initiative is approved in November. He told the council to assume the measure that the voters approved would take precedent but added that ultimately "it would be for the courts and the city to decide."

The Let Dublin Decide initiative had four vocal supporters at the meeting. About 30 people showed up in support of the Dublin Open Space initiative, including Dublin residents and members of local environmental groups. About half commented.

"We're ecstatic, obviously," said Seth Adams of Save Mt. Diablo after the council's vote. "This is one of the biggest environmental victories in the Bay Area right now."

From: Jeremy Madsen, Greenbelt Alliance [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2014 3:43 PM To: Erich Pfuehler Subject: Two huge wins for Bay Area open space

Today, I am ecstatic to share with you two monumental wins for open space in the Bay Area from last night:

 The City of Dublin has adopted an urban limit line, which will protect vital open space in Alameda County—such as Doolan Canyon—from sprawl development.  Measure AA—the $300 million bond measure that will fund the preservation of and improvements to open space in San Mateo, Santa Clara, and Santa Cruz counties—appears to have passed in a close vote. These two victories show that there is strong support for safeguarding our natural landscapes among both the general public and elected officials throughout the Bay Area.

According to SFGate, Measure AA appears to have passed with the required two-thirds vote by the slimmest of margins: 0.1% (results won't be confirmed until election officials certify the vote). Thank you to everyone who voted yesterday and to those of you who volunteered with us on this campaign—Measure AA would not have passed without your support. Read more about Measure AA.

At last night's Dublin City Council meeting, the urban limit line initiative—which designates where the city can and cannot grow—was unanimously approved by a count of 5-0. There was a huge outpouring of support for the initiative from Dublin residents and local environmental leaders. This win is the culmination of their hard work with support from groups like the Sierra Club, Save Mount Diablo, Greenbelt Alliance, and many others.

We also applaud the City Council for unanimously opposing a deceptive initiative backed by sprawl developers that would have opened the floodgates for development in Doolan Canyon. If this initiative appears on the November ballot, we'll be ready.

Today, the Bay Area has taken a big step toward fully protecting its 3.6 million-acre greenbelt, and in doing so, has also encouraged reinvesting in our cities and towns to grow in a way that benefits everyone.

Thank you for your support and your passion for the places that make the Bay Area special.

Jeremy Madsen Executive Director

Senate panel to vote on new ethics measure

Updated 10:42 am, Thursday, May 29, 2014

PROVIDENCE, R.I. (AP) — A Senate panel is expected to vote on a new version of legislation that takes a step toward restoring the state ethics commission's jurisdiction over Rhode Island lawmakers.

Senate spokesman Greg Pare said the Judiciary Committee is expected to vote Thursday. The measure proposes a constitutional amendment that would give the ethics panel exclusive oversight authority over lawmakers. Voters would have to approve it.

In 2009 the state Supreme Court interpreted the state constitution's "speech in debate" clause to mean lawmakers are immune from ethics commission prosecution for their core duties, including voting and speaking. Efforts to close the loophole have stalled.

House Speaker Nicholas Mattiello had expressed concern about an earlier version. A spokesman said Thursday Mattiello has pledged to review the new version if it passes.

State Senate scandals inspire new wave of ethics bills

Melody Gutierrez Published 5:05 pm, Wednesday, May 28, 2014

Sacramento --

The criminal scandals in the state Senate this year have resulted in a surge in proposals by lawmakers who want to restore integrity and the public's trust in the Legislature.

Multiple Democratic and Republican proposals are being floated, including bills that would double criminal sentences for lawmakers convicted of bribery, prevent candidates from using campaign funds for their criminal defense and create fundraising blackout periods.

The myriad bills come on the heels of unrelated criminal cases against three senators: Leland Yee, D-San Francisco, is fighting charges levied in March that he conspired to traffic in firearms and traded favors in Sacramento for bribes; Sen. Ron Calderon, D-Montebello (Los Angeles County), was charged in February with bribery and corruption in an FBI sting; and Sen. Roderick Wright, D-Inglewood (Los Angeles County), was convicted in January of eight counts of perjury and voter fraud for lying about living in his district.

All three Democrats were suspended with pay in March.

Scandals are typically followed by political reform efforts, said Jessica Levinson, a Loyola Law School professor who specializes in governmental ethics.

"If you want to pass something dealing with ethics, this is the moment," she said. "We have to be sure when we are passing these laws, it's real reform and not window dressing reform or PR reform."

On Wednesday, Senate Republicans proposed a set of reforms that includes the tougher sentences for bribery and restricts campaign funds from being used for criminal defense.

Yee has been using his campaign account for his abandoned secretary of state bid to pay for his legal defense, including a recent $50,000 payment to the San Francisco law firm Murphy Pearson Bradley & Feeney.

"We're acting decisively in order to begin restoring the public's trust," said Senate Republican Leader Bob Huff of Diamond Bar. "These are simple reforms and we call on Democrats to join us."

Senate Democrats, meanwhile, have proposed myriad new rules, including appointing a Senate ombudsman to investigate misconduct and banning fundraising activities during the end of the legislative session, when critical votes are cast. On Tuesday, the Senate passed a proposal for a constitutional amendment that would allow the Legislature to suspend a lawmaker without pay.

BART strikes a big issue in East Bay Assembly race

John Wildermuth Updated 11:37 pm, Sunday, May 25, 2014

Steve Glazer, an Orinda councilman and Assembly candidate, seeks support last fall at the Orinda BART Station for his campaign to ban transit strikes. Photo: Mike Kepka, The Chronicle

Glazer, an Orinda councilman who is a political consultant and former aide to Gov. Jerry Brown, is taking an unusual path for a Democrat running for the Legislature. He's grappling with unions and running a near single-issue campaign of banning public transit strikes, like the two BART walkouts last year that made life miserable for voters in the East Bay's 16th District.

That's not all the 56-year-old is grappling with. He's joined by two other Democrats, Dublin Mayor Tim Sbranti and Danville Mayor Newell Arnerich, and Republican attorney Catharine Baker in the political equivalent of a no-holds-barred WWE cage match for the chance to replace termed-out Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan, D-Alamo.

Two of the candidates will emerge from the June 3 primary to meet again in November. Glazer is hoping that lingering anger over the BART strikes will give his campaign a boost in a suburban district where thousands of people depend on the train system to get to and from work each day.

"Steve Glazer puts riders first," reads one of his mailers. "That's why his opponents will stop at nothing to try and defeat him."

Glazer toured the BART system last year, gathering signatures on a petition to ban transit strikes, and was a regular outside the Oakland building where BART managers and union leaders engaged in often fruitless talks.

'Fight for commuters'

"I was shocked that not a single elected official in the Bay Area would stand up to the unions," said Glazer, who hasn't spoken much about how he would replace the transit agency's current bargaining system. "I have the independence and courage to fight for commuters against the power of the special interests."

Glazer has his own hooks to special interest money, however. A group financed by California real estate interests has spent nearly $1.1 million on Glazer's behalf, much of it for ads attacking Sbranti, a onetime official with the California Teachers Association, for his support of BART workers' right to strike. As a political consultant, Glazer worked as an adviser to the California Chamber of Commerce's JobsPAC group, which gets its money from companies like Safeway, Disney, Anthem Blue Cross, Occidental Petroleum, Philip Morris and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. So far this year, the group has spent $52,000 to support Glazer's campaign and about $177,000 to oppose Sbranti.

Sbranti, a longtime coach and teacher, isn't happy with Glazer's attempt to dismiss him as the pro-labor candidate because of his support for the BART workers.

"Who started the 'this is the labor guy' stuff?" asked the 39-year-old Sbranti. "Look at my record and you'll see I've always been for economic development. ... I've always been pro-labor, but I'm also pro-business and pro-environment - and refuse to say you can't be all of them."

Sbranti, who says his focus as an assemblyman would be on education, has the endorsement of Buchanan, who is leaving the Assembly after the maximum six years in office. He also has the backing of a number of East Bay Democratic legislators and a wide range of party groups and labor unions.

That support has meant more than a signature on an endorsement card. Labor unions, led by the California Teachers Association, have put together an independent expenditure committee that has raised more than $1.5 million to back Sbranti. Much of the money has gone toward ads and mailers attacking Glazer as a tool of California's business interests.

Low-priced alternative

The megabucks throw-down between Glazer and Sbranti and their backers has left Arnerich shaking his head. The 61-year-old architect says he offers an alternative.

"I'm running a grassroots effort and staying away from the state employee and special interest money," he said. "That's not who I want to represent."

His campaign finance report shows that. So far this year, Arnerich has collected about $21,000 in outside contributions and loaned his campaign $68,000.

Arnerich says he got into the race because his years as a city official and businessman have left him frustrated with Sacramento and the Legislature.

"Every day the state takes and steals money from local government," he said. "The state is sucking the life out of business."

He is not convinced that BART is the all-consuming issue for voters in the district, which runs from Orinda east to Walnut Creek and then down to the Livermore Valley.

"California has a lot of issues," Arnerich said. "I haven't found anyone who wakes up every morning wondering if workers at that particular transit agency should have the right to strike."

Republicans' hope

Baker, the only Republican in the race, may be best served by standing back and watching the three city officials fight. While Democrats have 39 percent of the registration, Republicans and independents make up more than half the district's voters, and a three-way split of the Democratic electorate could give Baker a clear path to the November ballot.

Baker, a Dublin resident who works mainly as an attorney for small family enterprises, wants to loosen state regulation of business.

The state's work rules "make it really hard for employers to make good jobs that are flexible for employees," she said.

Educational priorities

Baker agrees that BART workers shouldn't be allowed to strike and "hold the community hostage." She also favors merit pay for teachers, an easier way to fire educators and a system under which parents could formally evaluate the job their children's teachers are doing.

"This is not just another rung on the political ladder for me," the 43-year-old Baker said. "I saw a problem, wanted to solve it, and that pointed me toward Sacramento."

John Wildermuth is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail: [email protected] Twitter:@jfwildermuth

Feinstein's California drought bill passes Senate

Carolyn Lochhead Updated 9:02 am, Friday, May 23, 2014

(05-23) 09:02 PDT WASHINGTON -- Sen. Dianne Feinstein won unanimous Senate approval of a drought bill Thursday, setting up a potential compromise with House Republicans who have passed legislation that would override endangered-species protections to send more water to farms and cities.

Feinstein's bill had been stalled for weeks, but the California Democrat finally pushed it through by using a process that bypassed committee review and public debate. She overcame Republican objections by dropping $300 million in spending on drought-relief projects.

The bill's co-sponsors include Feinstein's fellow California Democrat, Sen. Barbara Boxer, who has strong ties to environmental groups. That did little to ease the concern of environmentalists, who fear that both the Senate and House versions of the bill will weaken protection for salmon and steelhead trout during their spring migration.

Feinstein dismissed their concerns, saying in an interview last week that environmentalists "have never been helpful to me in producing good water policy."

Her bill, SB2198, would ease restrictions on water exports from the San Joaquin-Sacramento River Delta to farms and cities. She said her goal is to "maximize pumping" within the confines of endangered species protections "for the length of the emergency."

The eased restrictions would remain in effect until Gov. Jerry Brown lifts the emergency drought declaration he imposed in January. The declaration permits water agencies to relax certain environmental rules temporarily to ensure water supplies for human use.

Feinstein said she intends to take the legislation into conference with the House, where Republicans passed a bill in February that would mandate more water shipments from the delta to San Joaquin Valley farms and override the Endangered Species Act.

Feinstein's bill would increase "flexibility" for agencies to manage the drought, a term that has come to mean easing environmental rules to increase water deliveries.

In a statement Thursday night, Feinstein said, "The next step is working with the House to determine what measures we can agree on to improve water supplies. My hope is that this process can proceed quickly and bypass many of the controversial issues that have been raised in the past."

Six members of the California GOP House delegation released a statement saying, "While Sen. Feinstein's bill is a starting point, it fails to address our state's long-term needs. We now have an opportunity to find a balance between her temporary measure and the comprehensive bill passed by the House."

At least one environmentalist was not optimistic. "Despite claims to the contrary, the Senate legislation will undermine the minimum protections our endangered steelhead need to avoid jeopardy of extinction," said Jon Rosenfield of the Bay Institute. "Federal scientists were very careful to make sure that this and other protections have the minimum possible impact on water supplies - they are less protective of the fish during drier years. Overriding scientific findings from Capitol Hill is not going to get us through this drought or help us solve California's perennial water woes."

Editorial: Jerry Brown needs to find an innovative and energetic parks director

By the Editorial Board Published: Friday, May. 23, 2014 - 12:00 am

Gov. Jerry Brown’s parks director quit after an embarrassingly short tenure, giving the governor an opportunity to try again to find someone who can transform the troubled but world-class system.

Anthony Jackson, a retired Marine major general, was supposed to restore confidence after the previous director blamed budget cuts for needing to close 70 parks, only to discover $20 million in an off-budget account. Jackson is departing after only 18 months, with the parks system still struggling.

The Department of Parks and Recreation is in need of help but also has incredible assets, much public support and great promise.

California has more park land than any state other than Alaska. It gets between 60 million and 80 million visits a year, more than any other state system. However, policymakers long have lamented that they have failed to attract inner-city dwellers, particularly poor people.

California will devote $553 million in revenue from taxes and fees to the parks system in the coming year, more than any other state in the union. However, not enough of the money is used in the parks. California’s per-capita spending ranks and per-acre spending ranks in the lower half among the states, the California Research Bureau reported last year.

In a report last month, the legislatively created organization Parks Forward called for “fundamentally transforming” operations, and offered numerous suggestions. One was to hire more parks workers who don’t have peace officer status and carry guns.

The next director must be able to win support among the department’s rangers and other far-flung personnel, while also finding ways to make parks more inclusive and, if not innovative, at least up to date.

The state parks system relies heavily on user fees. But in 2014, the parks department has failed to adopt credit-card readers so patrons can easily pay for their admission.

Perhaps there are other seemingly simple steps the department could take to become more relevant. The state could, for example, develop a mobile app that would give people information about the relative difficulty of trails. The department could make greater use of yurts and small cabins for campers, which would be less expensive than hotels but wouldn’t involve backpacking.

California’s parks system includes diverse locations such as Emerald Bay State Park at Lake Tahoe to Anza-Borrego in the desert, Prairie Creek Redwoods on the North Coast, to Cornfields State Park in downtown Los Angeles. No other state comes close to matching the richness of this state’s parks.

Being California’s Department of Parks and Recreation’s director ought to be a dream job. Brown needs to focus on finding an innovative and energetic director who will be the match of the system he or she will represent.

New structure proposed to bring state parks up to speed

Jon Christensen Updated 10:49 pm, Tuesday, April 29, 2014

Visitors to Bodega Head State Park enjoy beautiful coastal views. A blue-ribbon commission has proposed a new organization to help the parks agency manage and modernize the system. Photo: Michael Macor, The Chronicle

Parks Forward - a blue-ribbon commission studying the troubled California State Parks system - is proposing a surprisingly bold vision for the future of parks in California: a brand-new privately and publicly funded organization to do what the state parks agency cannot do.

The Parks Forward commission evidently recognizes that the parks agency will have its hands full with the daunting internal reforms necessary to get its own house in order for years to come. And it will never have the capacity to take on the innovations necessary to bring California parks into the 21st century. The solution: create a new, more nimble, nonprofit parks support organization to work with the state parks agency, other local and regional parks agencies, nonprofits, businesses, and community groups to do what needs to be done.

It's a simple, elegant and seemingly obvious solution that will, no doubt, require lengthy discussion and negotiation.

The commission is refreshingly frank in its assessment of the challenges ahead. "First, California's parks system is debilitated by an outdated organizational structure, underinvestment in technology and business tools, and a culture that has not rewarded excellence, innovation and leadership. Second, only broad-based, fundamental change will transform the system into one that will transform parks and the parks experience to once again lead the nation and the world in meeting the needs of citizens and visitors for decades to come."

The commission's recommendations for internal reforms include upgrading the department's information and technology infrastructure; budgeting, planning and accounting systems; and fee collections. Right now, as state parks director Anthony Jackson, a retired Marine major general, has said, the agency is stuck two-thirds of the way through the 20th century technologically. Bringing it into the 21st century is going to be a huge undertaking. The commission also recommends a big change in state parks leadership. Right now, to rise in the agency's ranks to district superintendent and above, employees must be peace officers. As a result, the commission says, leaders tend to focus on law enforcement. The commission recommends abolishing the requirement and opening up leadership to more diverse candidates with other skills and interests.

The new support organization would be tasked with providing funding, design and support for deploying state-of-the-art fee collection machines in parks; finding new business development opportunities such as special events and partnerships for parks; raising funds and securing other financing for parks; developing digital tools for communications, marketing and on-the-ground guides to parks in English and Spanish; and working with organizations focused on providing parks in underserved urban communities.

From the beginning of its efforts, the commission says it has been "mindful" of California's rapidly changing demographics. The state's Latino population is projected to grow from 38 percent in 2010 to 52 percent in 2040. Millennials - people born between 1980 and 2000 - now make up 29 percent of the state, constitute "the single largest generation in human history," and nationally "will decide the next six presidential elections." And while 61 percent of Californians were clustered in three urban areas in 2010, that number will rise to 76 percent by 2050.

All of this gives an urban, millennial, technologically savvy flavor to the Parks Forward recommendations. In 1928, when the landscape architect Frederick Law Olmsted Jr. offered his recommendations to a state park commission, he noted the "magnitude and importance, socially and economically, in California, of the values arising directly and indirectly from the enjoyment of scenery and from related pleasure of non-urban outdoor life." Today, the future of California's 280 state parks, covering 1.6 million acres and providing access to more than a third of the state's coastline, hinges not on escaping the city but on reconnecting to urban life.

A new vision for state parks

The Parks Forward commission will discuss its recommendations Wednesday. Additional public meetings will be held this summer to gather feedback. The commission's final recommendations are due this fall.

When: 9:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m., Wednesday, April 30

Where: Holiday Inn SFO, South San Francisco

What: Draft recommendations are at http://parksforward.com/meetings

Jon Christensen is an adjunct assistant professor in the Institute of the Environment and Sustainability at UCLA and is collaborating on a project visualizing social media in California parks at http://parks.stamen.com