EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT BOARD LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE Friday, August 21, 2020 12:30 p.m.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND STAFF WILL ATTEND VIA TELECONFERENCE
Pursuant to Governor Newsom’s Executive Order No. N-29-20 and the Alameda County Health Officer’s current Shelter in Place Order, effective March 31, 2020, the East Bay Regional Park District (“Park District”) Headquarters will not be open to the public and the Board Legislative Committee and staff will be participating in the meetings via phone/video conferencing.
Members of the public can listen to the meeting in the following way: Via the Park District’s live audio stream, on the Park District’s YouTube channel, which can be found at: https://youtu.be/kztmA8ZfiD4
Public comments may be submitted one of three ways: 1. Live via zoom. If you would like to make a live public comment during the meeting this option is available through the virtual meeting platform: https://zoom.us/j/94060469333 Note that this virtual meeting platform link will let you into the virtual meeting for the purpose of providing a public comment. If you do not intend to make a public comment, please use the YouTube link at https://youtu.be/kztmA8ZfiD4 to observe the meeting. It is preferred that those requesting to speak during the meeting contact the Finance Committee Recording Secretary by 4:00 p.m. on Tuesday, August 4, 2020 via email at [email protected] or voicemail (510) 544-2400 to provide name and the subject line public comments – not on the agenda or public comments – agenda item #. 2. Via email to recording secretary [email protected] by 4:00 p.m. Thursday, August 20, 2020. Email must contain in the subject line public comments – not on the agenda or public comments – agenda item # followed by their name and place of residence, followed by their comments. 3. Via voicemail at 510-544-2002 by 4:00 p.m. Thursday, August 20, 2020. The caller must start the message by stating public comments – not on the agenda or public comments – agenda item# followed by their name and place of residence, followed by their comments.
Comments received during the meeting and up until the public comment period on the relevant agenda item is closed, will be provided in writing to the Board Legislative Committee, included transcribed voicemails. All comments received by the close of the public comment period will be available after the meeting as supplemental materials and will become part of the official meeting record. Please try to limit your written comments to no more than 300 words. The Park District cannot guarantee that its network and/or the site will be uninterrupted. To ensure that the Park District receives your comments, you are strongly encouraged to submit your comments in writing in advance of the meeting.
If you have any questions about utilizing the video stream, please contact the Recording Secretary of the Committee, Yulie Padmore, at [email protected] or at 510-544-2002. To ensure the best opportunity for Park District staff to address your question, please contact the Recording Secretary prior to 4:00 p.m. on Thursday, August 20, 2020.
EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT BOARD LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE Friday, August 21, 2020 12:30 p.m. The following agenda items are listed for Committee consideration. In accordance with the Board Operating Guidelines, no official action of the Board will be taken at this meeting; rather, the Committee’s purpose shall be to review the listed items and to consider developing recommendations to the Board of Directors.
A copy of the background materials concerning these agenda items, including any material that may have been submitted less than 72 hours before the meeting, is available for inspection on the District’s website (www. ebparks.org), the Headquarters reception desk, and at the meeting.
Accommodations and Access District facilities and meetings comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. If special accommodations are needed for you to participate, please contact the Clerk of the Board at 510-544-2020 as soon as possible, but preferably at least three working days prior to the meeting.
AGENDA
TIME ITEM STATUS STAFF
12:30 I. PARK AND PUBLIC INTEREST SURVEY COMMUNITY I Pfuehler/Baldinger ENGAGEMENT PROJECT UPDATE
II. STATE LEGISLATION / OTHER MATTERS R Doyle/Pfuehler A. NEW LEGISLATION – RECOMMENDED BILLS FOR SUPPORT 1. AB 2371 (Friedman D-Glendale) – Climate Resilience Science Advisory Team 2. SB 1320 (Stern D-Canoga Park) – California Specific Climate Change Assessment
B. NEW LEGISLATION – RECOMMENDED BILLS FOR R Doyle/Pfuehler WATCH 1. SB 1349 (Glazer D-Orinda) – Contra Costa County Tax Increase Authority
C. OTHER STATE MATTERS I Doyle/Pfuehler 1. State Budget 2. Hertzberg-Ting Job Stimulus Package 3. Statewide Ballot Measure Overview 4. Other Matters
III. FEDERAL LEGISLATION / OTHER MATTERS A. NEW LEGISLATION – RECOMMENDED BILLS FOR R Doyle/Pfuehler SUPPORT 1. H.J.Res. 79 (Speier D-CA) – Deadline Removal for the Ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment 2. H.R. 7264 (Neguse D-CO) – 21st Century Conservation Corps for Our Health and Our Jobs Act 3. S. 3964 (Coons D-DE) – Cultivating Opportunity and Response to the Pandemic through Service (CORPS) Act 4. S. 4273 (Harris D-CA) and H.R. 7585 (DeSaulnier D-CA) – Expanding Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park
B. NEW LEGISLATION – RECOMMENDED BILLS FOR I Doyle/Pfuehler WATCH 1. N/A
C. OTHER FEDERAL MATTERS 1. Federal Response to Covid-19 and Federal Relief Funding 2. Update about S. 4308 (Sinema D-AZ) and H.R. 7073 (Garamendi D-CA) – Special Districts Qualifying for Coronavirus Relief Fund 3. Land and Water Conservation Fund / Great America Outdoors Act 4. Other Matters
IV. ARTICLES & OTHER MEDIA
V. OPEN FORUM PUBLIC COMMENT Individuals wishing to address the Committee on a topic not on the agenda may do so by completing a speaker’s form and submitting it to the recording secretary.
VI. BOARD COMMENTS
(R) Recommendation for Future Board Consideration (I) Information Future Meetings: (D) Discussion January 17 July 17 (Cancelled) February – NO MTG August 21 Legislative Committee Members March 27 September – NO MTG Dennis Waespi (Chair); Beverly Lane, Elizabeth Echols April 24 (Rescheduled) October 16 Ellen Corbett, Alternate May 22 (Rescheduled) November – NO MTG Erich Pfuehler, Government Affairs Manager June – NO MTG *December 11
TO: Board Legislative Committee (Chair Dennis Waespi, Beverly Lane, Elizabeth Echols, alt. Ellen Corbett)
FROM: Robert E. Doyle, General Manager Erich Pfuehler, Government Affairs Manager
SUBJECT: Board Legislative Committee Meeting WHEN: Friday, August 21, 2020 12:30 PM
WHERE: Members of the public can listen to the meeting in the following way: Via the Park District’s live audio stream, on the Park District’s YouTube channel, which can be found at: https://youtu.be/kztmA8ZfiD4
Items to be discussed:
I. PARK AND PUBLIC INTEREST SURVEY COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PROJECT UPDATE Chief of Government and Legislative Affairs Erich Pfuehler and Legislative and Policy Management Anyalyst Lisa Baldinger will present the findings of a recent N=500 scientific survey conducted from July 27 – July 30, 2020. Survey was conducted by Lake Research Partners who will be available for questions after the presentation.
II. STATE LEGISLATION / OTHER MATTERS A. NEW LEGISLATION – RECOMMENDED BILLS FOR SUPPORT 1. AB 2371 (Friedman D-Glendale) – Climate Resilience Science Advisory Team This bill would create an advisory team of scientists to make recommendations about California’s climate adaptation plans and investments. The goal is to ensure climate investments are cost-effective and make gains toward adapting the state to and mitigating from climate related impacts. Science-based climate-related hazard mitigation across state agencies makes sense, but is not currently a requirement. Existing law establishes the Integrated Climate Adaptation and Resiliency Program (ICARP) in the Office of Planning and Research (OPR). This bill would require the Science Advisory Team (SAT) to serve as a working group of a specified ICARP advisory group. The SAT would also provide input into the Safeguarding California Plan, which is the roadmap for California’s Climate Adaptation Strategy. The OPR would be required to issue a report by July 1, 2024 summarizing the actions of the SAT, the SAT’s contribution to climate resiliency and adaptation planning, and the office’s recommendations to improve the effectiveness of the SAT. As climate change increases the risk of catastrophic wildfires, droughts, floods, extreme weather and sea level rise, science-based hazard mitigation can help reduce those risks. This approach is consistent with the District’s wildfire hazard mitigation plan, stewardship efforts and park planning.
2. SB 1320 (Stern D-Canoga Park) – California Specific Climate Change Assessment This bill would require the Office of Planning and Research (OPR), through the Integrated Climate Adaptation and Resiliency Program (ICARP), to develop the California Climate
1
Change Assessment. OPR would coordinate with the Natural Resources Agency, the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission, and the Strategic Growth Council, and in consultation with partner public agencies. The assessment would report the impacts and risks of climate change, based on the best available science, and identify potential solutions to inform legislative policy. Regional and local governments, such as the District, would be included in determining the scope of the assessment. The bill would require OPR to conduct the assessment no less frequently than every 5 years. Currently, there is no legal requirement for California to produce a climate assessment, although four have been conducted since 2006. This bill would codify the practice and provide more actionable information through consistent reporting. The requirement for OPR to engage with local and regional governments could include consultation with the District.
B. NEW LEGISLATION – RECOMMENDED BILLS FOR WATCH 1. SB 1349 (Glazer D-Orinda) – Contra Costa County Tax Increase Authority State law imposes the sales tax on retailers in the state. The current rate is 7.25%. State law allows cities, counties and some special districts to increase sales taxes up to 2% over the 7.25% state rate. Contra Costa County has two countywide district taxes, a 0.5% rate for BART and 0.5% for the Contra Costa County Transportation Authority (CCTA) for a countywide rate of 8.25%. CCTA is authorized for an additional 0.5% increase. This bill would exempt all three of these additional 0.5% increases from the 2% cap. It also authorizes the county to impose a new countywide tax up to 0.5% if the County Board of Supervisors enact an ordinance and voters approve. The Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 on August 4th on the second and final resolution to place a “Healthy and Safe Contra Costa” sales tax measure on the ballot. The measure is projected to raise $81 million a year for the next 20 years. The funding would go into the General Fund and could include support for fire districts (including East Contra Costa Fire Protection District), Contra Costa’s regional hospital and “safety net” services. The measure is contingent on SB 1349 passing and being signed by the Governor. The Board of Supervisors can pull the measure at a special session on August 21st if not approved.
C. OTHER STATE MATTERS 1. State Budget On June 29th, Governor Gavin Newsom signed the 2020 Budget Act – a $202.1 billion spending plan that strengthens emergency response, protects public health and safety, and promotes economic recovery while seeking to close a $54.3 billion budget shortfall caused by the Covid-19 recession. It is, however, unlikely to be the final effort to address the economic impacts of the state’s Covid-19 pandemic. Legislators persuaded Governor Newsom to largely replace the cuts he proposed in May to some of the state’s core programs with an assortment of other budget-balancing solutions: delayed payment plans, borrowing from various internal funds and more optimistic tax revenue estimates. The final agreement also relies heavily on cash reserves, withdrawing almost half the money in California’s $16 billion “rainy day” fund. A key component of the final deal between Governor Newsom and Democratic lawmakers was how much new coronavirus relief funding California might receive this year from Washington and what to do until it arrives. The spending plan includes a list of more than $11 billion in spending cuts which will be reversed if at least $14 billion in new Federal dollars arrive this fall. Education programs dominate the list. The budget envisions Federal dollars would allow some of the education payment deferrals to be avoided. Cuts to housing programs, court operations and child
2
support administration would be erased. Pay cuts to state workers would also be offset. If less than $14 billion arrives from Washington, the budget requires those dollars to be doled out proportionally among the various programs slated for reinstatement. As of this writing, it is still an open question about what may happen with Federal stimulus funding for state and local assistance.
2. Hertzberg-Ting Job Stimulus Package There continue to be ongoing conversations about a “Green Infrastructure Economic Recovery, Air and Water Quality Improvement, and Ocean and River Protection Program.” The key drivers of the proposal are Senator Bob Hertzberg (D-Van Nuys) and Assembly Member Phil Ting (D-San Francisco). The proposal is divided in to three chapters: 1. Air Quality and Public Health Improvements 2. Safe Drinking Water, Groundwater Clean-Up, Drought and Flood Control 3. Fire, Forests, Ocean, River, Parks and Beach Protection There are a number of categories which could benefit the District, most of which are included in chapter 3. Those include: • Green infrastructure funding to improve forests, rivers and associated riparian corridors, coastal habitat and estuaries, wetlands, response to sea-level rise, community access to natural lands, beach quality and access, and conservation-based workforce training. • Funding to state conservancies for grants supporting regionally significant, shovel- ready economic stabilization and recovery projects, including vegetation management and fire risk reduction, natural land restoration, park and open space improvements and expansion, public facility development and watershed improvements. • Specific funding to the State Coastal Conservancy for grants including natural land restoration, land acquisition, land transfers to local and regional open space districts or the state park system, and construction of natural surface recreation trails. • A specific set aside for the State Coastal Conservancy San Francisco Bay Area Conservancy Program. • Funding for the Wildlife Conservation Board for grants including natural land restoration, wildlife corridor protection and expansion, land acquisition, and land transfers to local and regional open space districts. • Funding for Natural Community Conservation Plans and Habitat Conservation Plans. • Funding for public access, wayfinding signage, natural surface recreation trails, and preservation of culture and historical sites. • The California Cosnervation Corps and certified local community conservation corps. • Funding to the Wildlife Conservation Board and Natural Resource Agency for grant programs for climate mitigation, adaptation and resilience.
In chapters 1 and 2, some opportunities exist for the District including: • Funding for vegetation and carbon soil sequestion management, and soil-based emissions sequestration (ch. 1). • Flood management projects including levee setbacks, enhancement of flood plains, off- stream groundwater recharge and land acquisitions to improved watersheds (ch. 2). • Direct allocation to the San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority (ch. 2).
District staff and Advocate Houston will provide an additional verbal update about this
3
proposal.
3. Statewide Ballot Measure Overview The qualified ballot initiatives include: Proposition 14 (bonds) – Issues $5.5 billion in bonds for state stem cell research institute. Proposition 15 (taxes) – Requires commercial and industrial properties to be taxed based on market value. Proposition 16 (affirmative action) – Repeals Proposition 209 (1996), which says that the state cannot discriminate or grant preferential treatment based on race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin in public employment, education or contracting. Proposition 17 (voting) – Restores the right to vote to people convicted of felonies who are on parole. Proposition 18 (voting) – Allows 17-year-olds who will be 18 at the time of the next general election to vote in primaries and special elections. Proposition 19 (taxes) – Allows homeowners who are over 55, disabled or victims of natural disaster to take a portion of their property tax base with them when they sell their home and buy a new one. It also changes inheritance rules which have allowed family members to keep 1970’s level property taxes when they inherit homes. Proposition 20 (law enforcement) – Makes changes to policies related to criminal sentencing charges, prison release and DNA collection. Proposition 21 (housing) – Expands local governments' power to use rent control. Proposition 22 (business) – Considers app-based drivers to be independent contractors and enacts several labor policies related to app-based companies. Proposition 23 (health care) – Requires physician on-site at dialysis clinics and consent from the state for a clinic to close. Proposition 24 (business) – Expands the provisions of the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) and creates the California Privacy Protection Agency to implement and enforce the CCPA. Proposition 25 (trials) – Replaces cash bail with risk assessments for suspects awaiting trial.
4. Other Matters
III. FEDERAL LEGISLATION / OTHER MATTERS A. NEW LEGISLATION - RECOMMENDED BILLS FOR SUPPORT 1. H.J.Res. 79 (Speier D-CA) – Deadline Removal for the Ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment This resolution quite literally removes the deadline for the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment. The deadline of March 22, 1979 was set in 1972. 35 of the necessary 38 states voted to ratify by the original deadline. Since the deadline passed, Nevada, Illinois and Virgina have voted to ratify. Repeal of the deadline could allow ratification to occur. As the District is an employer with a commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion, supporting this repeal is an appropriate action.
2. H.R. 7264 (Neguse D-CO) – 21st Century Conservaton Corps for Our Health and Our Jobs Act This bill is similar to legislation of which the District is already in support, S. 3684 sponsored by Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR). It is an effort to address the impacts of Covid- 19 on health, the economy and, combined with high levels of drought throughout the West,
4
the unprecedented wildland firefighting challenges in 2020. This legislation seeks to infuse funding and employment opportunities for wildfire hazard mitigation. Some key differences between H.R. 7264 and S. 3684 are H.R. 7264: • Reduces the allocation to the Forest Service from $4.2 billion to $3.975 billion • Reduces the allocation for the Forest Service State and Private Forestry program fom $600 million to $500 million. These funds will be divided between programs to help facilitate landscape restoration projects on state, private and Federal lands – including $100 million for the Firewise program to help local governments plan for and reduce wildfire risks. • Provides $5 million for Every Kid Outdoors • Provides new language on youth and conservation corps • Excludes the full permanent funding of the Land and Water Conervtion Fund (has already occurred)
Other key elements of the legislation: • Establishes a $9 billion fund for qualified land and conservation corps to increase job training and hiring specifically for jobs helping to restore public lands. • Provides $12 billion to address the growing public lands maintenance backlog. • Establishes a $7 billion fund for an Outfitter and Guide Relief Program to provide financial assistance to the outdoor recreation industry suffering seasonal closures due to the Covid-19 pandemic. • Supplies $100 million for equipping firefighters with Personal Protective Equipment amidst the Covid-9 pandemic. • Provides funding for wildfire mitigation, including $200 million for the National Fire Capacity program which administers the Firewise program to assist State and local communities in the prevention, control and suppression of wildfires. • Allocates $100 million for FEMA’s Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program, to provide funds to state and local governments as they undertake hazard mitigation projects to reduce risk and lower the cost of responses to natural disasters.
3. S. 3964 (Coons D-DE) – Cultivating Opportunity and Response to the Pandemic through Services (CORPS) Act This bill is similar to legislation which the District supports and also authored by Senator Coons, S. 3624. Senator Coons made some changes to his original bill to secure more Republican cosponors. The number of participants were reduced from 750,000 to 250,000 over three years. The amount of funding to AmeriCorps was reduced from $14 million to $10.3 million. The overall funding for the Segal AmeriCorps National Education Awards were reduced from $7.525 million to $3.659 million (these are the funds AmeriCorps members can use to pay education costs or repay qualified student loans).
Key elements of the legislation: • Funds AmeriCorps positions for a three-year response and recovery period and grows the program to the levels authorized in the Serve America Act of 2009 (PL 111-13 or 42 USC 12511). • Under the CORPS Act, the number of positions could grow from 75,000 to 150,000 in the first year and then steadily to 250,000 by year three.
5
• Provides flexibility to stabilize national service programs during the economic crisis. It allows them to grow and respond quickly to dynamic local recovery needs. • Prioritizes funding for activities directly related to response and recovery, such as: o Public health services, including support for isolation and quarantine activities. o Work that furthers the capacity of state, tribal and local health departments. o Emergency logistics, such as the setup of alternate care sites. o Services that support economic opportunity, workforce and reemployment services. o Work that furthers the capacity of nonprofit and community organizations to respond to the immediate needs of individuals affected by Covid-19. o Education support (including for adult learners). o Jobs for youth in conservation. o Services to address housing and food insecurity. Prioritizes expanding programs and services in rural and high poverty communities. • Ensures individuals’ financial resources do not limit participation by temporarily increasing the AmeriCorps living allowance to 175% of the Federal poverty line. • Establishes a pilot program allowing State Commissions to directly place AmeriCorps members in state national service programs – with priority given to programs which serve rural and underserved areas – during the Covid-19 response and recovery period. • Funds new online tools for Senior Corps aimed at safely moving toward a teleservice model and expands Senior Corps eligibility. • Encourages participation by members of low-income and underrepresented communities. It funds an awareness and outreach campaign on response service opportunities. • Invite participation from a diverse range of Americans by investing Federal funds on volunteer management practices to increase both volunteer recruitment and retention through the Volunteer Generation Fund.
4. S. 4273 (Harris D-CA) and H.R. 7585 (DeSaulnier D-CA) – Expanding Rosie the Riverter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park This legislation would add the Nystrom Elementary School in Richmond, California to the Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park. Built during World War II to accommodate the large number of families who moved to Richmond to work at the Kaiser Shipyards, Nystrom Elementary School sits just north of the current historical park. Nystrom was built as part of a planned development that includes the Maritime Child Development Center, which has already been preserved as part of the park, as well as the Nystrom Housing Area, which has been scheduled for future preservation and redevelopment by the City of Richmond. Congressional approval of this addition is required by the law which created the Historical Park. The bill would also provide the National Park Service with the authority to add other historically relevant sites to the park’s boundaries.
B. NEW LEGISLATION – RECOMMENDED BILLS FOR WATCH 1. N/A
6
C. OTHER FEDERAL MATTERS 1. Federal Response to Covid-19 and Federal Relief Funding Federal Advocate Peter Umhofer will provide a verbal update.
2. Update about S. 4308 (Sinema D-AZ) and H.R. 7073 (Garamendi D-CA) – Special Districts Qualifying for Coronavirus Relief Fund The District continues to advocate to include special districts as eligible for state and local aid in the next Covid-19 emergency relief package. Since the Legislative Committee of the Board last considered H.R. 7073, a Senate companion bill has been introduced by Senator Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona. It is cosponsored by Senators Feinstein and Harris. It also has bipartisan support from Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and Martha McSally (R-AZ). H.R. 7073 is cosponsored by East Bay Reps. Barbara Lee, Mike Thompson, Ro Khanna, Jerry McNerney and Mark DeSaulnier. Staff and Advocate Umhofer will provide additional verbal updates.
3. Land and Water Conservation Fund / Great America Outdoors Act A verbal celebration of the permanent full funding of the Land and Water Conservation Fund!
4. Other Matters
IV. ARTICLES
V. OPEN FORUM PUBLIC COMMENT Public comments may be submitted one of three ways: 1. Live via zoom. If you would like to make a live public comment during the meeting this option is available through the virtual meeting platform: https://zoom.us/j/94060469333 Note that this virtual meeting platform link will let you into the virtual meeting for the purpose of providing a public comment. If you do not intend to make a public comment, please use the YouTube link at https://youtu.be/kztmA8ZfiD4 to observe the meeting. It is preferred that those requesting to speak during the meeting contact the Finance Committee Recording Secretary by 4:00 p.m. on Tuesday, August 4, 2020 via email at [email protected] or voicemail (510) 544-2400 to provide name and the subject line public comments – not on the agenda or public comments – agenda item #. 2. Via email to recording secretary [email protected] by 4:00 p.m. Thursday, August 20, 2020. Email must contain in the subject line public comments – not on the agenda or public comments – agenda item # followed by their name and place of residence, followed by their comments. 3. Via voicemail at 510-544-2002 by 4:00 p.m. Thursday, August 20, 2020. The caller must start the message by stating public comments – not on the agenda or public comments.
VI. BOARD COMMENTS
7
Board Legislative Committee August 21, 2020 – Articles and Other Media
Both sides play the blame game as virus relief talks stall By LISA MASCARO and ANDREW TAYLOR August 13, 2020
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of Calif., speaks during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Aug. 13, 2020. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)
WASHINGTON (AP) — With talks on emergency coronavirus aid having stalled out, both sides played the blame game Thursday rather than make any serious moves to try to break their stalemate. Official Washington is emptying, national politics is consuming the airwaves and the chasm between the warring sides appears too great for now.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi pressed the case for funding for the U.S. Postal Service, rental assistance, food aid and rapid testing for the virus at her weekly press event, blasting Republicans as not giving a damn and declaring flatly that “people will die” if the delay grinds into September. “Perhaps you mistook them for somebody who gave a damn,” Pelosi said when asked if she should accept a smaller COVID-19 rescue package rather than endure weeks of possible gridlock. “That isn’t the case.”
All of the chief combatants have exited Washington after a several-day display of staying put as to not get blamed for abandoning the talks. The political risk for President Donald Trump is continued pain in U.S. households and a struggling economy — both of which promise to hurt him in the September campaign. For Democrats, there is genuine disappointment at being unable to deliver a deal but apparent comfort in holding firm for a sweeping measure instead of the few pieces that Trump wants most.
At the White House, Trump suggested that one main holdup is the amount of money Democrats want for cash-strapped states and cities, which he dismissed as “bailouts.” It’s a view shared by top Republicans.
A modest Trump administration overture on Wednesday to restart talks generated nothing but stepped-up carping and accusations of bad faith.
“It’s a stalemate,” White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow said Thursday.
Across a nearly empty Capitol, the Senate’s top Republican sought to cast the blame on Pelosi, whose ambitious demands have frustrated administration negotiators like White House chief of staff Mark Meadows.
“They are still rejecting any more relief for anyone unless they get a flood of demands with no real relationship to COVID-19,” said Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. McConnell has kept the talks at arm’s length, nursing deep divisions among Republicans on the foundering relief measure.
Among the items lost is perhaps $10 billion in emergency funding for the Postal Service to help improve service as its role in the fall election takes on greater importance, given an expected surge in mail voting because of the coronavirus pandemic. Trump is against $3.4 billion demanded by Pelosi for helping states with the crush of mail-in ballots.
Trump seemed to take advantage of the stalemate to press his case against voting by mail. He said Thursday on Fox Business Network’s “Mornings with Maria” that among the sticking points were Democrats’ demand for billions of dollars to assist states in protecting the election and to help postal workers process mail-in ballots.
“They need that money in order to have the post office work so it can take all of these millions and millions of ballots,” Trump said. “If they don’t get those two items, that means you can’t have universal mail-in voting because they’re not equipped to have it.”
The White House and congressional leaders are far apart on the aid for shoring up households, reopening schools and launching a national strategy to contain the virus, which has infected more than 5.2 million people in the United States and has killed more than 166,000, according to figures compiled by Johns Hopkins University. Trump’s top negotiator, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, tried to revive stalled talks Wednesday, but Pelosi and Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer dismissed the overture, saying the Trump administration was still refusing to meet them halfway. Congressional Republicans are largely sitting out the talks.
With the House and Senate essentially closed, and lawmakers on call to return with 24 hours’ notice, hopes for a swift compromise have dwindled. Instead, the politics of blame have taken hold, as the parties focus on this month’s presidential nominating conventions and lawmakers’ own reelection campaigns.
All indications are talks will not resume in full until Congress resumes in September, despite the mounting coronavirus death toll.
For Americans, that means the end of a $600 weekly unemployment benefit that has expired, as has a federal ban on evictions. Schools hoping for cash from the federal government to help provide safety measures are left empty-handed. States and cities staring down red ink with the shattered economy have few options.
Trump’s executive actions appeared to provide a temporary reprieve, offering $300 in jobless benefits and some other aid. But it could take weeks for those programs to ramp up, and the help is far slimmer than what Congress was considering. More than 20 million Americans risk evictions, and more are out of work.
The Democrats said they are waiting for the White House to put a new offer on the table: “We have again made clear to the Administration that we are willing to resume negotiations once they start to take this process seriously,” they said in a statement.
But Mnuchin shot back with his own statement, saying, “The Democrats have no interest in negotiating.”
___
Associated Press writer Aamer Madhani contributed to this report.
OPINION Treatment of vice presidential contenders highlights struggle to overcome patriarchal status quo
By Jennifer Siebel Newsom and Soraya Chemaly Aug. 8, 2020 Updated: Aug. 8, 2020 11:45 a.m.3
Sen. Kamala Harris Photo: The Chronicle
Since Joe Biden’s statement that he would choose a woman for the vice presidential nomination, pundits and critics have weighed in on the degree to which sexism has been a factor in considerations of Biden’s pick. The commentary reveals tightropes that every woman aspiring toward leadership is painfully familiar with:
Be competent and successful, but not in a way that outshines others.
Be tough, but not stern. Smile more.
Be driven, but not too ambitious. In fact, apologize, so as to put men at ease. Critical coverage has focused on mainly men using sexist, insulting or abusive language. Headlines like “Stacey Abrams feels entitled to power, which is why she shouldn’t get it” and comments like Elizabeth Warren “comes off as too ambitious, too needy, too much” have rightfully been called out for their thinly veiled sexism. Yet, as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez recently pointed out in a viral speech against our culture of misogyny, sexism and racism aren’t only matters of interpersonal aggression, but of political marginalization.
The problem, in the end, isn’t really these headlines or the intentions of the men who provoke them. It’s the deeper issue of why, again, so many competent and accomplished women have to compete intensely for this one seat at the table? A table, which, we are constantly being reminded, is benevolently made available to them by a machinery that has always doubled down on a white patriarchal status quo.
The reality is that leadership, especially at the highest levels, is not a neutral proposition in the United States. Authority. Strength. Protection. Judgment. Control. Anger. Aggression. Ambition — are all attributes that are seamlessly associated with “manhood,” particularly white manhood. “Leadership” is so male-coded that it is virtually impossible to separate the two notions: leaders and masculinity.
As a result, white men continue to dominate the majority of leadership positions across sectors. Women who aim for powerful positions are often perceived to be violating rules of proper feminine behavior. Additionally, these cognitive gender schemas for how we think about people and their roles are simultaneously layered with racial stereotypes, so Black women leaders are targets of even greater disapproval and hostility.
When women don’t conform to biased, social-role expectations, most voters experience cognitive dissonance. And the proof is in the pudding: More than 50% of men and more than 40% of women say they aren’t “very comfortable” with the idea of a woman as president.
Much of the nation must have sighed in relief when our top two presidential candidates ended up being men, secure in the knowledge that a woman would not, in fact, be in a position of relatively absolute executive authority. Instead, she would be up for the position of vice president, which is in many ways a feminized role — vice presidents are supposed to be less visible and more supportive. They are supposed to be the loyal, silent partners to the true leader, the president.
Yet ironically, considering women for a more “feminine” institutional role highlights women candidates’ more “masculine” characteristics — ambition, strength, power and competitiveness — therefore making them less viable candidates overall, and putting into sharp and uncomfortable relief the double and triple standards and expectations we place on women in leadership: be strong, yet vulnerable; have authority while showing deference; exercise power, but only in self-effacing ways.
“When you do something different, when you meet the standards that are normative for men with behavior that they don’t expect from you, either as a woman or person of color, then you’re going to get critiqued,” said Stacey Abrams, former minority leader of the Georgia House of Representatives and 2018 gubernatorial candidate.
In fact, studies show that women who appear to be putting themselves first are disliked, distrusted and considered less competent. Indeed, Abrams has been criticized for fighting too hard to be Biden’s vice president. Sen. Kamala Harris, conversely, has faced charges of disloyalty. And yet still others expect women to merely be content with what they’ve been given. On Monday, a former Democratic Party chair and a Biden supporter said of Susan Rice, former President Barack Obama’s security adviser, after watching her on TV, that she’s “actually somewhat charming” because he’s seen her smiling, “something that she doesn’t do all that readily.”
But once again we must remember that media’s coverage of these slights and of individuals’ sexist behaviors, continue to overshadow the more profound institutional obstacles that women face when seeking office and public trust: biased media portrayals, less funding and increasing online harassment.
Being told to smile, curtail your ambition, be nicer, and take a back seat is nothing new for women. We all have similar experiences, even if they differ in degree. The deeper and more intractable concern in the race for the vice presidency is a systemic one: How did we go from the most diverse Democratic field in history to a situation where once again a traditionally paternal man who “looks presidential” is picking the most “attractive” woman from a lineup?
Voters actually want more. Yes, it will be a genuinely important historic moment to have a woman vice president for the first time in our history, especially if it’s a Black woman. If the nation wants to make real its claims of equality and if we want to capture the immense energy and passion of voters who support those claims, we have to stop asking smart, ambitious and talented women to play second fiddle. We have to elect a woman to the presidency.
Jennifer Siebel Newsom is the first partner of California, a filmmaker and founder of the Representation Project. Soraya Chemaly is executive director of the Representation Project and author of “Rage Becomes Her: The Power of Women’s Anger.”.
From outdoors to Oprah: Rue Mapp’s mission to open nature to everyone Oakland group takes thousands of people hiking, camping, fishing every year
Next Rue Mapp, CEO and founder of Outdoor Afro, kayaking on Lake Merritt in Oakland. (Photo: Bethanie Hines, Outdoor Afro) By PAUL ROGERS | [email protected] | Bay Area News Group PUBLISHED: August 9, 2020 at 6:00 a.m. | UPDATED: August 9, 2020 at 5:59 p.m.
Growing up in the Bay Area, Rue Mapp loved the outdoors. She hiked. She fished. She swam. But as she got older and ventured to the Sierras and farther afield, she noticed “fewer people who looked like me.” After a stint as an analyst with Morgan Stanley, the Oakland native was considering going back to college to pursue an MBA. But when a trusted friend, venture capitalist Freada Kapor Klein, asked what she would do if time and money were no issue, she said she wanted to start a website to reconnect African Americans with the outdoors.
So in 2009, Mapp took a leap of faith and founded Outdoor Afro. With the motto “where Black people and nature meet,” the blog and Facebook page has grown into an influential nonprofit group that now connects thousands of people a year by organizing activities like camping, hiking, biking, birding, fishing, gardening and skiing. The organization, based in Oakland, has 45,000 participants and 80 leaders in 30 states. Through her work, Mapp realized that Black people have been involved in the outdoors all along. But they are rarely depicted in outdoor magazines or other media. They have few leadership positions in the environmental movement, and until now, few options to connect with each other in nature.
Last year Mapp won the environment category of the prestigious Heinz Awards. She was named a National Geographic Fellow. She serves on the board of the Wilderness Society, the Outdoor Industry Association and the California Parks and Recreation Commission. In February, she hiked with Oprah Winfrey through the redwoods at Joaquin Miller Park in Oakland. When times are particularly tough, she says, we all need nature more than ever. This conversation has been condensed and edited for clarity and length.
Q: Why is it important that we connect everybody, and in the case of your organization, more Black people, to nature? A: It’s something that our planet needs. We need all hands on deck. We also need it for our healing and our atonement. I find that when you go into nature with people, the trees don’t know you’re Black. The birds are going to sing and fly no matter how much money you have in your account. The flowers are going to bloom no matter your gender or political affiliation. We need to turn to nature now more than ever so that we can be free of everything that ails us. Nature gives us hope. It’s a metaphor for how we can have a way forward, even when the moment feels impossible. I don’t know what better medicine we could ask for.
Rue Mapp, founder and CEO of Outdoor Afro, an Oakland-based non-profit group that connects African- Americans with nature through hiking, fishing, kayaking and other outings. (Photo: Bethanie Hines, Outdoor Afro) Q: There seems to be a stereotype out there that Black people don’t hike or camp. What do you say when you hear that kind of thing? A: I’ve had people say ‘I don’t camp and I don’t hike.’ I’ll say ‘do you like cookouts?’ and they’ll say ‘Well, yeah.’ ‘Do you ever walk around Lake Merritt? What about fishing? Even tailgating?’ We really have to rethink the outdoors and not limit it to a set of specific activities that are often in remote areas.
I love birds and wildlife. I love identifying them. But if I were to say we’re going birding today, I don’t know if anybody would show up unless you already were a birder. But if I say let’s go to Lake Merritt for a stroll and a potluck, people are going to show up. And guess what? I’m going to still bring out my binoculars, my spotting scope and my bird ID book. I’m going to talk about the history of Lake Merritt as the oldest wildlife sanctuary in the country. I’m going to talk about the Pacific Flyway. I’m going to get to the same outcome. But I didn’t call it a birding event. I made it about where people are and what they are about. At the end of the day, people want to connect with other people, and other families.
Q: What do you think are the main limits on Black people accessing the outdoors? A: When people say that to me, I respond that they are looking in the wrong places. Deciphering the gear is one piece of it. Transportation is huge. If you don’t have a reliable car that’s a barrier. Also, there are fears of wildlife and fears of other people — and of not being welcome. The number one thing that keeps people out is time. So we created a platform that lowered all of those barriers, and which focuses on nature close to home. You don’t have to get in a car and drive 3 or 4 hours. If you want to go to Yosemite, you have to really know how to work that. You can’t just decide on a Friday morning you want to go camping in Yosemite that weekend. Those sites have been booked a long time in advance and if you are a busy working family, you may not have time to drive four hours or more away from the Bay Area to someplace you’ve never been, to do things you’ve never done before, with people you don’t know.
We have to provide easier pathways to make it happen. You know who does a good job of this? The cruise industry. And Disneyland. When I hear that people don’t go camping because of money, I’m like ‘no way!’ People go on cruises and pay top dollar for these experiences. People know what they are getting. They know they will be welcome. There is hospitality built into it. It’s memory-making as a family. Some of our public lands and parks really leave it for people to fend for themselves and figure it out on their own. If you don’t have a family history or mentors to do these things, it’s going to be a really steep pathway to entry. That’s why Outdoor Afro exists. We want to flatten those barriers and give people the confidence so they can go back and do it again and again.
Rue Mapp, far left, the CEO and founder of Outdoor Afro, leads a bike trip in Vallejo in July, 2019. (Photo: Outroor Afro) Q: Your organization has a special focus on swimming programs. A: The drowning rate of black children is five times that for white children ages 5 to 19. The reason why is because we’ve inherited the consequences of Jim Crow. People couldn’t go to public pools or public beaches. If they did there were special colored reserved areas. So we have generations that didn’t learn how to swim or have a relationship with water. If a child doesn’t learn how to swim, they aren’t going to grow up to put a pole in a lake or shimmy into a kayak, or care about plastic in the ocean. People need to know how to swim. And the Earth needs us to be in relationship with it. If people do not have a relationship with our precious wild all around, they are not going to be first in line to vote for its protection.
______Rue Mapp Age: 48 Position: Founder and CEO, Outdoor Afro Hometown: Oakland Residence: Vallejo Education: BA, art history, city and regional planning, UC Berkeley ______Five facts about Rue Mapp • She loves to hike, fish, bike, kayak and whitewater raft in the Sierra Nevada. • In February, Oprah Winfrey went hiking with her in Joaquin Miller Park in the Oakland Hills as part of Winfrey’s wellness tour. • Last year she was named a recipient of the Heinz Award, a $250,000 prize given by the Heinz Family Foundation to honor achievements in the environment, technology, public policy, arts and other areas. • She once won a ribbon at the Alameda County Fair for her cornbread recipe. “It was eight years ago but I’m going to claim it for the rest of my life,” she said, laughing. • She has hiked and camped around the West, including at Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, where a grizzly bear wandered into her camp.
Paul Rogers | Natural resources and environment reporter Paul Rogers has covered a wide range of issues for The Mercury News since 1989, including water, oceans, energy, logging, parks, endangered species, toxics and climate change. He also has worked as managing editor of the Science team at KQED, the PBS and NPR station in San Francisco, and has taught science writing at UC Berkeley and UC Santa Cruz.
Coronavirus: California bill would make employers report exposures Business groups fight bill, cite ‘name and shame’ provision
By ETHAN BARON | [email protected] | Bay Area News Group PUBLISHED: August 6, 2020 at 11:50 a.m. | UPDATED: August 6, 2020 at 3:17 p.m.
A California bill supported by labor unions and opposed by business groups would force employers to quickly notify employees and health officials if a worker is exposed to coronavirus.
Under Assembly Bill 685, sponsored by The California Labor Federation and United Food and Commercial Workers, public or private employers would face fines up to $10,000 for failing to provide notifications of exposure within 24 hours. Failure to provide any of the notifications would be a misdemeanor, under the bill authored by Eloise Gómez Reyes (D-San Bernardino) and promoted by Robert Rivas (D-Hollister) and Lorena Gonzalez (D-San Diego). “As the average age of those falling ill from COVID-19 has become younger, it is critical to track workplace exposure and to use that data to find ways to keep workers safe on the job,” the bill says. “With infections and deaths disproportionately high in the Latino, Black, and Asian-Pacific Islander communities, more information about workplace illness and industry clusters can inform policy makers in addressing healthcare disparities and protecting vulnerable workers.”
Existing law fails to make employers’ reporting requirements clear, the bill says.
“This deficiency has led to workers and members of the public living in fear for their own safety, unaware of where outbreaks may already be occurring,” according to the bill. “It is imperative that positive COVID-19 tests or diagnoses be reported immediately in the occupational setting, to members of the public, and to relevant state agencies.”
If the bill passes, when a worker is exposed to coronavirus — through contact with someone who has tested positive, been diagnosed with the virus, quarantined under a COVID-19 order, or died because of confirmed or possible coronavirus infection — the employer must take a series of steps. All employees at the worksite must be notified in writing, in English and the dominant language of the workplace, and the employer must “make every reasonable effort necessary to notify workers verbally,” the bill says. Worker representatives would have to be notified, and along with workers, be told of any existing options for exposed employees to take leave, as well as disinfecting plans the employer intends to follow before reopening.
The employer would also have to tell state health and safety authorities how many workers, and in which jobs, have tested or been diagnosed positive, ordered to quarantine or died from possible coronavirus infection.
California’s Division of Occupational Safety and Health and the State Department of Public Health would have to put reported information on its websites “in a manner that allows the public to track outbreaks, the number of COVID-19 cases reported by any workplace, and the occupation of employees involved.”
Business groups, including the California Chamber of Commerce are fighting the bill. “Its definition of ‘exposure’ is broad and vague, resulting in triggering ‘exposures’ in non-sensical scenarios,” a statement of opposition filed in the legislature says. “If an infected employee (or customer) briefly visits a workplace, wearing a mask, drops off an item, speaks briefly to a clerk who is 10 feet away behind a desk, then leaves is that an ‘exposure?'”
Although the groups said they agree that a positive COVID-19 test or diagnosis are appropriate grounds for a person to be considered potentially infectious, the threshold for worker exposure should not be met merely because a worker had contact with someone under a quarantine order or whose death “could have been” caused by the virus, the groups said.
“Employers should not face potential criminal penalties for failing to provide notice in ambiguous scenarios, particularly with a disease that we do not yet understand well and can be asymptomatic,” the groups said.
There is already coronavirus case recording done through California’s Division of Occupational Safety and Health and through testing labs’ mandatory disclosures, the groups argued.
“AB 685 also includes a ‘name and shame’ provision by requiring state agencies to post on their websites company-specific coronavirus exposure information, the groups asserted. “In addition, publication poses potential privacy concerns, as reporting an individual’s ‘occupation’ and worksite may render the person identifiable. For example, a location may have only one or two managers or technicians.”
Billions for Californians riding on coronavirus stimulus talks in Congress Tal Kopan Aug. 7, 2020 Updated: Aug. 7, 2020 8:10 p.m.
Senate Minority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer of N.Y., left, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of Calif., right, walk out of a meeting with Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows as they continue to negotiate a coronavirus relief package on Capitol Hill in Washington, Friday, Aug. 7, 2020. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik) Photo: Andrew Harnik / Associated Press
WASHINGTON — California and its residents are waiting on the result of heated negotiations over the latest coronavirus stimulus package in Congress — and tens of billions of dollars are at stake.
From money directly into the pockets of millions Californians, to billions to avoid deep cuts to public universities and housing programs, the state has a lot riding on talks that hit a standstill Friday.
After the latest in a two-week series of meetings, congressional Democratic leaders and Trump administration officials said they were at an impasse.
“I’ve told them, ‘Come back when you are ready to give us a higher number,’” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, told reporters.
“To the extent that they are willing to make new proposals, the chief and I will be back here any time to listen to new proposals,” Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said as he and White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows left the talks.
Here are some of what is hanging in the balance for California: State and local aid: One of the biggest-ticket items in negotiations — one that Democrats have said is the centerpiece of their proposal — is billions of dollars for state and local governments.
It’s also funding that California is relying on in the state budget.
House Democrats passed a bill in May that included nearly $1 trillion for state and local governments, which would direct scores of billions for California. Under that plan, the state would receive more than $20 billion this year and $26 billion next year. On top of that, California cities and counties would directly receive a cumulative $30.5 billion this year and $15 billion next year.
This year’s state budget is counting on at least $14 billion coming from the federal government. If that money doesn’t come through, there will be steep cuts to the University of California and California State University systems, affordable housing programs, courts and state worker pay.
And the local government aid would be crucial to cities such as San Francisco, which is facing a budget deficit of up to $1.7 billion.
Democrats have indicated they could come down from their $1 trillion total, including by not offering funding into next year. California could eliminate its budget hole with 70% of what Democrats proposed in their bill.
But Republicans have offered $150 billion total for state and local governments, a sum that almost certainly would leave California with a huge budget shortfall.
Unemployment insurance: Also hanging in the balance is an extra $600 per week in jobless benefits that expired at the end of last month.
Democrats and Republicans have haggled over how to extend the program. Republicans want to continue it at a lower level, arguing that the $600 figure offers an incentive for Americans in lower-wage jobs to stay unemployed. Democrats say cutting the benefit would take away a lifeline from struggling families that can’t work during the pandemic.
Maurice Emsellem of the National Employment Law Project told The Chronicle last month that the average unemployment benefit in California is below the national average, at $338 per week. Even the extra $600 brought the benefit to just 69% of the average weekly wage, he added. Without it, the $338 is akin to a $17,500 yearly salary.
California’s unemployment rate was 14.9% in June, down from 16.4% in May but up from 4% a year ago.
Paycheck Protection Program: Congress is also discussing ways to continue the Paycheck Protection Program, a forgivable loan fund for small businesses to keep workers employed during the pandemic.
California companies have received more than $33 billion from the program, the most in the country, according to an analysis by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
Almost 90,000 businesses from California received at least $150,000 from the program, Small Business Administration data showed. That money began going out in May, with a requirement that it be used to pay employees for at least eight weeks for the loans to be forgiven. But as the pandemic continues and many states, including California, are rolling back reopenings of public life and commerce, companies could be in need of another round of loans.
Stimulus payments: A previous congressional relief package sent out one-time payments to American families of up to $1,200 per adult and $500 per child. Both parties have proposed another round of such payments, if they can reach a deal on a broader package.
According to the Internal Revenue Service, nearly 18 million Californians received checks from the program, putting $29 billion in their pockets.
Tal Kopan is The San Francisco Chronicle’s Washington correspondent. Email: [email protected] Twitter: @talkopan
Tal Kopan Follow Tal on: https://www.facebook.com/SFChronicle/TalKopan Tal Kopan is the Washington Correspondent for The San Francisco Chronicle. Previously, she was a political reporter for CNN Politics, where she covered immigration, cybersecurity and other hot-button issues in Washington, including the 2016 presidential election.
Prior to joining the network, Kopan was a reporter for POLITICO in Washington, D.C., where she reported for their breaking news team and policy verticals, including a special focus on the Department of Justice, courts and cybersecurity.
Kopan started her career working in Chicago with local media outlets ABC7 Chicago and Fox Chicago News.
Her work has earned her awards and fellowships from the Atlanta Press Club; National Press Foundation; Loyola Law School, Los Angeles; and the National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences.
Kopan graduated with honors from the University of Chicago with a bachelor's degree in “law, letters and society.”
Last-ditch virus aid talks collapse; no help for jobless now By ANDREW TAYLOR August 7, 2020
Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, center, and President Donald Trump's Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, second from right, leave following a meeting with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of Calif. and Senate Minority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer of N.Y. as they continue to negotiate a coronavirus relief package on Capitol Hill in Washington, Friday, Aug. 7, 2020. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
WASHINGTON (AP) — A last-ditch effort by Democrats to revive Capitol Hill talks on vital COVID-19 rescue money collapsed in disappointment Friday, making it increasingly likely that Washington gridlock will mean more hardship for millions of people who are losing enhanced jobless benefits and further damage for an economy pummeled by the still-raging coronavirus.
President Donald Trump said Friday night he was likely to issue more limited executive orders related to COVID, perhaps in the next day or so, if he can’t reach a broad agreement with Congress. The day’s negotiations at the Capitol added up to only “a disappointing meeting,” declared top Senate Democrat Chuck Schumer, saying the White House had rejected an offer by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to curb Democratic demands by about $1 trillion. He urged the White House to “negotiate with Democrats and meet us in the middle. Don’t say it’s your way or no way.”
Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said, “Unfortunately we did not make any progress today.” Republicans said Pelosi was relying on budget maneuvers to curb costs and contended she has overplayed her hand.
Often an impasse in Washington is of little consequence for the public — not so this time. It means longer and perhaps permanent expiration of a $600 per-week bonus pandemic jobless benefit that’s kept millions of people from falling into poverty. It denies more than $100 billion to help schools reopen this fall. It blocks additional funding for virus testing as cases are surging this summer. And it denies billions of dollars to state and local governments considering furloughs as their revenue craters.
Ahead is uncertainty. Both the House and Senate have left Washington, with members sent home on instructions to be ready to return for a vote on an agreement. With no deal in sight, their absence raises the possibility of a prolonged stalemate that stretches well into August and even September.
Speaking from his New Jersey golf club Friday evening, Trump said “if Democrats continue to hold this critical relief hostage I will act under my authority as president to get Americans the relief they need.” Trump said he may issue executive orders on home evictions, student loan debt and allowing states to repurpose COVID relief funding into their unemployment insurance programs. He also said he’ll likely issue an executive order to defer collection of Social Security payroll taxes, an idea that has less support among his Republican allies.
White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows said, “This is not a perfect answer — we’ll be the first ones to say that — but it is all that we can do, and all the president can do within the confines of his executive power.”
Friday’s Capitol Hill session followed a combative meeting Thursday evening that for the first time cast real doubt on the ability of the Trump administration and Democrats to come together on a fifth COVID-19 response bill. Pelosi summoned Mnuchin and Meadows in hopes of breathing life into the negotiations, which have been characterized by frustration and intransigence on both sides — particularly on top issues such as extending the bonus jobless benefit that expired last week.
Pelosi declared the talks all but dead until Meadows and Mnuchin give ground.
“I’ve told them ‘come back when you are ready to give us a higher number,’” she said.
The breakdown in the negotiations is particularly distressing for schools, which have been counting on billions of dollars from Washington to help with the costs of reopening. But other priorities are also languishing, including a fresh round of $1,200 direct payments to most people, a cash infusion for the struggling Postal Service and money to help states hold elections in November.
In a news conference on Friday Pelosi said she offered a major concession to Republicans.
“We’ll go down $1 trillion, you go up $1 trillion,” Pelosi said. The figures are approximate, but a Pelosi spokesman said the speaker is in general terms seeking a “top line” of perhaps $2.4 trillion since the House-passed HEROES Act is scored at $3.45 trillion. Republicans say their starting offer was about $1 trillion but have offered some concessions on jobless benefits and aid to states, among others, that have brought the White House offer higher.
IMPACT ON THE ECONOMY:
– S&P 500 ekes out 6th straight gain following jobs report
– 1.2 million seek jobless aid after $600 federal check ends
– Apple shines in pandemic with $2 trillion value on horizon
Mnuchin said renewal of a $600 per-week pandemic jobless boost and huge demands by Democrats for aid to state and local governments are the key areas where they are stuck. “There’s a lot of areas of compromise,” he said after Friday’s meeting. “I think if we can reach an agreement on state and local and unemployment, we will reach an overall deal. And if we can’t we can’t.”
Democrats have offered to reduce her almost $1 trillion demand for state and local governments considerably, but some of Pelosi’s proposed cost savings would accrue chiefly because she would shorten the timeframe for benefits like food stamps.
Pelosi and Schumer continue to insist on a huge aid package to address a surge in cases and deaths, double-digit joblessness and the threat of poverty for millions of the newly unemployed.
On Friday, they pointed to the new July jobs report to try to bolster their proposals. The report showed that the U.S. added 1.8 million jobs last month, a much lower increase than in May and June.
“It’s clear the economy is losing steam,” Schumer said. “That means we need big, bold investments in America to help average folks.”
Senate Republicans have been split, with roughly half of Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s rank and file opposed to another rescue bill at all. Four prior coronavirus response bills totaling almost $3 trillion have won approval on bipartisan votes despite intense wrangling, but conservatives have recoiled at the prospect of another Pelosi- brokered agreement with a whopping deficit-financed cost.
McConnell has kept his distance from the negotiations while coordinating with Mnuchin and Meadows.
In addition to restoring the lapsed $600-per-week bonus jobless benefit, Pelosi and Schumer have staked out a firm position to extend demanded generous child care assistance and reiterated their insistence on additional funding for food stamps and assistance to renters and homeowners facing eviction or foreclosure.
“This virus is like a freight train coming so fast and they are responding like a convoy going as slow as the slowest ship. It just doesn’t work,” Pelosi said Friday.
Michelle Obama Says She Is Dealing With ‘Low-Grade Depression’
In her new podcast, the former first lady connected her experience with the effects of quarantine and news about civil unrest and politics.
Michelle Obama said she had benefited from keeping a routine, including exercise, getting fresh air and having a regular dinner time.Credit...Vincent Thian/Associated Press By Derrick Bryson Taylor Aug. 6, 2020
Michelle Obama said this week that she was experiencing “low-grade depression” and seemed to suggest that it was because of a combination of quarantine, racial unrest and the Trump administration’s response to the pandemic.
In the second episode of her new podcast, which was released on Wednesday, Mrs. Obama, the former first lady, told the Washington Post columnist Michele Norris that she has had low points recently.
“There have been periods throughout this quarantine where I just have felt too low,” Mrs. Obama said, adding that her sleep was off. “You know, I’ve gone through those emotional highs and lows that I think everybody feels, where you just don’t feel yourself.” “I know that I am dealing with some form of low-grade depression,” she added. “Not just because of the quarantine, but because of the racial strife, and just seeing this administration, watching the hypocrisy of it, day in and day out, is dispiriting.”
She suggested that her depression was related to the ongoing protests and racial unrest around the United States since the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis police custody in May.
“I have to say, that waking up to the news, waking up to how this administration has or has not responded, waking up to yet another story of a Black man or a Black person somehow being dehumanized or hurt or killed, or falsely accused of something, it is exhausting,” she said. “It has led to a weight that I haven’t felt in my life — in, in a while.”
Mrs. Obama said she had benefited from keeping a routine, including exercise, getting fresh air and having a regular dinner time.
The psychological effects of the pandemic are not yet fully clear. But the World Health Organization warned in May of a “massive increase in mental health conditions in the coming months,” fueled by anxiety and isolation as well as by the fear of contagion and the deaths of relatives and friends.
A survey conducted in June by the Kaiser Family Foundation found that more than 30 percent of adults in the United States were reporting symptoms consistent with anxiety or depression since the coronavirus pandemic began.
Depression is an illness that affects more than 264 million people worldwide, according to the W.H.O. Dr. Timothy Sullivan, the psychiatry and behavioral sciences chairman at Staten Island University Hospital, described it as a complicated mental state.
“Depending on how it’s defined, anyone, particularly at a time like this, could be experiencing some of the symptoms,” Dr. Sullivan said, including trouble sleeping, low energy and a lack of enthusiasm for things that usually interest them.
Depression is a result of individual biological risk factors coupled with influences in the environment, Dr. Sullivan said. “When someone experiences a loss, we know that it can make them sad,” he said, citing one example. “But if that loss also causes them to change fundamental routines that are important to their health, that’s going to create an additional risk factor.”
Since the beginning of the pandemic, he said, “we’ve learned that when people experience significant disruptions in their daily routines, those disruptions can predispose people to depression.”
Asked how the news could affect a person’s mood or battle with depression, Dr. Sullivan said: “I think the main risk with news events is that people tend to ruminate about them. We know that when people ruminate, it increases feelings of helplessness and, in some cases, hopelessness, and that mental state does worsen mood and increases risk of depression.”
Dr. Sullivan said that if you think you may be experiencing symptoms of depression, you should review your daily routines and try to establish healthy patterns, including managing sleep, eating at regular times of the day, exercising and having meaningful social interactions early in the morning, if possible.
Derrick Bryson Taylor is a general assignment reporter on the Express Desk. He previously worked at The New York Post's PageSix.com and Essence magazine.
Contra Costa moves forward with half-cent sales tax measure for social services by Sam Richards / Bay Cities News Service Uploaded: Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 12:39 pm 13 Time to read: about 2 minutes
The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors will proceed with pursuing a half-cent, 20- year sales tax measure for November's general election ballot, though it could be derailed if a bill now languishing in Sacramento isn't passed by the end of July.
The tax would raise an estimated $81 million a year to pay for county services including health and emergency services, safety net services and housing and early childhood services.
The supervisors will be presented with proposed ballot measure language at their July 28 meeting, and will have to approve a measure at that same meeting to allow enough time to get the measure on the November ballot.
County Supervisor Candace Andersen of Danville was the sole "no" vote Tuesday for moving ahead, saying she has "serious concerns" about adding further tax burdens to families already stressed by the economic effects of the COVID-19 restrictions.
"A sales tax is the most regressive form of taxation for those who can least afford it," Andersen said Tuesday. "I think the timing of it is really, really off."
But other supervisors, including John Gioia of West County, said the need for these services is also greater, driven by the same re-tightened restrictions and by the county's own budget problems. He said a similar tax in Los Angeles County costs most families between $25 and $65 annually.
"I don't think that is an undue burden," said Gioia, who noted Contra Costa is the only Bay Area county that doesn't have a sales tax that supports county services.
The Contra Costa sales tax measure will depend on passage of state Senate Bill 1349, drafted by Sen. Steve Glazer, D-Orinda, that would authorize the county to impose a transactions and use tax of up to a half-cent "for general or specific purposes to support countywide programs."
That bill would allow such a tax to pass with only a majority vote, rather than a two-thirds vote.
That bill, and all others, are on hold as the state Senate and Assembly have postponed resumption of work after summer recess next week because COVID-19 has directly affected several staffers and at least one legislator.
David Schonbrunn, president of San Rafael-based TRANSDEF, a tax-oversight nonprofit, said he believes this measure is more a special tax than a general one; a special tax would require a two-thirds vote.
"If SB 1349 fails, you will have wasted taxpayer dollars," Schonbrunn told the supervisors.
The motion approved Tuesday would put the sales tax on the November ballot contingent on approval on SB 1349. But the supervisors have to have their ballot information to elections officials by Aug. 7 for the measure to appear on November's ballot.
The Contra Costa supervisors last month approved spending $10,000 for a poll by the firm FM3 to help determine voter support for this sales tax measure.
Supervisors on Tuesday heard the results of that polling, of 666 Contra Costa County voters likely to cast ballots in November conducted June 22-29 online and via telephone. Approximately two-thirds of respondents said they would support a 20-year tax, with 59 percent supporting a 35-year tax.
Among the most strongly supported uses for the tax money, according to the FM3 polling, are to support mental health care, after-school programs, the Contra Costa County Regional Medical Center and for increasing transparency and accountability of the Contra Costa County Sheriff's Office.
"People are more understanding of our need to provide more health care," Supervisor Federal Glover of Pittsburg said.
Follow DanvilleSanRamon.com on Twitter @DanvilleSanRamo, Facebook and on Instagram @ for breaking news, local events, photos, videos and more.
Billions for national parks as historic bill becomes law Amid election-year politics Trump signs rare bipartisan Great American Outdoors Act
Vew of the Half Dome monolith from Glacier Point at the Yosemite National Park in California on June 4, 2015. At first glance the spectacular beauty of the park with its soaring cliffs and picture-postcard valley floor remains unblemished, still enchanting the millions of tourists who flock the landmark every year. But on closer inspection, the drought's effects are clearly visible. AFP PHOTO/MARK RALSTON (MARK RALSTON/AFP via Getty Images) By PAUL ROGERS | [email protected] | Bay Area News Group PUBLISHED: August 4, 2020 at 8:14 a.m. | UPDATED: August 5, 2020 at 4:55 a.m.
After spending his presidency denying climate change, placing coal and oil industry officials in top environmental jobs, and weakening dozens of public health and wildlife rules, President Donald Trump on Tuesday reversed course and signed a historic law to pump billions of dollars into long-neglected repairs and upgrades at America’s national parks.
The measure, known as the “Great American Outdoors Act,” is the most significant new federal conservation law in 40 years, since President Jimmy Carter doubled the size of the national park system by establishing 157 million acres of new parks, wildlife refuges, scenic rivers and other wilderness areas in Alaska during his final weeks in office in 1980. “There hasn’t been anything like this since Teddy Roosevelt, I suspect,” Trump said during a ceremony in the East Room of the White House.
Environmentalists cheered, finally securing a win they have sought for more than 20 years.
“The Great American Outdoors Act is a truly historic, bipartisan conservation accomplishment that will protect wildlife habitat, expand recreational opportunities, restore public lands and waters, and create good jobs,” said Collin O’Mara, president and CEO of the National Wildlife Federation. Election year pressures were at the center of the unusual breakthrough.
Several of the chief sponsors of the bill, including Cory Gardner of Colorado, Steve Daines of Montana, Martha McSally of Arizona and Susan Collins of Maine, are Republican senators in close re- election races. The White House and GOP leaders, who previously have opposed increasing the funding, saw the measure as a major accomplishment that could help Republicans win those races. Gardner and Daines personally urged Trump to embrace it, and were featured at the signing ceremony Tuesday.
During the ceremony, the president twice mispronounced the name of Yosemite National Park, calling it “Yo-se-MIGHT,” sparking ridicule on social media.
The new law makes two landmark changes.
First, it will provide $9.5 billion over the next five years to repair roads, restrooms, trails and campgrounds at America’s 419 national parks — from Yosemite to the Everglades — and at other public lands where facilities have fallen into disrepair after years of neglect and funding shortfalls.
The money would come from royalties on oil, gas, coal and renewable energy that is already being paid to the federal treasury.
Second and more enduring, the bill would guarantee $900 million a year to the Land and Water Conservation Fund in perpetuity. Congress created the fund in 1964, requiring that up to $900 million a year in offshore oil revenues go to buy new park land and maintain local parks as a way for outdoor conservation and recreation to keep pace with a growing population.
Over the past 56 years, the fund has become the most important tool for preserving public land in the United States. It has helped protect 7 million acres, from Redwood National Park in California to Cape Cod National Seashore to Martin Luther King Jr.’s boyhood home site in Atlanta.
The fund helped complete the Appalachian Trail, bought out old mining claims within Alaska’s Denali National Park and expanded public lands along the Big Sur coast. It bought private tracts within some of America’s crown jewel parks — Yosemite, Yellowstone, Olympic and Grand Canyon.
The money also has funded state grants to build 40,000 swimming pools, soccer fields, baseball diamonds, playgrounds, fishing piers, jogging trails and other projects at local parks nationwide. Among those in California: new bike paths at Lake Merritt in Oakland, renovations at Pacifica’s fishing pier, public pools in Los Angeles, public trails and beaches at Lake Tahoe, land adjacent to Big Basin Redwoods and Mount Diablo state parks that would have been logged or developed, and wetlands restoration around San Francisco Bay.
But over the years, instead of providing $900 million as the law intended, Congress and numerous presidents have instead shifted more than half of the money to other uses. Trump’s original budget this year proposed just $15 million be spent on parks and public lands from the fund. The new law requires the full $900 million to be spent every year on parks.
“That’s a soccer field we’re talking about. It’s clean bathrooms we’re talking about,” said Rue Mapp, founder and CEO of Outdoor Afro, a conservation group based in Oakland that works to expand diversity in the outdoors. “When we go to places and they aren’t taken care of you don’t feel welcome in those places when they are in disrepair.” Trump has done little to preserve public lands or reduce pollution until now. He has pushed to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to offshore oil drilling. He overturned a rule that prohibited using bait, such as grease-soaked doughnuts, for hunters to lure and kill grizzly bears. He cut more than 2 million acres from two national monuments in Utah ― Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante ― the largest rollback of national monuments in U.S. history.
He has pushed for new offshore oil drilling off the entire West Coast, including California. He weakened rules put in place by the Obama administration to raise gas mileage standards in vehicles, allowed more mercury pollution from power plants, announced the U.S. would withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement, and falsely claimed wind turbines cause cancer.
But with the November election just three months away, his Interior Secretary David Bernhardt, along with his daughter, Ivanka Trump and some Republicans, urged passage of the bill and held events to promote it. The new law passed in rare bipartisan fashion, clearing the Senate by a vote of 73-25 in June and the House by a vote of 310-107 with nearly all Democrats and about half of the Republicans voting in favor. At the signing ceremony Tuesday, however, Trump invited only Republicans.
Teresa Jordan of Scottsdale, Ariz., watches the sunrise from Yavapai Observation Station on the Grand Canyon’s south rim. (TOM VAN DYKE/ Mercury News Archives)
Coronavirus and social protests motivating young California voters: poll Nearly 80 percent expressed support for Black Lives Matter movement
PALO ALTO – JULY 9: A Black Lives Matter mural at Hamilton Avenue in Palo Alto, Calif., on Thursday, July 9, 2020. (Randy Vazquez / Bay Area News Group)
By LAURENCE DU SAULT | [email protected] | Bay Area News Group PUBLISHED: August 3, 2020 at 3:38 p.m. | UPDATED: August 4, 2020 at 3:25 a.m.
A new poll released Monday by Power California, a nonprofit working to get more young people to vote, suggests that the economic impact of the coronavirus pandemic coupled with growing concern about social justice issues are pushing young voters to the ballot boxes.
The survey of about 1,500 eligible California voters between the ages of 18 and 29 revealed that nearly two out of three say they plan to vote in 2020. That’s a 10 percent increase from a similar poll conducted in 2018 by Power California.
The increase coincides with a stark uptick in attendance by young people at Black Lives Matter protests and other social movements. The number of young voters who have taken part in a protest or march this year doubled, to nearly 40 percent, compared to the nonprofit’s 2018 poll. Nearly 80 percent of those polled expressed support for the Black Lives Matter movement.
“You see the intersection of them protesting and marching, and then them wanting to take that to the polls and the voting booth,” said Power California executive director Luis Sánchez.
The devastating effect of the pandemic is also mobilizing California’s youth, the poll suggests, with 68 percent of Latinos and 72 percent African Americans saying they feel they lack support from state government. Nearly one in two respondents said they have had difficulty buying food, medicine or household supplies and 48 percent of those polled continue to work outside their homes.
Half of California’s population under 21 has at least one immigrant parent, according to the Public Policy Institute of California, meaning that many 2020 voters could be the first of their families to vote in the US. But despite a sharp spike in the 2018 elections, when young voters showed up at the polls in much larger numbers than they did in 2014, young voter turnout has historically been low.
Since 2018, Power California has helped pre-register 75,000 young people who will be eligible to vote for the first time, and about a third of California’s roughly 18 million population under 35 years old has pre-registered for the 2020 election. “You’ve never had these confluent of forces coming together,” Sanchez said. “Young people are fighting for both their physical and economic life.”
The poll, which has a margin of error of +/- 2.5 percent, was conducted for Power California by Latino Decisions.
This article is part of The California Divide, a collaboration among newsrooms examining income inequity and economic survival in California.
BLOG POST Jul 22, 2020 The 5 Best Things That Happened for Parks This Summer ICYMI: Even amid a global pandemic and months of bad news, advocates won huge victories for our national parks and the people who love them.
#{image.caption} A blaze along the Appalachian Trail in the Blue Ridge Mountains. © Bwineka/Dreamstime The last few months have been defined by health and economic crises, environmental rollbacks, and challenges to human rights and social justice that have tested our collective faith. But even during a troubled time in our nation’s history, the long-term advocacy work of thousands of concerned people has resulted in five major recent victories we can all be proud of.
1. Congress passed a historic public lands bill.
#{image.caption} The John Muir Trail at Yosemite National Park, one of many popular sites at the park that is in serious need of repairs. © Henryturner/Dreamstime On July 22, Congress passed the Great American Outdoors Act — a tremendous park funding package that NPCA staff, advocates and partners have worked steadfastly for two decades to achieve. The legislation will dedicate $6.5 billion over five years toward addressing the highest-priority maintenance and repair needs across the National Park System, including visitor centers, trails, roads, bridges, water and electrical systems, and more. It will also allocate $900 million annually in perpetuity to the Land and Water Conservation Fund, one of our country’s most important tools for preserving the integrity of our national parks. These funds would be used to purchase vulnerable lands within park borders to protect them from incompatible residential and commercial development — a substantial ongoing investment in our parks and public lands.
2. The courts protected undeveloped Indigenous land outside Glacier National Park.
#{image.caption} The Badger-Two Medicine region borders Glacier National Park to the southeast. Oilmen have eyed this wild land for decades, and NPCA has joined the Blackfeet Nation in calling for permanent protections. © Stephen Legault Montana’s Badger-Two Medicine region is an expanse of undeveloped land adjacent to Glacier National Park that is sacred to the Blackfeet Nation. In the early 1980s, the federal government sold numerous oil and gas leases in this area without required tribal consultation and in violation of environmental law. The Blackfeet, NPCA staff, and our supporters and partners have fought for years to have these leases cancelled, and many companies have voluntarily retired their holdings, noting the cultural and environmental importance of the region. But one company, Louisiana-based Solenex LLC, filed a lawsuit in 2013 to begin drilling in this wild landscape. Last month, a federal appeals court overturned a lower court ruling, canceling this last remaining lease in the Badger-Two Medicine — a victory that will keep this extraordinary land free from industrialization.
3. Energy companies abandoned the Atlantic Coast Pipeline.
#{image.caption} Evening view toward Hawksbill Summit from Betty’s Rock, along the Appalachian Trail in Shenandoah National Park, Virginia. © Appalachianviews | Dreamstime.com Dominion Energy and Duke Energy announced earlier this month that they would halt plans to build an $8 billion, 600-mile natural gas pipeline in the Northeast that would have cut under the Appalachian Trail and the Blue Ridge Parkway, devastating waterways and wildlife corridors, ruining scenic views, and disrupting historic communities of color. NPCA joined the Southern Environmental Law Center as an active partner in the Coalition to Protect America’s National Parks, working for six years to defeat the pipeline. Advocates challenged the irresponsible project at every turn, finally putting an end to this threat to one of the country’s most beloved thru-hiking trails and the communities that surround it.
4. A court upheld endangered species protections for Yellowstone’s grizzly bears.
#{image.caption} A grizzly bear at Yellowstone National Park, one of the few suitable habitats left in the country that is large enough for this wide-ranging mammal. Photo © Catherine Lall/Dreamstime. In August 2017, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service removed the Yellowstone-region grizzly bear population from the federal endangered and threatened species list, even though the area’s grizzly population has suffered high levels of human-caused deaths in recent years. That fall, for the first time in more than 40 years, the states of Wyoming and Idaho announced grizzly hunts that would have allowed hunters to kill up to 23 bears outside of Yellowstone National Park. The Northern Cheyenne Tribe and conservation groups filed a lawsuit and received a temporary restraining order to the block the hunt, and the court later reinstated federal endangered species protections that the Fish and Wildlife Service had removed. Last week, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed this decision, upholding sound science and protecting this majestic animal in one of the few remaining landscapes where it can still survive.
5. Supreme Court ruling will protect National Park Service employees.
#{image.caption} The U.S. Supreme Court. Photo © Orhan Çam/Dreamstime. Last month, the nation’s highest court prohibited workplace discrimination against LGBTQ employees — a victory for workers across the nation. NPCA had separately called on the Department of the Interior to ensure protections for its LGBTQ employees after agency officials removed references to sexual orientation from its ethics guide on workplace discrimination last December. The Supreme Court decision will protect all LGBTQ federal employees, despite the lack of any clear move by Interior staff to specifically restore these protections within the agency.
This is an updated version of a previously published story.
POLITICS What’s in a name? Everything, unhappy California initiative backers say as they sue state
John Wildermuth Aug. 2, 2020 Updated: Aug. 3, 2020 9:09 a.m.
Lawsuits contend that ballot summaries submitted by Attorney General Xavier Becerra are biased. Photo: Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press 2019
Campaigns in four of the 12 initiative measures in California’s November election have sued state Attorney General Xavier Becerra, charging that his office wasn’t fair and neutral when it prepared the titles and summaries that will appear on the ballot. Becerra has written “an argument in favor” of Proposition 16 rather than the “true and impartial statement” required by state election law, opponents of the measure said in their suit. The measure would repeal Proposition 209, a 1996 initiative banning affirmative action in public university admissions and in government contracting and hiring. That complaint was echoed in the other suits, which argue that Becerra improperly slanted the language in those ballot titles in favor of positions he supports.
A spokesman for Becerra was unavailable for comment. In an email, his office said state law requires the attorney general to issue the official titles and summaries, adding, “We take that responsibility seriously.”
Ballot review
The 2020 ballot titles and summaries, along with the entire Official Voter Information Guide for the November election, are now available for review until Aug. 10 on the Secretary of State’s website. By law, any voter can challenge any of the material on display, including the ballot titles.
Read More The title and statement that appear on the ballot “can make or break” an initiative effort, said Jamie Court, who as president of the public interest group Consumer Watchdog has been involved in many ballot measure campaigns.
“The ballot label is the billboard for your initiative,” he said. “It’s the last thing voters are going to see before they cast their ballot. In campaigns where there is not a lot of money spent for or against, it may be the only thing some voters see.”
Each of the campaigns has its own reasons for seeking to have those titles revised.
• Proposition 15 would revise 1978’s Proposition 13 to allow most commercial and industrial property to be regularly reassessed. Opponents are unhappy with the title, which says the initiative “increases funding sources for public schools, community colleges and local government services by changing the tax assessment of commercial and industrial property.”
The title of a virtually identical measure Prop. 15 backers pulled from the November ballot said it “requires certain commercial and industrial property to be taxed based on fair-market value.” If it’s a tax increase, said Jon Coupal of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, which filed the suit, “call it what it is.”
• In the Prop. 16 affirmative action battle, opponents complain that by saying in the title that the measure “allows diversity as a factor,” Becerra tilts the argument. Diversity is already allowed as a factor in school admissions and other decisions, the suit argues, and the title and summary “improperly takes sides in the election by ... leaning on the high-polling buzzword ‘diversity.’”
• Proposition 22 would reverse part of AB5, a 2019 state law granting employee rights to many gig workers, and allow Uber and Lyft drivers to work as independent contractors. Supporters say the title and summary were “infected with the contagion of bias and hostility.”
The title language saying the initiative “exempts app-based transportation and delivery companies from providing employee benefits to certain drivers” is both wrong and prejudicial, the suit argues. A more neutral title, according to the suit, would say the initiative would “change employment classification rules for app-based” drivers. • Proposition 23 would change the rules for kidney dialysis clinics. Opponents argue the title statement that the initiative “requires on-site medical professional” for every clinic is both wrong and misleading. They say it suggests there are no medical professionals at the clinics now, although federal law requires a registered nurse to be present whenever someone is treated. The title also doesn’t note that the initiative would require a doctor to be present at all times, an expensive proposition for the clinics, the suit states.
Legal battles over ballot measures are nothing new. In 2008, supporters of Proposition 8 unsuccessfully sued then-Attorney General Jerry Brown to have the ballot title changed from his “Eliminates the right of same-sex couples to marry,” to “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
In 2017, Republicans looking to kill the state’s 12-cents-a-gallon gas tax for road repairs fought to change Becerra’s title, which said the GOP-backed initiative “eliminates recently enacted road repair and transportation funding,” without mentioning the tax rollback. A judge ruled that the attorney general’s title was one-sided and misleading, but was overturned on appeal.
There’s plenty of legal wiggle room in writing ballot titles, said Jessica Levinson, an election law professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.
“The attorney general has a ton of discretion,” she said. “And judges are pretty deferential. It’s pretty aggressive to say (to the attorney general), ‘You’re not neutral and you’re looking to mislead the public.’”
That’s not to say campaigns don’t have a chance to make their pitch.
“We go in and the other side goes in to make our cases, telling them what are the most important parts of our arguments,” said Court of Consumer Watchdog.
But the final decision is up to the attorney general and that’s not a good thing, said Assemblyman Kevin Kiley, R-Rocklin (Placer County).
Kiley has twice sought to put constitutional amendments on the ballot that would take the responsibility for writing the ballot summaries from the attorney general and give it to the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office, which already prepares the fiscal impact statements for the ballot. Neither went anywhere. A 2017 bill lost on a party-line committee vote and a 2019 effort never even moved to committee.
“By moving the responsibility to a nonpartisan figure like the legislative analyst, the ballot is insulated from the demands of politics,” Kiley said.
The attorney general can write titles for initiatives on issues his office is already dealing with, like challenges to AB5, which sets the rules for app-based drivers that Prop. 22 is seeking to overturn. Other measures can be supported or opposed by his political allies or donors.
“This is a long-standing problem,” Kiley said. “And it’s not just about Democrats. Republican attorney generals also produced slanted titles.” For campaigns convinced they’re on the wrong side of the attorney general’s ballot work, a change to a nonpartisan system can’t come soon enough,
“The Dodgers are always going to hate the Giants,” said Coupal, an opponent of Prop. 15. “But the umpire should have nothing to do with that.”
John Wildermuth is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: [email protected] Twitter: @jfwildermuth
Follow John on: https://www.facebook.com/SFChronicle/jfwildermuth John Wildermuth is a native San Franciscan who has worked as a reporter and editor in California for more than 40 years and has been with the San Francisco Chronicle since 1986. For most of his career, he has covered government and politics. He is a former assistant city editor and Peninsula bureau chief with The Chronicle and currently covers politics and San Francisco city government.
LOCAL // BAY AREA & STATE Here’s how much money is flowing into California ballot campaigns
John Wildermuth Aug. 2, 2020 Updated: Aug. 2, 2020 7:25 p.m.
A man collects signatures outside of a Safeway in Novato in February. California voters will pass judgment on 12 ballot measures in November. Photo: Scott Strazzante / The Chronicle
Millions of dollars flowed into the 12 initiative campaigns on the November ballot in the quarter ending June 30, but the latest financial reports released by the California secretary of state show campaign cash isn’t spread equally. Some campaigns, including Proposition 17, which would restore felons’ right to vote as soon as their prison terms end, and Proposition 18, which allows 17-year-olds to vote in some primary elections, haven’t raised enough money, either in support or opposition, to require a financial report.
Others, such as measures on rent control, property tax changes, Uber and Lyft drivers, and kidney dialysis, already have collected millions with plenty more cash likely to come before the Nov. 3 election. The quarter’s biggest contribution was dropped on Proposition 21, which would make it easier for local governments to enact rent control. The AIDS Healthcare Foundation of Los Angeles, which backs the initiative, put in $10.4 million, bringing its total contribution to $11.9 million. The apartment industry gave $9.5 million to oppose the measure, with $1.8 million from San Mateo’s Essex Property Trust raising its stake to $2.3 million.
With $10 million available on the “yes” side and $14.2 million for opponents, the rent control battle will be played out over the airwaves this fall.
Developers and business interests are pouring money into the effort to defeat Proposition 15, which would revise the 1978 Proposition 13 tax rules to allow commercial and industrial property to be reassessed more often, prospectively raising their property taxes. Opponents raised $1.5 million in the quarter, with $250,000 each from Vornado Realty Trust of New York and Long Point Development of Rancho Palos Verdes (Los Angeles County). The “no” side has just under $900,000 cash on hand.
Supporters took in $726,000, giving them $4.6 million available for the fall campaign. The California Teachers Association has spent more than $6 million on the effort, with the Service Employees International Union adding $4 million and Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg’s Chan Zuckerberg Advocacy donating $1.6 million.
Backers of Proposition 22, which would circumvent the state’s AB5 and allow app-based drivers to work as contractors and not employees, didn’t raise a cent in the second quarter because they didn’t need it. Thanks to $110 million in contributions last October from companies like Uber, Lyft and Doordash, they have $92 million in the bank for what promises to be a high-spending campaign.
Opponents, led by $450,000 from the Transport Workers Union and money from other labor groups, raised $575,000 and have almost $192,000 cash on hand.
Proposition 23, a rerun of an unsuccessful 2018 initiative effort over rules for kidney dialysis clinics, is another measure that didn’t need to book many contributions. Supporters raised only $200,000 in the quarter, but that brings the United Healthcare Workers contribution to $6 million, with $7,433 in the bank.
Opponents listed no contributions for the quarter, but two of the country’s largest dialysis companies, DaVita and Fresenius Medical Care, each kicked in $1 million earlier this year. The two companies spent a combined $100 million to defeat Proposition 8, a similar measure, two years ago.
Proposition 20 would virtually overturn a 2016 initiative designed to reduce the prison population. It limits parole and reclassifies a number of crimes as felonies. Supporters raised only $475 for the quarter, but the measure has $1.6 million cash on hand, thanks to a $2 million contribution in 2018 by the California prison guards union.
Opponents collected $1.6 million in the quarter, giving them $2 million in the bank. Patty Quillin, wife of Netflix founder Reed Hastings, and Stacy Schusterman, a Tulsa, Okla., philanthropist, each gave $500,000.
Supporters also are lining up in a pair of Democrats-only Bay Area state Senate races. In San Francisco, state Sen. Scott Wiener has $830,000 cash on hand, with contributions that include $4,700 from the California Building Industry Association and $9,300 from the laborers union. Jackie Fielder, the progressive activist challenging Wiener, raised $214,000 and now has $128,000 in the bank.
In the race to replace termed-out state Sen. Jim Beall of San Jose, Santa Clara County Supervisor Dave Cortese, with support from unions and the construction industry, has $570,000 available for the fall campaign, compared to $238,000 for Ann Ravel, former Santa Clara County counsel, who has strong support from the legal community.
John Wildermuth is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: [email protected] Twitter:@jfwildermuth
J Follow John on: https://www.facebook.com/SFChronicle/jfwildermuth John Wildermuth is a native San Franciscan who has worked as a reporter and editor in California for more than 40 years and has been with the San Francisco Chronicle since 1986. For most of his career, he has covered government and politics. He is a former assistant city editor and Peninsula bureau chief with The Chronicle and currently covers politics and San Francisco city government.
East
July 30, 2020
The United States just endured its worst economic quarter in recorded history. If this trend had continued for an entire year, American economic output would have been down by about a third.
So I’m hoping Joe Biden and his team are reading up on Franklin Roosevelt and the New Deal. The New Dealers succeeded in a moment like this. Their experience offers some powerful lessons for Biden as he campaigns and if he wins: Offer big change that feels familiar.
Economic and health calamities are experienced by most people as if they were natural disasters and complete societal breakdowns. People feel intense waves of fear about the future. They want a leader, like F.D.R., who demonstrates optimistic fearlessness.
They want one who, once in office, produces an intense burst of activity that is both new but also offers people security and safety. During the New Deal, Social Security gave seniors secure retirements. The Works Progress Administration gave 8.5 million Americans secure jobs.
Biden’s “Build Back Better” slogan is a perfect encapsulation of this mood of simultaneously longing for the safety of the past while moving to a brighter future. Broadcast pragmatism, not ideology.
New Dealers were willing to try anything that met the specific emergencies of the moment. There was a strong anti-ideological bias in the administration and a wanton willingness to experiment. For example, Roosevelt’s first instinct was to cut government spending in order to reduce the deficit, until he flipped, realizing that it wouldn’t work in a depression. “I really do not know what the basic principle of the New Deal is,” one of his top advisers admitted. That pragmatism reassured the American people, who didn’t want a revolution; they wanted a recovery. Even in a crisis of capitalism, embrace capitalism.
Historian Richard Pells notes that flagship progressive magazines like The Nation and The New Republic did not endorse F.D.R. in 1932, but rather his socialist opponent, Norman Thomas. As the New Deal succeeded, many progressive intellectuals mobilized a barrage of criticism against it. By 1934 they were producing books with titles like “The Coming American Revolution” and calling for the creation of a new political party of the left.
They understood Roosevelt was a liberal capitalist, not a socialist. “I want to save our system, the capitalist system,” he said at one point. “My desire [is] to obviate revolution,” he said at another. He was seeking to save capitalism from the capitalists, who had concentrated too much power in themselves. He was trying to reform capitalism to preserve it. Get capitalism moving.
The Reconstruction Finance Corporation, run by Jesse Jones, a Hoover administration holdover, gave bankers incentives to take the capital that had been sitting in their vaults and get it out into the community. The Federal Housing Administration backed mortgages. As Louis Hyman of Cornell notes, the F.H.A. induced more private lending in a few months than the Public Works Administration spent during the entire decade. The New Deal was more clever and diverse than just tax-and-spend liberalism. Editors’ Picks
Embrace expertise.
Huey Long, Father Coughlin and Francis Townsend were leading a populist revolt that threatened to bring an era of bottom-up authoritarianism. F.D.R. tried to co-opt them a bit, but mostly he just outperformed them with talent. He staffed his administration with a very bright and unabashedly “brains trust” array of lawyers, professors, economists and social workers. Look for imbalances.
Capitalist economies get out of whack from time to time. The New Deal brought balance. It made it easier for workers to unionize and deal on more equal terms with business. Wall Street was too powerful. The New Deal reined it in. Devolve power to Congress.
Historian Ira Katznelson argues that too much attention is paid to F.D.R., when the real action was in Congress. If you want to unleash a torrent of action you have to let individual members of Congress drive their own initiatives, not concentrate power in the White House or House speaker’s office.
The New Deal didn’t produce an instant economic turnaround. But it did show that democratic capitalism could still function. His enemies called Roosevelt a socialist or a populist, but in reality it was Roosevelt who defeated socialism and populism. In America at least, they were spent forces by 1939.
F.D.R. also demonstrated that the most effective leaders in crisis are often at the center of their party, not at left or right vanguard. Abraham Lincoln took enormous heat from abolitionists. But he’s the one who defeated slavery. Theodore Roosevelt had a conservative disposition and lagged behind many Progressives. But he’s the one who led Progressive reforms. F.D.R. was able to pass so much legislation precisely because he was so shifting and pragmatic and did not turn everything into a polarized war.
We’re not going to have another Roosevelt. But in a time of crisis, in an ideological age, he showed it’s possible to get a lot done if you turn down the ideological temperature, if you evade the culture war, if you are willing to be positive and openly experimental.
That’s the New Dealers’ big lesson for Biden & Company.
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: [email protected].
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.
David Brooks has been a columnist with The Times since 2003. He is the author of “The Road to Character” and, most recently, “The Second Mountain.”
California economy faces tough slog BY DAN WALTERSAUGUST 2, 2020
California Capitol. Photo by Anne Wernikoff for CalMatters IN SUMMARY In just a few weeks, California’s economy went from boom to bust, leaving Californians wondering what the future holds.
It now seems like ancient history, but only a few months ago, California’s economy was roaring.
“By any standard measure, by nearly every recognizable metric, the state of California is not just thriving but, in many instances, leading the country, inventing the future, and inspiring the nation,” Gov. Gavin Newsom boasted in February’s state of the state address.
“We remain the fifth-largest economy in the world — enjoying 118 consecutive months of net job growth, some 3.4 million jobs created since the Great Recession and nearly 4 million small businesses call California their home. More than half of all U.S. venture capital still flows to California companies. We’ve averaged 3.8% GDP growth over five years — compared, respectfully, to 2.5% national growth.”
Just eight days later, Newsom delivered his first webcast report on the coronavirus infection, quickly followed by his March 4 state of emergency declaration and the first of many orders that would shut down much of the state’s economy.
Get a veteran journalist's take on what's going on in California with a weekly round-up of Dan's column every Friday.
The economy quickly imploded as hundreds of thousands, and then millions, of Californians lost their jobs. Two months later, with California’s infection rates relatively low and unemployment soaring to levels not seen since the Great Depression, Newsom eased up. He allowed a partial “reopening” of some economic sectors and a few hundred thousand Californians went back to work.
The respite was, however, short-lived. As infections, hospitalizations and deaths surged in July, Newsom reimposed economic shutdowns, many jobs once again vanished and Californians were left wondering about the state’s economic future, and their own.
The latest report from the state Employment Development Department reveals that unemployment hit 16.4% in May — four points higher than the peak of the Great Recession a decade ago — and then dropped a bit to 14.9% in June during the brief reopening. Since then, it’s climbed again, but how high we don’t yet know.
Lodging and food service workers have been hit the hardest, but there are no exempt sectors in those grim numbers.
As high as it is, the official jobless rate is a bit misleading, because it is a percentage of the state’s labor force, and thus doesn’t count those who have dropped out. California’s labor force has shrunken by about 400,000 persons in the past year and including them as jobless pushes the real unemployment rate up by at least two percentage points, knocking on the door of 20%.
Overall, employment in June was 2.5 million below what it had been a year earlier, which corresponds to having 2.5 million more Californians collecting unemployment insurance benefits than in June 2019. The extra $600 a week in benefits that Congress provided to jobless workers has buoyed California’s consumer economy by more than $5 billion a month, staving off housing evictions and foreclosures, but they expired last week and it’s uncertain whether they will be reinstated, eliminated or reduced.
Legislative leaders are proposing a state-only relief program that would maintain extra jobless benefits, but it hinges on borrowed money and its fate is equally uncertain.
After the rollercoaster ride of the past five months, and with COVID-19 still rampaging, it’s evident that the V-shaped recovery some economists predicted — a rapid decline followed by a rapid expansion — is not going to happen.
It’s more likely to be a U-shaped recovery when, and if, it happens. That is, we will probably see a fairly long period of low output and high unemployment and, whenever the pandemic is tamed, a gradual expansion — but no one can predict when the worst will be over.
It’s going to be a very tough slog.
Dan Walters
[email protected] Dan Walters has been a journalist for nearly 60 years, spending all but a few of those years working for California newspapers. He began his professional career in 1960, at age 16, at the Humboldt Times... More by Dan Walters
Opinions The fight for civil rights isn’t a rejection of America’s founding. John Lewis knew that.
Marc A. Thiessen Columnist
July 28, 2020 at 11:21 a.m. PDT Perhaps the most poignant moment in this week’s commemoration of Rep. John Lewis’s life was seeing him cross the Edmund Pettus Bridge one last time in a horse-drawn caisson, while a line of Alabama state troopers stood at the other end of the bridge — this time to honor him rather than beat him. It was a testament to just how far this country had come since Bloody Sunday in 1965. Lewis was the last of the “Big Six” leaders who organized the March on Washington. So with his passing, it is a good time to ask what lessons we can draw from their example that can inform today’s movement for racial justice — especially at a moment when some have embraced an iconoclasm that seeks to cancel and discredit the founding of this country. In his “I Have a Dream” speech, the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. appealed to the ideals of the American founding. He declared, “When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir.” Our founders made a “promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the ‘unalienable Rights’ of ‘Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.’ ” He had come to Washington, he said, “to cash … a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice” so that “one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.’ ”
Lewis, the youngest speaker at the March on Washington, echoed King’s sentiments in his address that day. “I appeal to all of you to get into this great revolution that is sweeping this nation,” he said. “Get in and stay in the streets of every city, every village and hamlet of this nation until true freedom comes, until the revolution of 1776 is complete. We must … complete the revolution.”
They saw the fight for civil rights not as a rejection of the American founding but as the necessary next step for its fulfillment and completion. They did not simply argue that racism was unfair; they argued that racism was un-American. That is a message King kept preaching until his last moments on earth. In a speech the night before he was killed, King appealed to our founding principles, and argued that it was Bull Conner who was violating them. “If I lived in China or even Russia, or any totalitarian country, maybe I could understand some of these illegal injunctions,” King said. “Maybe I could understand the denial of certain basic First Amendment privileges, because they hadn’t committed themselves to that over there. But somewhere I read of the freedom of assembly. Somewhere I read of the freedom of speech. Somewhere I read of the freedom of press. Somewhere I read that the greatness of America is the right to protest for right.” King said the goal of the civil rights movement was to “to make America what it ought to be” by “standing up for the best in the American Dream and taking the whole nation back to those great wells of democracy, which were dug deep by the Founding Fathers in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.” The next day, he was felled by an assassin’s bullet. King never made it to the promised land. But Lewis did. On the 50th anniversary of Bloody Sunday, Lewis stood at the Edmund Pettus Bridge, and citing President Lyndon B. Johnson, compared the March on Selma to the battles of Lexington and Concord. “In the final analysis,” he said, “we are one people. … We all live in the same House, the American House, the world House.”
We can’t advance racial justice by tearing that house down.
Marc Thiessen Marc Thiessen writes a twice-weekly column for The Post on foreign and domestic policy. He is a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and the former chief speechwriter for President George W. Bush.
Legislators want to pile on debt
California Capitol. Photo by Anne Wernikoff for CalMatters IN SUMMARY California’s legislative leaders are proposing a $100 billion “economic stimulus plan” financed by massive new borrowing. What could possibly go wrong?
When legislators passed and Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a 2020-21 state budget in June, they described it as “balanced.”
Not by a long shot.
As detailed in this space earlier, it included at least $20 billion in direct and indirect, on-the-books and off-the-books borrowing that must, of course, eventually be repaid. More than half of the new debt is in “deferrals” of state aid to local school systems that, by constitutional law, must be restored in future years. Having emulated the federal government by financing current spending with longer-term borrowing, legislative leaders now want to dive into the deep end of the debt pool with a $100 billion “economic stimulus plan.”
It’s a laundry list of public works and direct payments to Californians and businesses affected by the pandemic-induced recession, financed by “new revenues without raising taxes.”
Get a veteran journalist's take on what's going on in California with a weekly round-up of Dan's column every Friday.
“Millions of Californians are suffering in this economic downturn, and Republicans in Washington, D.C., don’t seem to care,” Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon said in a statement as an outline of the plan was released on Monday. “Assembly and Senate Democrats are advancing innovative proposals to help people and small businesses.”
Some of the new benefits and projects would be financed by borrowing against existing revenue streams, such as speeding up highway projects by pledging future gas tax and motor vehicle fee proceeds. That at least makes some fiscal sense.
But while details are scant, it appears that the big money would come from authorizing the state treasurer “to issue future tax vouchers to generate billions of revenues for general economic stimulus efforts outlined in the plan.”
In other words, corporations, and perhaps high-income individual taxpayers, would be induced to make payments of future income taxes in return for certificates that could be used to pay those taxes when they are due — with, it’s assumed, direct or indirect interest payments to those who participate.
It’s similar in concept to the budget’s creating a big chunk of indirect debt by suspending some corporate tax breaks to generate $4.5 billion for the budget while allowing affected businesses to claim the tax credits in the future.
Unless extended by Newsom, the legislative session is due to end in a month, which leaves little time to fine-tune such a huge scheme. And we don’t know whether Newsom is on board, even conceptually, although he’s fond of “big, hairy, audicious goals.”
“I would be remiss to comment until I have a chance to review the details,” Newsom said at a news conference. “We have to include a framework of bringing people along as we reopen our economy.” In part, the legislative stimulus plan seems aimed at fending off demands from the left wing of the Democratic Party for hitting corporations and wealthy Californians with new taxes to enhance recession relief programs.
Bob Schoonover of the Service Employees International Union immediately denounced the plan’s lack of new taxes, saying, “While we support many of the items listed in the Legislature’s plan, we cannot support the chicanery with which the Legislature proposes to secure them: taking from future generations without demanding that today’s billionaires and powerful corporations step up and contribute.”
Piling on debt for current spending is obviously risky, particularly since no one knows how long the pandemic and its recession will last. But raising taxes is also risky because it could spur further flights of corporations and the wealthy from California, taking jobs and tax payments with them.
This could be a defining political moment.
Dan Walters [email protected] Dan Walters has been a journalist for nearly 60 years, spending all but a few of those years working for California newspapers.
Oakland business tax measure on ballot — in 2022 Would shift from flat rate
By ANGELA RUGGIERO | [email protected] | Bay Area News Group PUBLISHED: July 20, 2020 at 12:37 p.m. | UPDATED: July 21, 2020 at 4:01 a.m. OAKLAND — A measure that could overhaul the way businesses are taxed in Oakland will go before voters — but not until 2022.
The Oakland City Council has agreed to place the business tax measure titled “Lift Up Oakland” on the November 2022 ballot — not the upcoming election this year.
Currently, businesses all pay the same flat tax rate, no matter how much money they bring in, according to Councilwoman Nikki Fortunato Bas who first brought the measure to the council. The proposal aims to reinvent the ways businesses are taxed, reducing what small businesses pay while holding large corporations accountable for their fair share, she said. Instead of paying a flat rate, the ballot measure calls for a different rate structure based on gross receipts.
“It’s not fair that one business may be paying the same flat tax rate as another who may have 10 or 20 time the revenue,” said Bas in an interview.
Bas first proposed the measure for this November’s ballot, but instead pushed it back to the 2022 election. The change was made after some council members suggested changes to the legislation, first introduced by Bas and council members Sheng Thao and Dan Kalb. Bas said she wanted the council to “move forward in a unified fashion” and give the city more time to speak with businesses. The council is also expected to approve creating a “Blue Ribbon Task Force” at its meeting Tuesday. The task force would study and recommend potential tax rates to the council. The task force would not meet until January; its members would be appointed by the mayor.
Earlier, council members who sponsored the legislation said that the tax burden would shift in large part from small businesses to larger ones. The proposal would lower taxes for small businesses such as restaurants, retail and wholesale ones that generate $250,000 or less in revenue per year. In turn, those that make more revenue would be taxed at higher rates.
If passed, the measure would go into effect in January 2023.
But the proposal received some criticism from speakers at last week’s council meeting. Aly Bonde, public policy director for the Oakland Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce, said it was clear no one spoke to small businesses about what they need.
“There are many things the City Council can and should do to help small businesses immediately, but rushing a measure that could threaten every size and sector of business in Oakland is not one of them,” Bonde said.
Passing the measure first and maybe fixing it later is a poor policymaking choice; instead, create a measure for the 2022 ballot with a commission that starts with a blank slate, she said. “Today, the council has taken a bold step toward making Oakland a welcoming place for small businesses, while inviting our larger corporations to make a deeper investment from which all Oaklanders will benefit,” Thao said in a statement.
“Once implemented, this new progressive tax structure will help guide Oakland through this economic crisis and nurture the small business growth that will define the city,” she said.
Bas said she hopes the tax measure will be more equitable for business owners.
“There is broad consensus that we must modernize Oakland’s business tax to become more equitable and fair, and to provide relief to our small businesses, so many disproportionately impacted by COVID-19 and struggling long before the pandemic hit,” Bas said in a statement.
In an online and telephone survey of 400 likely Oakland voters, at least 59% favored the shift in taxation. A simple majority would be required for a ballot measure to pass.
Park It: District wants your views on East Bay parks, trails Survey meant to guide mitigation of pandemic’s negative impact now and after threat passes
photo courtesy of Cali Godley
A family takes a break from cycling on the San Francisco Bay Trail’s new section in Albany between the Golden Gate Fields racetrack and the bay. The East Bay Regional Park District reminds the public to follow this family’s example in the district’s parks by bringing along face masks to wear.
By NED MACKAY | East Bay Regional Park District
PUBLISHED: July 26, 2020 at 5:00 a.m. | UPDATED: July 26, 2020 at 7:37 a.m. During the coronavirus pandemic, the East Bay Regional Park District has experienced what the district describes as an unprecedented surge in visitor attendance, as people head to the parks for healthy exercise and relief from stress.
According to findings from a recent survey, 96% of the respondents said it’s been important to keep regional parks and trails open during the pandemic; 90% said access to the parks and trails has been important to their health and well-being; and 94% said they believe the parks will play an equal or greater role in their lives when the pandemic is over.
Now the district is conducting an online survey along the same lines and would like to hear from as many people as possible. The purpose is to help the district develop ways to mitigate the negative impact of the pandemic while it’s still a threat and afterward, when the coronavirus has been controlled and people can get back to resuming as normal a life as possible.
If you’d like to participate in the survey, go online to surveymonkey.com/r/ebrpd-covid19-2020. The survey is available in English and Spanish.
Oakland Zoo: As has been widely reported, the Oakland Zoo has planned to reopen its doors at the end of July, after a months-long closure due to the COVID-19 pandemic. It’s great news for animals and people.
The regional park district is a partner with the zoo, as the park district’s 2008 Measure WW Local Grant Program has provided $4 million over the years for zoo capital improvements. Measure WW is a bond issue that received strong support from park district voters in Alameda and Contra Costa counties. The park district also joined the zoo in urging county and state leaders to allow the zoo to reopen with appropriate social-distancing protocols in place. For more about the zoo’s reopening plans, go to oaklandzoo.org. LWCF: Here’s more good news — the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives have just approved the Great American Outdoors Act, which permanently mandates $900 million annually for the national Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). The bill now goes to President Donald Trump, who has said he will sign it. The LWCF receives its money from royalties paid by energy companies drilling for oil and gas on the Outer Continental Shelf. Over the past 50 years, the program has provided more than $16 million in funding for various parks and trails in the East Bay Regional Park District, most recently for the $750,000 Bay Point Restoration and Public Access Project awarded in 2017. In general LWCF funds are used to expand public lands, safeguard natural areas and protect cultural heritage sites nationwide. In advocating full permanent funding of LWCF, the district has had the support of the East Bay’s whole Congressional delegation.
Tilden Regional: The Regional Parks Botanic Garden, located in Tilden Regional Park near Berkeley, has received the Frank Cabot Award from the North American Rock Garden Society. The award is national recognition for a public garden that features outstanding rock gardens and rock garden plants. Cabot was a major figure in American public gardens who founded the Garden Conservancy. The Regional Parks Botanic Garden specializes in the propagation of native California trees, shrubs and flowers. It’s located at the corner of South Park Drive and Wildcat Canyon Road but is currently closed to the public because of the pandemic.
Digital learning: The park district’s virtual nature programs continue, with all kinds of information and activities on video at ebparks.org, thanks to the district’s naturalist corps. From art to zoology, you can view it all by clicking on “Digital Learning” when it appears on the serial slide show, or by clicking on the “Digital Learning” display near the bottom of the home page. Also, when you’re actually out in the parks, please don’t forget to bring along a face mask to wear when social distancing is difficult on narrow trails. The more we make a habit of mask wearing, the safer we’ll be and the sooner we’ll all get through the pandemic. Thanks to everyone for cooperating.
Ned MacKay writes about East Bay Regional Park District sites and activities. Email him at [email protected].
Opinion: What Congress must do to provide added COVID-19 relief Any further delay will hurt American families and slow recovery
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., is urging Congress to extend income support for unemployed and vulnerable individuals, including continuing the expanded unemployment benefits beyond the end of this month. (Bay Area News Group File Photo)
By DIANNE FEINSTEIN | PUBLISHED: July 25, 2020 at 6:30 a.m. | UPDATED: July 26, 2020 at 6:23 a.m.
Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell late last month said the outlook for the U.S. economy is “extraordinarily uncertain and will depend in large part on our success in containing the virus.”
Employment data illustrates this uncertainty: While the economy added 4.8 million jobs in June, a record number, that progress is threatened by a renewed surge of coronavirus cases. And to make matters worse, many Americans laid off since March are finding their old jobs are no longer there for them to return to.
The success we have experienced can be attributed to the CARES Act. This law has helped nearly 5 million small businesses remain afloat and prevented millions of layoffs from becoming permanent.
In addition to helping businesses maintain their payroll, the CARES Act provided $1,200 to most Americans to help pay bills and stimulate spending. Expanded unemployment benefits — an additional $600 per week — helped tens of millions more. All told, approximately 12 million Americans remained above the poverty line because of this intervention. But as promising as the economic recovery was, it has faltered since mid-June with the resurgence of coronavirus infections. As we wait for the July job numbers to be released, new unemployment claims stubbornly continue to rise by more than 1 million per week, now for 18 straight weeks
On top of that, many states and localities face massive budget deficits due to declining revenues from the economic shutdown and the costs of addressing the pandemic. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that state governments alone will face a $555 billion shortfall through 2022. That doesn’t include hundreds of billions more in expected deficits for local and tribal governments.
What we can do:
As the Senate considers another stimulus package, there are a number of steps we should take to provide additional relief and bolster the nascent recovery.
• First, the Senate bill should provide federal aid to state and local governments to help them continue providing essential services. With experts predicting the pandemic will result in more than $1 trillion in state and local budget shortfalls, the federal government must step in to prevent massive cuts to critical services, including health and education.
• Second, it should extend income support for unemployed and vulnerable individuals, including continuing the expanded unemployment benefits beyond the end of this month. Republicans, many of whom previously refused to consider extending this support, are now suggesting they’re open to compromise.
• Third, it must continue to invest in programs that keep workers on the job. The CARES Act provided forgivable loans to small businesses so long as employers retained their employees on payroll. This will make it easier for those businesses to reopen once conditions warrant. But we know that some sectors — restaurants, travel and tourism and entertainment, to name three — will face a longer and more difficult return to normal. They will need additional aid.
• And fourth, it should provide additional stimulus to make up for lost demand due to the economic crisis. Economic experts say there are a number of ways to achieve this, including continued support to the unemployed. But however it’s accomplished, stimulus will be needed to ensure a speedy recovery.
This is a common sense approach to help American workers and businesses as we continue to battle the coronavirus. However, all of these steps are contingent on a national strategy to get the coronavirus under control.
We need to rapidly expand testing and contact tracing. We must expand vital research into the development of treatments and a vaccine. And all of us should be doing our part by maintaining physical distancing, avoiding large gatherings and wearing masks in public.
The House already passed a $3 trillion package that would implement many of the strategies outlined above. The Senate should either immediately vote on the House bill or pass its own legislation that fully addresses those needs.
Any further delay will only hurt American families. If we do nothing, the economic gains we’ve seen could easily wither on the vine. We can’t let that happen.
Dianne Feinstein represents California in the U.S. Senate.
New York Times: Trump Weakens Major Conservation Law to Speed Construction Permits
President Trump announced an overhaul of the National Environmental Policy Act, a key conservation law, to speed up construction permitting for freeways, power plants and pipelines. Credit...Brandon Thibodeaux for The New York Times
By Lisa Friedman July 15, 2020
WASHINGTON — President Trump on Wednesday unilaterally weakened one of the nation’s bedrock conservation laws, the National Environmental Policy Act, limiting public review of federal infrastructure projects to speed up the permitting of freeways, power plants and pipelines.
In doing so, the Trump administration claimed it would save hundreds of millions of dollars over almost a decade by significantly reducing the amount of time allowed for completing reviews of major infrastructure projects.
The president announced the final changes to the rule at the U.P.S. Hapeville Airport Hub in Atlanta, making the case that “mountains and mountains of red tape” and lengthy permit processes had held up major infrastructure projects across the country, including a lane expansion to the perpetually clogged Interstate 75 in Georgia.
“All of that ends today,” he said. “We’re doing something very dramatic.”
Revising the 50-year-old law through regulatory reinterpretation is one of the biggest — and most audacious — deregulatory actions of the Trump administration, which to date has moved to roll back 100 rules protecting clean air and water, and others that aim to reduce the threat of human-caused climate change.
Because the action is coming so late in Mr. Trump’s term, it also elevates the stakes in the November elections. Under federal regulatory law, a Democratic president and Congress could eradicate the NEPA rollback with simple majority votes on Capitol Hill and the president’s signature.
With Dueling Environmental Events, Trump and Biden Define the Race July 15, 2020
Republican lawmakers, the oil and gas industry, construction companies, home builders and other businesses have long said the federal permitting process takes too long, and accused environmentalists of using the law to tie up projects they oppose.
“This will modernize and rationalize the permitting process so that we can get these projects built at a state and local level,” said Martin Durbin, president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Global Energy Institute. The final rule, he said, “is a big step forward and it’s about our nation maintaining its global competitiveness.”
The final rule sets new hard deadlines of between one and two years to complete environmental studies, according to two people who have seen the document but were not authorized to speak about it publicly.
The rule will also allow agencies to develop categories of activities that do not require an environmental assessment at all.
And in one of the most bitterly contested provisions, the rule would free federal agencies from having to consider the impacts of infrastructure projects on climate change. It does so by eliminating the need for agencies to analyze a project’s indirect or “cumulative” effects on the environment and specifying that they are required to only analyze “reasonably foreseeable” impacts.
“This may be the single biggest giveaway to polluters in the past 40 years,” said Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental group. He accused the Trump administration of “turning back the clock to when rivers caught fire, our air was unbreathable and our most beloved wildlife was spiraling toward extinction.”
With the economy still reeling from the coronavirus pandemic, the president has repeatedly said the government must loosen environmental rules to get the country back on its feet. In June he signed an executive order allowing energy and infrastructure projects to bypass parts of certain laws like the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act, with the justification that it will “strengthen the economy and return Americans to work.”
Belinda Archibong, an assistant professor of economics at Barnard College of Columbia University, said if the Trump administration wanted to improve the economy, the president would actually call for more regulations to protect vulnerable communities already highly susceptible to coronavirus from the threat of increased air pollution.
“Saying ‘We’re going to pull back on regulation’ does not mean that firms are going to start hiring more people. That’s complete nonsense. All that’s going to happen is it’s going to lead to more pollution, period,” Dr. Archibong said.
Conservationists like to call the National Environmental Policy Act the “Magna Carta” of environmental law. Just as the charter of rights protected English citizens from monarchical rule, activists note, the foundational environmental policy gives United States citizens a voice in every federal road, housing project, airport or major infrastructure development.
It requires agencies to analyze and disclose the extent to which proposed federal actions or infrastructure projects affect the environment, from local wildlife habitat to the projected levels of greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change.
Activists opposed to fossil fuel expansion have used the environmental policy to challenge a proposed major coal terminal in the state of Washington. Last year a federal judge found that the Obama administration did not adequately take into account the climate change impact of leasing public land for oil gas drilling in Wyoming, a ruling that also presented a threat to Mr. Trump’s plans for fossil fuel development.
Earlier this month, a district court shut down the Dakota Access Pipeline, an oil route from North Dakota to Illinois that has inspired intense protests and legal battles, pending more detailed environmental review. Oil and gas industry officials said while changes to the law will not retroactively help the case for the Dakota Access Pipeline, it will speed decisions on future permits. The same week the United States Supreme Court upheld a district court order that cited the environmental policy act when it halted construction on the Keystone pipeline. The decisions were major blows to Mr. Trump, who has been determined to see those projects become reality.
Mr. Trump, a former real estate developer who has had personal run-ins with state-level versions of the law, had made weakening it a top priority of his administration.
But despite tasking at least a half dozen people from various agencies to finish the regulation this summer, the final rule is not likely to be safe from the Congressional Review Act, a law that had hardly been used until Mr. Trump took office. Under the law, Congress can overturn a federal agency’s rule- making within 60 legislative days of its finalization, something Democrats have pledged to do next year if they have the votes. Otherwise, the rule is expected to be subject to a lengthy court battle.
The revisions, if they hold up in court, are expected to lead to more permitting for pipelines and other projects that worsen global greenhouse gas emissions. It could also make roads, bridges and other infrastructure riskier because developers would no longer be required to analyze issues like whether sea-level rise might eventually submerge a project.
Documents obtained under public records laws by Documented, a watchdog group that tracks corporate influence in government, show that the White House has been working with conservative allies to build support for the measure.
On Feb. 20, Francis Brooke, Mr. Trump’s energy adviser, held a call with Republican governors, according to an email describing the discussion. On the call Mr. Brooke urged state leaders to submit official comments praising the rule, and encouraged them to detail “illustrative examples from states where projects have been slowed or delayed due to NEPA permitting.”
The NEPA change is likely to have an outsized impact on low-income neighborhoods that are already disproportionately exposed to environmental hazards, said Kerene N. Tayloe, director of federal environmental affairs at WE ACT for Environmental Justice, an advocacy group. The polluting effects of a new toxic waste incinerator or a port expansion or roadway bringing heavy traffic cannot be considered in isolation in neighborhoods that already have high numbers of industrial sites.
“One new refinery in ‘cancer alley’ might not emit much alone, but combined, that cumulative effect would pose an unacceptable health risk,” Ms. Tayloe said, adding, “If we aren’t looking at legacy pollution, if we aren’t looking at long pattern of environmental degradation, we’re only going to harm communities even more.”
Where to hike, run, and get outside right now in the Bay Area We compiled a map of all the beaches, trails and parks you can visit in the Bay Area, and let you know if they’re open or closed By Tom Stienstra | July 6, 2020 8:25 a.m.
California has started relaxing its lockdown rules, and people are eager to get outside and enjoy the beauty and wonder of the land near Golden Gate Bridge, see the surf at Venice Beach or experience the natural glory surrounding San Francisco Bay. But you know what’s almost as frustrating as being stuck in your home for weeks? Finally getting out to enjoy some nature and realizing the place you wanted to visit is closed.
Fortunately, we can help you know if the trip is worth your time.
The Chronicle has mapped out a comprehensive list of parks, beaches and nature trails in the Bay Area and Northern California with the status of each place — letting you know if the area is open to the public, has visitation restrictions or is closed until further notice. So if you want to see the marine life splendor in the tide pools of Ocean Beach or walk the tranquility path of the labyrinth at Lands End, check our interactive map first. We can save you the headache of arriving at a closed location, and point you toward somewhere that will welcome you.
We’ll be updating this list, so check back periodically to see if a favored place, like, say, the mammoth waves of Mavericks or the miles of trails in the Foothills is ready for you to revisit. But remember to be safe out there, and follow all guidelines for social distancing and face coverings.
Oakland Zoo faces permanent closure if it doesn't reopen this month
By Amanda Bartlett, SFGATE Updated 4:39 pm PDT, Wednesday, July 1, 2020
Photo:
Reuben Maness/Courtesy Of The Oakland Zoo The Oakland Zoo could close for good if it isn't permitted to reopen this month, according to Dr. Joel Parrott, the zoo’s president and CEO.
Following drastic budget cuts and millions of dollars in revenue loss, the Oakland Zoo is faced with the possibility of closing permanently if it does not receive approval to reopen this month, according to Dr. Joel Parrott, the zoo’s president and CEO. Normally, attendance soars during July, and the popular summer months are critical to sustaining the zoo’s operating costs through the less-visited winter season. But this year has been anything but normal. In mid-March, the zoo was forced to close with no reopening date in sight. As the pandemic lingered, zookeepers and veterinary staff had their wages cut by 20%, while the zoo’s executive staff saw pay reductions of at least 40%. The following month, all part-time and seasonal employees were laid off, and by July, 15 permanent, full-time employees representing 10% of the zoo’s remaining workforce were also furloughed. RELATED: 'Last thing to go will be care for animals': Oakland Zoo has used $1.5M of $4.5M reserve Now, the zoo is down to a dire $3.2 million in its emergency reserve fund. To put that into perspective, the cost to keep the zoo running at its lowest possible operating budget is $1.2 million per month, focused on caring for the animals and 24/7 public safety. “If we don’t open in July, we won’t make it through the winter,” said Parrott. “And if that’s the case, we have about three months to go.” Though the zoo received a PPP loan in mid-April, it only helped it stay afloat temporarily as it prepared to safely reopen with restrictions in place. Social-distancing markers and hand sanitizer stations were installed throughout the park as staff received special safety training. During this time, the zoo also spearheaded “Behind the Scenes,” a daily interactive livestream program with the goal of virtually connecting guests with animals and zookeepers during the shelter- in-place order to help generate revenue. But as the zoo continued to wait for approval from county public health officials, the funds from its PPP loan ran out, forcing the park to dip into its already draining financial reserves. The Oakland Zoo is currently classified as a Stage 3 business, but Parrott said the staff is vying for it to be considered as an outdoor museum, allowing it to continue operations. The San Francisco Zoo (which was slated to reopen on Monday but later deferred) attempted to obtain a similar title, but was consistently denied. MORE: San Francisco Zoo not reopening Monday as previously announced “We’re more like the East Bay Regional Parks than we are like a theater or restaurant,” said Parrott. “When people are here, they are outdoors. They very briefly pass one another and are usually in a small, family-sized group. The zoo is not a threat to public health.” He added that none of the zoo’s employees have tested positive for COVID-19 and are required to wear masks in addition to practicing social distancing. All surfaces are regularly disinfected throughout the day. Additionally, the park’s restaurants, play areas and rides will be closed until further notice. Despite these preparations, Parrott wasn’t expecting guests to show up in droves. He noted zoos that have been able to reopen, such as the Sacramento Zoo, reported a 50% drop in attendance. Anticipating a similar turnout for the Oakland Zoo, the staff is in the process of contacting state officials in the hopes that it can be recognized as a Stage 2 business before time runs out.
“We’ve cut our budget; we’ve cut our staff,” said Parrott. “We have ramped up as much as we possibly can in our efforts for philanthropy. But philanthropy can’t rescue the zoo.” The public has raised $450,000 since the zoo’s closure in March — an impressive feat, although one that covers just a quarter of their typical monthly operating costs. Still, Parrott said, “We do need donations in an urgent way. At this point, it will all go straight toward the care of the animals.” The zoo is currently operated by the Conservation Society of California, a nonprofit organization that manages the facility for the city of Oakland under a contract. If the zoo does run out of funds, those operations would be taken over by the Oakland Parks Department, which Parrott said is less equipped to operate the zoo and would also be a costly endeavor for the city to take on. On Tuesday afternoon, zoo officials met with the Alameda County board of supervisors. Parrott said supervisors were originally going to write a letter in support of the zoo’s reopening but later decided against doing so. “What we’re confronted with is this: If there’s not going to be another PPP program from the federal government, and the state’s out of money, and the county can’t help … we’re at a loss," said Parrott. "This staff is so committed; they would volunteer to take care of the animals for free before leaving their responsibility. Including me. That’s not sustainable, though.” He said the zoo was left with two options: to drain the rest of their emergency reserve, or reopen to the public again. “That’s the only way we can solve the problem. If we don’t, we most assuredly will run out of money. It’s as simple as that.” Amanda Bartlett is an SFGATE Digital Reporter. Email: [email protected] | Twitter: @byabartlett
These are the California statues being removed amid calls for racial justice
Kellie Hwang | June 28, 2020 Updated: June 28, 2020 6:57 p.m. Californians are toppling statues and challenging controversial place names in solidarity with the nationwide demonstrations against police brutality and systemic racism.
A statue of Queen Isabella and Christopher Columbus stands in the rotunda of the Capitol in Sacramento.
Photo: Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press Here’s a look at some of the actions being taken across the state amid a national reckoning over how we memorialize history and honor racial justice in public spaces.
San Francisco
• Christopher Columbus statue, Coit Tower: Officials removed the 4,000-pound statue, with the city’s Arts Commission commenting that the monument was not reflective of the city’s values. Officials said the removal was also a matter of public safety, as the statue had been vandalized multiple times and a social media flyer was circulating that encouraged people to take it down and throw it in the bay. It is now in storage.
• Junipero Serra statue, Golden Gate Park: On June 19, a 30-foot replica of Serra in Golden Gate Park was pulled down by protesters, memorialized in a viral Twitter video. Serra, the 18th- century Franciscan friar canonized in 2015, was the founder of nine California missions and a controversial figure who has been criticized for the domination of native people.
A statue of Junipero Serra is pulled to the ground by protesters in Golden Gate Park, San Francisco, on Friday, June 19. Photo: Jungho Kim / Special to The Chronicle
• Francis Scott Key statue, Golden Gate Park: Demonstrators in San Francisco also took down a statue of “Star-Spangled Banner” lyricist Francis Scott Key, who was a slaveholder.
• Ulysses S. Grant statue, Golden Gate Park: Protesters also vandalized and toppled a statue of the Civil War general, who led the Union army to victory. Grant had one slave, William Jones, whom he freed in 1859.
Fort Bragg
• The town, which is named after Confederate general Braxton Bragg, decided not to go through with a November ballot measure to change the town’s name. Instead, the mayor will appoint a committee to come up with other names for the town. Tahoe area
The Village at Squaw Valley Ski Resort Photo: Michael Macor / The Chronicle
• Owners of the Lake Tahoe ski resort Squaw Valley are considering a name change as the term “squaw” is a derogatory term against Native American women.
Sacramento
• Columbus statue, Capitol rotunda in Sacramento: Top lawmakers in Sacramento announced that the marble sculpture of the Italian explorer and Queen Isabella would be removed.
• A statue of John Sutter was removed at Sacramento’s Sutter Medical Center on June 15. Sutter was a colonizer of California and founded Sutter’s Fort, which would later become Sacramento. Many places around the city are named after Sutter, but historians have written about his enslavement of Native Americans.
Workers remove a statue of John Sutter in Sacramento on Monday, June 15. Photo: Daniel Kim / Associated Press
Los Angeles
• Junipero Serra statue, Placita Olvera: Protesters toppled a statue of Serra located within a historic district in downtown Los Angeles, and then defaced it with red paint.
• Junipero Serra statue, Mission Hills: The Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians covered the statue, which depicts Serra with his arm around a native indigenous child, in black trash bags and chains on Saturday. The tribe would like to see the state permanently removed.
Chula Vista
• Christopher Columbus statue, Discovery Park: On June 12, the statue was removed due to safety concerns before a planned protest. It is unclear if the move was permanent.
Ventura
• Junipero Serra statue, City Hall: Local leaders vowed to remove the statue of Serra in front of City Hall, releasing a statement that said the sculpture would be moved to a less public area. Folsom
• State park officials are discussing a possible name change to the recreation area currently called Negro Bar.
Placerville
• A petition earlier this month calls to change the welcome sign for the El Dorado County town, which now reads “Old Hangtown.” Critics say the nickname celebrates a racist history, and the petition has received more than 5,000 signatures. A counterpetition to keep the moniker has garnered more than 13,000 signatures.
Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks
• Park officials last week removed their only known reference to the 255-foot Robert E. Lee Tree, so named to honor the Confederate general, by pulling the name from an online list of the planet’s 30 biggest sequoias. The tree at Grant Grove, 50 miles east of Fresno, is the world’s 11th largest.
Kellie Hwang is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: [email protected]
Kellie Hwang is the engagement reporter for The San Francisco Chronicle. Before returning to the Bay Area, she held roles as transportation reporter and trending news reporter at the IndyStar in Indianapolis. Previously, Kellie covered dining news and trends, visual arts, events and nightlife for the Arizona Republic, and freelanced for the former Contra Costa Times. Kellie also serves as co-director of the Asian American Journalists Association Features Forum. She is a University of Washington graduate.
U.S. Postal Service Celebrates The Great Outdoors With New Forever Stamps JULY 3, 2020 (INDIANAPOLIS) – The U.S. Postal Service celebrates the many ways we appreciate the natural world with the release Thursday of the new Enjoy the Great Outdoors stamps. To salute Great Outdoors Month, these Forever stamps are being dedicated during a virtual ceremony hosted by John M. Barger, U.S. Postal Service Board of Governors, and David Vela, deputy director, National Park Service. The virtual stamp event can be found on the Postal Service’s Facebook and Twitter pages. “The American people have been blessed with an amazing country ‘from sea to shining sea,’ a vast nation with a Great Outdoors of national parks and splendid monuments. This Great Outdoors is also accessible to all Americans to explore and enjoy millions of acres of parks, beaches, rivers, lakes, deserts, snow- topped mountains and every landscape you can imagine,” said Barger. “I encourage all Americans to order these magnificent Enjoy the Great Outdoors stamps. Let these miniature works of art inspire you to explore our great land as you mail messages of friendship and love to the people in your life you cherish. These beautifully designed Forever stamps serve as a reminder of all the glory and majesty in our great land and America’s Great Outdoors.” “This wonderful collection of stamps takes us on a journey to the Great Outdoors and the endless opportunities for recreation and inspiration available in the natural world, including in national parks in every state,” said Vela, exercising the authority of the National Park Service director.
The stamp art depicts five scenes of various outdoor activities — building a sandcastle, hiking, cross- country skiing, canoeing, and biking. In these hand-sketched and painted designs, artist Gregory Manchess uses light and shadow to evoke a sense of wonder for these remarkable landscapes. Surrounding the pane of 20 stamps is a painting showing trees and the bank of a body of water. The small figures of a canoe in the water and a man standing ashore holding an oar are visible at the top of the selvage. The title “Enjoy the Great Outdoors” appears right above the pane of stamps in white lettering. Art director Derry Noyes designed the stamps. These stamps are available today at Post Office locations nationwide and at usps.com/outdoors. News of the stamps is being shared using the hashtag #GreatOutdoorsStamps. The abundance of natural resources in the United States provides endless opportunities for appreciating nature. National and state parks, nature preserves, placid lakes, sandy beaches and much more offer landscapes for many outdoor activities. Whether you prefer an adrenaline-fueled bike ride, a picturesque hike or a scenic paddle, there is something for everyone outside. Being outdoors reminds us to slow down and appreciate the natural beauty that surrounds us. It’s also good for us. Spending time in nature can provide many health benefits, which include lowering blood pressure, reducing stress and increasing energy levels. Overall, a connection to the great outdoors improves our well-being — physically and mentally. Nature is vast and remarkable. By experiencing our world, we come to better understand both our role in it and how we can each take care of our shared lands. Take a hike, ski a slope, build a sandcastle and enjoy all that the great outdoors has to offer. Postal Products Customers may purchase Enjoy the Great Outdoors stamps and other philatelic products through the Postal Store at usps.com/shop, by calling 800-STAMP24 (800-782-6724), by mail through USA Philatelic or at Post Office locations nationwide. The stamps are being issued as Forever stamps and will always be equal in value to the current First-Class Mail 1-ounce price. The Postal Service receives no tax dollars for operating expenses and relies on the sale of postage, products, and services to fund its operations.
EB Times In brief: U.S. House OKs act with several of DeSaulnier’s provisions The Moving Forward bill would invest almost $1.5 trillion to fund new projects
Jose Carlos Fajardo/staff archives Ten measures authored by California’s 11th congressional district U.S. Rep. Mark DeSaulnier, above, were included in the Moving Forward Act (H.R. 2) that the House of Representatives passed July 1.
By COMPILED BY EAST BAY TIMES | July 5, 2020 at 1:00 p.m.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY On July 1, 10 measures authored by California’s 11th congressional district U.S. Rep. Mark DeSaulnier were included in the Moving Forward Act (H.R. 2) that passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 233 to 188. The bill would invest nearly $1.5 trillion to fund new, transformative projects to create millions of jobs; reduce carbon pollution; dramatically improve safety; improve school, hospital, and airport infrastructure; and spur economic activity.
In brief: Walnut Creek Rotarians award scholarships, commend Class of 2020 “Our nation’s infrastructure is in dire need of repair. As a result, traffic increases, students’ education suffers, safety is compromised and irreparable harm is done to our environment,” said DeSaulnier. “Now is the moment for bold action to fix our infrastructure and put our country back to work.” DeSaulnier’s efforts included in the bill would support and encourage thoughtful, effective planning; provide strong oversight of our federal investments; and combat climate change through transportation infrastructure. Among those provisions are:
• Growing Electric Vehicle (EV) infrastructure: Based on DeSaulnier’s Clean Corridors Act (H.R. 2616), the bill would provide grant funding to build out EV and hydrogen fueling infrastructure, with an emphasis on communities that are most affected by greenhouse gas emissions. It would also ensure that a range of EV chargers are eligible for federal funding, reducing “range anxiety” for EV owners and drivers. • Linking economic and transportation development: This would provide grants to help implement a process known as “land value capture” to better public transportation investment and would require the U.S. Transportation Department to develop value-capture best practices, standards and policies. • Expanding bicycle and pedestrian programs: The provision would ensure that multicounty special agencies such as the East Bay Regional Park District are eligible for bicycle, pedestrian and environmental innovation program funding. • Improving megaproject oversight: Introduced by DeSaulnier in the Transportation Megaprojects Accountability and Oversight Act (H.R. 5508), the language establishes a megaprojects peer review group, helping to save taxpayers millions of dollars by reducing project cost overruns and minimizing projects delays. DeSaulnier, a member of the House Committee on Transportation & Infrastructure, previously served as chair of the California State Senate Transportation and Housing Committee as well as the California Assembly Transportation Committee, is a former member of the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and has been a longtime leader in advocating for safe and efficient transportation systems. For more details, visit desaulnier.house.gov.
— U.S. Rep. DeSaulnier’s office BY WES VENTEICHER JULY 06, 2020 01:26 PM
CEO David Lubarsky describes on Wednesday, July 1, 2020, how the UC Davis Medical Center in Sacramento has prepared for surges in coronavirus cases, as well as normal patient care. BY DANIEL KIM
Gov. Gavin Newsom and the California State Legislature are cutting state workers’ pay in a way that could burden the state’s long-term finances for many years to come. The state is cutting workers’ pay for the next two years, and in exchange is giving most of them two flexible days off. That’s 48 days off to use at their discretion. Newsom expects the reductions, achieved through what’s called a personal leave program, to save the state $2.8 billion per year, helping the state close a projected $54 billion deficit. But if past experience with similar programs is a guide, the state could end up paying more than a fifth of the savings back to workers over time, according to a 2013 Legislative Analyst’s Office report on state pay cuts during the Great Recession. The program also will grow the state’s liabilities related to pensions and retirement health care, according to a June report from the office. Many workers didn’t use all of the days off they received in exchange for the round of pay cuts a decade ago, and accumulated banks of leave. Over the years, the value of their leave grew as their pay grew, increasing what the state would have to pay them for the time, including cashouts upon retirement. “There’s not really much reason to assume there won’t be a similar liability associated with this leave,” Nick Schroeder, an analyst with the office, said of the new leave program.
WES VENTEICHER 916-321-1410 Wes Venteicher anchors The Bee’s popular State Worker coverage in the newspaper’s Capitol Bureau. He covers taxes, pensions, unions, state spending and California government. A Montana native, he reported on health care and politics in Chicago and Pittsburgh before joining The Bee in 2018.
California voters: Here are the 12 measures on the November ballot
Dustin Gardiner July 3, 2020 Updated: July 3, 2020 4:54 p.m.
Election worker Laura Herrera disinfects her station at a mobile voting site amid the coronavirus pandemic during a special election in Lancaster (Los Angeles County) in May. Photo: Marcio Jose Sanchez / Associated Press
Californians will see a lengthy list of initiatives and referendums on the November ballot.
Secretary of State Alex Padilla has assigned proposition numbers to 12 measures that have qualified for the ballot, from funding for stem cell research to a repeal of the state’s ban on affirmative action and an expansion of consumer privacy laws. Each must be approved by a simple majority to become law.
Proposition 14: Stem cell research. Would re-fund the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, the state’s stem cell agency, by allowing it to issue $5.5 billion in bonds for research, training and facilities construction. Proposition 15: Limits on property taxes. Would rewrite Proposition 13, the landmark 1978 measure that limits property tax increases and allows residential and commercial property to be reassessed only when it is sold.
Prop. 15 would boost property taxes on large commercial and industrial property by allowing it to be reappraised more frequently. The added money would go to school districts and local governments. Prop. 13 rules for residential property would be unchanged.
Proposition 16: Affirmative action. A constitutional amendment, proposed by state legislators, that would reverse California’s voter-approved 1996 ban on affirmative action. It would repeal Proposition 209, which prohibits public universities, schools and government agencies from using race or sex in their admissions criteria, hiring and contract decisions.
Election 2020
Proposition 17: Parolee voting. A constitutional amendment, proposed by state legislators, that would restore the voting rights of all people on parole if they’ve completed their state or federal prison terms.
Proposition 18: Voting age. A constitutional amendment, proposed by state legislators, that would allow 17-year-olds to vote in primary elections if they would turn 18 before the general election.
Proposition 19: Property tax transfers. A constitutional amendment, proposed by state legislators, that would allow people age 55 and older, and victims of wildfires and other disasters, to keep lower property tax rates when they move to new homes.
Proposition 20: Criminal justice. Would make changes to the criminal justice system by revising two earlier initiatives, Proposition 47 and Proposition 57. The new measure would expand the list of violent crimes for which there is no early release, adding sex trafficking of a child and felony domestic violence. It would also require DNA collection for those convicted of several types of misdemeanors.
Proposition 21: Rent control. Would reverse a ban on local rent control laws. It would repeal the Costa- Hawkins Rental Housing Act, which prohibits cities from passing rent control ordinances for housing built since 1995. Voters overwhelmingly rejected a similar measure in 2018.
Editor’s note
An earlier version of this story erroneously stated that two additional measures could qualify for the November ballot. The window for qualifying has closed.
Read More Proposition 22: Gig worker classification. Would exempt app-based drivers, including those working for Uber, Lyft and DoorDash, from a state law that classifies gig workers as employees. The companies want to undo part of AB5, California’s gig-worker law, which aims to classify their drivers as employees and make them eligible for benefits. Under the ballot measure, the companies could keep drivers as independent contractors while granting them some benefits and earnings guarantees. Proposition 23: Kidney dialysis clinics. Would increase state regulation of kidney dialysis clinics. Among the proposed requirements: Clinics would be prohibited from discriminating against patients based on their source of payment.
Proposition 24: Consumer data privacy. Would expand California’s consumer privacy law, passed in 2018. The measure would triple penalties for companies that break laws regarding the collection and sale of children’s private information. It would also create a state agency to enforce consumer privacy protections.
Proposition 25: Cash bail. Would overturn a 2018 law that eliminates cash bail as a requirement to release people from jail before trial.
Dustin Gardiner is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: [email protected] Twitter: @dustingardiner
.
Dustin Gardiner Follow Dustin on: https://www.facebook.com/SFChronicle/dustingardiner Dustin Gardiner is a state Capitol reporter for The San Francisco Chronicle. He joined The Chronicle in 2019, after nearly a decade with The Arizona Republic, where he covered state and city politics. Dustin won several awards for his reporting in Arizona, including the 2019 John Kolbe Politics Reporting award, and the 2017 Story of the Year award from the Arizona Newspapers Association. Outside of work, he enjoys hiking, camping, reading fiction and playing Settlers of Catan. He's a member of NLGJA, the association of LGBTQ journalists.
National 19th Amendment anniversary celebration will put women on Mount Rushmore, temporarily
By Amanda Becker | The 19th June 5, 2020 at 7:33 a.m. PDT Last November, Christina Korp was at dinner in Los Angeles talking with friends about the upcoming centennial of the 19th Amendment, which gave some women the right to vote. The amendment’s 100th anniversary deserved a big celebration, Korp believed, and she knew a bit about marking significant events. Last year, she produced the Apollo 50th Gala at the Kennedy Space Center. Korp, an entertainment industry veteran, said she wanted to create some type of visual mosaic to honor the anniversary this August, prompting her friend to joke that Korp, a South Dakota native, should put images of women on the facade of Mount Rushmore in her home state. Korp took it seriously. In late August and early September, Korp’s project, “Look Up to Her,” will become one of a number of ways the Women’s Suffrage Centennial Commission will mark the anniversary, along with a commemorative coin and medal produced by the U.S. Mint and a virtual event at the Kennedy Center. She’ll project the images of 14 female leaders of the suffrage and civil rights movements on Mount Rushmore, including women who never themselves got the right to vote.
For two weeks, Abigail Adams, Sojourner Truth, Clara Barton, Harriet Tubman, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, Ida B. Wells, Alice Paul, Jeannette Rankin, Gladys Pyle, Mabel Ping-Hua Lee, Zitkala-Sa, Nellie Tayloe Ross and Rosa Parks will be projected in pairs flanking Mount Rushmore’s four presidents — George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt — in several-minute increments. When the 19th Amendment was ratified on Aug. 18, 1920, it granted American women the right to vote after nearly a century of protest. But black women still faced significant barriers to casting ballots. Native American women were still not considered U.S. citizens. The Chinese Exclusion Act prevented Chinese immigrants from becoming U.S. citizens until 1943. Korp says she intentionally chose to include women such as Truth, who was born a slave and died before she had the right to vote; Zitkala-Sa, a Native American who at the time was not a citizen under U.S. law; and Lee, a Chinese immigrant who fought for suffrage knowing it would not apply to her.
“To me, being willing to do it anyway, knowing you might not live to see it but seeing the value of playing a part in it is really important,” Korp said. The Women’s Suffrage Centennial Commission was created by Congress in 2017 with every female member of the U.S. Senate co-sponsoring the bill. It was appropriated $4 million for programs and projects marking the centennial of the ratification of the 19th Amendment. Commission Chair Susan Combs, a former assistant secretary to the Interior Department during the Trump administration, said they embraced Korp’s idea because it aligns with the commission’s goal of backing projects that will have a lasting legacy instead of a one-time event. Combs said “Look Up to Her” will probably be filmed so those who cannot go to Mount Rushmore in person can still share in the experience.
The coronavirus pandemic has shifted plans for much of the celebration. An event the commission was planning for the Kennedy Center will now be virtual. It will work with the National Collaborative for Women’s History Sites and other groups to create statutes and signs to mark important suffrage sites. A rose bush will be planted at the White House. One event that Combs hopes will still happen post-pandemic is a group of 100 women parachuting from the sky trailing purple and gold smoke — colors traditionally used by suffrage activists. The women were initially supposed to parachute into Seneca Falls, N.Y., where women gathered in 1848 for the first women’s rights convention. Due to coronavirus concerns, the jump was delayed, and the women will likely parachute into Chicago in October. Korp, who described her upbringing in South Dakota as a “humble” one in a family with 10 children, said she hopes the legacy of “Look Up to Her” will be to “light a spark in another kid like me, especially a young girl.”
“I always think that people are afraid to do things because they’re afraid they’re going to hear ‘no.’ I get lots of ‘nos.’ I just try to go and find the yes. And I think that’s probably the spirit of what kept these women going. I’m just trying to do my part as a patriotic girl from South Dakota,” she said. This story is part of a collaboration between The Washington Post and The 19th, a nonprofit newsroom covering gender, politics and policy.
Coronavirus Is a Crisis. Might It Also Narrow Inequality?
Economic downturns have often led to political moves to lift the most vulnerable. But recoveries tend to reverse the effect.
By Eduardo Porter June 25, 2020
The United States faces an economic downturn without precedent. Is it also a moment that could produce lasting change?
The official unemployment rate was 13.3 percent in May, compared with 3.5 percent in February, and even the Labor Department thinks the recent figures are a substantial undercount. Covid-19 cases, which prompted the crisis, are surging in many states. And the burdens have landed disproportionately on people of color, just as crowds have protested the justice system’s treatment of African-Americans.
“You have three crises compounding each other: a 100-year pandemic, a 75-year depression and 50- year civil unrest,” said Rahm Emanuel, President Barack Obama’s first chief of staff and later Chicago’s mayor. This, he believes, opens political space for bold action.
The political system has already responded in ways unimaginable a few years ago. It took only a smidgen of negotiation in March for Congress to pass a $2 trillion stimulus program by an overwhelming majority, including a temporary supplement to unemployment insurance payments and direct payments to low- and middle-income families.
To some in the economic and political arenas, that should be only a start.
Scholars are brimming with ideas to construct a more generous safety net on a permanent basis, bolstering everything from Medicaid to child care support. Timothy Smeeding, a professor of economics and public affairs at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, suggests that the federal government pick up the entire tab for Medicaid, which it now shares with the states.
This would save struggling states nearly $250 billion a year and allow the federal government to establish a uniform set of benefits covering things like mental health and reproductive health, which some states have balked at. With an additional $44 billion, Mr. Smeeding added, the government could extend the $2,000 child tax credit to families with no income, subsidize child care and expand the earned-income tax credit.
Mr. Emanuel is thinking in similar terms. He and his brother Ezekiel, a medical ethicist who also worked in the Obama administration, have put together a plan in which the federal government would take over states’ responsibility for Medicaid and unemployment insurance, in exchange for state commitments to fund universal prekindergarten, expand spending on public colleges and invest in infrastructure.
“This offers both parties policy accomplishments and political benefits,” Rahm Emanuel said. “There is a grand bargain that has more winners than losers. That is in the tradition of American politics and policymaking.”
This would not be the first time an economic crisis opened the door for an expansion of government assistance. Indeed, much of the American social safety net was built during the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration in response to the Great Depression.
More recently, the Great Recession offered an opportunity for the Obama administration to build on it. In 2009, government redistribution efforts, including food stamps, tax provisions and other social programs, shifted 5.3 percent of the nation’s income that year to the poorest 40 percent of households. This was the biggest such transfer in at least three decades, raising the incomes of that contingent to 18.6 percent of the total.
By the end of his presidency, Mr. Obama had not only extended health insurance to millions of working-class Americans. According to the Congressional Budget Office, in 2016 government programs transferred 6.1 percent of national income to the poorest 40 percent, increasing their slice to 18.8 percent, the largest in almost a quarter-century.
Mr. Obama’s chief economic adviser, Jason Furman, highlighted the “historic achievement” of the administration in mitigating the nation’s income inequality. Mr. Emanuel, who in the depths of the crisis argued that “you never want a serious crisis to go to waste,” acknowledged that the administration might not have achieved all its policy goals, but said, “It wasn’t a swing in the wind.”
In the coronavirus crisis, however, not everybody shares this sense of political opportunity.
Walter Scheidel, an economic historian at Stanford University, has written exhaustively about the power of crises — wars, famines, natural disasters, pestilence — to shift societies onto a more egalitarian path. As far back as the Roman Empire and even beyond, he writes, the equalizing moments in history “shared one common root: massive and violent disruptions of the established order.”
While the current emergency might seem like a big deal, Mr. Scheidel argues, it probably won’t be damaging enough. “If the crisis is bad enough, it might shape preferences enough to shift where the majorities are,” he said. “But it’s not something I see happening any time soon. We are too stable.”
And that reveals one important effect of the country’s social safety net: Though too weak to mitigate deepening inequality, it is generous enough to prevent Americans from pushing for more radical policies.
As Gary Burtless of the Brookings Institution points out, inequality declined by some measures during the nation’s recent recessions. The share of income going to the poorest fifth of the population increased slightly in 1990, 2001, 2008 and 2009, even as incomes at the top fell sharply. Expanded unemployment insurance and other programs shielded the poorest Americans from the full brunt of the downturns. The flip side is that inequality surges during economic expansions. And the tax and transfer system has been powerless to offset it. For instance, despite the Obama administration’s push against inequality, during the expansion from 2009 to 2016 the share of the nation’s income accruing to the richest 10 percent of the population jumped to 33.5 percent from 32.1 percent after considering taxes and transfers, according to a Congressional Budget Office analysis. This vastly outpaced the growth in the share accruing to the poorest 40 percent.
Government in the United States spends less on social programs to benefit the less fortunate than most other advanced nations, even though — by international standards — the poverty rate is the highest among the 35 countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
And in important respects, the American safety net has been getting weaker.
Despite the large increase in spending on unemployment insurance and food stamps, the safety net was less effective in the Great Recession than during the recession of the early 1980s in protecting those at half the poverty line or less, according to an analysis by Hilary Hoynes of the University of California, Berkeley, and Marianne Bitler of the University of California, Davis.
The main reason, Ms. Hoynes noted, was the increase in the conditionality of government benefits. Unconditional cash assistance for poor families was largely replaced after the 1996 welfare law with programs that usually require people to work, such as the earned-income tax credit and the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. The tax credit “is great for a number of things,” Ms. Hoynes said, but losing your job means losing the credit.
Since the Great Recession, work requirements have been attached to more bits of the safety net, including food stamps and Medicaid. And for all the support for #BlackLivesMatter evident on the streets, racial animus remains a strong political constraint in developing more generous assistance programs.
Research has found that after the welfare overhaul of 1996 empowered states to set rules for benefit entitlement, those with larger African-American populations provided less cash assistance to poor families. Moreover, welfare officers are more likely to punish African-American families for violations of program rules.
Martin Gilens of Yale has written extensively about the power of racism to stunt the American safety net, concluding that “racial attitudes are in fact the most important source of opposition to welfare among whites.”
Racial divisions show no sign of dissipating. “I have reviewed nearly every academic article containing the name ‘Donald Trump,’” wrote Matt Grossmann, a political scientist at Michigan State University. “This huge literature has plenty of disagreements — but the dominant findings are clear: Attitudes about race, gender and cultural change played outsized roles in the 2016 Republican primaries and general election.”
While the images of young protesters in the streets of American cities after the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis last month might suggest political support for expanding the safety net to lift the most vulnerable, research suggests that such protests can motivate a backlash.
As Mr. Emanuel noted, one consequence of Mr. Obama’s efforts to expand government assistance after the Great Recession was a movement against government spending more widely: the Tea Party. Correction: June 25, 2020 An earlier version of this article misstated the academic affiliation of Marianne Bitler. She is at the University of California, Davis, not the University of California, Irvine.
Eduardo Porter joined The Times in 2004 from The Wall Street Journal. He has reported about economics and other matters from Mexico City, Tokyo, London and São Paulo. @portereduardo
A version of this article appears in print on June 26, 2020, Section B, Page 4 of the New York edition with the headline: Could Economic Downturn Produce Lasting Change?. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe
POLITICS Newsom signs California’s $202.1 billion state budget
Alexei Koseff June 29, 2020 Updated: June 29, 2020 9:11 p.m.2
Gov. Gavin Newsom in a news conference in Sacramento on June 1.Photo: Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press
SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a $202.1 billion state budget Monday that largely avoids widespread cuts to public services to close a multibillion-dollar deficit caused by the coronavirus pandemic.
The budget, which takes effect July 1, maintains spending on schools and health and safety net programs by tapping reserve accounts, borrowing from special funds, delaying billions of dollars in payments until future years and temporarily limiting corporate tax credits to raise new revenue.
Some programs are nevertheless hit with steep reductions, including public universities, the court system, affordable-housing grants and state worker compensation. State officials hope to reverse $11 billion of those cuts if California receives a federal bailout by Oct. 15. “In the face of a global pandemic that has also caused a recession across the world and here in California, our state has passed a budget that is balanced, responsible and protects public safety and health, education, and services to Californians facing the greatest hardships,” Newsom said in a statement.
The budget Newsom signed is about 9% smaller than the spending plan he proposed in January, which would have been a record. As the coronavirus forced Californians into their homes this spring, much of the economy ground to a halt and tax revenue dried up.
Facing a projected $54.3 billion deficit, the governor dropped some of the liberal priorities he wanted to adopt this year, such as an expansion of the state’s health care program for the poor to undocumented immigrant seniors. But in extended negotiations with legislative leaders, he agreed to forgo more extensive cuts he originally proposed to close the budget gap, including the elimination of a program to keep seniors out of nursing homes.
As the economic consequences of the pandemic become clearer, lawmakers will likely amend this budget. That could happen as soon as August, when the Legislature reconvenes after its summer recess with a more accurate sense of how much the state has collected in taxes. The deadline for filing taxes was pushed back by three months, to July 15.
Alexei Koseff is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: [email protected] Twitter: @akoseff
Follow Alexei on: https://www.facebook.com/SFChronicle/akoseff Alexei Koseff is a state Capitol reporter for The San Francisco Chronicle, covering Gov. Gavin Newsom and California government from Sacramento. He previously spent five years in the Capitol bureau of The Sacramento Bee, reporting on everything from international recruiting by the University of California to a ride service for state senators too drunk to drive. Alexei is a Bay Area native and attended Stanford University. He speaks fluent Spanish.
Census shows white decline, nonwhite majority among youngest By MIKE SCHNEIDER 6/25/2020
In this Aug. 22, 2019, file photo, people walk through New York's Times Square. The population of non- Hispanic whites in the U.S. has gotten smaller in the past decade as deaths have surpassed birthU.S. Census Bureau. (AP Photo/Bebeto Matthews, File)
ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — For the generation of Americans not yet old enough to drive, the demographic future has arrived.
For the first time, nonwhites and Hispanics were a majority of people under age 16 in 2019, an expected demographic shift that will grow over the coming decades, according to figures released by the U.S. Census Bureau on Thursday.
“We are browning from bottom up in our age structure,” said William Frey, a senior fellow at The Brookings Institution. “This is going to be a diversified century for the United States, and it’s beginning with this youngest generation.”
At the same time, the number of non-Hispanic whites in the U.S. has gotten smaller in the past decade as deaths surpassed births in this aging demographic, according to the Census Bureau population estimates. Since 2010, the number of whites who aren’t Hispanic had dropped by more than 16,600 people. But the decline has been escalating in the past three years, with the number of non-Hispanic whites dropping by more than a half million people from 2016 to 2019, according to the Census Bureau population estimates.
In 2019, a little under 40% of the total U.S. population was either nonwhite or Hispanic. Non- Hispanic whites are expected to be a minority of the U.S. population in about 25 years.
A natural decrease from the number of deaths exceeding births, plus a slowdown in immigration to the U.S., contributed to the population drop since 2010 for non-Hispanic whites, whose median age of 43.7 last year was by far the highest of any demographic group. If these numbers hold for the 2020 census being conducted right now, it will be the first time since the first decennial census in 1790 that there has been a national decline of whites, Frey said.
“It’s aging. Of course, we didn’t have a lot of immigration, that has gone down,” Frey said. “White fertility has gone down.”
In fact, the decrease in births among the white population has led to a dip in the number of people under age 18 in the past decade, a drop exacerbated by the fact that the much larger Millennial cohort has aged out of that group, replaced by a smaller Generation Z.
Over the past decade, Asians had the biggest growth rate of any demographic group, increasing by almost 30%. Almost two-thirds of that growth was driven by international migration.
The Hispanic population grew by 20% since 2010, with almost three-quarters of that growth coming from a natural increase that comes when more people are born than die.
The Black population grew by almost 12% over the decade, and the white population increased by 4.3%.
The nation’s seniors have swelled since 2010 as Baby Boomers aged into that demographic, with the number of people over age 65 increasing by more than a third. Seniors in 2019 made up more than 16% of the U.S. population, compared to 13% in 2010.
In four states — Maine, Florida, West Virginia and Vermont — seniors accounted for 20% of the population. That’s a benchmark that the overall U.S. population is expected to reach by 2030.
“The first Baby Boomers reached 65 years old in 2011,” said Luke Rogers, chief of the Census Bureau’s Population Estimates Branch. “No other age group saw such a fast increase.”
___
Follow Mike Schneider on Twitter at https://twitter.com/MikeSchneiderAP
IMF lowers global economic outlook By Martin Crutsinger Martin Crutsinger is an Associated Press writer.
Wilfredo Lee / Associated PressBusinesses, like this store in Florida, that are closing permanently led to the International Monetary Fund’s lowered forecast.
WASHINGTON — The International Monetary Fund has sharply lowered its forecast for global growth this year because it envisions far more severe economic damage from the coronavirus than it did just two months ago.
The IMF predicts that the global economy will shrink 4.9% this year, significantly worse than the 3% drop it had estimated in its April report. The IMF said that the global economic damage from the recession will be worse than from any other downturn since the Great Depression of the 1930s.
For the United States, it predicts that gross domestic product — the value of all goods and services produced in the country — will plummet 8% this year, even more than its April estimate of a 5.9% drop. That would be the worst such annual decline since the U.S. economy demobilized in the aftermath of World War II.
The IMF issued its bleaker forecasts Wednesday in an update to the World Economic Outlook it released in April. The update is generally in line with other recent major forecasts. The World Bank projected this month that the global economy would shrink 5.2% this year.
“This is the worst recession since the Great Depression,” Gita Gopinath, the IMF’S chief economist, told reporters at a briefing. “No country has been spared.”
The IMF noted that the pandemic was disproportionately hurting lowincome households, “imperiling the significant progress made in reducing extreme poverty in the world since 1990.”
In recent years, the proportion of the world’s population living in extreme poverty — equivalent to less than $1.90 per day — had fallen below 10% from more than 35% in 1990. But the IMF said the COVID19 crisis threatens to reverse this progress. It forecast that more than 90% of developing and emerging market economies will suffer declines in per capita income growth this year.
For 2021, the IMF envisions a rebound in growth, as long as the viral pandemic doesn’t erupt in a second major wave. It expects the global economy to expand 5.4% next year, 0.4 of a percentage point lower than its April forecast.
For the United States, the IMF predicts growth of 4.5% next year, 0.2 of a percentage point weaker than in its April forecast. But that gain wouldn’t be enough to restore the U.S. economy to its level before the pandemic struck. The association of economists who officially date recessions in the United States determined that the economy entered a recession in February, with tens of millions of people thrown out of work from the shutdowns that were imposed to contain the virus.
The U.S. government has estimated that the nation’s GDP shrank at a 5% annual rate in the Januarymarch quarter, and it is widely expected to plunge at a 30% rate or worse in the current Apriljune period.
In its updated forecast, the IMF downgraded growth for all major countries. For the 19 European nations that use the euro currency, it envisions a decline in growth this year of 10.2% — more than the 8% drop it predicted in April — followed by a rebound to growth of 6% in 2021.
In China, the world’s secondlargest economy, growth this year is projected at 1%. India’s economy is expected to shrink 4.5% after a longer period of lockdown and a slower recovery than was envisioned in April. In Latin America, where most countries are still struggling to contain infections, the two largest economies, Brazil and Mexico, are projected to shrink 9.1% and 10.5%, respectively.
A steep drop in oil prices has led to deep recessions in oilproducing countries, with the Russian economy expected to contract 6.6% this year and Saudi Arabia’s 6.8%.
The IMF cautioned that downside risks to the forecast remain significant. It said the virus could spread again, forcing renewed shutdowns and possibly renewed turmoil in financial markets similar to what occurred January through March. The IMF warned that such financial turbulence could tip vulnerable countries into debt crises that would further hamper efforts to recover.
US & WORLD // NEWS Is risk of coronavirus transmission lower outside? What to know before going outdoors
Sam Whiting June 22, 2020 Updated: June 22, 2020 2:33 p.m.
Maite Wallace (left) and Farah Norwood, both of Oakland, take a morning walk at Lake Merritt in Oakland.Photo: Yalonda M. James / The Chronicle
Summer is here. Stores are reopening. Many Bay Area restaurants now are offering outdoor dining. And the majority of counties in California have moved forward in the state’s reopening plan, allowing higher- risk businesses to open and easing up on the sheltering restrictions placed on us during this pandemic.
But this isn’t the same world we remember from before. The Chronicle talked to some health experts about how the virus is transmitted and how we can best navigate a reopening Bay Area while staying safe. Q: What are the transmission rates for people who are outside? Are they higher than being inside?
A: Outside exercise lowers the chance of spreading the virus by a magnitude of 10 compared with the same level of exertion indoors, said Dr. Gary Green, medical director of infection control at Sutter Santa Rosa Regional Hospital. The main danger is in exercising outdoors with others because the tendency is to pile into a car to get to the trailhead and then bunch up once you are there: “People are used to congregating before and after exercising and you want to be careful.”
Getting Outdoors
California’s reopening: What’s open and what’s shut down
Dr. Peter Chin-Hong, an infectious disease specialist at the UCSF School of Medicine, said that in all circumstances the outdoors are safer than indoors. It is easier to maintain social distancing and the virus does not have as many opportunities to spread. That’s why tuberculosis patients were always placed out in the fresh air. “If you want to meet people, meet them outside,” he said. “It is all about risk reduction.”
Q: Are there places outside that are worse for virus transmission? Like, is the beach better than a park?
A: It is not the outdoor setting that matters, it is the crowding. When the sun is out people tend to set up umbrellas for shade and crowd under them. That is to be avoided. The coronavirus “likes cold weather more than it likes hot weather, and it likes low altitude more than it likes high altitude,” said Chin-Hong. “But it likes people more than it likes hot or cold.”
Q: How long does the virus live on grass or trees? Is it safe to sit on grass at a park? A: Unless you immediately occupy a patch of grass that someone else has been sitting on or touch the exact same spot on a tree that someone else touched, it is highly unlikely that the living virus is there. Guardrails and public restrooms are much more dangerous.
The virus “doesn’t love grass or trees or clothing,” Chin-Hong said. “I would rate these as low-risk surfaces.”
People walk and run around Lake Merritt in Oakland this month. Lake Merritt has been a popular destination during the coronavirus pandemic despite shelter-in-place orders.
Photo: Paul Chinn / The Chronicle
Q: Will the sunlight cleanse a surface that has the virus on it?
A: Yes. “On a warm day in the outside air the virus will only survive for minutes under sunlight,” Green said. “The warmer the day, the quicker the virus dries out.”
Q: Does a runner exhaling while exercising potentially spread the virus greater than someone who is simply walking? And should we be worried about people running past us on sidewalks or trails?
A: There are no scientific data to suggest that a runner has more viral spread than a walker, according to Green. “If everyone is wearing a mask, and practicing social distancing, the brief time a runner goes by a walker is a minimal risk of exposure.” Singing and loud talking, however, have emerged as activities that could produce significantly more exhalations of viral droplets than normal activity and thus spread the virus. So watch for the noisy walkers, not the silent runners.
Chin-Hong recommends a simple solution. “If you can’t control your environment, wear a mask.”
Masks are now required for all Californians traveling outside the home, including when outdoors in public spaces if you will come within 6 feet of others who are not members of your household.
Q: Do people running or biking create “slipstreams” that could potentially push the virus toward you?
A: There are no data about this scenario, which has caused some online discussion. If everyone wears a mask, there is little or no danger.
Q: Are there masks that allow you to breathe better while exercising?
A: Doctors agree that the standard surgical mask is the best for exercise and the N95 mask — commonly worn by house painters, and more recently during wildfires — is the worst because it becomes uncomfortable when exercising and breathing heavily. “The N95 mask is more like a respirator,” Dr. Green said. He also recommends against anything that has a button on it. “That button opens and it allows breath to go out the vent,” he said. “These vented masks are not protective for the community. That’s why we never use them in the hospital.”
Double cloth masks are effective but can be difficult to draw breath through during a vigorous workout.
Chin-Hong advises runners and walkers to wear a cloth mask around the neck that can easily be pulled up when passing other people.
Q: Does sweat make it easier to transfer the virus? If you bump into a sweaty person, is that cause for concern?
A: Not really because COVID-19 is caused by a respiratory virus. “We are really only interested in mouth secretions and nose secretions,” Green said.
“The risk of random sweat vaporizing on you is very small,” Chin-Hong said, “unless the person runs around you in circles and creates a COVID sauna.”
Q: Does the wind affect transmission of the virus? Can it blow the virus onto me?
A: Wind is your friend in defending against the virus. “It disperses the virus much more rapidly and thins it out, which lowers the risk of infection,” Chin-Hong said. “The virus is trying to jump from someone who is infected, the wind creates turbulence and disrupts the path of the virus,” he added.
Q: Does chlorine kill the virus in a swimming pool?
Sammy Consani and Nutella (left) sits with Hannah Suh at Lake Merritt in Oakland this month. Oakland city officials are strongly discouraging gatherings at the lake and at parks and are reminding people to maintain social distancing during the coronavirus shelter in place orders.
Photo: Paul Chinn / The Chronicle
A: “Disinfectant is a good thing for the virus in general and chlorine is a disinfectant, so that is good,” Chin-Hong said. “You don’t need to wear a mask while swimming. Just maintain 6 feet of distance and if you are doing laps with others, swim in alternate lanes.” Keeping your distance in locker rooms is more the problem.
Q: How long does coronavirus stay in the air?
A: The virus can linger as droplets in the air for up to three hours, according to the New England Journal of Medicine.
Information varies on how far the virus can travel in the air. A report by the CDC said it can travel at least 13 feet by aerosols that are emitted by breathing or speaking — twice as far as established physical distancing guidelines. California health officials have said that a sneeze can send droplets of the coronavirus up to 26 feet through the air, coughing can spread droplets six feet and breathing can expel droplets 4.5 feet.
Talking can release thousands of fluid droplets per second that can remain suspended in the air for eight to 14 minutes, according to a study conducted under experimental conditions by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Masks are effective in blocking, or at least limiting, your exposure to these contagious viral droplets and aerosol particles.
Q: Can the virus travel on your shoes? A: Yes. Samples taken from the soles of the medical staff working in intensive care units at a hospital in Wuhan, China, where the coronavirus outbreak started, tested positive for coronavirus on the soles of their shoes.
“Therefore, the soles of medical staff shoes might function as carriers,” according to the study, which was published in the CDC’s Emerging Infectious Diseases journal.
Outside a hospital setting, the CDC does not offer advice on handling footwear but some good general guidelines to follow are to leave your shoes at the door when entering your home, minimize handling them and be sure to thoroughly wash your hands and disinfect any surfaces they come into contact with after touching them.
If your shoes are machine-washable, follow the laundry guidelines below to sanitize them.
Still, Chin-Hong cautions against the scenario of being infected from your shoes tracking in the virus. “I don’t know of any data that supports that someone has got it from the pavement. The probability is extremely small. You would have to rub your hands on the pavement and then put your fist in your mouth.”
Q: How long can the virus live on outdoor surfaces like, say, a basketball hoop structure?
A: “We know the virus loves cold and hard more than warm and soft surfaces and poles are good for that,” Chin-Hong said. “But if you don’t touch your face, and wash your hands, it doesn’t matter where you find it.”
San Francisco Chronicle reporter Aidin Vaziri contributed to this report.
Sam Whiting is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: [email protected] Twitter: @samwhitingsf
Follow Sam on: https://www.facebook.com/SFChronicle/samwhitingsf
Sam Whiting has been a feature writer at The San Francisco Chronicle for 30 years. He started in the People section, which was anchored by Herb Caen's column, and has written about people ever since. For five years he had a weekly Sunday magazine column called Neighborhoods. He currently covers art, culture and entertainment for the Datebook section. He walks a minimum of three miles a day in San Francisco, searching out public art and street art for posting on Instagram @sfchronicle_art.
Other Media:
Bill Dodd
@BillDoddCA
WEAR YOUR MASK pic.twitter.com/zLF20kZ0rj
7/1/20, 5:41 PM
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
@MTCBATA
MTC Chair Urges Passage of Huge Infrastructure Bill mtc.one/2Btasgh
7/1/20, 2:01 PM
CalMatters
@CalMatters
Since the 1920s — and before that, with a brief foray during the Civil War — a growing share of California’s electorate has been voting remotely. bit.ly/31hNumI
6/28/20, 8:53 AM
Bob Wieckowski
@BobWieckowskiCA
We must strengthen our cap and trade program to achieve our climate goals. Glad to have the Secretary’s commitment on improving our approach.
6/24/20, 8:33 PM
eUpdate - July 2, 2020
Let's Have a Safe and Healthy July 4th Weekend at Home
Sharp rise in virus calls for prevention vigilance
As we head into the July 4th weekend, I encourage everyone to celebrate the holiday in a safe and healthy way. This means don't set off fireworks (they are illegal in our county) and stay home as much as possible.
Due to the recent rapid spread of COVID-19 in many neighborhoods, Bay Area Health Officers are urging us to protect ourselves and others by celebrating from home and avoiding gatherings with those outside our household. These gatherings are potentially risky and increase transmission of the virus, and endangers older adults and those at risk of serious illness.
Although fireworks are cancelled this year (to discourage gatherings), we can still enjoy the fresh air with a walk, bike ride, or backyard family BBQ.
Here in Contra Costa County, I'm urging all of us to keep up our good work, and take prevention very seriously. Contra Costa is among the 19 counties statewide on a state watch list, because of our sharp rise in virus rates and hospitalizations.
Governor Newsom just announced new restrictions for these counties, which will remain in effect until our virus and hospitalization rates drop. Our County has already enacted these restrictions earlier this week by delaying many business openings originally planned for July 1.
We've flattened our curve before, and I know working together we can do this again. We can continue to reopen only after our virus and hospitalization rates drop.
Health Officers continue to recommend that we wear face coverings when outside, wash our hands thoroughly and frequently, practice physical distancing, and stay home if we feel sick and get tested!
It's important to know that we can pass the virus to others even if we don't have symptoms.
Happy Independence Day! And remember, protecting each other from the spread of COVID-19 is a patriotic way to celebrate the holiday.
John Gioia
Supervisor, District One
Contra Costa County
11780 San Pablo Avenue, Suite D
El Cerrito, CA 94530
510-231-8686 Phone
510-374-3429 Fax [email protected] contracosta.ca.gov/gioia
Stay Connected