North Bay Leadership Council Endorsements

North Bay Leadership Council is proud to make the following endorsements for November 2014 election:

Santa Rosa City Council: 

Tom Schwedhelm

John Sawyer

Ashle Crocker

Petaluma Mayor:

Mike Harris

Petaluma City Council:

Chris Albertson

Dave King

Rohnert Park:

Amy Ahanotu

Pam Stafford

Santa Rosa Junior College Board

Bob Burdo

Don Zumwalt

Kathleen Doyle

Napa City Council: 

Juliana Inman

Peter Mott

Previously endorsed in primary:

James Gore for Sonoma County Supervisor – District 4

Mike McGuire for State Senate – District 2

Marc Levine for Assembly – District 10

Bill Dodd for Assembly – District 4

Ballot Measures

Sonoma County Measure  H (Santa Rosa Junior College Bond) – SUPPORT

County of Marin Measure A (MERA parcel tax measure)  — SUPPORT

Prop 1 (State Water Bond)  — SUPPORT

Marijuana seeds are the foundation of any marijuana grow operation. That is because they contain the genetics of the marijuana plant and therefore determine what kind of plant will eventually grow. There are two main types of seeds: male and female. Male and female plants differ for reproduction purposes, but both can be used to produce both male and female flowers that produce buds, or flowers that will produce seed pods- the fruit of a marijuana plant.

NBLC Calls For Review of CEQA Guidelines

NBLC, other business council leaders and the leaders of five of the California Summit action teams are urging the governor and his Administration to complete a peer review of a scheduled update to CEQA’s administrative regulations—known as the CEQA Guidelines—before they are made public later this year. The letter also urged the Administration to include in the process state agencies that are obligated to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act for critical infrastructure, renewable energy, economic development, and regulatory activities.

In the letter to the governor, it said, “We believe that experienced CEQA practitioners…can efficiently advise the Administration, and OPR, on the extent to which the proposed updates to the Guidelines would achieve the Administration’s policy objectives to improve CEQA.  We believe these practitioners can [also] identify the types of ambiguous or impractical Guideline provisions that are likely to result in more lawsuits and litigation uncertainty.”

NBLC serves on the Summit’s Regulations action team, which has formed a group of experts dedicated to exploring administrative options for improving CEQA. Įtempiamos lubos Vilniuje Gera kaina Montavimas ir priežiūra cempianos.lt. These include updating the CEQA Guidelines, a set of regulations that explain and interpret the law for both the general public and the public agencies that administer CEQA.

Earlier this year, this Summit team offered a detailed analysis of a preliminary evaluation of the CEQA Guidelines conducted by the Office of Planning & Research (OPR)—a process set in motion by a piece of legislation, SB 743, signed into law in 2013. In that letter, the Summit applauded the Administration’s commitment to curtail CEQA litigation abuse, more effectively integrate compliance with California’s many other environmental laws into CEQA practice, and to reduce the time, cost, and uncertainties that have undermined effective CEQA implementation. The Summit identified several areas where OPR could advance these goals.

“All CEQA lawsuits target public agencies, and public agencies bear the highest burden of CEQA’s costs, delays, and uncertainties,” the letter said. “Updating the CEQA Guidelines can either increase this burden—or provide practical and clear direction on lawful compliance practices that reduce it. We urge the Administration to reach beyond OPR to other CEQA practitioners in key state agencies—and to complete this interagency peer review process, prior to releasing proposed revisions to the Guidelines.”

How The Past Can Devour The Future

In “How The Past Can Devour The Future,” David Crane, President of Govern for California,

(Fox & Hounds, July 22, 2014), shows why public pension liabilities are increasing despite the strong economy and record stock market growth. Crane says Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the 21st Century, “explains that capital is wealth derived from past activities (e.g., your savings represent wealth you accumulated over the past) that combines with labor to produce, and split the benefits from, economic growth. Everything works fine so long as returns promised to capital are lower than economic growth rates. But when returns promised to capital are higher than economic growth rates, Piketty says the past ‘devours the future.’”

Crane says, “That’s what’s happening with public pension costs. When elected officials promise pensions to public employees they create capital (assets for employees, liabilities for governments) requiring a high rate of return that forces governments to divert spending from current activities. Public pension funds must earn the expected return or governments have to divert money from other activities to cover the deficiency. Historically, according to Piketty, capital tends to expect a return of 4.5-5% per annum. That’s tough enough when GDP growth doesn’t reach those levels, but governments like California base upfront contributions on an even higher rate of return, usually 7.5-8% per annum. That’s why public pension costs are rising.”

Crane says, “Another consequence is that, once public pension assets fall behind pension liabilities, it’s virtually impossible to catch up if a high expected rate of return was employed to set upfront contributions. Even though the stock market is up more than 100% since 2009 and CalPERS has averaged extraordinary annual returns of 14% since then, the unfunded pension liability (i.e., the deficit when pension liabilities exceed pension assets) owed by California governments has improved (declined) only 30%. Even now, five years into a great bull market, CalPERS needs to earn double-digit annual returns just to keep the unfunded liability from growing.”  He claims achieving returns at 7.5% would require the stock market to be over 30,000.

Crane and others saw that “governments were way behind on their pension promises even before the Great Recession. With the market just now reaching a record 17,000, the difference must come from governments. That means more cuts to services, higher taxes or both (emphasis added).  Unless political leaders and labor unions work together to fix the problem, “meeting that rate of return will continue devouring the future. Citizens must plan accordingly.”

Policy Update: Community College Degree Tracking Bill Moves Forward!

SB 1425, a bill to provide degree tracking and retroactive awarding of degrees supported by NBLC passed out of the Senate unanimously.

SB 1425, co-sponsored by the Campaign and Southern California College Access Network (SoCal CAN), creates a degree tracking system at the California Community Colleges that will keep current and future students on track to successfully reach their educational goals, as well as award retroactive degrees and certificates to former students who are eligible to receive one. We are pleased to share the update that SB 1425 passed out of the Senate unanimously on May 28th, and unanimously out of the Assembly Higher Education Committee on June 24th! This proposal has received overwhelming support throughout the Senate legislative process, and we hope to continue this momentum as the bill moves on to the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

 

NBLC Supports The Passage of the California Film and Television Tax Credit Program

NBLC supports the passage of AB 1839, which would extend, expand and restructure the California Film and Television Tax Credit Program.  This legislation would support California’s hometown, homegrown, 100 plus-years-old motion picture production industry. The North Bay has benefited from this industry and, if AB 1839 passes, will benefit in the future.  This sector is a significant economic and job creation engine for our state and the cornerstone of California’s leading export-oriented entertainment industry cluster, directly responsible for more than 190,000 well-paying middle class jobs in California.

AB 1839 would invest in California’s highly lucrative film and television production industry, making the entire state more competitive against other states and countries in the escalating competition to attract, retain and grow more of the highly coveted “below-the-line” motion picture and television production jobs (e.g., grips, costume designers, graphic artists, technical engineers, hair stylists), as well as all the numerous indirect (e.g., trucking, food services, equipment rentals) and induced jobs that are also supported by this industry.

Over the last decade, “runaway film” has unfortunately become the rule, not the exception, in California as more and more states and countries have successfully lured our valuable film and television productions and jobs away in what can best be described as a film incentive “arms race.” In 2009, California enacted a modest tax credit program that helped ease runaway production, encourage in-state production, and retain a portion of the motion picture and television production sector’s extremely sizeable direct, indirect and induced economic, job and fiscal impacts.  With an average 11 percent positive return to local and state governments, there is no cost to state and local governments in terms of spending tax expenditures. This program is actually a smart business move (the public is earning income on its investment), a good investment in job creation, and wise public policy.

AB 1839 addresses the deficiencies in the current program and has received widespread bi-partisan support.   It passed the State Assembly on a unanimous 76-0 vote. The measure now moves to the State Senate where it will be heard on June 25th in the Senate Committee on Governance and Finance.  For more information on the effort and to find out how you can help maximize the positive fiscal, job and economic returns of AB 1839, visit www.filmworksca.com.

June 2014 Primary

NBLC’s endorsed candidates and ballot measure were all victorious in the primary. Congratulations to the candidates and Measure B supporters!

Mike McGuire running for State Senate District #2 came in first with almost 60% of the votes. He will face Republican Lawrence Weisner who received 26.9% of the votes in the runoff.

Incumbent Assembly member Marc Levine, District #10, received nearly half of the votes, at 49%. His will face Republican Greg Allen who received 20.5% of the votes in November. The closest Democratic challenger was Diana Conti.

Bill Dodd and his Republican challenger, Gary Schaupp, tied at 25.7% qualifying both to be in the runoff for the Assembly District #2 seat.

Running for termed out Assembly member Wes Chesbro’s seat, Jim Wood received almost 45% of the vote ahead of three others.

In the Supervisors’ races, incumbent Marin County Supervisor Judy Arnold narrowly beat Toni Shroyer with only 140 votes separating the two. Marin Supervisor Susan Adams was unseated by Damon Connolly.

In Sonoma County, Supervisor David Rabbitt easily won re-election with almost double the votes of his contender. The fight for the 4th District seat vacated by Mike McGuire continues to November with James Gore and Deb Fudge squaring off. Fudge topped Gore but led by less than 300 votes.

Measure B, the Marin County Farmers’ Market won handily, allowing a permanent Farmer’s Market to be on the Civic Center property.

NBLC’s Legislative Advocacy Day Reaps Rewards

On NBLC’s annual Legislative Advocacy Day, we were pleased by the response of Senator Pro-Tempore, Darrell Steinberg, with our request for expanded pre-school.  Sen. Steinberg shared with us his new plan the Senate Fair Start proposal, which:

  • provides high-quality pre-k opportunities to all low-income 4 year olds—an additional 234,000 children;
  • provides full-day, full-year pre-k to those with at least one working parent, totaling 77,000 children; and
  • takes effect in fall 2015 at a modest additional cost of $378 million.

The senator also backed the goal of the Legislative Women’s Caucus to offer more than 40,000 child care opportunities for low-income children, largely focused on those ages from birth to age 3, starting this year.

The NBLC delegation was also pleased with the Assembly budget subcommittee proposal, which was also approved:

  • includes $440 million to add 47,000 new early education spaces;
  • increases reimbursement rates and family eligibility;
  • eliminates the Preschool Family Fee;
  • improves provider quality; and
  • reinstates a state stipend for nutrition.

The legislation will move on to the budget committees.  Please add your voice that these proposals that put our youngest learners first are important and need to pass. With their leadership, we can send a strong budget proposal to Governor Brown with a clear message: our children deserve a fair start!

Please take two minutes to contact your legislators and urge them to support high-quality early childhood education for our youngest learners!

Early Child Education Reaps Best ROI

NBLC’s top public policy priority is education.  We have four goals to improve education and thereby, create the workforce we need to fill the 21st Century jobs being created in the North Bay.  One of these goals is to improve and expand early child education and care (ECE).  Why?  Because our children are the next generation of workers and leaders.  And as Nobel economist, James Heckman discovered, by investing in early child education and care, we get the best return on any investment in education.

Numerous studies show the profound impact of ECE on a child’s life course:

    • 29% more likely to graduate from high school
    • 80% more likely to go to college
  • For every dollar invested in high quality preschool, nearly $7 in economic returns is generated.

NBLC supports universal pre-school and transitional kindergarten.  We see the benefits of children not falling behind and being able to have a level playing field where they are not disadvantaged by being English learners or from differing socio-economic classes.

We also prize that quality early child education and care helps parents be employed, and more productive in their work.  Companies that offer employees access to better childcare education and care are more attractive as employers and able to attract and retain top talent.

The U.S., and California in particular, are falling behind in educating our youngsters. The U.S. lags behind almost every other developed country when it comes to preschool.  Each of these countries—including most of Western Europe and Scandinavia—enroll a greater proportion of four year olds in preschool and invest more in early child education relative to the size of their economies than the U.S.  If we want to compete in a global market and be an economic leader, we must keep up with other countries when it comes to early child education.

Close to Home: Reject Voting Pledges in Local Elections

A former state Assembly member once said that the biggest problem in state politics is the serious decline of independent thought by elected officials. Sacramento politicians usually toe the party line — whether Republican or Democrat — or suffer the consequences, which often includes their party finding a new candidate who will follow voting orders.

There is a similar trend in politics in the North Bay that is equally troubling. It is the growth of voting pledges or similar commitments that some special interest groups require candidates for local office to sign in order to get that group’s endorsement and funding.

Increasingly during campaigns, candidates are being asked for more than just their general views on broad topics such as education, transportation, health care, affordable housing, taxation, environmental quality or economic development.

We agree that on important issues like these, learning a candidate’s beliefs and positions is the public’s right and is an important part of the election process. How else can voters determine which candidate would best represent their own interests?

But that is not what is happening. Instead, candidates are being asked to make a firm pledge in writing or verbally as to exactly how they will vote on very specific issues if they are elected. In effect, they are being made to pre-commit their vote.

Some of the voting pledges or commitments we’ve seen insist on a candidate agreeing when elected to oppose any form of tax increase, impose so-called living wage Ordinances, walk picket lines, create district elections in cities, support labor agreements on public works projects that benefit one employer over another and make mandatory the public financing of local political campaigns. Sadly, these are only a few examples.

This is wrong. A candidate has a right to express his or her view on important issues like these and an obligation to voters to do so. But it is not right for any group or individual to demand that a candidate give a guarantee how they will vote on a specific issue in order to get a group’s funding and endorsement.

If every candidate pre-committed their vote on an issue, why would a city council or board of supervisors bother to conduct extensive studies or hold public hearings to get input on an issue? In essence, the vote by some candidates who become elected officials has already been determined before all the facts are presented — or worse yet, their vote has been promised to a special interest group. Their mind is made up or their mind has been made up for them.

Because we believe so strongly in the detrimental effects on the public when candidates sign voting pledges during campaigns, the North Coast Builders Exchange and the North Bay Leadership Council have both agreed that their organizations will not endorse or provide funding to any candidate — even ones with whom we may agree on many issues — who has signed or committed to such pledges.

We encourage local voters to take their own action. When candidates knock on your front door, ask them the following question: “Have you signed any kind of voting pledge on behalf of any group — be it business organizations, environmental groups, neighborhood associations, unions, or other special interest groups — or will you remain independent-minded if elected?”

If a candidate has signed a pledge of any kind, politely thank them for dropping by and slowly close the door. This damaging political practice must come to an end.

Greg Hurd is chairman of the North Coast Builders Exchange Political Action Committee. Cynthia Murray is CEO and president of the North Bay Leadership Council.

College and Career Readiness is Key

For many employers and employees, 2013 has been their best year ever.  And yet, we have others still struggling to get out of the hole of the Great Recession.  Unemployment is down but far too many cannot find work due to the mismatch of their skills and the job requirements.  The acceleration of automation and technology replacing human capital is clear.  If it is possible for a machine to do a job, then those doing that job will lose it to a machine.  And this applies to jobs beyond manufacturing, such as management, retail, services, etc.  The future of work relies on being well-trained and educated with skills matching those of the jobs being generated.  In the North Bay, attracting and retaining skilled employees is the order of the day since we are at risk.  Why?  Because companies now go where the talent is.  All of us need to ensure that the talent is here at home so we can be economically competitive, foster innovation and sustain our economic growth.  As more Baby Boomers retire, the talent shortage will increase.  NBLC is partnering on improving college and career readiness and using collective impact to achieve our goals.  We look forward to working together to develop homegrown talent in the North Bay.  Our future depends on it!