Advancing one of Assembly Democrats top priorities, a key Assembly committee today approved the Middle Class Scholarship Act to reduce student fees by up to 40 percent for middle class UC and CSU students.

“Taking action to lower the outrageous cost of higher education is essential for California’s middle class families, and I am very pleased the Budget Committee has approved funding for the Middle Class Scholarship Act,” said Assembly Speaker John A. Pérez (D-Los Angeles). “By taking this action, we are making a dramatic investment in opportunity for millions of middle class families, and that is an investment that will bring our state enormous returns in the future.”

The Assembly Budget Sub Committee on Education Finance approved funding for the Middle Class Scholarship Act using revenues from a corporate tax loophole what was closed through Proposition 39, which was passed by the voters in November 2012. The Sub Committee approved $200 Million to fund the Scholarship, which will be available to any California UC or CSU student whose parents earn less than $150,000 annually, beginning in the Spring Semester of 2014.

“This is common sense,” said Bob Blumenfield (D-San Fernando Valley), Chair of the Assembly Budget Committee. “We must invest in students to revitalize the power of our public universities and to help ensure the competitiveness of our future workforce. Creating this scholarship will validate our society’s belief that hard work should be rewarded with opportunity.”

The Subcommittee’s report will be adopted by the full budget committee in the coming days, and will be included as part of the final on-time, balanced budget the Assembly will pass by its June 15 Constitutional Deadline.

The Middle Class Scholarship Act is one component of the Assembly Blueprint for a Responsible Budget, which calls for continuing fiscal responsibility, more efficiency in government services, and strengthening California’s middle class families.

Projected Student Fees After the Implementation of the MCSA:

Now that the state's public pension systems are reporting double-digit returns, hundreds of jurisdictions are settling pension issues at the bargaining table across the state, and courts are throwing out unlawful pension changes, it's no surprise that the attack on retirement security fueled by right-wing interests is losing steam.

CalPensions.com founder Ed Mendel reports today that there are no pending ballot measures at either the state or local level in the state and that the “pension measure wave” has "crested." He also reports that court cases haven't progressed and, most notably, the San Diego case has cost that city's pension fund more than $3.2 million with zero savings to date.

Mendel also reports a Monterey County superior court judge ruled that a measure to cut payments to CalPERS in Pacific Grove “violated the contract clause of the state constitution, reaffirming the view that pensions promised on the date of hire are a “vested right” that can’t be cut without providing a new benefit of equal value.”

Meanwhile, CalPERS investments have hit a record high, erasing every penny of the investment losses it suffered in the market crash last decade. The pension giant has wiped out nearly $97 billion worth of investment losses it suffered in the market crash, and its portfolio has climbed to a record $261.7 billion. That surpasses the pre-crash high in 2007.

Recent polls found that voters rank pensions low on their lists of priorities and have grown less likely over the last two years to view pensions as too high. Voters also strongly oppose further reducing current employees’ benefits, and have expressed strong preferences for pension policies to be set through negotiations rather than at the ballot box.

To be clear, this is not simply a matter of the public being distracted by other issues. Public employees – firefighters, safety officers, school bus drivers, garbage collectors and so many more – are a huge part of why pensions are recovering. Even after suffering years of pay cuts, concessions made by public employees have amounted to billions of dollars in savings.

The reforms approved by the Legislature and signed by Gov. Jerry Brown last year amount to a reduction of somewhere between $60 billion and $100 billion in the benefits promised to public employees. For example, before the law, a public employee making an average salary of $40,000 and working a 30 year career would have retired with a pension of $24,000. Now that worker will receive $15,600, a reduction of $8,400.

Even before the new pension law, state workers had saved taxpayers $600 million in pension concessions and more than 300 California cities, counties and local districts have increased employee pension contributions and lowered public costs at the bargaining table. Public employees have foregone raises, endured pink slips and dealt with increased workloads, and unequivocally supported efforts to curb pension system abuses such as spiking and creating pension reserve accounts for bad economic times.

A recent study by the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College says that pension “reforms” made at the state and local level will restore the state’s public pension funds to pre-financial crisis levels. “Whether it has been at the bargaining table in more than 300 jurisdictions or at the state level, public employees have been part of the solution to ensure public pension systems are financially sound,” wrote the study’s authors. Researchers also found “in most cases, reforms fully offset or more than offset the impact of the financial crisis.”

Fact is, California’s public retirement systems are better off than they were during Gov. Jerry Brown’s first term in office. CalPERS was about 55 percent funded In the early 1980s, the final years of Gov. Brown’s first term and following another severe recession.

Despite being publicly bashed and smeared time and time again, public workers were at the table, part of the solution.

Read Mendel's report here: http://calpensions.com/2013/05/20/pension-measure-wave-crests-court-slog-remains/

The New Leaders Council (NLC), Sacramento Chapter, which calls itself "the premier political entrepreneurship training program for young progressives," announced yesterday that Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson will be honored as their Political Leader of the Year at a fundraiser hosted by the 2013 fellows’ class.

The NLC Sacramento Progressive Leadership Reception and Silent Auction will be held on Tuesday, May 21st from 5:30p.m.-7:30 p.m. at Parlaré Lounge, located at1009 10th Street, Sacramento, CA. Mayor Johnson will be there to accept his award in person.

“We are witnessing gridlock and titanic struggles over the future direction of our country. The need for positive, forward-thinking progressive leadership has never been clearer," said NLC Executive Director Mark Riddle. "These young people are working to ‘pay it forward’ by hosting this event to help support NLC’s future leaders in 2014 and beyond -- I couldn’t be prouder of how our 2013 fellows are rising to the challenge."

New Leaders Council (NLC) works to train and promote the progressive political entrepreneurs of tomorrow — trendsetters, elected officials and civically-engaged leaders in business and industry who will shape the future landscape. NLC recruits young men and women from outside traditional power structures and equips them with the skills necessary to be civic leaders in their communities and workplaces. NLC established its Sacramento Chapter in 2009 to engage young progressive leaders from the public, private and non-profit sectors. There are currently 19 fellows, participating in the program.

This year’s NLC Sacramento Institute was made possible by the fundraising efforts of past fellowship classes. Notable NLC Sacramento Alumni include Planning Commissioner of the City of Sacramento, Kiyomi Burchill; Lobbyist for the ACLU CA, Tiffany Mok; and Harvard Kennedy School, MPP Candidate and Rangel Fellow, Robert Blanco. The 2013 fellows’ class will also honor a local business leader, to be announced.

For more information on NLC Sacramento and this year’s fellows class visit www.nlcsac.org.

Tickets for the event can be purchased here.

Find us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/NLCSac and on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SacNLC

Jamie Court, the Executive Director of the Astroturf group ConsumerWatchdog.org, said in a recent interview that "stunts and props are part of our work." Today, he's at it again, with a press event outside the capitol in Sacramento that he's conducting for the special interest that helps bankroll his pay-to-play operations, the state's trial lawyers.

Court claims the event is to kick off a drive for a 2014 ballot measure. Never mind that ConsumerWatchdog.org already has one initiative on the ballot. It's the health care rate regulation measure that the group failed to qualify for 2012 after its bumbled signature-gathering effort. Never mind that the "non profit" organization told a Sacramento Superior Court just a few months ago it was nearly broke. (Under penalty of perjury, Harvey Rosenfield filed papers in the Court saying his organization has "extremely scarce resources" and "would not be able to afford" to hire attorneys that specialize in election law for its campaign efforts.)

Yet with today's press conference is trying to hoodwink the media into believing it will run TWO initiatives for the 2014 ballot. No one should take this seriously, but it's easy to see why Court is seeking headlines today: as a thank you for its largest donors.

According to the Secretary of State's office, trial lawyers dominate the list of donors to the organization's campaign fund, including $100,000 from the Consumer Attorney Issues PAC. More than $500,000 of the funds to ConsumerWatchdog's campaign fund came from its nonprofit arm. Yet the group refuses to disclose those donors. What's it hiding? Even more trial lawyer money?

ConsumerWatchdog's attorneys have more than $650 per hour for their "public service" work. Its lawyers received in excess of $850,000 from the California Department of Insurance's intervenor fee program last year.

So there's no surprise why ConsumerWatchdog.org is fighting for higher rates for lawyers. Like nearly all its actions, this isn't about consumers -- it is about how ConsumerWatchdog.org can pocket more money for its self and its special interest contributors.

(For more info on this group, visit www.ConsumerWatchdogWatch.com)

The Assembly Agriculture Committee unanimously passed Assembly Bill 38 by Speaker John A. Pérez (D-Los Angeles) yesterday. The legislation is an effort to ensure every California child has access to healthy and nutritious food by creating the Office of Farm to Fork in the Department of Food & Agriculture.

The new office will be tasked with promoting access to healthy, California grown foods in underserved communities by bringing public health officials, agriculture industry leaders and educators together to make sure California’s children receive nutritious meals.

“Fruits and vegetables with the ‘California Grown’ label are known for their quality throughout the world, and Californians—especially kids—should have the proverbial first bite at the apple when it comes to the nutritious and healthy food grown in our state,” said Speaker Pérez. “Rural and urban communities throughout California do not have reliable access to quality, nutritious food that helps improve their health and quality of life, and this legislation will help to address this critical, if often overlooked, issue.”

AB 38 expands on the Speaker’s previous legislation, AB 581, which established the California Healthy Foods Financing Initiative, a program intended to eradicate food deserts — large geographic areas with little to no access to affordable, quality, healthy foods — and increase access to healthy and nutritious foods.

Residents of “food deserts” have disproportionally higher incidences of diabetes, cancer, obesity, heart disease and premature death than people living in areas with access to health foods. Speaker Pérez’s efforts have received strong bipartisan support in the past, including today’s unanimous approval of AB 38.

The bill will next be heard by the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Last week, to perform an end-run around sequester cuts that would have caused massive airport delays, Congress passed legislation to keep funding those agencies in record time. Supporters -- Democrats and Republicans -- crowed about the speed and efficiency to fix a problem.

Yet that wouldn't be possible if a handful of legislators have their way. They're proposing to rewrite the state constitution so that bills have to be put on ice for three days.

Adding a speed bump to the legislative process -- a proposal included in Prop 31, another "good government" proposal that was defeated in each of the state's 58 counties -- may sound good. As the advocates tell it, the measure would give legislators more time to read bills, prevent hastily drawn measures to be exposed to more scrutiny, and give the public more time to weigh in on them.

But what Common Cause and other backers don't tell you is that special interests would be delighted if their proposal passes muster. Why? Because it would likely unravel carefully crafted compromises and allow armies of lobbyists to apply pressure to undo delicately negotiated legislation.

Sausage-making and arm twisting is all part of the legislative process. It's not pretty. But it is why the Legislature often has passed difficult budgets and other key legislation under the pressure of time.

(Note: I wrote about this a few months ago in the Sacramento Bee http://www.sacbee.com/2013/02/02/5159541/viewpoints-vote-delay-sounds-good.html)

Who says there's a doctor shortage in California? The California Medical Association that's who. Yesterday it held a press conference to talk about their bills to ease the shortage, which Californians for Accessible Healthcare's coalition of nurse practitioners, pharmacists, and optometrists support. But as the San Jose Mercury News put it in an editorial http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_23013219/mercury-news-editorial-curing-californias-acute-doctor-shortageon Saturday: "Good plan -- but thinking it will solve the immediate problem is like expecting a Band-Aid to heal a bullet wound. Training a doctor takes a decade. That's a long time for a patient to sit in a waiting room."

Here are some more thoughts from CMA about the doctor shortage in California:

"The Affordable Care Act is a very good first step, but we are on the brink of a physician shortage," Reporter: So what happens if doctors keep losing money with more patients on the way under the new health care law?“ At a certain point, you got to turn off the lights. You can’t keep doing it,” -- Dr. Paul Phinney, President, California Medical Association, CBS13 News, June 28, 2012.

"I think there will be a huge access problem" (when the Affordable Care Act is implemented) -- James Hay, Encinitas physician, past president, California Medical Association, Los Angeles Daily News, 6/29/12.

"California is facing a dwindling supply of family medicine doctors...This shortage has reached critical proportions in Riverside County. Currently, Riverside County ranks 57th out of California's 58 counties for state reimbursement of health care and emergency room services." -- Richard Rajaratnam, President, Riverside County Medical Association (California Healthline, July 11, 2011)

California has a shortage of primary care doctors in many inner cities and rural areas. Doctor Villanueva knows that from experience. "We have been attempting to recruit physicians for two and a half years and we have been unsuccessful and have made at least seven physician offers and we've been unsuccessful with all seven of them. And of the seven, five have stated our compensation is too low for the work that we do relative to what they can make elsewhere," Capitol Public Radio, 4/7/13.

Yet while Senator Ed Hernandez (D-Los Angeles), backed by the Bay Area Council, family nurse practitioners, optometrists, pharmacists, and others, is offering legislation to bridge the provider gap, CMA is offering blind opposition to what 17 other states have done to help provide more access to primary care from licensed, trained health care professionals.

We don't share the CMA President's view that we've got to "turn off the lights" when it comes to providing the up to 7 million more Californians that will benefit from the Affordable Care Act. That's why our coalition supports CMA's efforts to provide more access to physicans -- as well as other health care professionals that are equipped to do so when the doctor isn't in.

A group of prominent Davis citizens today announced the formation of a new community group, the Friends of Davis Firefighters, to educate the community about the ongoing efforts of the Davis Fire Department to ensure the safety of the City of Davis’ 69,000 residents through its emergency and preventive services.

“Davis firefighters work around the clock to ensure our safety yet they are under attack by a vocal minority in our community,” said Alan Fernandes, a Wildhorse resident and community volunteer. “It’s time that our city officials understand that public safety is a core function of local government and that we need to attract and retain the finest firefighters we can so our families and property remain safe. As a resident of a neighborhood which is outside the desired 911 response time, it is important that this group educate city officials and other citizens about the value of the firefighters and the level of service they provide to our community," said Fernandes.

“The last thing these brave men and women need is someone playing Monday morning quarterback about the hard-earned benefits they deserve for being on the front lines of every emergency that comes Davis’ way,” said Gina Nunes, a dedicated school parent volunteer. “The Friends of Davis Firefighters is a group of concerned residents who are willing to say ‘enough is enough’ and show that the overwhelming majority of Davis citizens appreciate the hard work of these public servants." Nunes said the group will launch a public awareness campaign about the Davis firefighters that will include social media, a website, and local advertising.

The Davis Department consists of three fire stations located in Central, West, and South Davis. These facilities are staffed by one fire chief, three division chiefs, one fire marshal/division chief, 36 shift personnel, and 2 support staff. With the shift personnel broken up into three shifts, each shift work a 24 hour day or the equivalent of a 56 hour work week. The Department, which protects an area of 133 square miles, responded to nearly 4,400 calls in 2012 is charged with a range of responsibilities that includes:

• Providing pre-hospital emergency medical services at the EMT-1D level;
• Minimizing loss from fires, hazardous materials incidents and natural disasters and other emergency
services;
• Ensuring that the community's emergency service resources are effectively and efficiently managed; and
• Coordinating citywide planning for large scale disasters and emergency incidents.

The cozy arrangement between the California Department of Insurance and ConsumerWatchdog.org, exposed by the Los Angeles Times last week http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-0403-insurance-critic-hired-20130403,0,5476273.story, is being criticized
in a harshly-worded editorial in the Sacramento Bee today.

"But as any consumer advocate should know, the public wants recipients of taxpayer money to be careful with those funds -- and not use them for self-serving purposes," noted the editorial.

Read the full piece here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/04/08/5323588/editorial-consumer-watchdog-should.html

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/04/08/5323588/editorial-consumer-watchdog-should.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/04/08/5323588/editorial-consumer-watchdog-should.html#storylink=cpy

A few weeks ago, PG&E revved up its greenwashing campaign in an attempt to hide its agenda to thwart the development of Governor Brown's plan to boost rooftop solar in California with net metering.

Now, more of the state's utilities are spelling out why they are trying to crush the growth of rooftop solar.

Simply put, utilities don’t like rooftop solar purely because it eats into their profits.

Consider comments by SDG&E, which admits rooftop solar is becoming too popular in its service territory. At the recent Cleantech Forum in San Francisco, Lee Krevat, director of SDG&E's smart grid division, confessed that his utility has seen a 40 percent annual growth rate in rooftop solar over last year.

Or the remarks in a recent interview by the director of regulatory policy at Southern California Edison Gary Stern who said: "There is potentially less need for new transmission lines as a result of local generation.”

Less transmission = lower profits for the utilities. That's because the more infrastructure they build, the higher their guaranteed rate of return can be.

That’s exactly why the assault by California’s IOUs is underway.

Despite a recent Crossborder Energy study that shows net metering will deliver more than $92 million in benefits to all ratepayers, SDG&E’s Krevat makes false claims of solar shifting costs onto ratepayers. The truth is, SDG&E is okay with solar as long they can make billions of dollars of profit off of it. Like the $1.6 BILLION profit it is expected to rake in from its investment the $1.9 BILLION Sunrise Powerlink Transmission Line. Rooftop solar helps avoid these costs.

Bryan Miller, vice president of public policy and power markets at Sunrun, isn't buying the utility pro-solar masquerade.

"If anyone wants to believe the utility story that they're just looking out for the poor ratepayer, I've got some swamp land in Arizona that you might be interested in," he said. "At high solar penetration levels, they're just imaging a world where there are smaller companies and they simply move less power over the wires. In the long run, the less distributed generation that's on the grid, the less wires they get to build and put into the ratebase. It's less money and a smaller world for them."

Last year, the PUC wisely rejected a proposal from the San Diego utility to charge solar users a fee for connecting to their grid after hundreds of solar customers, including schools and local governments, protested the move.