Press release from the Yurok Tribe:

Textron Aviation Inc. announced today it delivered a Cessna Grand Caravan EX aircraft to the Yurok Tribe’s Condor Aviation.  The special missions Grand Caravan EX aircraft will increase the Tribe’s capacity to perform large-scale environmental restoration projects, evaluate long-term natural resource management decisions and quantify the effects of climate change. 

The Yurok Tribe will make use of state-of-the-art Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) systems and high-end aerial imaging equipment to create extremely accurate three-dimensional maps of the earth’s surface and collect an infinitely broad range of data regarding terrestrial and aquatic habitats, including rivers, lakes and oceans.

“This new aircraft will significantly enhance our ability to holistically restore salmon-spawning streams and make our landscape more resilient to climate change,” said Yurok Vice Chairman Frankie Myers. “We employ LiDAR data and high-definition aerial imagery to maximize the efficacy of our efforts to rebuild biologically diverse ecosystems and repair fire-damaged forests in Northern California.”

The Grand Caravan EX joins a Cessna Turbo Skylane already in service with Condor Aviation. In addition to tribal projects, Condor Aviation, in conjunction with the Yurok Fisheries Department’s technical team, provides precision mapping and high-resolution imaging services to a wide range of clients from California to Alaska.

About the Cessna Grand Caravan EX

The Cessna Caravan platform has seen more than 3,000 aircraft delivered that are certified in 100 countries with nearly 24 million flight hours amassed worldwide since the aircraft was introduced. Caravans fulfill roles for multiple missions, ranging from flight training to recreation, commuter airlines to VIP transport, cargo carriers and humanitarian missions. The Grand Caravan EX aircraft is known for its dependable and efficient performance by regional airlines, charter operators, cargo carriers and special missions operators worldwide. The aircraft offers an impressive output of 867 horsepower and a rate of climb of 1,275 feet per minute.

About Condor Aviation and the Yurok Tribe

The Yurok Tribe is the most populous federally recognized tribe in California. With more than 50 biologists, ecologists and engineers as well as many other subject-matter experts, the tribe administers one of the largest fisheries departments on the West Coast. Condor Aviation is a partnership between the Yurok Tribe’s award-winning Fisheries Department and the Yurok Tribe Construction Corporation.  Using a newly acquired Cessna Grand Caravan EX aircraft fitted with high-resolution aerial imaging and Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) equipment, the technologically advanced equipment can create extremely precise three-dimensional maps of the earth’s surface, while concurrently accumulating an infinitely broad range of information regarding terrestrial and aquatic environments. Condor Aviation will use the precision tools to collect myriad data, which will help drive the design of large-scale river and habitat restoration projects, inform long-term natural resources management decisions and illuminate the impact of climate change. Condor Aviation also offers contract mapping services to tribal, federal, state, and local partners in the Klamath Basin and across the U.S.

About Textron Aviation

We inspire the journey of flight. For more than 95 years, Textron Aviation has empowered our collective talent across the Beechcraft, Cessna and Hawker brands to design and deliver the best aviation experience for our customers. With a range that includes everything from business jets, turboprops, and high-performance pistons, to special missions, military trainer and defense products, Textron Aviation has the most versatile and comprehensive aviation product portfolio in the world and a workforce that has produced more than half of all general aviation aircraft worldwide. Customers in more than 170 countries rely on our legendary performance, reliability and versatility, along with our trusted global customer service network, for affordable, productive and flexible flight.

About Textron

Textron is a multi-industry company that leverages its global network of aircraft, defense, industrial and finance businesses to provide customers with innovative solutions and services. Textron is known around the world for its powerful brands such as Bell, Cessna, Beechcraft, Pipistrel, Jacobsen, Kautex, Lycoming, E-Z-GO, Arctic Cat, and Textron Systems. For more information, visit: www.textron.com.

Folded into California’s $310 billion budget agreement is a relatively small line item: $3 million to resurrect an obscure old state commission that once regulated industries from factories to farms to laundries — and even had the power to set the minimum wage.

The budget deal between the Legislature and Gov. Gavin Newsom would reconvene the Industrial Welfare Commission, dormant since 2004, to issue new rules on wages and working conditions for specific industries.

If that sounds familiar, that’s because it’s similar to what labor groups tried to institute for California fast food workers last year, with the passage of a law to create a state-run council governing the industry.

Business groups quickly put that law on hold, pouring millions into a referendum campaign shortly after Newsom signed it last fall. Whether the state convenes a new fast food council — which would be empowered to raise the minimum wage in fast food to as much as $22 an hour — is now up to the voters in November 2024.

But using a state-appointed board to issue industry-specific labor regulations was no new idea in California. The state’s Industrial Welfare Commission did just that for most of the 20th century, before it was defunded in 2004. Without funding, the commission hasn’t met or operated, but it’s still a part of state law. The new, tentative budget deal would bring it back.

Business groups were quick to criticize this funding proposal Monday, calling it a “backdoor” way for the state to start issuing rules for fast food despite the pending referendum.

“This budget bill is undemocratic and a shameful attempt to silence California voters,” said International Franchise Association CEO Matthew Haller in a statement.

The budget bill doesn’t specify an industry for the new Industrial Welfare Commission to focus on, but does direct it to prioritize industries in which 10% or more workers live below the federal poverty line – for which fast food likely qualifies.

Asked for comment, Service Employees International Union, which pushed for the fast food law, did not say whether they want a new commission to convene specifically for fast food. In a statement, SEIU California president David Huerta praised Newsom and lawmakers for “listening to workers and taking the bold action needed to make progress against a growing tide of inequality and poverty experienced by low-wage workers and people of color.”

The union’s close ally Sen. María Elena Durazo, a Los Angeles Democrat who leads a budget subcommittee on labor, said lawmakers have heard workers across industries testify that they can’t afford the basics despite working full time or more.

“Some of these industries already have wage orders,” she said. “It’s just a matter of looking at them (again) … It’s not just fast food.”

Newsom administration officials did not respond to a request for comment.

The bill only allows about 10 months — right up to about a week before next November’s election — to issue new rules on wages and working conditions. Longtime Capitol lobbyist Chris Micheli said given that tight timeframe, a new commission could only focus on a few industries that fit the poverty description, with fast food being likely.

In the current budget bills, the new Industrial Welfare Commission would not be allowed to issue labor rules that are less protective of workers than current law.

That’s raised the ire of business groups. In a statement Monday, the California Chamber of Commerce, state Restaurant Association and other groups denounced the limitation, saying it “will only create unnecessary confusion, create layered burdens on employers, and subject businesses to more frivolous litigation.”

Ironically, it was labor groups that pushed to disband the commission nearly two decades ago.

Created in 1913, the Industrial Welfare Commission was California’s version of “wage boards” that were common methods of setting labor standards across several Northern states during the Progressive Era. The commission was initially tasked with regulating labor in industries employing many women and children, the marginalized workers of that era who had neither union representation nor the ability to vote for stronger labor protections on their own.

The commission includes five members appointed by the governor: two representing employers’ interests, two representing labor’s interests and one representing the “general public.” It met in public, received comments and issued rules by industry in the form of wage orders.

In later decades, it expanded in scope to cover virtually every occupation.

The commission’s wage orders covered industries such as manufacturing, timber, agriculture, motion picture production, canneries, transportation and personal services. They regulated such working conditions as the length of breaks, overtime pay, the provision of seating and water for workers and whether employers had to provide uniforms if they were required.

The commission’s most high-profile responsibility was setting the statewide minimum wage. One of its most famous moves was to grant farm workers the right to overtime pay in the 1970s.

It was as susceptible as any Sacramento body to political influence. In the 1990s, then-Republican Gov. Pete Wilson appointed labor representatives to the commission that labor groups opposed, Fisk said.

The commission made the controversial move to roll back daily overtime rules — the requirement that employers pay extra for more than eight hours of work per day. Lawmakers later reinstated the overtime rules on their own.

Why commission went dormant

Labor groups ultimately decided the commission wasn’t serving workers. At the urging of the California Labor Federation, lawmakers in 2004 zeroed out the commission’s funding, according to news reports.

Since then, the commission has lain dormant — other than a brief revival in 2006 under Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who was deadlocked at the time with the Democratic-led Legislature over how much to hike the minimum wage.

The state Labor Commissioner still enforces the commission’s old wage orders. The Legislature has become the primary body for writing new labor rules. Fisk said that’s not the best set-up for workers or the economy.

“It might be that the minimum wage should be $24 an hour in some occupations, but that in others, that’s too high and it would cause harm,” she said. “That’s an empirical question that should be studied based on sociological and economic analysis, which the Legislature is not set up to do as well as an expert body.”

Whether a resurrected Industrial Welfare Commission focuses on fast food or another industry, UC Santa Barbara labor historian Nelson Lichtenstein said it makes sense for the board to return.

The conditions and diminished clout of low-wage workers today, he said, in some ways mirror those of the women and children laboring in canneries and garment factories in the 1910s.

“Labor law is pretty ineffectual; labor organization is very very low,” Lichtenstein said. “You have (workers) who are only semi-citizens, whether they’re undocumented or marginalized. So we’ve sort of returned to the sociology of the Progressive Era.”

###

CalMatters.org is a nonprofit, nonpartisan media venture explaining California policies and politics.

Just in time for the start of a new fiscal year July 1, Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislative leaders announced Monday night that they have reached a deal on the state budget — a $310 billion spending plan that they say protects core programs and covers a $30 billion-plus deficit without dipping into key reserves.

Despite largely agreeing on the overall structure for weeks, budget negotiations were delayed by the governor’s demands to include a sweeping infrastructure proposal that many lawmakers resisted. The final compromise narrows the types of projects that can take advantage of an expedited approval of permits, leaving out a contentious proposed water conveyance tunnel under the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.

“We are accelerating our global leadership on climate by fast-tracking the clean energy projects that will create cleaner air for generations to come,” Newsom said in a statement.

Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins, a San Diego Democrat, said she was “heartened” that the leaders agreed on the infrastructure package, and “in a way that focuses on equity by laying the groundwork to ensure that our most vulnerable communities will be hired first on impactful state infrastructure projects.”

The governor and legislative leaders also touted that they were able to preserve money for education and social service programs, and increase money for childcare providers.

Newsom also noted that the budget includes accountability measures for transit and homelessness, and tax credits for some industries.

“This is a budget for the future,” said Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, a Lakewood Democrat who is scheduled to hand over the speaker’s gavel to Assemblymember Robert Rivas, a Salinas Democrat, on Friday under a negotiated transition.

If all goes to plan, the main budget bill will be approved by both the Assembly and Senate today and signed by Newsom soon after. The Legislature began publishing a series of budget-related bills — reflecting agreements in specific policy areas — online Saturday morning to fulfill a requirement that they be available for public review for 72 hours before any votes.

Democratic lawmakers already passed a budget, reflecting their own priorities, on June 15 in order to meet a constitutional deadline. That kicked off a 12-day window for Newsom to sign or veto the bill, increasing pressure on the two sides to reach a deal by Tuesday.

This year’s negotiations were more fraught due to a $31.5 billion deficit, a sharp contrast with record budget surpluses the last two years. The deficit is the result of a downturn in the stock market — a volatile but significant source of California’s state revenues because of its reliance on income taxes, especially those of high earners. Bracing for potential further revenue declines, the budget deal allows the governor to delay, with notification to the Legislature, one-time spending commitments before March 1.

The budget process this year was also made more complicated when many Californians were granted until October, instead of April, to file income tax returns because of storm-related disaster declarations, which made it hard to pin down a precise figure on the state’s revenue.

Add to that Newsom’s insistence that legislators approve his recent proposal to overhaul the permitting process for major infrastructure projects by changing the landmark California Environmental Quality Act, a move that some housing advocates and developers have demanded for years.

The governor wanted a package of 11 measures, alongside the main budget bill, that aim to streamline the permitting process among federal, state and local governments; limit the time courts have to hear challenges on environmental reviews; and increase funding to state agencies.

Lawmakers pushed to consider the plan outside of the budget process so they would have more time to review its potential effects and to exempt the proposed Delta tunnel from the changes. That contentious $16 billion project would send water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta south to 27 million people and 750,000 acres of farmland.

Here are some other highlights of the deal — how much the state plans to invest in other key policy areas that have been sticking points since Newsom kicked off the budget process in January with his initial proposal.

Social services and the safety net

Low-income families who receive state subsidies to pay for child care would see a near-elimination of copayments known as “family fees” under the budget bills that are part of the Legislature’s agreement with Newsom.

The fees, which can be hundreds of dollars a month for families, have been waived throughout the pandemic but were set to return at the end of September. Under the tentative agreement, families would not have to pay more than 1% of their incomes toward the fees.

The budget bills also include funding to raise pay for child care providers, who have demanded an immediate 25% increase in reimbursement rates (amounting to $1 billion a year) and a long-term plan to overhaul how those rates are calculated.

But how the funding gets doled out — whether the funding is a permanent raise or a temporary stipend — remains a sticking point between Newsom’s administration and the child care providers’ union. The parties are still bargaining a new labor contract for providers days before the current one expires.

Patricia Moran watches children enrolled at her at-home daycare in San Jose on Nov. 2, 2022. Photo by Laure Andrillon for CalMatters

In addition to other funds intended to help communities across the state recover from this year’s storms and flooding, the budget plan would provide direct relief to the towns of Planada and Pajaro. Both towns were partially under water after the winter storms. Now they are slated to receive $20 million each to help residents recover, regardless of their citizenship or legal status.

The agreement kills a proposal to create an unemployment insurance program for undocumented workers, who are ineligible for jobless benefits. Advocates had hoped to start a pilot program; then pushed instead for a working group to study the issue. Neither got the administration’s agreement in the budget.

The tentative agreement also includes $500 million to make permanent a temporary 10% increase in welfare benefits for recipients of CalWorks, the state’s cash aid program. But lawmakers couldn’t reach an agreement with Newsom’s administration on an Assembly proposal to loosen work requirements and lessen financial penalties for recipients, which could have weakened the ties between welfare and work and focused more on supportive social services that could help a family in crisis.

The Legislature did get its way in the agreement by rejecting a Newsom proposal to use half of the state’s $900 million in reserves for social safety net programs, with lawmakers reasoning the reserves should be saved for worse budget years.

— Jeanne Kuang and Nicole Foy

A hit on climate programs

California’s efforts to battle climate change — particularly programs to help switch to zero-emission vehicles and clean energy — appear poised to take a substantial hit in the budget agreement between Newsom and the Legislature.

Based on the June 15 budget approved by the Legislature, an estimated $5 billion, or 9%, will be cut out of $54 billion in climate climate projects established in the 2021 and 2022 budgets. The Legislature and the governor were still working out final details.

Newsom has said his budget proposals give priority “to communities that face disproportionate harm from pollution and the climate crisis.” But environmentalists say the reductions will keep California from meeting its targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions and other air pollutants.

“These climate budget rollbacks undercut our state’s ability to meet our climate goals — pure and simple,” Mary Creasman, chief executive of the advocacy group California Environmental Voters, said in a statement. “The climate crisis isn’t taking a break in 2023, that much is clear, and neither can our climate action.”

Senate leaders in April proposed restoring some of the climate cuts but the governor’s office rejected that plan because it depended largely on tax increases and suspending corporate tax credits.

The $5 billion would be less than the $6 billion reduction that Newsom originally proposed in January. But environmentalists said even some of the wins will have mixed results.

For instance, regional transit agencies will be able to use money slated for clean energy infrastructure and the purchase of zero-emission buses for operations, Pew said.

Given how central a role public transportation plays in meeting greenhouse gas targets, the tradeoff was necessary, Pew said. The cuts do, however, endanger the state’s potential to achieve its landmark electric vehicle mandate.

“We love electric buses and want to see more of them and want to electrify the entire fleet but there is not much point to running electric buses if you don’t have a transit system,” Pew said. “It hurts to have to make that tradeoff, but from my perspective it is an acceptable one to make in this budget situation.”

To make up for the cuts, Newsom has said he is seeking federal climate funding from the Inflation Reduction Act and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. He also has asked the Legislature to seek voters’ approval of a climate bond, ranging from $6 to $16 billion.

— Alejandro Lazo

A mixed bag for K-12 education

The budget includes a historic, 8.22% cost-of-living adjustment for California’s public schools. The total Proposition 98 funding for the 2023-24 fiscal year will be $108.3 billion. But the governor and the Legislature also agreed to some hefty cuts.

First off is the $200 million decrease to the Arts, Music, Instructional Materials Discretionary Block Grant. Despite its name, school districts were allowed to use this money on everything from facilities to salaries. In January, Newsom proposed slashing $1.8 billion, but his office ultimately agreed to go with the Legislature’s smaller cut.

The governor and Legislature also met in the middle to reduce the Learning Recovery Block Grant by $1.6 billion, leaving $6.3 billion available to districts for helping students recover from pandemic-era learning loss.

Students collaborate on solving additional problems inside Bridgette Donald-Blue’s classroom at Coliseum Street Elementary in Los Angeles on Feb. 28, 2023. Photo by Pablo Unzueta for CalMatters

In a big win for dyslexia advocates, the budget includes $1 million for the California Department of Education to form an independent task force that would compile a list of screening tools used to test students for difficulties with reading. California is currently one of 10 states that doesn’t screen all students for dyslexia, despite having a governor who’s been outspoken about his past struggles with the learning disability.

The $1 million is just the beginning. Districts will be required to screen all students starting in the 2025-26 school year, using one of the tools approved by the task force. Advocates, including classroom teachers, say it’s long overdue.

The budget also includes a $300 million “equity multiplier” allocated for schools with the highest concentrations of “socioeconomically disadvantaged” students, which includes students from low-income households, students experiencing homelessness and students whose parents did not graduate high school.

The state will also require districts receiving equity-multiplier funding to create plans to support student groups who performed lowest on one or more of the categories included in the California School Dashboard, which tracks suspension rates, test scores, chronic absenteeism and graduation rates.This component of the equity multiplier was not in Newsom’s original proposal and suggests concessions to advocates for Black students who had fought for all of this money to go to Black students, who are the lowest-performing on standardized tests throughout California.

— Joe Hong

More in-state slots at UC, CSU

More admissions letters for California undergraduates, a fulfilled promise to increase state support for public universities, vows to further grow the state’s financial aid program for the middle class, and expanded affordable student housing are the key features in the deal crafted by the Legislature and Newsom.

The University of California will need to enroll 7,800 more in-state undergraduates this fall and be expected to educate another 8,800 California students by 2026.

The move doubles down on the state’s commitment to maintain access to the selective public institution. Part of the plan includes giving the UC to enroll fewer 900 out-of-state students, who pay three times as much in tuition, to make way for an equal number of California residents.

Under the same deal, the California State University system is expected to grow its in-state undergraduate enrollment by 4,000 students for the coming academic year and add another 20,000 seats by 2025.

While the budget deal fulfills Newsom’s ongoing promise that state funding for the UC and CSU grow by 5% each it won’t be enough money to address the CSU’s recent revelation that they take in far less revenue than they need to support their students.

Students walk through the Fresno State campus on Feb. 9, 2022. Photo by Larry Valenzuela for CalMatters

The Middle Class Scholarship is also set to get a previously promised $227 million this fall, which should net most in-state UC and CSU undergraduate students several hundred more dollars toward their education this fall.

The deal so far also ensures $2.2 billion in affordable student housing grants is on the way — enough for at least 11,000 beds. The UC, CSU and community colleges were going to receive state funding directly, but will now be expected to issue bonds that the state will pay off. The funding switch shouldn’t slow down campus construction, an analyst at Newsom’s Department of Finance told CalMatters.

Finally, the three systems will gain access this year to another $200 million in zero-interest loans to build student and staff housing — part of a revised plan to ultimately receive $1.7 billion in state loans by 2028, short of the original $1.8 billion by 2024-25 promised last year.

— Mikhail Zinshteyn

Fixing a typo on community college funding

In addition to a financing change for student housing — instead of cash financing, community colleges will have to issue bonds, which will free up more money this year — the budget deal fixed the governor’s prior typo: All colleges — not just Los Angeles — will see new funding for LGBTQ students.

The deal also includes new reporting requirements about CalFresh in an effort to promote more collaboration between county agencies and the UC, CSU, and community college administrators who sign students up for food benefits. The requirements come after a change from the federal government has put some students in jeopardy of losing their benefits.

— Adam Echelman

Status quo on homelessness

The proposed budget also allocates funding to one of the state’s most pressing problems — its massive homelessness crisis. It pours $1 billion into round five of the state’s Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention program, which doles out money local officials can use for housing, outreach at encampments, emergency shelters and more.

This marks the third year in a row the program would receive $1 billion from the state budget. Collectively, the state has allocated nearly $21 billion to housing and homelessness since the 2018-19 fiscal year, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

But this year’s figure is sure to disappoint homeless advocates and local government leaders who wanted more from the Newsom administration.

A person walks by a homeless encampment in downtown Los Angeles on Nov. 18, 2022. Photo by Larry Valenzuela for CalMatters/CatchLight Local

With an estimated 171,521 unhoused residents, California is home to nearly one-third of the country’s entire homeless population. And local leaders and activists say Newsom’s current approach — handing out one-time grants every year instead of guaranteed ongoing funding — is hampering their efforts to make a dent in the problem. The League of California Cities, which asked for a guaranteed $3 billion a year, earlier this month said it’s “incredibly disappointed” in the budget’s lack of ongoing funding.

— Marisa Kendall

New money for down payments

In the final hours of negotiations, a few big-ticket spending programs on housing were saved from the chopping block.

Earlier this year, the governor proposed closing the deficit in part by clawing back funds set aside for a downpayment assistance program. The California “Dream For All” program was open for just 11 days this spring buyers hoovered up its initial $300 million allocation. But over Newsom’s earlier objections, the fund will be reinflated with another $200 million.

The final budget also restores $50 million each for two grant programs — one to help homeowners get started on building secondary units and another for first-time homebuyers.

And the city of Fresno will be getting $250 million to update and revitalize its downtown infrastructure, but over three years, and not all at once as Newsom initially proposed.

But budgets aren’t just about spending money. Sometimes they’re used to make — or, in this case, underscore — policy.

Case in point: The city of Santa Ana was called out in all but name in the final budget.

Just last week, the Orange County city opted to exempt vast swaths from two state laws designed to make it easier for developers to convert old strip malls, parking lots and defunct office buildings near public transit into new apartments. The Legislature passed the streamlining bills last year and they are set to go into effect on July 1.

On June 20, the Santa Ana City Council exempted more than 600 parcels, instead putting forward alternative sites for fast-tracked development. That was over the objections of state housing regulators, who questioned whether the new proposed sites would actually allow for enough new housing to make up for the exempted parcels.

The resolution in Santa Ana passed easily, so any disagreement the state still has may have to be resolved in court. But if any other cities are planning to try the same maneuver, California’s budget-making legislators are one step ahead of them.

Call it the city of Santa Ana honorary anti-loophole amendment: The budget now stresses that if a city exempts a commercial parcel from fast-tracked conversion, it has to make up for it by fast-tracking permitting at an alternative site that realistically could provide just as much housing, if not more.

— Ben Christopher

A big deal for Medi-Cal

The final budget deal provides more detail on how the state will use revenue from its Managed Care Organization tax, levied on Medi-Cal and commercial health insurance plans and that helps the state receive matching federal dollars. (Health plans agree to this tax because they are eventually paid back.)

This MCO tax is set to generate $19.4 billion for the state from April 2023 through the end of 2026. About $11 billion of that will be used in part to boost pay for Medi-Cal providers, who have long criticized the state for its low reimbursement rates that they say limits the number of low-income people they can serve. The rest will be used to help cover shortfalls in the upcoming and future state budgets.

In the 2023-24 budget, specifically, the state will receive $4.4 billion from the MCO tax, of which $3.4 billion will go to the General Fund. The remaining $1 billion will go toward:

• Increasing reimbursements for Medi-Cal providers in primary care, maternity care and non-specialty mental health starting in 2024. This group will see a new Medi-Cal reimbursement floor — 87.5% of what Medicare, the federal health insurance program for seniors and people with disabilities, pays for the same services. In Medi-Cal, some of these services are currently reimbursed at 60% of what Medicare pays;
• $50 million to help rural hospitals come into compliance with the state’s seismic mandate, due in 2030;
• $150 million to the distressed hospital loan program for public and nonprofit hospitals in financial trouble, bringing the total available for that purpose to $300 million;
• $75 million to the University of California to expand its graduate medical education program, in an attempt to produce more physicians.

A nurse practitioner examines an elderly patient at a clinic in Guerneville in February 2020. Photo by Anne Wernikoff for CalMatters

The newly minted deal also directs the state to increase reimbursement for other types of Medi-Cal providers and services in future budgets. Among providers and services to be included: specialists, women health providers, hospital emergency services, ground emergency transport services, and behavioral health in long-term care settings. The deal also fast tracks how quickly these other providers can see their payment boosts — now a five-year timeline. Newsom’s budget in May proposed an 8-to-10-year period.

“It’s hard to overstate how big this is for patients,” said Dustin Corcoran, CEO for the California Medical Association, a group involved in these negotiations. “We want to get to a place of equity in health care, and equity in health care means everybody has access to a physician and needed services. This agreement puts us a long way down the road to accomplishing that.”

— Ana B. Ibarra

A consumer win on Covered California

Health care watchdogs scored another win in this year’s budget, successfully negotiating ongoing investment in the state’s Covered California cost-sharing reserve after months of pressure from consumer advocates and legislators. Advocates and lawmakers were miffed when Newsom’s January and May budget proposals moved more than $333 million from the reserve into the General Fund and grew increasingly frustrated upon learning that the state failed to invest a cumulative $1 billion to lower out-of-pocket health insurance costs.

In 2020, Newsom proposed and lawmakers approved a polarizing tax penalty on Californians without health insurance to help fund a cost-sharing program for people insured through Covered California, the state’s version of the Affordable Care Act Marketplace. The penalty generates more than $300 million annually, but has only been used to lower costs once.

The deal this year ensures that the penalty money goes directly into a cost-sharing reserve fund instead of the General Fund. It does approve a $600 million loan to the General Fund to help address the state’s $31.5 billion shortfall, but it commits $82.5 million to lowering health insurance costs over the next year and $165 million annually. The $600 million will be repaid in fiscal year 2025-26.

— Kristen Hwang

Lawmakers want more answers on prison closures

California lawmakers want to close prisons, but first they want an answer: Which ones need the costliest upgrades?

That question has lingered ever since a declining inmate population led Gov. Newsom to begin shutting down prisons three years ago. More closures likely are in the works because of the state’s tightening budget and still-falling inmate numbers.

Assembly Budget Committee Chairperson Phil Ting, a San Francisco Democrat, said in February that the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation has been unwilling to turn over “the most basic information” about prison infrastructure needs.

If he had that, Ting said, Newsom and legislators could direct the closure of the facilities with the most expensive needs rather than spend heavily on repairs to prisons bound for shutdowns.

Now, legislators are trying to force answers from the corrections department in a public safety spending bill attached to the budget. The language in the bill requires the agency to assess housing by mid-November and also to show its work by providing its methodology and the underlying data.

The budget bill declares the Legislature’s intent to close more prisons, but it does not commit to a number. The Legislative Analyst’s Office reported earlier this year that the state can close nine prisons and eight yards, including the four facilities already tabbed for closure by Newsom.

The cost of operating prisons varies by institution, but the closure of a prison in Tracy last year is projected to save the state about $150 million a year.

Determining infrastructure needs can help the state avoid spending money on prisons it no longer needs, like the $31 million the state spent on a health care facility at a California City prison in 2021 just months before the state announced its closure.

The California prison towns losing their largest employers have tried two tactics to keep the prisons open. In Susanville, the city sued the state to prevent the closure of the California Correctional Center. The city ultimately lost that battle.

The city of Blythe chose a different tack, launching a public relations blitz they hope will stave off the closure of Chuckwalla Valley State Prison.

— Nigel Duara

A lifeline for public transit

The governor and legislators hashed out a plan to help public transit agencies still reeling from plummeting ridership during the pandemic. While Newsom’s May budget proposal failed to provide any assistance for transit agencies facing a “fiscal cliff,” and delayed $2 billion in construction projects, the Legislature rejected that move and proposed an additional $1.1 billion over the next three years from the state’s cap-and-trade funds.

The deal includes a total of $5.1 billion over four years — restoring the full $4 billion for construction and adding the $1.1 billion from cap-and-trade — with complete flexibility for agencies to use the money for operations as well as construction, subject to accountability measures and state oversight.

But that money only gets transit agencies through the next few years. To supplement funding for Bay Area transit agencies, Sen. Scott Wiener announced Monday a coalition of Bay Area lawmakers to co-author Senate Bill 532, which would increase tolls on seven Bay Area bridges for five years by $1.50. That would yield about $180 million annually, most of which would be required to be used for maintaining current service levels, while 10% could go toward improvements. The bill would also give counties and transit agencies time to organize regional bond measures. (That coalition doesn’t include Sen. Steve Glazer, a fellow Democrat from Orinda, who opposes further investment in Bay Area transit until more oversight is in place).

— Sameea Kamal

A boost for CalFresh

While pandemic-era food assistance programs have been winding down, demand for assistance at food banks is rising. The Legislature’s spending plan included $35 million for the California Nutrition Incentive Program, which helps participants in the state’s CalFresh program buy healthy food from farmers’ markets.

The agreement with the governor preserves that spending, and also includes the Legislature’s line items for $9.9 million in one-time money for a CalFresh fruit and vegetable pilot program, plus $3 million to extend a clean drinking water program.

Sacramento State student Madeline Waters prepares a meal in her Sacramento home with ingredients provided by CalFresh on June 1, 2021. Photo by Rahul Lal for CalMatters College Journalism Network

Minehana Forman, the director of Market Match, said she’s thrilled the money for the program is in the budget, and said it will keep it going through 2028 and will also bring in federal dollars.

The deal also includes $915,000 to start launching a test program to increase the monthly minimum CalFresh benefit from $23 to $50. Spending for that program would rise to $15 million in 2024-25. That’s a far cry, however, from the original proposal for a statewide program costing $95 million, or even a slimmed-down $30 million version the Legislature passed.

— Rya Jetha

After ‘Rust’ tragedy, new movie safety rules

When actor Alec Baldwin discharged a gun while practicing on the set of a Western movie, killing the cinematographer and wounding the director, it prompted questions like “How could this happen?” and “Why would a gun capable of killing people end up on a movie set?”

In the wake of the incident, the Legislature considered two bills in 2022 aimed at gun safety on movie sets, but neither of them passed, which lawmakers attributed to a lack of consensus within Hollywood about what to do.

But this year, some safety measures are tucked into the budget via a tax credit for movie studios. Since 2009, California has had a tax credit specifically for the film industry, with the goal of countering other states’ efforts to lure productions — and all the jobs and spending that come with them — away from Hollywood.

In this year’s budget agreement, that tax credit was revamped. Starting in 2025, any film industry employer that receives the credit would also have to hire or assign a safety advisor to perform a risk assessment and be present during production. Among other provisions, productions would have to conduct daily safety meetings and those with firearms would need to have a prop master or armorer with a permit from the California Department of Justice.

The tax credit would also be refundable starting in 2025, meaning film studios that receive a large credit but have a small tax bill will be able to get cash back. That’s a change the film industry has been lobbying for. The credit would have incentives and requirements aimed at increasing diversity in the film industry workforce.

A little less than half of all film industry jobs in the country are located in and around Los Angeles, according to state analysts, a slight decline from a decade ago.

— Grace Gedye

###

CalMatters.org is a nonprofit, nonpartisan media venture explaining California policies and politics.

Forrest Arthur Schafer of Bayside unexpectedly passed away at his home, on Wednesday, June 14, 2023, at the age of 79.

Forrest was born in Lodi, California on February 2, 1944, to mother O’tilla Rose Schafer and father Arthur Carl Schafer. Forrest grew up working in their family store, “Schafer’s”, in Rio Vista, California. After he graduated high school, Forrest attended Sacramento State University, where he met Carole Judith Schafer when they were paired together as tennis partners. Upon graduating, Forrest & Carole married and moved to Bayside, where they proceeded to be lifelong partners. They would have celebrated their 57th wedding anniversary on June 26.

When they arrived in Humboldt, Forrest began working as a deputy for the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Department. He retired 33 years later as a Sergeant. While working as a deputy, Forrest also served as a reservist with the U.S. Army, National Guard, and Coast Guard, stationed out of Eureka. He retired from the Coast Guard achieving the highest enlisted rank of Master Chief Petty Officer, E9. After retirement, Forrest continued to serve the community not only as a dispatcher but as a volunteer with the Humboldt County Search & Rescue (SAR) Posse. On June 10, 2023, he was presented with the SAR Lifetime Achievement Award.

Forrest had many hobbies. He was an active member of the Humboldt Amateur Radio (HAM) and the Good Sam RV clubs. He enjoyed years of camping, fishing & boating with friends and family. He had a luscious garden, in which you could always find him tending to his strawberries. He loved writing regular newsletters for the Posse and Good Sam, photographing for the Redwood Discovery Museum’s annual Perilous Plunge and time with his family, especially any occasion he could use as an excuse for a ‘family dinner’. Forrest was most particularly known for his love and passion for embracing the sun’s rays & keeping up his year-round tan!

Forrest is survived by his wife, Carole Schafer, his children Cristine Duncan, Jeff Schafer (Chloe) & Amy La Jeunesse (Joseph), his grandchildren, Shelbye Duncan, Brooke Cabrera (Juan), Kindyl Duncan, Bryce Schafer (Hilanea), Riley Secor (Marissa), Joshua Duncan, Micah Duncan, Alexis La Jeunesse, & Joseph Jamie “JJ” La Jeunesse, and his great-grandchildren, Braelynn Schafer & Jaxson Cabrera. Forrest was preceded in death by his mother, O’tilla Schafer, father, Arthur Schafer, and his brother, Doug Schafer.

A funeral service is scheduled for 11 a.m. on Thursday, June 29 at the Lutheran Church of Arcata, 151 East 16th Street, Arcata, with a reception immediately following until 2 p.m. The family will have a private burial at 3 p.m.

In keeping with Forrest’s true passions, the family asks, in lieu of flowers, donations be made to the Humboldt County Search & Rescue (P.O. Box 410, Eureka, CA 95502) or Humboldt Amateur Radio Club (P.O. Box 5251, Eureka, CA 95502).

###

Flyer provided by the County of Humboldt

PREVIOUSLY: 

• Humboldt Supervisors Shoot Down Billboard Ban (For Now), Approve Temporary Short-Term Rental Moratorium and Proposed Budget for Next Year

###

Press release from County of Humboldt’s Planning and Building Department:

The County of Humboldt reminds the community that an ordinance is being prepared to allow the use of short-term rentals (STRs) in unincorporated Humboldt County. 

The Planning & Building Department will host a virtual public meeting on Wednesday, July 28 to receive public input on the draft ordinance, so it can be improved before it is reviewed by the Planning Commission and presented to the Board of Supervisors for consideration.

Background

On June 6, 2023, the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors adopted an urgency ordinance establishing a temporary moratorium on the establishment and permitting of short-term rental units in unincorporated Humboldt County. The moratorium was adopted to discourage short-term rental operators from rushing to initiate new STRs in advance of the adoption of a proposed Short-Term Rental Ordinance. If the ordinance is adopted giving deference to existing short-term rental properties, STRs initiated after June 6 will not be acknowledged as existing due to this moratorium.

Many community members do not realize STRs are not currently allowed in unincorporated Humboldt County. While there are many residences operating as STRs in Humboldt County, enforcement against these rentals is pursued only in response to complaints from the public. The adoption of the moratorium does not change this approach or change anything for existing short-term rental operators.
The purpose of the draft Short-Term Rental Ordinance is to allow some residences in unincorporated Humboldt County to be used for STRs while protecting the character of the neighborhoods where they are located and to preserve residential units for people and families who live and work in Humboldt County.

To learn more and review the draft ordinance documents, please visit the Short-Term Rental Ordinance web page. 

Public Meeting

A virtual public meeting will be held at 6 p.m. on Wednesday, June 28, to discuss the proposed ordinance. The meeting will feature a presentation of the draft ordinance and attendees will have the opportunity to ask questions and share concerns, ideas, and input.
To register to attend the Short-Term Rental Ordinance Public Meeting, please visit bit.ly/HumSTRO.

Before joining the meeting, attendees are encouraged to download the most recent version of Zoom to be able to fully participate. Closed captioning will be provided. 

This meeting will be recorded and posted on the County of Humboldt’s YouTube channel. Attendees may choose to keep their cameras off and not use their full names. The purpose for posting the recorded videos is to make it available as a resource for community members. 

For more information, please email Associate Planner Keenan Hilton at khilton@co.humboldt.ca.us or call (707) 268-3722.

Special report to everyone not living underneath the cursed Humboldt County coastal marine layer: Unlike where you live, today has been cold. Cold, gray, miserable.

The forecast high temperature in Eureka for today was a frigid 58 degrees Fahrenheit. Here are some other locations along roughly the same line of latitude that Eureka sits on, with their forecast highs:

• Redding: 91 degrees
• Salt Lake City: 89 degrees
• Lincoln, Nebraska: 87 degrees
• Allentown, Penn.: 78 degrees
• New York City: 77 degrees
• Salamanca, Spain: 97 degrees
• Naples: 84 degrees
• Istanbul: 84 degrees
• Beijing: 103 degrees

… etc. Everywhere is at minimum 20 degrees warmer than we are.

Are we complaining? Yes. Do we have a right to complain? Probably not. These gray skies will keep us snuggling up and dressing in layers long after the rest of the planet has burned to the ground. But the deal is supposed to be this: In the summertime, which is now, we are supposed to get gray skies up until about noon, at which point the powerful sun burns through and we get Vitamin D and temps into the 60s – or even the 70s! — until night falls. Then we do it all over again the next day. That’s how it’s supposed to work.

Not this year, though. The long, long winter has transitioned into … whatever this is. It left us wondering: Exactly how much sun have we received this year? How many hours of pure direct light have we enjoyed? Sure don’t seem like much!

Would you like to guess? Because this is more or less calculable, it turns out. Our good friends at the National Weather Service office on Woodley Island take observations every hour of the day, every day of the year. The Outpost robots have snatched that information going back many years, and we have it tucked away in our databases, finally to be put to good use.

There were 2,196 hours of daytime in Eureka between Jan. 1, 2023 and 1 p.m. today. Those hours were placed into one of 11 categories by the meteorologists. One of those categories is “clear” — i.e., sunny. The others are all variations on the theme of “gray.”

Want to stop and take a guess how many sunny hours we’ve received so far since New Year’s Day?

• Overcast: 721
• Partly Cloudy: 441
• Mostly Cloudy: 402
• Rain: 215
• Mist: 128
• Fog: 11
• Snow: 8
• Haze: 26
• Drizzle: 33
• Hail: 2
• Clear: 209

A grand total of 209 hours — fewer than 10 percent of the daylight hours since the beginning of the year — involved the clear unfettered sun shining from the sky onto our heads.

Admittedly, this is a lot more than we had thought it would be. The general consensus guess in the Outpost office was somewhere in the low two figures. Still: Maddening. Worse odds than Russian roulette.

Here’s a spreadsheet if you want to check the data.

Dare we hold out hope for the morrow? The good people of Woodley Island, unswayed the fatalism to which normal humans like us are prone, promise “decreasing clouds” to “partly sunny” to “mostly sunny” to downright actually all-the-way “sunny” weather over the next six days. We shall see!

###

It is nearly time again for the Arcata Planning Commission to convene, and if you follow the commission meetings much then you know that recently the commission has been almost exclusively spending its meeting time discussing the city’s General Plan and, one of Arcata’s hottest topics – the Gateway Area Plan. This week is no different, with the only item on the agenda being to “consider a recommendation to the City Council on the General Plan Updates.”

In case you aren’t up-to-date on the Gateway Area Plan, here’s a quick recap: With things like HSU becoming Cal Poly Humboldt and climate change making coastal Humboldt’s weather increasingly more attractive, Arcata’s population is expected to explode in the coming years. To accommodate that growth and to meet state housing requirements, city staff came up with the Gateway Area Plan – which will rezone about 138 acres of Arcata near downtown to allow for high-density housing and mixed-use developments. The city has been working on this plan for years and over the last several months the Planning Commission has been going over every detail of the General Plan, the Gateway Area Plan and the zoning code that will make these new developments possible. 

During this week’s meeting the commission is slated to focus on its “bike rack” items – topics that have come up during recent discussions that the commission decided to table for later discussion (this is often referred to as a meeting “parking lot,” but is being called a “bike rack” to be more aligned with Arcata’s vibe.) Basically, the commission is going over any final topics that need to be discussed in preparation for its next meeting on July 11, when the commission is slated to make its recommendations to the Arcata City Council on the General Plan and Gateway Plan. 

After the Planning Commission makes its recommendations, the council and commission will be holding multiple joint study sessions during the late summer and early fall, to go over all of the documents together. The Environmental Impact Report should be ready for review by late fall/ early winter and, if everything goes as planned, the city council should be ready to adopt the General Plan and Gateway Area Plan by spring, 2024. 

Between now and then, city staff are still taking public feedback on the documents. You can provide feedback by attending the Planning Commission meeting, or other upcoming meetings, or by emailing comdev@cityofarcata.org.  

The Arcata Planning Commission meets Tuesday, June 27 at 5:30 p.m. at Arcata City Hall – 736 F Street. You can view the full agenda and directions on how to participate here.

###

PREVIOUSLY:

• ARCATA’S GATEWAY PLAN: City Releases Draft Plan For Developing Housing in the 138-Acre ‘Gateway Area’ of Town, and Wants Your Input
• Arcata City Council Approves Plan to Convert Valley West Hotels to Homeless Housing, Reviews ‘Gateway Area Plan’ to Create High-Density Housing in Town
• GUEST OPINION: Gateway Plan Does Housing the Right Way
• ARCATA’S GATEWAY PLAN: Planners Propose Converting K and L to One-Way Streets; Transportation and Safety Committee Will Review Plan This Evening
• Confused About Arcata’s Gateway Area Plan? There are Still Opportunities to Learn More and Provide Feedback About How You Want the City to Create More Housing
• Arcata Mayor Atkins-Salazar Can’t Participate in Gateway Plan Work, Says State’s Fair Political Practice Commission in Response to City’s Request for Guidance
• (UPDATE) Arcata’s Mayor Can’t Participate in the City-Defining Gateway Area Plan; These Two Current Candidates for City Council Probably Can’t Either, for the Same Reason
• HUMBOLDT HOLDING UP: Catching Up on the Arcata Gateway Plan With Senior Planner Delo Freitas
• Want to Learn More About Arcata’s Gateway Plan? City Holding Public Meeting on Wednesday to Answer Your Questions
• A Big Week for the Arcata Gateway Area Plan: Planning Commission, Historical Landmarks Committee to Look at the Area’s Past and Future 
• A Big Public Meetings on Nordic Aquafarms and Arcata’s Gateway Area Plan Tonight
• ARCATA’S GATEWAY PLAN: Big Meetings Coming! Planning Commission to Consider New Public Engagement Approach Ahead of Big Study Session Later This Month
• TONIGHT at ARCATA CITY COUNCIL: Council to Review Request for ‘Gateway Plan Advisory Committee’, Receive Update on Wastewater Treatment Plant
• ‘Gateway Plan Advisory Committee’; Councilmembers Brett Watson and Alex Stillman Argue Over Stillman Not Recusing Herself From Gateway Meetings
• ARCATA’S GATEWAY AREA PLAN: Arcata City Council and Planning Commission Joint Study Session Tonight; Maximum Building Heights May be Set
• Big Gateway Study Session Produces Few Tangible Results
• What’s Next for Arcata’s Gateway Area Plan? Community Development Director Offers Clarification on Results of Recent Study Session
• TODAY in the GATEWAY PLAN: Arcata Planning Commission Will Discuss Plan’s Potential ‘Community Benefits’ During Special Meeting
• NEXT UP in the GATEWAY AREA PLAN: Arcata Planning Commission to Discuss Building Designs and Bird Safety at Upcoming Study Session
• GATEWAY AREA PLAN: Arcata Will Host Online Public Workshop Thursday Evening to Gather Your Design Input
• GATEWAY AREA PLAN: Fearing that the Community is Growing Restless, Arcata City Council Discusses Ways to Boost Public Engagement
• Arcata Planning Commission Keeps Proposal to Make K and L Into One-Way Streets on the Table, Looks at Other Short-Term Options to Improve K Street
• NEXT UP in the GATEWAY AREA PLAN: Arcata Planning Commission to Review Draft of the City’s New Form-Based Code that Will Guide New Development in the Gateway