Oh, the heady days of 2003; there was a perfect storm brewing that Gray Davis could do nothing to stop. Darrell Issa was busy tossing around his car security cash around in order to be elected governor in the recall election. Of course, that never happened, as Arnold Schwarzenegger jumped in to the race, and the rest is history. But what is the CW on that?
Well, if there is a source of Sacramento CW, certainly George Skelton is your man. And today, he declares that the recall was folly:
One thing should now be evident as Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger packs up his office: It was a mistake to recall Gray Davis.
Davis didn't deserve it. He had just been reelected the year before. He would have been out of office in three years anyway.
Schwarzenegger wasn't an improvement except for, briefly, providing entertainment. He didn't make the state's money mess any better. In fact, it has gotten worse. (LA Times)
Of course, seeing where he is now in the polls, and the position the state is in right now, this takes no great source of conventional wisdom. During the last seven years, Arnold made some pretty important moves. But, ultimately, he was a failure because he didn't understand the system, and his only attempts to change it were at the margin where it is safe and cuddly.
He billed himself as a reformer, and the only reforms he could get through were do-nothing reforms like redistricting and Top 2. He billed himself as somebody who could sweep away the debt and deficit, but really, he was in no position to do either. And he never even seriously tried to work for real change on the budget system. He was content to further aggrandize the Big 5 system, making the system even more closed than it was in the past.
Gray Davis got rolled, but as we learned from Prop 8, the voters of this state can make mistakes. Some they learn quickly, and others it takes a few years. It seems with the Mistakinator, it took about 6 years.
Jerry Brown will replace Lester Snow, the Secretary of the California Natural Resources Agency, after he takes office as Governor on January 3.
Brown's transition team has already informed Snow, along with other Schwarzenegger appointees, that he will not be asked to stay on in the incoming administration.
"A number of the current administration appointees have been informed that their appointment will conclude when the current Governor's term ends," said Evan Westrup, Brown's spokesman. "The Governor-elect will be assembling a leadership team and will make additional appointments in the weeks ahead."
"As is standard in adminstration changes, the services of many of the current Governor's appointees will no longer be needed," he noted. "Our focus is on making sure that most qualified candidates are chosen for leadership positions."
Westrup said the incoming Brown administration hasn't chosen a new Resources Secretary yet and a number of candidates are being considered to fill Snow's position.
California's Natural Resources Agency is responsible for the state's natural resource policies, programs and activities. It oversees 25 departments, commissions, boards and conservancies, according to the agency website.
Fishing groups, Indian Tribes and environmentalists have criticized Snow, as Schwarzenegger's head environmental official, for his support of the peripheral canal and new dams, the controversial Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative and the annual dewatering of the Scott and Shasta rivers, key Klamath River tributaries, by irrigators.
As the director of the Department of Water Resources (DWR) until Schwarzenegger appointed him as Resources Secretary earlier this year, Snow presided over the unprecedented collapse of Central Valley chinook salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, Sacramento splittail, young striped bass, threadfin shad and other Delta fish species. Under his leadership, the state exported record amounts of water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta from 2004 to 2006.
"Lester Snow's removal from the Natural Resources Agency gives me hope that Jerry Brown will work on Delta issues with an open-minded attitude," said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, campaign director for Restore the Delta. "I am hopeful that Brown that won't perpetuate the party line that the Delta is nothing other than a transfer site for California water. I am hoping that Snow's termination is a sign that Delta fisheries and Delta communities will be given equal weight in the discussion of California water policies."
"Our hope is that Governor Brown will take heed of what Tribal people and recreational anglers are saying about the MLPA and other water issues," said Georgianna Myers, organizer for the Klamath Justice Coalition and Yurok Tribe member. "I encourage the Governor-elect to have not just big oil and corporate interests at heart, but to listen to the real Californians who use the ocean."
Arnold Schwarzenegger has been pressing pretty hard for the sale (and subsequent lease-back) of state buildings. He thinks it nets us $1.2 Bn in short term dollars, and that's true. But long term? Well, the other side is a business, so they understand that it is a long-term win for the corporate interests financing this little ploy. So, needless to say, Schwarzenegger was miffed when the California Court of Appeal, Sixth Appellate District blocked the sale from going forward.
Well, the administration has now filed an appeal, and clearly they are worried that Governor Elect Brown will not be nearly as interested in this gimmick:
Schwarzenegger's attorneys, in a legal brief filed Monday, asked the high court to step in "because time is of the essence and the transaction must close by year end or probably be lost forever."
*** **** ***
The state Legislature approved the sale in 2009, and Schwarzenegger has vigorously pursued it since.
"For those who say that California is ungovernable, this litigation should serve as Exhibit A," Schwarzenegger's lawyers wrote. "This court must act now to prevent this abuse of the legal process by those who put their own petty grievances above the will of the people and the needs of this state." (LA Times)
If the Supreme Court does not remove the stay from the appellate court, the sale will have to be ultimately concluded by the Brown administration. Brown has previously declined to defend the actions in court, so he's obviously not a big fan of the plan. As to whether he wants to dig out another $1.3 billion of debt, well that's a good question. However, Brown now seems inclined to stare headlong into the abyss of the budget, and completing this sale seems pretty much the opposite of that.
Expect a ruling from the CA Supreme Court very soon.
The questions that MLPA advocates refuse to answer
Officials from Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's fast-track Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative and their supporters have constantly repeated the false claims that the controversial process is "open, transparent and inclusive" and "protects" the ocean as part of a well-funded propaganda campaign to greenwash Schwarzenegger's abysmal environmental legacy before he leaves office.
In an editorial on December 20, the Sacramento Bee joined the campaign to greenwash the outgoing Republican Governor's environmental record by praising Schwarzenegger's MLPA initiative for taking "more bold steps on protecting state's coast."
"Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's environmental legacy certainly includes Assembly Bill 32, the law that aims to reduce carbon emissions to 1990 levels by 2020," the editorial states. "Equally significant, and less well known, is his support for conserving Californrnia's diverse coastal and marine wildlife habitats along the 1,100 mile coastline."
The Bee and other proponents of the process refuse to address the many criticisms that advocates of true ocean protection have leveled against the MLPA Initiative. I have challenged MLPA proponents to answer a series of hard questions that cut to the core of the MLPA process.
None have responded yet to my specific questions, but only continue to repeat their unsubstantiated claims that the Initiative is "open, transparent and inclusive" and that anybody who criticizes the initiative is an opponent of "ocean protection."
Rather than address the many criticisms by grassroots environmentalists, Indian Tribes and fishing groups of the MLPA's implementation under Schwarzenegger, the Bee stated, "Critics should cool the rhetoric and give this conservation effort a chance to work."
The Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) is a comprehensive, landmark law that was signed by Governor Gray Davis in 1999. The MLPA, as amended in 2004, is very broad in its scope.
The law was intended to not only restrict or prohibit fishing in a network of "marine protected areas," but to restrict or prohibit other human activities including coastal development and water pollution.
"Coastal development, water pollution, and other human activities threaten the health of marine habitat and the biological diversity found in California's ocean waters," the law states in Fish and Game Code Section 2851, section c.
The law broadly defines a "marine protected area" (MPA) as "a named, discrete geographic marine or estuarine area seaward of the mean high tide line or the mouth of a coastal river, including any area of inertial or sub tidal terrain, together with its overlying water and associated flora and fauna that has been designated by law, administrative action, or voter initiative to protect or conserve marine life and habitat" (Fish and Game Code 2852, section c).
However, the implementation of the law under Schwarzenegger has become a parody of real marine protection, in spite of the claims by the Bee editors and other MLPA Initiative advocates.
The Bee says, "Fishing and other activities in these protected areas are restricted or banned, allowing delicate reefs and kelp forests to recover." What are these other activities?
The MLPA process under Schwarzenegger has taken oil drilling, water pollution, wave energy development, habitat destruction and other human uses of the ocean other than fishing and gathering off the table. The MLPA would do nothing to stop another Exxon Valdez or Deepwater Horizon oil disaster from devastating the California coast.
Acknowledging the lack of funding for monitoring and enforcement for the MLPA at a time the State of California is in its greatest ever budget crisis, the Bee urges the incoming Brown administration to find "creative new funding sources, such as voluntary contributions, private fundraising, income tax checkoffs."
What the heck? Proposition 21, the State Parks Initiative, could have funded implementation of the MLPA, but the public voted it down in November. Does the Bee really think that the public is now ready to shell out more money to a controversial program through voluntary contributions and income tax checkoffs?
Here are the questions that I pose to the Sacramento Bee editorial board and other proponents of the MLPA fiasco.
Why did the Governor and MLPA officials install an oil industry lobbyist, a marina developer, a real estate executive and other corporate interests as "marine guardians" to remove Indian Tribes, fishermen and seaweed harvesters from the water by creating so-called "marine protected areas" (MPAS)? Isn't this very bad public policy?
Why was Catherine Reheis-Boyd, the president of the Western States Petroleum Association, allowed to make decisions as the chair of the BRTF for the South Coast and as a member of the BRTF for the North Coast, panels that are supposedly designed to "protect" the ocean, when she has called for new oil drilling off the California coast?
Why is a private corporation, the shadowy Resources Legacy Fund Foundation, being allowed to privatize ocean resource management in California through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the DFG?
Why do the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force (BRTF) and Science Advisory Team continue to violate the California Public Records Act by refusing to respond to numerous requests by Bob Fletcher, former DFG Deputy Director, for key documents and records pertaining to the MLPA implementation process?
Why do MLPA staff and the California Fish and Game Commission refuse to hear the pleas of the representatives of the California Fish and Game Wardens Association, who oppose the creation of any new MPAs until they have enough funding for wardens to patrol existing reserves?
Why did MLPA staff until recently violate the Bagley-Keene Act and the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution by banning video and audio coverage of the initiative's work sessions?
Why has the Initiative shown little or no respect for tribal subsistence and ceremonial rights? In fact, it was only because of massive opposition by North Coast Tribes and their allies that an amendment that would have terminated tribal fishing and gathering rights failed to pass during a special MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force teleconference meeting held in Fort Bragg, Crescent City and Eureka on December 9.
Since the MLPA was privatized in 2004, the initiative has violated the American Indian Religious Freedom Act and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People. Article 32, Section 2, of the Declaration mandates "free prior and informed consent" in consultation with the indigenous population affected by a state action (http://www.iwgia.org/sw248.asp).
The unified proposal adopted by North Coast MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force is the first MLPA proposal that acknowledges tribal gathering and fishing rights, a tribute to the hard work of the Tribal, fishing and environmental stakeholders. However, why did it take 6 years for this to happen?
Why were there no Tribal scientists on the MLPA Science Advisory Team and why were there no Tribal representatives on the Blue Ribbon Task Forces for the Central Coast, North Central Coast or South Coast MLPA Study Regions? Isn't this a case of institutional racism on behalf of MLPA officials?
Why does the initiative discard the results of any scientists who disagree with the MLPA's pre-ordained conclusions? These include the peer reviewed study by Dr. Ray Hilborn, Dr. Boris Worm and 18 other scientists, featured in Science magazine in July 2009, that concluded that the California current had the lowest rate of fishery exploitation of any place studied on the planet.
Finally, why did 300 Tribal members, fishermen, immigrant workers and environmentalists feel so left out of the MLPA process that they had to organize a march and direct action to take over a MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force meeting in Fort Bragg of July 21 so their voices would be finally heard?
Proponents of the MLPA Initiative have failed to address the many criticisms of the MLPA process by Indian Tribes, recreational fishermen, commercial fishermen, conservationists and environmental justice advocates.
Real environmentalists support true, comprehensive ocean protection as the MLPA originally intended, not the facade of protection that Schwarzenegger's MLPA Initiative provides.
Real environmentalists don't support a process that has gone to great lengths to take oil drilling, water pollution, wave energy development, habitat destruction, military testing and other human uses of the ocean other than fishing and gathering off the table in its perverse concept of marine "protection."
Finally, real environmentalists oppose the privatization of ocean conservation that has occurred under the MLPA Initiative.
The MLPA process must be seen in the context of the campaign by the Schwarzenegger administration, corporate media, some NGOs and political hacks to greenwash the environmental legacy of the worst Governor in California history for fish, water and the environment.
This is the same Governor who presided over the unprecedented collapse of Central Valley chinook salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, green sturgeon, Sacramento splittail and other fish species, relentlessly campaigned for the construction of an environmentally destructive and enormously expensive peripheral canal and new dams and vetoed numerous laws protecting fish, water and the environment.
John and Barbara Stephens-Lewallen, two of Mendocino County's most dedicated and respected environmental leaders, are asking Governor-elect Jerry Brown to terminate Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's widely-contested Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative.
"We ask you to cancel the illegal and unconstitutional memorandum of understanding signed under the Schwarzenegger administration transferring powers of the State of California to the Resources Legacy Fund Foundation, a private foundation, to control the process of creating Marine Protected Areas in California State lands and ocean waters under the Marine Life Protection Act Initiative," the Philo-based couple stated in a letter to Brown.
"The corrupt, privatized Marine Life Protection Act Initiative process scorns state laws and sovereign tribal rights," they wrote. "Marine Protected Areas enacted under the Marine Life Protection Act Initiative threaten great environmental and economic harm to present and future generations of Californians."
"Please act to cancel the memorandum of understanding with Resources Legacy Fund Foundation, and to nullify the Marine Protected Areas already enacted by this corrupt private process. Californians need and deserve access to sustainable food from our public ocean waters and intertidal zone. We do not consent to being governed by private foundations," they concluded.
The Stephens-Lewallens have fought offshore oil drilling, the clear cutting of forests, military testing, wave energy projects and other threats to coastal ecosystems for decades. John was the co-founder of the Ocean Protection Coalition and Seaweed Rebellion, two prominent grassroots environmental organizations.
The Marine Life Protection Act, signed by Governor Gray Davis into law in 1999, was designed to create a comprehensive network of marine protected areas along the California coast. However, the Schwarzenegger administration, in a grotesque parody of marine "protection," has taken water pollution, oil drilling, oil spills, military testing, wave energy projects, habitat destruction and all other uses of the ocean other than fishing and gathering off the table.
Schwarzenegger appointed an oil lobbyist, real estate executive, marina developer and other corporate interests to preside over the implementation of so-called marine protected areas on the California coast. This process has been characterized by conflicts of interest, corruption and the violation of numerous state, federal and international laws, including the American Indian Religious Freedom Act and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People.
During the annual fisheries forum at the State Legislature in Sacramento in April 2009, It was John who exposed the alarming role that a top oil industry lobbyist, Catherine Reheis-Boyd, now the president of the Western States Petroleum Association, was playing in the MPLA process.
"Why is Catherine Reheis-Boyd, CEO and Chief of Staff for the Western States Petroleum Association, a key member of the five-member MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force which has decreed new zones where people can take no food from state waters?" Stephens-Lewallen asked the Senators and Assemblymembers. "Is it coincidence that the Point Arena Basin offshore from Point Arena is the area of highest oil industry interest in Northern California, and the only tract here now open to Minerals Management Service offshore oil leasing process?"
In August of 2009, Reheis-Boyd in fact became the chair of the South Coast MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force and also served on the North Coast task force. Isn't having a oil industry lobbyist, who has repeatedly called for new drilling off the California coast, a huge conflict of interest?
The movement against the privately-funded MLPA Initiative is one of the most significant grassroots political movements on the North Coast since the Redwood Summer of 1990. On July 21, over 300 people including members of 50 Indian Tribes, recreational anglers, commercial fishermen, immigrant seafood industry workers and environmentalists peacefully took control of the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force (BRTF) meeting in Fort Bragg to demand that the initiative respect tribal gathering and fishing rights.
Under political pressure from the Yurok Tribe and other North Coast Tribes, the task force decided on Thursday, December 10 not to approve a motion that would have effectively terminated Tribal gathering and fishing rights.
The Tribes, fishermen and environmentalists insisted that there be no changes to the unified marine protected area proposal developed by stakeholders in a long, grueling and controversial process. The Klamath and Coastal Justice coalitions launched a campaign to urge the panel to stop any attempt to deny tribal subsistence and ceremonial rights - and this political pressure, along with a strongly worded letter by Yurok Tribal Chair Thomas O'Rourke and a letter from a coalition of other North Coast Tribes, apparently worked.
The North Coast proposal will be presented to the Fish and Game Commission on February 2, 2011, after Governor-Elect Jerry Brown takes office.
Meanwhile, the Commission (FGC) in Santa Barbara on December 15 voted 3-2 to approve a wide-ranging array of marine protected areas (MPAs) along the southern California coast. The Central Coast and North Central Coast marine reserves are already in place.
"We hope that sovereign tribal rights will stay in the forefront of the MLPA process," said Georgiana Myers, organizer for the Klamath Justice Coalition and Yurok Tribal member. "This should be true in every region that is impacted by the MLPA, especially on the North Coast. We will be organizing people to show up in numbers for the Commission meeting in February."
Brown has to date made no comment on his position on the MLPA Initiative, a process that Governor Schwarzenegger privatized in 2004. While NRDC, the Ocean Conservancy and other big environmental NGOs avidly support the privately funded process, grassroots environmentalists, fishermen, Tribal members and pro-democracy activists strongly oppose the corrupting influence of private Resources Legacy Fund Foundation money on a public process.
The MLPA process was privatized by the same Governor who presided over the unprecedented collapse of Central Valley chinook salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, green sturgeon, Sacramento splittail and other fish species, relentlessly campaigned for the construction of an environmentally destructive and enormously expensive peripheral canal and new dams and vetoed numerous laws protecting fish, water and the environment.
A panel overseeing the creation of marine protected areas on the North Coast voted unanimously on October 27 to forward the unified proposal developed by Tribal, fishing and environmental stakeholders, but the California Fish and Game Commission's final decision on the issue will not be made until 2011 after Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger leaves office.
The MPA proposal, developed by Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative's 33-member north coast regional stakeholder group (NCRSG), will be presented to the California Fish and Game Commission together with a modified "enhanced compliance alternative" marine protected area proposal and other recommendations in Sacramento on February 2, 2011.
After the proposal is presented to the Commission, the Commission will hold hearings to solicit public comment. A final decision is not expected until later in the year under the incoming Jerry Brown administration.
Brown has not made any public comments to date about what direction his administration will take regarding the implementation and enforcement of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's MLPA process. In 2004, Schwarzenegger privatized the process by allowing a private corporation, the Resources Legacy Fund Foundation, to fund the initiative through a MOU between the foundation and the Department of Fish and Game.
The Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative Blue Ribbon Task Force (BRTF) also adopted two additional recommendations related to traditional tribal uses in the north coast region and recognizing a tribal use category within MPAs and a recommendation for the state to seek co-management partnerships between sister agencies and California tribes and tribal communities. One motion included a mutual reservation of rights by the state and California Tribes and Tribal communities.
In addition, the panel adopted a recommendation to retain existing MPAs at MacKerricher, Russian Gulch and Van Damme state parks.
If adopted by the Commission, the unified proposal would result in about 13 percent of the North Coast region being restricted or closed to fishing and gathering, versus 16 to 20 percent in other regions of the state.
"I'm extremely proud of the stakeholder group for accomplishing their task with great integrity and consideration for the entire north coast region and all ocean users," said Ken Wiseman, executive director of the MLPA Initiative. "The stakeholders did a tremendous job of working together as a community in this science-based public process."
Jim Martin, West Coast Regional Director of the Recreational Fishing Alliance, said the approval of the single proposal represented a "tremendous effort by North Coast recreational anglers, commercial fishermen, Indian Tribes and Tribal Communities, local conservationists and local governments to come together."
"This unified plan has garnered support from every corner of the north coast, and it really considers the needs of everyone that uses the ocean for work or play," said Jennifer Savage of the Ocean Conservancy.
On October 20, three counties, 10 cities and three harbor districts signed and sent a resolution to the state of California urging the adoption without modification of the unified array for marine protected areas developed by North Coast Tribal, fishing and environmental stakeholders.
Assemblymember Wesley Chesbro (D-Arcata), who has been critical of the MLPA Initiative, urged the task force to adopt the single proposal.
"I believe that there are fundamental flaws in the way that the MLPA has been implemented," Chesbro told the panel. "The MLPA Initiative has not looked at the ecological differences between regions in the state. They have no consideration of existing fishing regulations. I strongly urge that the unified proposal be adopted unchanged."
"The unified proposal is fragile like a soap bubble," quipped Martin, emphasizing the hundreds and hundreds of hours spent by Tribes, fishermen, seaweed harvesters, local governments and businesses to develop one proposal. "If you reach out and touch it, it will pop. The adoption of the proposal with no substantive changes is a huge victory for all of the North Coast communities who participated in the process."
Megan Rocha, Self-Governance Officer of the Yurok Tribe, applauded the resounding support for the unified proposal plus the recognition of tribal uses by the task force and the stakeholders.
"The Tribe now looks forward to working with the Department of Fish and Game, the Fish and Game Commission and the Legislature to resolve the tribal use issue," she said. "The motion regarding the mutual reservation of rights by the Tribes and the state is really big, since early on in the process the state said it didn't have the authority to recognize tribal uses. Now we can move forward and recognize that the real issue is resource management, not quibbling over who has authority."
On July 21, over 300 members of 50 Indian Nations, recreational anglers, commercial fishermen, environmentalists, seaweed harvesters and community activists peacefully took over the previous Blue Ribbon Task Force meeting to protest the violation of tribal fishing and gathering rights under the MLPA.
Frankie Joe Myers, a Yurok Tribal ceremonial leader and organizer for the Coastal Justice Coalition that organized the direct action, said that he was glad that the task force adopted the unified proposal and passed motions supporting traditional tribal gathering and co-management.
"It is close to what we are looking for," said Myers. "However, the proposal still has to go through the Fish and Game Commission - it's not over yet. As native people, we have seen time and time again where we sit down and agree on something and then what comes out in the end is nothing like we expected."
Some critics of the controversial MLPA Initiative, including David Gurney, the independent journalist and activist who was arrested for filming a work session on the MLPA Regional Stakeholders Group in April, don't support the unified proposal.
"The fraudulent MLPA Initiative is indeed a bubble," said Gurney. "It is a soapy, oily bubble of fraud and corruption that has plagued this state for six years and running. The MLPA Initiative was a fraud from the get-go, and will continue to be up until the time that they arrest you for trying to feed yourself. You cannot legislate who will eat and who will starve."
Judith Vidaver, chair of the Ocean Protection Coalition, criticized the proposal for eliminating the only public access for shore based fishing and gathering between between Cleone and Westport by the creation of the Ten Mile MPA.
"So after presenting this issue, along with members of the Regional Stakeholders Group, to the BRFT multiple times with no response from the BRTF, I asked them to make a motion to move the boundary 600 feet south," said Vidaver. "On consultation, DFG made it clear that to do so would result in the Ten Mile MPA no longer meeting the minimum science guidelines."
"The BRTF did leave it open to the RSG to possibly come up with a solution. We are researching our options," she stated.
She also emphasized, "OPC believes the MLPAI is politically-not science-driven." Fishing groups, Tribes and environmentalists have criticized the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force, a panel that includes an oil lobbyist, marina developer and real estate executive, for conflicts of interests over the designation of marine protected areas.
"Several members of the BRTF have conflicts of interest, most obviously, Catherine Reheis-Boyd, President of the Western States Petroleum Association, who repeatedly lobbies for opening up the entire coast of California to offshore oil drilling," Vidaver told the BRTF during the public comment period before their votes. "OPC again requests Mrs. Reheis-Boyd and anyone else with blatant conflicts of interest to recuse themselves from these proceedings."
However, Vidaver did note that Reheis-Boyd made the proposal to move the unified proposal forward. "That action goes a long way towards alleviating our concerns about her conflicts of interest," Vidaver said.
Meanwhile, the Partnership for Sustainable Oceans and United Anglers of Southern California continue to pursue multi-layered litigation against the MLPA Initiative.
On October 1, a Superior Court Judge in Sacramento issued a ruling confirming that two panels overseeing the MLPA Initiative must comply with the California Public Records Act. Judge Patrick Marlette ruled that the Marine Life Protection Act Blue Ribbon Task Force (BRTF) and Master Plan Team (MPT) are state agencies and are therefore compelled by California's Public Records Act to share information with representatives of angling/conservation organizations working to protect recreational ocean access.
Here is the latest newsletter, "Delta Flows," from Restore the Delta.
"Or have we eaten of the insane root/That takes the reason prisoner?"
- Shakespeare, MacBeth
Land grab in the works
It will come as no surprise to anyone who has been observing the arrogance of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan's Potentially Regulated Entities (PREs) that they don't intend to acquire land for habitat restoration using willing sellers.
Restore the Delta has learned that the BDCP is looking at eminent domain as the process to achieve habitat goals.
They'd have trouble paying for what they want to take
Back in March of 2009, the San Luis and Delta-Mendota Water Authority issued revenue notes to fund the Delta Habitat Conservation and Conveyance Program (DHCCP) Development Project. The DHCCP is the entity that is supposed to assess potential habitat restoration and water conveyance options for the BDCP and conduct an environmental review.
Fitch Ratings, a global rating agency that evaluates and rates agencies that issue bonds, said this about the March 2009 bond issue: "Financial strength is derived from the obligor's, the Westlands Water District (WWD, or the district), credit quality (revenue bonds rated 'A' by Fitch Ratings), based on satisfactory historical financial operations and high commodity value."
Fitch Ratings also said, "The value of the WWD's entitlement to a substantial amount of water (1.15 million acre feet) offers financial flexibility, as it can be marketed for municipal and industrial uses at higher price if the water is not sold for agricultural purposes."
But Fitch also noted, "Although the authority manages substantial water rights, the availability of water in recent drought years raises concerns regarding future water availability and associated rising costs due to infrastructure needs that will continue to escalate the cost of the commodity."
Two things are worth noting here:
First, back in 2009 Westlands was considered stable from an investment perspective because they could market their water to cities and industry if they could make more money that way than selling water to grow food.
This is the district that asserts a moral claim to water from the Delta, saying that it is growing food to feed the country and scoffing at protections for fish.
Westlands needs a stable water supply not to grow food but to borrow money.
Sean Hannity? Leslie Stahl? Is anyone listening out there?
Second, somebody ought to be looking out for the best interests of municipal bond investors, because investments backed by water rights and water supply just may not be wise investments. Two years ago, Fitch recognized that water availability was a concern.
Not good for your investment portfolio
Last week, the New York Times reported on a new study warning of the risk of municipal bonds that finance water supply. The study is one of the first to assess the potential impact of water shortages on the municipal bond market.
According to the study, credit ratings do not adequately reflect the growing risks of water shortages and legal battles over water supplies. When the risks become apparent, investors may see bond values drop. And water and electric utilities may find it more expensive to raise money.
The Times article ("Water Scarcity a Bond Risk, Study Warns") says, "Among the seven cities and agencies examined in the report, Los Angeles and Atlanta were identified as the ones whose water systems faced the greatest risk in the years ahead."
Cities and agencies that were subjects of the study, including Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, said the analysis was flawed by basic misunderstandings about supply and demand. But authors defended the study's bias again imported water because of the high energy costs associated with moving the water.
Investors in utilities that rely on hydroelectric power or on water to cool nuclear power plants are subject to the same water scarcity risks.
The study was jointly produced by Ceres, a national coalition of investors, environmentalists, and public interest groups, and by Water Asset Management, an investor in water-related businesses.
So here's where things stand
So export water contractors plan to seize Delta land to create a combination of habitat and infrastructure so complicated that they can't even figure out how to describe it in a proper public project description. Their plan to pay for this hodgepodge includes issuing bonds based on a degree of water supply availability and stability that no amount of infrastructure can possibly guarantee. And they're going to try to persuade their ratepayers to pay for the bonds and bond investors to accept the risk. The greater the risk, the higher the returns to investors, and the higher the cost to ratepayers.
These are the kinds of fantasies that brought us the savings and loan debacle, Enron, the foreclosure crisis, and a national recession.
Somewhere along the line, "beneficiary pays" will fall apart and we'll see California's taxpayers on the hook for bailouts.
On the bright side, more Bass Tournament thank-yous, and some congratulations
Restore the Delta thanks the following sponsors who helped with the Bass Tournament benefit on October 17th:
BlackDog Baits
Mel Cotton's Sporting Goods of San Jose
Snagproof Lures
The Fly Shop in Redding
Lamiglass
Mike Keopke/Pure Fishing
Simms(John Sherman)
Dan Blanton
Roger Stegal (ABA TD scales)
John Rohmer
Quantum Fishing
Marty Martinez (sound system)
Russo's Marina and staff
And the winners:
Kickboater/Float Tube Division - Scott Rouhier...............................3.fish..4.73 lbs.
Fly Division - Geg Holland/Matt Green..................................5..fish ..6.43 lbs.
Standard Gear Division - Dan & Travis Fontes.................................5.fish...11 .26 lbs.
A huge thank you to all 35 entrants in this tournament to help us boost awareness of the threats the Delta is facing.
For more information, go to: www.restorethedelta.org.
Governor Schwarzenegger's veto of almost a billion of spending, primarily for the neediest Californians couldn't have come at a worse time. To recap, now is a good time to allow the needy to starve, the sick to suffer, and the elderly to go unassisted, but a bad time to increase taxes a single penny on the wealthiest Californians. Sen. Steinberg has indicated that he will attempt to reverse the cuts under a new governor, but that is still a ways away.
Anyway, some legislators and child care activists held a press conference in the East Bay yesterday, and managed to get a few members of the press there. It is still pretty big news that over a quarter of a billion for working parents on CalWORKS was cut, at least for non-insiders.
Meanwhile, Arnold Schwarzenegger's team has moved on. Any discussion of that news is just rehashing battles already fought. That the cuts are about to take effect, and the devestation about to be wreaked on families across the state, well, pay no mind to that. It just isn't news. Reporters spilling ink on the subject are basically historians wasting their time...or so says Aaron McLear, the governor's spokesman.
Schwarzenegger spokesman Aaron McLear this afternoon questioned why, despite today's news conference and the veto's impending effects, I'm bothering to report about a veto that happened weeks ago - "We're having a presser tomorrow to overturn Prohibition. Hope you can make it." - and referred questions to state Department of Finance spokesman H.D. Palmer.
(Asked if he really wanted to be so cavalier about a veto that will impact so many families, McLear responded by e-mail, "Sounds like you're writing from a particular point of view - interesting reporting. Just making sure u know this story is weeks old.") (InsideBayArea)
I suppose when you are walking through Brentwood, admiring the scenery, you don't really see the people suffering from the cuts. But they are real, and their stories worth telling. That the Governor's staff is that heartless should be no surprise at this point, though.
While it isn't likely that the Legislature will be able to come up with the 2/3, Steinberg is hoping to wait out Gov. Schwarzenegger:
Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg will try to reverse Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's line-item budget vetoes when the next legislative session begins in December, according to his spokeswoman, Alicia Trost. ...
Steinberg's strategy does not rely on overriding the line-item vetoes, which would take a two-thirds vote of the Legislature. Instead, it seems that Steinberg intends to ask Democrats to reauthorize spending for the programs slashed by the governor.
It's unclear to what extent Steinberg's plan relies upon passage of Proposition 25, which would reduce the state's budget requirement of a supermajority vote to a majority vote. Even without passage of Proposition 25, lawmakers could appropriate funds for education on a majority vote - including the $256 million in child care funds that Schwarzenegger vetoed.(SacBee)
Schwarzenegger went behind the back of the Legislature and blue penciled cuts that he knew the Democrats could not abide. Now we need to ensure that Brown wins, but one hopes that he would be amenable to these programs.
After the budget deal was done, Arnold reached for his blue pencil. The blue pencil was not kind to California, and for some it meant the difference between getting back on their feet, and struggling to survive...or worse.
The list of whom the $1b in cuts attacks reads like a who's who of the most vulnerable Californians. Foster children, the disabled, AIDS patients, struggling working families, you name it, Arnold attacked.
Schwarzenegger sliced $962 million from the spending plan sent to him by the Legislature 100 days after the start of the fiscal year July 1.
In most cases, the governor explained his line-item vetoes with boilerplate language saying the cuts were necessary to "help bring ongoing expenditures in line with existing resources and to build a prudent reserve." In some cases Schwarzenegger pointed out that alternative funding might be available to blunt the effect of his reductions, or suggested that California will seek federal money to offset the loss of state dollars.
But those explanations did not satisfy the governor's many critics, some of whom felt betrayed by his actions.
Sarah Jimenez, communications director for the County Welfare Directors Association, released a statement from the group calling Schwarzenegger a "hypocrite." She noted that just last week, the governor signed Assembly Bill 12, a bill extending services to youth in foster care until age 21, and spoke about his commitment to children.(Healthy Cal)
While Schwarzenegger points out that many of these cuts may be offset by other sources of revenue, many will not. CalWORKS has now been cut to a hollow shell of its former self. It was once a model for the type of welfare reform that the neoliberals, Clinton and many Republicans, said they could support. Now that the Right has moved far to the right of their 1980s counterparts, that is completely out of fashion. That it was successful at both stabilizing families and getting members of the community back into the work force seems to be secondary at this point.
Foster children will continue to be left for the most part to fend for themselves as they age out of the system, and AIDS patients have to hope that pharma wants to continue to get the federal match. It's government by hope and prayer, not a productive system for sustainable government.
In an ideal world, labor wouldn't have to spend their negotiations on the subject of givebacks of gains they have made in the past. But, this is far from an ideal world, and labor has been up against the wall to do just that. However, for far too long the Governor has declined to negotiate in good faith, instead unilaterally declaring furlough days and otherwise attacking state workers.
But, of course, there is that first way. You know, where labor and the administration work cooperatively towards a shared goal of a functioning state government. And while this isn't necessarily the vision of a functioning government that we would like to see, at least there was some cooperation:
The contract includes a one-day-a-month "personal leave program" that amounts to a 5% pay cut for the union's 95,000 members in the first year. It also lowers the pension levels for future employees and requires current workers to contribute an additional 3% toward their retirement.
Union workers would be exempt from furloughs or being paid minimum wage during any future budget impasses.
"This was a hard-fought negotiation but we proved that collective bargaining works," SEIU Local 1000 President Yvonne Walker said in a prepared statement. "We reached an agreement that helps the state maintain services, during this unprecedented fiscal crisis, while providing stability for our members." (LA Times)
The deal lasts for three years, and will clear up one of the bigger remaining sticking points for the budget approval process.
Governor Schwarzenegger and Meg Whitman aren't really seen around town too often. Whitman can't seem to get far enough from Arnold, and with his record, who would blame her. Yet, as Meg Whitman attempts to make California into Texas, Governor Schwarzenegger is lashing out at the terrible Texas two, Valero and Tesoro, who have been funding Prop 23's effort to kill California's regulation of greenhouse gas pollution.
Schwarzenegger, speaking before several hundred people at the Commonwealth Club in Santa Clara, said the proponents of Prop. 23 are attempting to subvert the democratic process using scare tactics. He likened the campaign to a shell game hiding what he said was the real purpose: "self-serving greed."
"They are creating a shell argument that they are doing this to protect jobs," the governor said. "Does anybody really believe they are doing this out of the goodness of their black oil hearts - spending millions and millions of dollars to save jobs?"
Schwarzenegger said AB32, which he signed into law in 2006, will create jobs by allowing California to establish a "green economy" featuring solar energy, hydrogen power, bio-energy and a renewable electricity standard that will provide "the seed money for the world's energy revolution."
The only job losses or costs, he said, would be in polluting industries like Valero Energy Corp. and Tesoro Corp., both of which have refineries in California that climate experts say are sources of greenhouse gas emissions.(SacBee)
The tone of Schwarzenegger's attacks were as surprising as anything else, so it is worth watching the Olbermann clip up top to here the audio of the speech. He puts the lie to the notion that Prop 23 is going to "save a million jobs."
It is striking that Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has attempted to throw the state off the cliff through his shock doctrine budget techniques. But even for him, this is a bridge too far.
Commissioner Dan Richards Calls Governor A 'Forked-Tongue Devil'
by Dan Bacher
In the secrecy and corrupt politics that have characterized the administration of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, the lame-duck Governor on Monday removed Michael Sutsos, a member of the California Fish and Game Commission who had just been recently appointed, and selected a new Commissioner.
Members of fishing groups, California Indian Tribes and grassroots environmentalists believe that Sutsos was removed to make sure that the Commission votes down a request to extend the public comment period for the South Coast Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIR) for the Governor Schwarzenegger's Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative in a special Fish and Game Commission meeting to be held in McClellan, CA. on Wednesday, September 29 from noon to 5 pm.
In his first and only Commission meeting during his 18 days as a commissioner, Sutsos was one of three Commissioners to vote favorably for holding the meeting to consider the comment period extension.
Jack Baylis, a public member of the Coastal Conservancy, will be sworn in tomorrow as a Fish and Game Commissioner, Then, in a gross miscarriage of justice, he will go straight to the Commission meeting at McClellan to vote on the extension! He will resign as a Coastal Conservancy member.
Baylis, 52, is apparently a corporate Schwarzenegger stooge appointed to greenwash the Governor's ocean and other environmental policies before he leaves office.
Baylis has worked as AECOM Technology Corporation since 2006 and currently serves as the US group executive for strategic development. Prior to that, Baylis worked for CH2M Hill, where he served in a variety of positions including senior vice president and vice president from 2000 to 2006. From 1996 to 2000, he served as the president and chief operating officer for Linabond and, from 1994 to 1995, Baylis was the vice president and corporate officer for Brown and Caldwell Engineers.
He serves as vice chair of the Heal the Bay Board of Directors - a group that adamantly supports Schwarzenegger's fast-track MLPA Initiative - and is a founding member and strategic planning committee chair of the Clean Water America Alliance. Baylis is also a member of the California State Parks and Recreation Commission. Baylis is a Republican.
"Sutsos' dismissal is no surprise," said Vern Goehring of the California Fisheries Coalition. "The Governor doesn't want to sit idly and watch his MLPA process be delayed over to the next administration. The MLPA proponents are trying to shut down down the public comment period to keep important information off the official record. If the project was warranted, it could withstand the change of Administrations."
"An extension of the DEIR is completely warranted and necessary given the importance and complexity of this report," said Paul Lebowitz, director of the Kayak Fishing Association of California and member of the Partnership for Sustainable Oceans (PSO). "Mr. Sutsos felt that all of the issues and controversy surrounding the DEIR were worthy of further consideration. Obviously that did not jive with Governor Schwarzenegger's agenda to railroad the process through before he leaves office, so the Governor now will appoint a more politically compliant commissioner."
"From the outset, the MLPA process has been plagued by a rush to meet arbitrary deadlines while science, data and transparency have been lacking," noted Steve Fukuto, president of United Anglers of Southern California, also a PSO member. "Unfortunately we have seen these concerns consistently pushed aside in an effort to meet politically-based deadlines. The termination of Mr. Sutsos' appointment is further proof of the Governor's true intentions."
Sutsos' removal was confirmed today by Ed Zieralski of the San Diego Union-Tribune in an interview that he conducted with Dan Richards, Fish and Game Commmissioner (http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/sep/28/fish-and-game-commissioners-removal-raises-doubts).
Richards told Zieralski that he received a call about Sutsos removal on Monday. Ironically, Sutsos was appointed after the California Senate refused to confirm the appointment of Don Benninghoven, a Schwarzenegger stooge, after a flood of letters and phone calls in opposition to his confirmation by fishermen and environmental justice advocates.
Last August Schwarzenegger appointed Benninghoven days before a key Commission meeting in Woodland to impose so-called "marine protected areas" on the North Central Coast, in spite of massive opposition by fishermen, Indian Tribes, seaweed harvesters and North Coast environmentalists. In an egregious example of racism and elitism, the new closures removed the Kashia Pomo Tribe and other Indian Tribes from their traditional ceremonial and subsistence fishing and gathering areas.
Fortunately, an historic "blessing ceremony" held by the Kashia Pomo elders at Stewarts Point in protest of the closures and pressure by tribal leaders and lawyers led to an exemption for tribal members and recreational users on a small section of the reserve. However, the Commission and the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force have yet to fully recognize tribes as sovereign nations and respect tribal fishing and gathering rights that they have no jurisdiction over.
In the interview, Richards, who has consistently stood up for fishermen and tribes with fellow Commissioner Jim Kellogg in votes on the MLPA Initiative, had very harsh words for Schwarzenegger and the MLPA fiasco.
"This just shows how corrupt this process is," Richards said. "This process, the Marine Life Protection Act, is so corrupt, so offensive it's unimaginable. Gov. Schwarzenegger is a forked-tongue devil."
"The reason I have such a problem with (Sutsos) getting taken off the Commission is that this denigrates and disrespects every person who worked on the MLPA process," Richards told Zieralski. "Many of the people who worked on the stakeholder groups weren't paid, certainly weren't hired guns. That's why this is so offensive to me. These people don't care about what the science says, what the reality is, or how what waters they close will affect people's livelihoods."
Well-funded corporate environmental NGOs including the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), the Ocean Conservancy and California League of Conservation Voters are pushing the Commission to reject the proposed extension in order to greenwash Schwarzenegger's abysmal environmental legacy before he leaves office.
In over 27 years of covering California environmental and water issues, the MLPA initiative is the most corrupt process I have ever researched. The Initiative, funded by the shadowy Resources Legacy Fund Foundation, has taken water pollution, oil drilling, wave energy projects, military testing, habitat destruction and all other human uses of the ocean off the table in its perverse conception of "marine protected areas."
The Blue Ribbon Task Forces that oversee the MLPA Initiative are dominated by oil industry, marina development, real estate and other corporate interests that have many conflicts of interest in the implementation process. Catherine Reheis-Boyd, the president of the Western States Petroleum Association, was the chair of the South Coast MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force and now serves on the North Coast panel.
The MLPA and the removal of Sutsos must be seen in the context of the worst-ever administration for fish, the environment, tribes and fishermen in California history. Schwarzenegger and his collaborators including Resources Secretary Lester Snow have presided over the unprecedented collapse of Delta smelt, longfin smelt, Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River chinook salmon, green sturgeon, Sacramento splittail and other fish populations, spurred by record water exports out of the California Delta.
Rather than address these problems, the Governor and his collaborators have gone out of their way to aggravate the collapse by campaigning to build a peripheral canal and new dams to facilitate increased water exports to corporate agribusiness and southern California water agencies. In addition, the Governor has allowed agribusiness on the Scott and Shasta River valleys to de-water these Klamath River tributaries every year at tremendous peril to endangered and threatened coho salmon, chinook salmon and steelhead populations.
I agree entirely with Richards that Schwarzenegger is "a forked-tongue devil." While Schwarzenegger has grandstanded at endless photo opportunities and press conferences about "green energy" and "climate change," he has waged a relentless war against fishermen, Tribes and the state's fish populations. There is nothing "green" about Schwarzenegger other than the toxic "green" of corporate money that he and his collaborators worship.
I urge you to support this action alert calling for a 90-day extension of the public comment period for the South Coast Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) as part of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's widely-contested Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative. Please send in your comments TODAY and then attend the California Fish and Game Commission meeting at McClellan (north of the city of Sacramento) from noon to 5 pm on Thursday.
Below the action alert is my article on the upcoming meeting, followed by a letter from the California Fisheries Coalition supporting an extension of the public comment period.
Please forward widely!
Thanks
Dan
Urgent Action Alert from Keep America Fishing:
California Fish and Game Commission to Hold Special Meeting to Discuss Timeline for South Coast MLPA Report
Send in your comments today asking for more time for review of this large, complex and highly important document
The Situation
On September 29, 2010, the California Fish and Game Commission (FGC) will hold a special meeting to discuss and consider a potential extension to the public comment period for the South Coast region Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) as part of the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) implementation process. The DEIR, which was released on August 18, 2010, analyzes the potential environmental impacts of the marine protected area (MPA) proposals currently under consideration for this area. The DEIR was given a 45-day review and comment period.
The DEIR is a 548-page document that addresses a number of complex environmental issues that require careful consideration. The recreational fishing and boating community believes that it is imperative that the FGC extend this to a 90-day period to provide the public with sufficient time to review and comment on this report.
Decisions made under the MLPA process, including the DEIR, will have significant and long-lasting consequences for angling and boating in the region. The public deserves enough time to carefully review and provide input on the DEIR to ensure it is as comprehensive, informative and accurate as possible and is not driven by a need to meet arbitrary deadlines.
SEND YOUR MESSAGE NOW - EXTEND THE COMMENT PERIOD DEADLINE
Send the letter to the FGC urging them to extend the comment period on the DEIR to 90 days by going to http://www.keepamericafishing....
ATTEND UPCOMING FGC MEETING
The FGC will also be receiving public comment during its September 29 meeting. This is your chance to convey to the FGC - in person - the importance of allowing an extension.
The meeting will be held from Noon - 5 p.m. PDT at the Lion's Gate Hotel & Conference Center, 3410 Westover Street, McClellan, Calif.
Commission to Discuss Extending South Coast MLPA Comment Period
by Dan Bacher
The California Fish and Game Commission will hold a special meeting on September 29 in McClellan, California to discuss and consider a potential extension to the public comment period for the South Coast Region Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) under Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative.
Fishing and conservation groups are supporting a 90 day extension of the controversial MLPA process to provide the public with sufficient time to review and comment on this report, while some environmental NGOs are opposing the delay in their effort to keep the initiative on its fast track. The initiative is privately funded by the Resources Legacy Fund Foundation, led by executive director Michael Eaton.
The DEIR, released on August 18, analyzes the potential environmental impacts of the marine protected area (MPA) proposals currently under consideration for this area. The DEIR was given a 45-day review and comment period. The DEIR is a 548-page document that addresses a number of complex environmental issues that require careful consideration.
"Decisions made under the MLPA process, including the DEIR, will have significant and long-lasting consequences for angling and boating in the region," according to a statement from Keep America Fishing (http://www.keepamericafishing.org). "The public deserves enough time to carefully review and provide input on the DEIR to ensure it is as comprehensive, informative and accurate as possible and is not driven by a need to meet arbitrary deadlines."
In contrast, an action alert from the Santa Barbara Channelkeeper (http://www.independent.com/news/2010/sep/20/channelkeeper-asks-help-protecting-socal-coast) claimed, "Delaying plans for Southern California could threaten the historic Marine Life Protection Act-one of our state's most important ocean protection laws that calls for the creation of a statewide network of marine protected areas."
"Half of this network already exists along the California coast from Point Conception to Point Arena, where MPAs are already working to restore ocean health in breathtaking biodiversity hot spots like the Channel Islands, Point Sur, and Point Reyes," the Channelkeeper stated. "But it's up to the Fish and Game Commission to complete the statewide network of protected areas, starting with Southern California."
Unfortunately, the Channelkeeper and other MLPA advocates fail to acknowledge that the so-called "marine protected area" network is a grotesque parody of real marine protection being used by Schwarzenegger to greenwash his abysmal environmental legacy. This is the same governor that has presided over the collapse of Central Valley salmon, Delta smelt, green sturgeon, Sacramento splittail, young striped bass and other fish populations while campaigning for a peripheral canal, new dams and increased water exports out of the California Delta.
The Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA), a comprehensive, landmark law signed by Governor Gray Davis in 1999, is very broad in its scope. The law was intended to not only restrict or prohibit fishing in a network of "marine protected areas," but to restrict or prohibit other human activities including coastal development and water pollution.
"Coastal development, water pollution, and other human activities threaten the health of marine habitat and the biological diversity found in California's ocean waters," the law states in Fish and Game Code Section 2851, section c.
In contrast with the intent of the original law, the MLPA Initiative under Schwarzenegger has taken oil drilling, water pollution, wave energy development, habitat destruction, military testing and other human uses of the ocean other than fishing and gathering off the table in its bizarre concept of "marine protection." The MLPA would do nothing to stop another Exxon Valdez or Deepwater Horizon oil disaster from devastating the California coast.
The Channelkeeper and other MLPA advocates also fail to acknowledge the corruption and conficts of interest that have proliferated under the process. The Governor has installed an oil industry lobbyist, a marina developer, a real estate executive and other corporate interests with numerous conflicts of interests as "marine guardians" on the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Forces to remove Indian Tribes, fishermen and seaweed harvesters from the water in these fake marine protected areas.
In fact, Catherine Reheis-Boyd, the president of the Western States Petroleum Association, served as the chair of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (BRTF) for the South Coast, as well as a member of the task forces for the North Coast and North Central Coast. This oil industry superstar has in recent months repeatedly called for new oil drilling off the California coast. How can there be any justice under this initiative when Schwarzenegger's head MLPA official for the South Coast is the head oil lobbyist for the Western United States?
On July 21, over 300 people, including members of 50 Indian Nations, recreational anglers, commercial fishermen, immigrant seafood industry workers, environmentalists and seaweed harvesters, peacefully took over a meeting of the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force in Fort Bragg to protest the violation of tribal gathering rights and the corporate greenwashing that have proliferated under the initiative.
"This is the largest demonstration on the North Coast since the Redwood Summer of 1990," Dan Hamburg, former North Coast Congressman and current candidate for the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors, told me as we marched through the streets of Fort Bragg on the way to the meeting.
"Whether it is their intention or not, what the Marine Life Protection Act does to tribes is systematically decimate our ability to be who we are," said Frankie Joe Myers, Yurok Tribal ceremonial leader and organizer for the Coastal Justice Coalition. "That is the definition of cultural genocide."
The privatization of ocean conservation management under the shadowy and unaccountable Resources Legacy Fund Foundation is at the core of everything that is wrong with the MLPA process. The time has come for a suspension of the privately-funded initiative, and for state and federal investigations of the conflicts of interests and violations of state, federal and international laws that have bloomed under the MLPA process.
I urge everybody to send a letter to the Fish and Game Commission (FGC) urging them to extend the comment period on the DEIR to 90 days by going to http://www.keepamericafishing.... The FGC needs to hear from you before the upcoming meeting!
You should also attend the commission meeting on September 29. The FGC will be receiving public comment during this meeting. This is your chance to convey to the FGC - in person - the importance of allowing an extension.
The meeting will be held from Noon - 5 p.m. PDT at the Lion's Gate Hotel & Conference Center, 3410 Westover Street, McClellan, California. For more details regarding the September 29 FGC meeting, visit http://www.fgc.ca.gov/meetings...
For more information on the MLPA Initiative, read my piece, "The questions that Arnold's MLPA proponents don't want to answer," http://www.indybay.org/newsite...
The Governor is off to China, and he's left his trusty puppet lieutenant in charge of the place. And look, he even gets to play like he's important, getting to sign bills and everything!
Maldonado, who is battling San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom in the November election for lieutenant governor, is making arrangements to hold a bill signing ceremony in front of Bell City Hall on Monday, according to an e-mail to that city from one of his staffers. A spokeswoman confirmed Maldonado may sign AB 900, which would refund property taxes overcharged by the city of Bell.
"Should the bill be sent to the governor's office, the people of Bell deserve to have their money returned to them," said Erin Shaw, a spokeswoman for Maldonado. "The lieutenant governor will be in Los Angeles on Monday and it makes sense for our staff to put our logistics in place should he be needed to expedite the state's business."
Having been appointed lieutenant governor by Schwarzenegger, who is seen as his mentor, it appears Maldonado is getting some assistance from the governor to grab the media spotlight, according to the e-mail, which talks of the governor's office supplying some of the equipment for the ceremony. (LA Times)
I guess St. Abel is now completely buried the hatchet with the Governor over their little dispute about whether he really loved him or not. In theory, it isn't really all that common for Lt. Governors to actually sign legislation, mostly because they are frequently of differing parties in California. But, in this case, St. Abel has so much experience being Arnold's sock puppet, there really isn't anything new going on here. When you see Abel, you might as well see Arnold Schwarzenegger.
And the people of California just loooooove Arnold Schwarzenegger these days, right?
Hey look at that, a better than expected August bought us some time to avoid IOUs:
The Democratic controller said the state took in 3.9 percent more revenues in August than the Department of Finance projected it would. Chiang said the August cash totals were sufficient to ward off an IOU threat for now. He previously said IOUs might be necessary by mid-September at the latest.(SacBee)
Not sure what that will do to get the budget in place any sooner, but as for right now, with Arnold in Asia, a deal still seems a long way off. It just might be that we don't have anything until the election is decided. In case this election needed to become more important, well, there you have it.
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on August 10 signed Assembly Bill 1265 (Caballero and Jeffries), a measure that would delay the controversial $11.14 billion water bond until November 2012.
Schwarzenegger signed the bill to delay Proposition 18 the day after it passed through the Assembly on a 54-22 vote - the bare minimum required for a two-thirds vote. The Senate approved the measure on a 27-7 vote earlier that day.
In contrast with usual plethora of press releases, photos and video clips that the Governor's Office sends to media outlets whenever he signs a bill, the bill signing was only indicated by a terse announcement from his office that AB 1265 and a companion measure, AB 1260 (Fuller) had been signed. AB 1260 specifies that the newly-appointed members of the California Water Commission, the panel charged with allocating funding for surface storage projects if the bond is approved by voters, are to serve a four-year term expiring in May 2014.
The lack of support by Californians for Schwarzenegger's water bond spurred the Legislature to delay this measure, so there wasn't really any way that the Governor and his publicists could spin this as a "victory." Bond opponents, who campaigned for the outright repeal of the bond, still consider the delay a huge victory for environmental justice, imperiled Central Valley salmon and Delta fish populations and all Californians.
"In the end, the push to postpone the bond to 2012 passed by the smallest of margins," said Elanor Starmer of Food and Water Watch, who described the vote as a situation of "when a loss is still a victory."
"It's not what bond opponents wanted," Starmer stated. "Ideally, the legislature would have seen the light and scrapped it altogether, or let the voters pull the plug this November so we could get to work on better approaches."
However, she noted that despite the passage of a bill that keeps the bond alive for another two years, "bond opponents should claim victory."
"The pro-bond lobby, which includes deep-pocketed construction, developer and agribusiness interests, wanted to see the bond passed this year," she stated. "Passing it was a priority for the Schwarzenegger administration; the governor's PAC, Schwarzenegger's California Dream Team, funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars into the pro-bond campaign."
Dave Cogdill, a cosponsor of the bill, and other bond proponents lauded the passage of AB 1265.
"At the end of last year, the Legislature made history by approving the first major investment in our water infrastructure in almost half a century," claimed Cogdill, who authored the legislation initially authorizing the bond for voter approval. "Mindful of the current economic slowdown, I support the move to give voters more time to understand this critical investment and give the state's economy more time to rebound."
"We know the decision to move the bond to the November 2012 ballot was a difficult one, but we applaud legislative leaders for working together to guide this through the process and set a new date to place this important measure before the voters," echoed Paul Kelley, president of the Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA).
Bond opponents blasted the bond for funding the infrastructure needed to build the peripheral canal and new dams. Due to overwhelming opposition to the bond by fishing groups, environmentalists, Indian Tribes, labor unions, family farmers and Delta residents, the Governor will leave office without setting in place the infrastructure for the canal that he has so relentlessly campaigned for over the past three years.
A bi-partisan coalition of legislators worked hard to prevent AB 1265 from passing, knowing that the water bond "would not get better with time," according to the No on 18 Campaign. Assemblymember Jared Huffman, who led the charge in the Assembly to pass last year's water package, was a vocal opponent of now delaying the bond.
Legislators of both parties, including the entire Delta delegation of Democrats Mariko Yamada and Joan Buchanan and Republican Bill Berryhill, joined Huffman in the Assembly. Twenty-two assembly members stood firm with the many environmental, fishing, tribal, labor and consumer groups opposing AB 1265.
In the Senate, Senator Lois Wolk of Davis, another Delta legislator, rallied the Democrats who had opposed the bond last year. Senators Corbett, DeSaulnier, Hancock, Para, Leno and Yee joined with Republican George Runner in opposing AB 1265.
The No on Proposition 18 legislative co-chairs, Senator Lois Wolk (D) and Assemblymember Bill Berryhill (R), portrayed the delay as a victory and vowed to defeat the bond two years from now.
"While we may have (narrowly) lost the fight to keep the bond on this ballot, we must remember that they're moving it in the first place because of the hard work and dedication of everyone on this team," said Assemblymember Bill Berryhill (R - Ceres). "This is a victory for us. As long as we use the next two years to continue to work together and educate people on this bond, I know we can defeat it just as soundly two years from now."
"I welcome the action taken to remove the bond from the 2010 ballot, although simply postponing it to 2012 has done nothing to address my concerns or the concerns of the voters," said Senator Lois Wolk (D - Davis). "It is still bloated with unnecessary pork and still fails to address the most important water issue in the state, the unsustainable over-reliance on the Delta for our water supply."
"I intend to get to work with other legislators and water policy advocates on a smart water financing plan that focuses on reducing our reliance on the Delta. A plan that is in touch with our times and recognizes our fiscal realities, not a lobbyist driven wish-list that saddles our children and grandchildren with more and more debt," said Wolk.
Representatives of environmental, fishing and tribal groups agreed with Wolk and Berryhill.
"We heard a laundry list of reasons why the bond is bad for California during the legislative debate on AB 1265," said Barbara Barrigan-Parilla, campaign director of Restore the Delta. "Yet the legislature voted to keep the measure afloat for another two years. The problems with the bond will only grow more glaring with time."
Voter disapproval of the bond has been strong since its razor-thin passage in November 2009 in during a special session called by Schwarzenegger. Faced with certain defeat by the voters in November, Schwarzenegger and Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg decided to postpone the bond for two years.
"The existing bond should have been withdrawn permanently, not delayed," said Zeke Grader, executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations. "In 2012, we need to go back to the drawing board and come up with a bond measure that will foster water conservation, water reuse and ground water management and provide permanent protection for the Delta and fish."
Mark Franco, headman of the Winnemem Wintu (McCloud River) Tribe, was disappointed by the Legislature's refusal to repeal the bond at a time that California is in its greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression.
"We're looking at a massive deficit in the state, with services being cut left and right, and the legislators are still pushing this massive log up a road that leads nowhere," said Franco. "They're blocking all traffic to all of the good things that they could be doing, such as promoting water use efficiency programs and making sure that we have sufficient water in the rivers for the salmon and other fish that we are trying to bring back."
The work by the broad coalition that organized against the bond and peripheral canal kept the Water Bond from being passed this year but it isn't over yet. The Governor and his collaborators will continue to push his schemes to build the canal and new dams through his Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) process and the Delta Stewardship Council.
The peripheral canal, backed by Governor Schwarzenegger, corporate agribusiness, and southern California water agencies, is likely to lead to the extinction of Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River chinook salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, green sturgeon and southern resident killer whale populations. The canal/tunnel would cost an estimated $23 billion to $53.8 billion, according to economist Steven Kasower.
Opponents of the water bond include a broad array of environmental, fishing, tribal, consumer, family farming, labor and family farming groups.
Organizations opposing the bond include the California Teachers Association, California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, California Sea Urchin Commission, Clean Water Action, Environmental Justice Coalition for Water, Friends of the River, Food and Water Watch, Inter-Tribal Water Commission of California, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, Planning and Conservation League, Restore the Delta, Sierra Club California, United Farmworkers Union, Winnemem Wintu Tribe and many others.
In their Opinion LA blog, the LA Times calls Governor Schwarzenegger "the gay friendly governator." Sure, he has recently been getting a lot of respect for declining, repeatedly, to get involved on behalf of Proposition 8. But how much is that worth?
Here's the Times take on the issue:
Who could have called it in 2003: Arnold Schwarzenegger, the body-building terminator who originally showcased his brutish masculinity as a campaign centerpiece and once called Democrats "girlie men," could go down in history as California's most gay-friendly governor to date. Sure, Schwarzenegger's done more for gay men and women when he's done nothing: Though he vetoed then-Assemblyman Mark Leno's bill to legalize same-sex marriage in 2005 (legislation that was almost certainly illegal under Proposition 22), he and Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown have refused to defend Proposition 8 in federal court.
This is in the context of a bill, AB 2199, that would delete from the state law books an official policy of curing homosexuality that recently passed out of the Legislature and is now heading for the Governor's desk. He'll likely sign the bill, as, truthfully, it isn't all that controversial. It sailed through both houses, with but one dissenting vote. The one vote would be the anachronistic and bigoted Assemblyman from San Diego, Joel Anderson.
It is great that Arnold has been on our side in the last few years. But, he has never been willing to put any of his own political capital on the line. Instead, he's content to wait it out. He vetoed the Harvey Milk Day bill before signing it. And with Mark Leno's marriage bills, he ran for the hills. His rationale was that somebody, the judges, the people, anybody but him, should say something first. Regardless of whether he thought Prop 22 was unconstitutional back in 2005 or not, he was not willing to take the lead by just signing the bill. If marriage inequality was odious to the constitution 6 months ago, it was odious in 2005 as well. Would it have stirred up some controversy? Most definitely. But real leaders have a tendency to do that.
Or perhaps he could have expended a bit of energy in 2008 campaigning against Prop 8? He did make a token endorsement of Prop 8, but beyond that was out of the picture.
But, LGBT issues go beyond the single issue of marriage, and on transgender rights he hasn't been quite so good, even of late:
On 12 October 2009, California Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, fell short of ensuring full protection of LGBTQ people in the California's prison system. Choosing to veto the LGBT Prisoner Safety Act (AB 382, Ammiano) and the Equal ID Act (AB 1185, Lieu), he has failed to cement two crucial policies into law. Needless to say, the LGBTQ community has been failed, and must now overturn the Governor's cruel and unusual decision.
First and foremost, the Governor's reasons for vetoing the LGBT Prisoner Safety Act (AB 382, Ammiano), was due to the fact that California's prison system already takes gender identity and sexual orientation into account when housing prisoners. Whilst that is very likely the case, GLBTQ inmates shall remain vulnerable until this becomes actual law. Until then, human rights violations may continue.
As for the vetoing of the Equal ID Act (AB 1185, Lieu), the Governor's reasons were similar. Thanks to a past landmark victory, Somers v. Superior Court, it had already been ruled unconstitutional to deny transgender inmates the right to petition a gender change. Despite this fact, the Transgender Law Center asserts that the "Equal ID Act would have alleviated any confusion in the statutory language itself." (Examiner blogs)
These veto messages are hardly the stuff of civil rights heroes. You hope, you think gender identity is considered in jails and prisons? Well, that might be nice in theory, but in reality the situation isn't quite so smooth. Transgender prisoners face very difficult conditions in the prisons, and very little extra caution is given to them.
In the end, I find it difficult to call this Governor gay friendly. Real friends are there for you, good times or bad. This one swoops in when the tide is clearly turning. At best, I would call him a frenemy.
Faced with massive opposition by Indian Tribes, fishermen and environmentalists, officials from Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's fast-track Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative will hold a "public information session" about the effort to create so-called Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) along California's northern coastline.
The meeting will be held on Sunday, Aug. 29, from 3 to 4 p.m., at the Shelter Cove Fire Station Meeting Hall, 9126 Shelter Cove Road.
"Adopted into California state law in 1999, the MLPA requires all existing state marine protected areas to be reevaluated, and a statewide system to be created to protect marine life, habitat and ecosystems," according to a news release from the DFG. "The MLPA Initiative is currently in the planning stages for the north coast study region, which includes state waters from the California-Oregon border to Alder Creek near Point Arena."
"Staffed by members of the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative, the meeting will provide interested members of the public with information about the scope and process of the effort," the release stated. "Questions and public input are welcome."
I have challenged MLPA proponents to answer the following questions that cut to the core of the current MLPA process -and I encourage attendees to challenge MLPA officials with these questions.
None have responded yet to my specific questions, but only continue to repeat their unsubstantiated claims that the Initiative is "open, transparent and inclusive" and that anybody who criticizes the initiative is an opponent of "ocean protection." Here are the questions:
Why did the Governor and MLPA officials install an oil industry lobbyist, a marina developer, a real estate executive and other corporate interests as "marine guardians" to remove Indian Tribes, fishermen and seaweed harvesters from the water by creating so-called "marine protected areas" (MPAS)? Isn't this very bad public policy?
Why is Catherine Reheis-Boyd, the president of the Western States Petroleum Association, allowed to make decisions as the chair of the BRTF for the South Coast and as a member of the BRTF for the North Coast, panels that are supposedly designed to "protect" the ocean, when she has called for new oil drilling off the California coast? Do we want to see oil rigs off Point Arena, Fort Bragg and other areas of some of the most beautiful coastline of North America?
Why is a private corporation, the shadowy Resources Legacy Fund Foundation, being allowed to privatize ocean resource management in California through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the DFG?
Why do the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force (BRTF) and Science Advisory Team continue to violate the California Public Records Act by refusing to respond to numerous requests by Bob Fletcher, former DFG Deputy Director, for key documents and records pertaining to the MLPA implementation process?
Why do MLPA staff and the California Fish and Game Commission refuse to hear the pleas of the representatives of the California Fish and Game Wardens Association, who oppose the creation of any new MPAs until they have enough funding for wardens to patrol existing reserves?
Why did MLPA staff until recently violate the Bagley-Keene Act and the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution by banning video and audio coverage of the initiative's work sessions?
Why has the Initiative shown no respect for tribal subsistence and ceremonial rights? This is an overt violation of the American Indian Religious Freedom Act and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People.
Article 32, Section 2, of the Declaration mandates "free prior and informed consent" in consultation with the indigenous population affected by a state action (http://www.iwgia.org/sw248.asp). The MLPA also violates Article 26, Section 3, that declares, "States shall give legal recognition and protection to these lands, territories and resources. Such recognition shall be conducted with due respect to the customs, traditions and land tenure systems of the indigenous peoples concerned."
Why are there no Tribal scientists on the MLPA Science Advisory Team and why were there no Tribal representatives on the Blue Ribbon Task Forces for the Central Coast, North Central Coast or South Coast MLPA Study Regions?
Why does the initiative discard the results of any scientists who disagree with the MLPA's pre-ordained conclusions? These include the peer reviewed study by Dr. Ray Hilbert, Dr. Boris Worm and 18 other scientists, featured in Science magazine in July 2009, that concluded that the California current had the lowest rate of fishery exploitation of any place studied on the planet.
Why does the MLPA Initiative refuse to acknowledge California Indian Tribes as sovereign nations?
Finally, why did 300 Tribal members, fishermen, immigrant workers and environmentalists on July 21 feel so left out of the MLPA process that they had to organize a march and direct action to take over a MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force meeting so their voices would be finally heard?
I urge you to sign a petition to support Assemblymen Wesley Chesbro's call for a six-month delay in the North Coast MLPA process at: http://www.thepetitionsite.com...
Second, please sign this petition to the State of California to acknowledge and include Tribal traditional uses within state regulations for marine protected areas of the MLPA nitiative. Go to the Inter-Tribal Water Commission of California website: http://www.itwatercommission.org. There is a link at the bottom of the posting that goes to: http://www.thepetitionsite.com...
For more information about the MLPA, visit www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa.
The California Supreme Court handed down a stay of the Alameda County court's order blocking the furloughs. Here's the text of the order:
The petition for review is GRANTED. Because the issue whether the Governor has the authority to direct the unpaid furlough of state employees is pending before this court and is scheduled for oral argument on Wednesday, September 8, 2010, in the related case of Professional Engineers in California Government et al. v. Arnold Schwarzenegger et. al., S183411, and without expressing any view on the merits of that issue, we conclude that it is appropriate to grant review in this matter and defer further action pending our resolution of the currently pending proceeding. Pending further order of this court, further proceedings in the Alameda County Superior Court in case number RG10494800 (and in consolidated cases numbered RG10507922, RG10507081, RGI0503805, RGI0501997, RGI0516259, RGI0514694, and RG10528855), as well as the temporary restraining order of the Alameda County Superior Court issued on August 9, 2010, are stayed. Votes: George, C.J., Kennard, Baxter, Chin, Moreno, and Corrigan, JJ.
What this means for the time being is that the upcoming furloughs, as defined by the Governor will go ahead until further notice. The Supreme Court will directly review the decision (bypassing the court of appeal) and render a decision, which you would assume would come in a fairly speedy manner.
Stay tuned for more on this, but this is a big win for Arnold's furloughs and will probably control through much of the budget fightin' season.
