Still, the intensity of that response caught the Democratic lawmaker from San Francisco by surprise.

“It did touch a nerve,” Weiner said in an interview. “The day that I announced the original version of the bill, one of my very best friends in the world texted me to tell me what a terrible idea it was. And then 10 minutes later, his boyfriend texted me to say, ‘thank you for getting my boyfriend to slow down.’”

Your car probably tells you when you’re running out of gas. It might alert you when you drift out of your lane. Now California lawmakers want to go a step further, requiring technology in your car to warn you when you’re speeding.

Safety advocates say speed assistance technology can reduce traffic deaths, but critics say California is moving too fast.

“What they’re trying to do is to impose their will on the rest of the country,” said Jay Beeber with the National Motorists Association, a driver advocacy group.

To understand why Wiener’s bill has been so divisive, it helps to know how speed assistance technology works. There’s an “active” version, which can physically stop drivers from exceeding the speed limit. But there’s also a “passive” version of speed assistance that only warns the driver when they’re going too fast.

After the initial pushback, Wiener changed his bill from active to passive speed assistance. And while some safety advocates might be disappointed, Wiener defends the decision.

“We listened and we heard,” Wiener said. “Once we looked at the studies, we saw that the passive speed limiter is also highly effective. And so I was comfortable making that change.”

There were political calculations involved, as well.

“The bill would not have passed with the active speed limiter,” Wiener conceded. “And it did pass with the passive speed limiter.”

The bill approved by the California legislature over the weekend would require all new cars sold in the state to warn drivers if they’re going more than 10 miles per hour over the speed limit. California would be the first state in the country to mandate speed assistance technology, starting with the 2030 model year.

The bill has some big backers, including the National Transportation Safety Board.

“Broad deployment of intelligent speed assistance would reduce the frequency of speeding and speeding-related crashes… saving lives and preventing injuries,” the NTSB wrote in support of the California bill, “and we applaud you for pursuing this policy.”

The NTSB can make recommendations, but it cannot force automakers to add speed assistance.

Critics of California’s bill say it’s too much, too soon.

“The technology is not perfect,” Beeber said in an interview. “You’re gonna have a lot of false positives.”

It’s easy for speed assistance technology to get confused, Beeber says, especially between highways and nearby surface streets with vastly different speed limits. He thinks that will annoy and potentially distract drivers.

“Unfortunately our cars right now are kind of in the business of distracting us,” Beeber said. “I think this increases distracted driving.”

The auto industry doesn’t like the speed assistance bill, either.

Speed assistance systems “rely on clear and visible speed limit signs placed at regular intervals to function properly,” wrote the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, an industry trade group, in comments opposing the bill.

“That sort of infrastructure is in place in Europe,” where passive speed assistance is already mandatory. “But it is severely lacking in the U.S. As a result, many/most intelligent speed assist systems are glitchy and unreliable in the U.S.,” the group wrote.

“It’s another example of California’s overreach,” said Karen Bailey-Chapman, with the Specialty Equipment Market Association, an industry trade group, in an interview.

California is a huge market for carmakers, and Bailey-Chapman says the state is trying to bully its way into setting policy for the whole country.

“We believe that the authority for regulations stands firmly within the federal government,” she said.

But the bill’s sponsor, Scott Wiener, says California can’t wait for federal regulators.

“I would love for the federal government to require this technology nationally,” he said. “But there is no indication – no real indication – that the federal government’s going to do that.”

Wiener compares the situation to the early 1960s, when Wisconsin moved to require seat belts more than six years before the federal government did.

“How many lives have been saved because Wisconsin stepped out ahead of the federal government in 1962 and required seatbelts, which started a domino effect nationally?,” he asked.

California’s speed assistance bill now heads to the desk of Governor Gavin Newsom, who has until the end of the month to decide whether he’ll sign it into law.

The post Should your car warn you that you’re speeding? California lawmakers vote yes appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Citing California’s budget deficit, the Democratic governor wants to save around $613 million in state funds by delaying pay increases for a year for about 150,000 disability care workers. The state will forgo an additional $408 million in Medicaid reimbursements, reducing funding by over $1 billion.

Some lawmakers say this decision will increase staff turnover and vacancies, leaving thousands of children and adults with disabilities without critical services at home and in residential facilities. Disability advocates warn it could violate the Lanterman Act, California’s landmark law that says the state must provide services and resources to people with disabilities and their families.

Newsom is “breaking a promise,” says Felisa Strickland, 60, who has been searching for more than a year for a day program for her 23-year-old daughter, Lily, who has autism and cerebral palsy. “It’s creating a lot of physical and mental health problems for people, and it’s a lot of undue stress on aging parent caregivers like myself.”

Disability care workers, known as direct support professionals, provide daily, hands-on caregiving to help children and adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities, such as autism, cerebral palsy, and epilepsy, remain independent and integrated into their communities.

In California, more than 400,000 people with disabilities need accommodation, and this population, along with seniors, is increasing. It’s unclear how big the worker shortage is because the state hasn’t released workforce data. As the demand for these workers grows generally, experts predict a shortage of between 600,000 and 3.2 million direct care workers by 2030.

Advocates say California pays most providers from $16 to $20 an hour, which meets the state’s minimum wage but falls short of what some economists consider a living wage. In 2021, the state committed to raising wages after identifying a $1.8 billion gap between the rates received by nonprofits that contract with the state to provide care and the rates deemed adequate.

Thus far, the state has provided around half that total, most of which has gone to raising wages and benefits. Workers had been expecting one more increase of $2–$4 an hour in July until Newsom proposed a delay.

Also, nonprofits say California has made it harder to compete for workers after raising wages in other service and health industries. Newsom approved a $20 minimum wage for fast-food workers that went into effect in April, and he struck a deal last year with unions and hospitals to begin raising health care workers’ wages to a minimum of $25 an hour.

Ricardo Zegri says Taco Bell would pay him more than the $19 an hour he makes as a disability care worker in a supervisory position.

“Every paycheck, it’s a discussion at home about what bills we need to prioritize and whether it’s time to start looking for work that pays more,” says Zegri, who works a second job as a musician in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Newsom wants to preserve key health initiatives, including the state expansion of Medi-Cal to low-income immigrants regardless of legal status, and CalAIM, an ambitious $12 billion experiment to transform Medi-Cal into both a health insurer and a social services provider. However, the rate delay for providing disability care is the largest savings in the Health and Human Services budget as Newsom and legislative leaders look to cuts, delays, and shifts in funding to close a deficit estimated between $38 billion and $73 billion.

Dozens of legislators from both parties are asking Newsom and legislative leaders to preserve the increase. Assemblymember Stephanie Nguyen, a Democrat from Elk Grove, signed a letter supporting the raise. Although lawmakers are negotiating with the administration, she says reversing the decision to delay the pay boost is unlikely. Everybody “has to take a hit somewhere,” Nguyen says.

Krystyne McComb, a spokesperson for the Department of Developmental Services, says that even though the state would lose federal matching funds this year, it would resume drawing funds when it reinstates the plan in 2025.

The department did not respond to questions about how it plans to retain workers and fill vacancies.

Newsom’s proposal risks a collapse of the disability service system, which would violate the Lanterman Act and make the state vulnerable to lawsuits, says Jordan Lindsey, executive director of the Arc of California, a statewide disability rights advocacy organization.

Families say the state has already fallen short of the services they need. Strickland quit her job to care for Lily, the Santa Barbara mother, says. “It’s not reasonable to expect someone to care for somebody else 24 hours a day, seven days a week,” she says.

Lily graduated from high school and, in 2022, completed a program that prepares youth with disabilities to transition into adult life. She had been looking forward to joining a day program to make new friends but has yet to find a spot. And due to a shortage of workers, Lily receives only four hours a week at home with a provider, who is paid around $16 an hour.

When Lily hangs out with the provider, her demeanor changes to the happy person she used to be, Strickland says.

“The system is already in crisis,” she says. “There are tons and tons of people that are sitting at home because there’s nowhere for them to go.”

The post California Disability Workers’ Raises at Risk as Gov. Newsom Faces Deficit appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The Southern California official has been approached in recent months by elected officials and leaders looking to throw Bianco’s name into the mix, POLITICO first reported, signaling some organized efforts by the state’s minority Republicans to put forward their own candidate.

“California has a lot of problems and they’re looking outside the Sacramento political class to bring the state back,” Bianco’s adviser, Nick Mirman told POLITICO, but clarified the sheriff has not made any decisions nor has there been a public commitment to run.

Bianco a controversial sheriff in Southern California

Bianco has attracted attention far beyond his Southern California district since winning election in 2018, from frequent interviews with Fox News to a succession of controversial policies and remarks on COVID-19, immigration and crime. His office has also been hit by several lawsuits and investigations.

The number of incarcerated people who have died in Riverside County’s jails skyrocketed in recent years, with 2022’s 19 deaths the highest since records were first made public decades ago. In response, the county’s Board of Supervisors in recent weeks has explored separating the Coroner’s office, which certifies causes of death including those who have died in police custody, from the sheriff’s department.

The California attorney general launched a 2023 investigation into whether Riverside County Sheriff’s Department practices violated civil rights, citing a sharp and “disturbing” rise in deaths in the county’s jails, as well as allegations of excessive force. A 2022 Desert Sun investigation found Bianco’s department broke the law when it failed to report some inmates’ deaths to the state Department of Justice within 10 days.

The Desert Sun reported on how the sheriff’s department failed to report some of these deaths to the California Department of Justice and on families that have described not receiving details about the deaths of their relatives for up to a year and a half. California Attorney General Rob Bonta opened a civil rights investigation last year after several families who have filed civil lawsuits asked for an outside agency to investigate the surge in deaths.

Who else is considering a run for California governor in 2026?

So far, those to either declare their candidacy or are reportedly mulling the 2026 race to succeed Gov. Gavin Newsom are prominent Democrats. The list includes Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis, former Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond and former state Controller Betty Yee. Bonta is expected to enter the race, and POLITICO reported Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra is considering leaving the Biden administration to run for the governorship.

The post Will Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, fierce Newsom critic, run for governor in 2026? appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Ron Wright | American Thinker

The District Attorneys of Tulare County and Riverside County, Tim Ward and Mike Hestrin, respectively, and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and Riverside City PD Chief Larry Gonzalez, held a joint press conference on April 12, 2023. These DAs are not radical Left Soros-supported prosecutors. Instead, they are at wit’s end regarding the unintended consequences of Assembly Bill 109, the California Public Safety Realignment Act, for serial low-level felony offenders.

In my experience, 8% to 10% of offenders commit most crimes, including violent ones. The others re-offend at a much lower rate. From a resource allocation perspective, it would be more practical for the criminal justice system to focus on the 8% to 10% population and divert the others. I would include in the serial offender definition, retail theft gangs who plague many commercial businesses across jurisdictional boundaries. These serial theft gangs seldom are caught and prosecuted because of the decriminalization of shoplifting. Every day, serial offenders are in custody. They aren’t committing new crimes.

AB109 released low-level felons from state prison back to their home counties for incarceration and supervision (AB109 local state prison). Riverside County DA Hestrin expressed his frustration “Frankly, all of us up here on stage have had enough…. We cannot protect our public; we are getting no help from Sacramento, the laws don’t back us up.”

Chief Gonzalez said, “There was a time when theft, specifically repeated theft, was met with a consequence …. These days, they have been legislated away and our community is suffering….” Sheriff Bianco added. “They [legislators] don’t care what we think, they care what voters think…. Until we can get the voters fed up and the voters start calling them, it is not going to change.”

Tulare Co DA Ward said they were, “calling on state legislatures to amend AB 109, which has tied their hands when it comes to prosecuting habitual criminal like Timothy Bethell, a ‘poster’ child for catch-release-and repeat criminal.”

Ward said, “Everyone in the state of California is living under the tyranny of crime or the fear of crime because of things coming out of Sacramento like ab 109.”

Timothy Bethell is a serial offender convicted of 14 felony counts of burglary in Tulare Co. in 2021. Bethell received a four-year sentence in state prison, suspended to grant him two years of local probation. However, Bethell violated his probation by committing another burglary. Instead of violating him and sending him to state prison to serve his four-year term, the court sentenced him to one year with one year of mandatory supervision. Bethell was released in May of 2022 and returned to his home county of Riverside at his request.

In the summer of 2022, in Riverside County, Bethell racked up another five business burglaries. Bethell was sentenced to three years in local state prison but was released three days later because of jail overcrowding. Bethell failed to report to probation. He returned to Tulare Co. and was arrested again. Bethell was sentenced to five years and four months in local state prison “after pleading guilty to 20 counts: 17 felonies of theft, burglary, attempted burglary, and vandalism [and three misdemeanors].”

Riverside DA Hestrin shares the concerns of his law enforcement colleagues:

AB109 and Prop 47 have had a disastrous impact on our communities. These laws have significantly diminished the ability of local prosecutors to hold repeat offenders accountable for their criminal behavior. Unfortunately, the Bethell case is not an exception or an outlier but all too common. The justice system has become a revolving door for thieves . . . They can count on being releas[ed] early from their . . . sentences if there is any punishment at all. This is untenable situation has left us unable to deter this rampant criminality and lawlessness.

Riverside County, CA’s chief law enforcement officers are not pleased with the unintended consequences of AB109’s results and subsequent actions of the progressive-dominated California State Legislature (here) and Governor Gavin Newsom. However, social justice reform advocates quickly point out that in prison populations, minorities are disproportionally represented and assume this is from racial discrimination and deserve early release (a debate for a later time).

Because of prison overcrowding and court rulings, AB109 sought to reduce the state prison population by sending nonviolent felony offenders back to their home counties for incarceration and supervision (in local state prison). Local county jails are squeezed between AB109 mandates and federal court orders on the local jail population. Hence, inmates receive early release. Local jails are not intended for long-term inmates but hold pretrial offenders and those serving less than one-year sentences. Increased caseloads slam local county probation offices. AB109 failed to address serial offenders like Bethell, who are released early or not detained at all. Once released, they wreak havoc in the communities. There must be provisions to up the ante so serial offenders like Bethell are deterred or incarcerated. These serial offenders will quickly commit multiple crimes before being caught again and successfully prosecuted.

Governor Gavin Newsom is traveling the country touting his successes (the California way). Newsom’s “successes” and sweeping “reforms,” others say, “are not what Californians identify as the most pressing problems . . .” Newsom’s soft-on-crime policies and George Soros-funded district attorneys aren’t doing well. Tucker Carlson has this to say about Newsom and his policies. Tucker quoted Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco who is not pleased either:

In the last 10 years, criminals have become increasingly more violent and brazen. What we are seeing in response to these very lax laws on crime, the push to decriminalize everything, the push to lessen the penalty for something or even take away the penalty for crime is basically emboldening criminals to do more. It’s really horrifying for law enforcement and it is horrifying for the public that has to deal with it.

Under the cloak of social justice reform, the radical Left decriminalized many crimes by selective prosecution and no cash bail releases before trial without considering victims and public safety in many states nationwide. There is a hidden political agenda of the radical Left with decriminalizing and no cash bail – to sow havoc and chaos to destabilize our local communities:

NGOs funded by George Soros and others dropped millions of dollars into local district attorney races to elect far-left prosecutors (as many as 70). Under the veil of social justice reform, these prosecutors implemented policies including no cash bail, which released violent serial offenders without regard for public safety. The released, ruthless, violent criminals commit new murders, rape, robberies, and mayhem before trial. Again, to wreak havoc and chaos within our communities, who then, in fear for their safety, will willingly relinquish their civil rights in exchange for totalitarian controls.

DISCLAIMER: The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed by the various author’s articles on this Opinion piece or elsewhere online or in the newspaper where we have articles with the header “COLUMN/EDITORIAL & OPINION” do not necessarily reflect the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints or official policies of the Publisher, Editor, Reporters or anybody else in the Staff of the Hemet and San Jacinto Chronicle Newspaper.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Governor Gavin Newsom, these California law enforcement leaders are calling you out appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom wants voters to reject a new tax on rich people that would pay for more electric vehicles in the nation’s most populous state, warning in a new statewide TV ad that a measure on the ballot this November won’t help the environment but is instead “one company’s cynical scheme to grab a huge taxpayer subsidy.”

Proposition 30 would raise taxes on people who make more than $2 million per year. It would generate up to $5 billion in new tax money each year, and most of that money would go to programs that help people buy electric cars and install charging stations. A smaller amount would go to wildfire prevention response and prevention programs. The ballot measure’s campaign is paid for by the ride-hailing company Lyft. Last year, state regulators ordered companies like Lyft to make sure nearly all of their rides are in electric vehicles by 2030.

Newsom says the ballot measure is Lyft’s attempt to make taxpayers pay for that. Newsom does not mention Lyft by name in the ad, but as he is speaking a headline from the San Francisco Chronicle is displayed in the background that says: “Why is Lyft bankrolling this California ballot measure on electric cars?” Representatives for Lyft did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Monday. Responding to the ad, the Yes on 30 campaign noted it is supported by lots of groups, including the American Lung Association and the California Democratic Party.

“It is disappointing that the Governor would side with the Californian Republican Party and a handful of San Francisco billionaires who would rather kids breathe toxic, polluted air than pay their fair share,” the campaign said in an email to The Associated Press. “The opposition has never been able to point to any actual provision in the measure that provides a special benefit to Lyft or any other interest,” said Bill Magavern, policy director for the Coalition for Clean Air, one of the groups that crafted the measure.

“The money would go to state agencies that the governor himself oversees and would fund existing programs that the governor himself funds through his budget.” Newsom has been a big advocate for electric cars, approving more than $10 billion in new spending over the next several years to accelerate their adoption in California. Last month, California regulators approved new rules that will require new cars, pickup trucks and SUVs be electric, hydrogen or a gas-electric hybrid by 2035. California law lets voters bypass the state Legislature to pass their own laws at the ballot box, typically resulting in several measures each year.

It’s not unusual for governors to campaign for or against these measures. But it’s somewhat rare for governors to appear in TV ads speaking directly to voters about an issue not related to their own election campaigns. “No one has more credibility on this issue than the governor,” said Matt Rodriguez, campaign manager for the No on 30 campaign. “I think you’re going to find the voters of California trust Gavin Newsom on what is the best way to go about addressing climate change.”

Newsom is being challenged in his re-election campaign this year by Brian Dahle, a little-known Republican state senator who hasn’t yet raised enough money to wage a strong statewide campaign. Free from the pressure of a well-funded challenger, the Newsom campaign has so far been spending its money on ads in other states that criticize the Republican governors of Florida and Texas.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post California governor opposes tax on rich in statewide TV ad appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

gov.ca.gov | Contributed

Taking new steps to further hold the gun industry accountable, Governor Gavin Newsom signed legislation Monday allowing the state, local governments and Californians to sue gun makers.

“To the victims of gun violence and their families: California stands with you. The gun industry can no longer hide from the devastating harm their products cause,” Governor Newsom said. “Our kids, families and communities deserve streets free of gun violence and gun makers must be held accountable for their role in this crisis. Nearly every industry is held liable when people are hurt or killed by their products – guns should be no different.”

AB 1594 authored by Assemblymembers Phil Ting (D-San Francisco), Mike A. Gipson (D-Carson) and Chris Ward (D-San Diego) allows individuals, local governments and the California Attorney General to sue irresponsible manufacturers and sellers of firearms for the harm caused by their products.

“Gun violence is now the leading cause of death among kids and teens in the United States, surpassing car accidents. I see no better argument for stronger gun safety legislation. I thank the Governor for signing AB 1594,” said Assemblymember Ting. “For far too long, the firearms industry has enjoyed federal immunity from civil lawsuits, providing them no incentive for them to follow our laws. Hitting their bottom line may finally compel them to step up to reduce gun violence by preventing illegal sales and theft.”

“There have been more mass shootings in our nation than days in the year, and yet many members of the gun industry continue to use a combination of bullying, exploitation, and fear to rack up profits from the very tools used in these shootings,” said Attorney General Rob Bonta. “There is no reason that the gun industry should be the only industry exempt from responsibility for the harm that its products cause, especially when its products are responsible for the deaths of thousands of Americans each year. In California, we refuse to settle with thoughts and prayers as innocent lives are lost— we demand and will deliver urgent action, now. I am grateful to the Governor for signing AB 1594 which will allow Californians to hold the gun industry accountable for the harm caused by its products. In California, we won’t let this industry off the hook.”

In 2005, Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which shields gun manufacturers and dealers from civil suits when crimes are committed using the guns they produce. AB 1594 utilizes an exemption to the federal statute that allows gun makers or sellers to be sued for violations of state laws concerning the sale or marketing of firearms.

“As a joint author of AB 1594, I proudly stand with my colleague from San Francisco, Assemblymember Phil Ting, in thanking the Governor for signing this historic bill that challenges the stronghold of the gun lobby and brings justice to gun violence survivors,” said Assemblymember Mike A. Gipson (D-Carson). “Our message is clear: California will not turn a blind eye to the gun industry’s direct responsibility for the killing machines they let flood our streets and murder our loved ones, day in and day out. Other industries and their products, even non-lethal, are held to this standard of accountability. Today, we stand together against the naysayers to create the type of parity that will save lives, setting a standard for others in the nation to follow.”

“This bill is a significant step toward holding irresponsible, reckless and negligent gun manufacturers, distributors and sellers accountable,” said Assemblymember Chris Ward (D-San Diego). “The U.S. has less than 5% of the world’s population, yet we make up nearly a third of the world’s mass shootings. I’m proud to joint author AB 1594 and support other common sense gun reforms that will help make our communities safer.”

California’s gun safety policies save lives and provide a national model for other states to follow. According to the Giffords Law Center, in 2021, California was ranked as the top state in the nation for gun safety. As California strengthened its gun laws, the state saw a 37 percent lower gun death rate than the national average. Meanwhile, other states such as Florida and Texas, with lax gun regulations, saw double-digit increases in the rate of gun deaths. As a result of the actions taken by California, the state has cut its gun death rate in half and Californians are 25 percent less likely to die in a mass shooting compared to people in other states.

Last month, Governor Newsom announced a record $156 million in gun violence prevention grants provided as part of the California Violence Intervention and Prevention Grant Program (CalVIP). The funding will support 79 cities and nonprofit organizations that are implementing anti-violence programs suited to the unique needs of their local communities.

A recent study from the Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of California, Davis found that California’s red flag law was used to stop 58 threatened mass shootings.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post New California Law Holds Gun Makers Liable: “The Gun Industry Can No Longer Hide” appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

To help ameliorate some of the economywide impacts of inflation, the Newsom administration instead should take the broader approach outlined by Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon and Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins : Use the state’s budget surplus to provide Californians with an across-the-board rebate for relief from all rising costs, not just gas.

California has some of the highest gas prices in the country, and working-class citizens across the state are dealing with the effects of record-breaking inflation. As our economy recovers from the pandemic, California still has the second-highest unemployment rate in the nation. It’s not controversial to say that many Californians are struggling, and the government should step in to help.

However, singling out a fossil fuel to frame a tax rebate is unnecessary and in contradiction to California’s — and the governor’s — climate goals.

Oil and gas companies are experiencing record profits because of the surges in gas prices and are, of course, passing those profits on to their executives. California’s government should focus on taking on greedy polluters, not subsidizing them.

Moreover, a gas rebate will not address the crucial issue of our dependence on fossil fuels. If Newsom is serious about helping all Californians, he needs to take major steps to transition California’s transportation system toward zero-emission technologies.

Earlier this year, Newsom detailed a new transportation budget proposal, including grants for free transit and substantial investments in zero-emission vehicle infrastructure. The proposal has some great elements in it, but Newsom should push even more aggressive legislation to ensure California can break its dependence on fossil fuels as soon as possible.

Outside of the Legislature, the governor can double down on electric vehicles. He should pressure the California Air Resources Board to pass the Advanced Clean Cars II rule that ramps up zero-emission vehicle sales as quickly as possible before reaching 100% by 2035.

The governor also should push the air board to adopt a strong Advanced Clean Fleets rule that requires 100% of the sales of heavy-duty trucks to be ZEVs by 2036. Finally, Newsom should encourage the air board to use its existing authority to force the retirement of fossil-fueled trucks as soon as the law allows.

As the governor looks at ways to provide relief to Californians, he must be careful that he does not deepen the state’s reliance on polluting fuels. The historic budget surplus and the air board’s wide docket of proposed transportation-related regulations provide Newsom with a unique opportunity to make real, progressive changes to our infrastructure while advancing the state’s climate goals. Let’s not waste this moment on a few Exxon Mobil gift cards.

Brandon Dawson | Contributed

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Newsom’s gas rebate would stymie state’s climate goals appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Despite pressure from experts urging a strong mandate, the order leaves the exact conservation measures up to the urban water providers and major water wholesalers that supply the vast majority of Californians. It does not affect agricultural water providers, or the small water systems that are especially vulnerable to drought.

Newsom also ordered state water regulators to consider banning irrigation of decorative lawns at businesses and other institutions.

California’s water watchers said that the order wasn’t enough.

“I would have liked to see a more directed statewide mandate that would have taken into consideration regional per capita water-use levels,” said Newsha Ajami, chief strategy officer for research at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. “However, I am glad to see he is initiating efforts to curb outdoor water use and banning non-functional turf.”

Water systems, however, applauded Newsom for leaving water conservation up to local agencies.

“The Governor’s Order today recognizes the diversity of California communities and their water supply conditions,” Jennifer Pierre, general manager of the State Water Contractors association of public water agencies, said in a statement. “Ordering agencies to exercise their specific plans strikes that important balance of statewide needs and local action.”

Under the order, which will require emergency regulations that are expected to take effect mid-June, local water suppliers must act as if their water supplies have dipped by at least 10 to 20 percent.

Each agency has spelled out what actions this degree of reduction — called a stage two water shortage — will trigger in their required Water Shortage Contingency Plans. This could include cutting the number of days when outdoor irrigation is permitted.

“That’s what we’re aiming towards: That everyone has a clear message of the need to conserve, but tailored locally based on the experiences of those suppliers,” said Jared Blumenfeld, California’s secretary for environmental protection.

Already, 41 percent of 385 water suppliers have reached or surpassed this level of shortage, administration officials said.

That includes San Jose Water, which supplies thousands of customers in the heart of Silicon Valley. Under a stage two water shortage, it would cut irrigation to three days a week — but it’s already reached stage three and cut customers back to two days of outdoor watering a week.

“Our current restrictions are already more restrictive than what the governor announced,” said Liann Walborsky, director of corporate communications for San Jose Water.

State officials tally 55 water providers — or about 14 percent of the water systems reporting their conservation efforts to the state — that have not yet activated their water shortage contingency plans. Many are in Southern California, according to state data, including the Yorba Linda Water District in Orange County.

Stepping up local conservation to the level Newsom called for will require increased customer outreach and education, expanded rebate programs, and a requirement for customers to promptly repair leaks. It does not include mandatory conservation measures.

“A mandate to conserve would need to come from the state. Then, (Yorba Linda Water District) would enact the level of the plan that matches the mandate,” said Alison Martin, the water district’s public affairs manager — who noted it’s currently raining in Yorba Linda.

Many residents, particularly in cities and towns, appear to be ignoring the state’s pleas to take the drought seriously and cut back: In January, Californians used nearly 3 percent more water statewide compared to before the drought emergency was declared.

Overall, from July through January, Californians cut back by less than 7 percent statewide compared to 2020, according to state data.

The increase came during the the second-driest January on record, despite Newsom’s call in July for Californians to voluntarily cut back water use by 15 percent percent.

Over the past several weeks, administration officials have made appearances across the state, live-streaming the same request against backdrops of drought-tolerant landscaping: urging Californians to conserve water as another dry summer looms.

The tour appears to have been laying the groundwork for a water conservation mandate, but one far more complicated than the mandate former Gov. Jerry Brown issued during the last drought, which called for water suppliers to cut back by an average of 25 percent statewide.

“A mandate that identifies a reduction target I think is an easier message for people to understand,” said Heather Cooley, research director with the Pacific Institute, a global water think tank.

Still, she said, there are benefits to tying Newsom’s conservation order to water providers’ existing plans for weathering dry spells: “They should be able to get started on it immediately.”

The news comes on the heels of the driest January and February on record. Historically dry conditions prompted California water regulators to cut deliveries from the state aqueduct to 5 percent of requested supplies, down from 15 percent.

Though rain and snow quenched the parched state Sunday and Monday, severe drought nevertheless continues to clutch nearly all of California. Across the San Joaquin Valley, North Coast, and the deserts of California’s southeast, extreme drought remains entrenched.

As of last week, reservoir storage had dropped to just 69 percent of average across the state, and the dwindling snowpack shows little hope of substantially refilling them in the dry months ahead.

California water restrictions: Deja vu?

Newsom’s order is more nuanced than the statewide conservation mandate that former Gov. Jerry Brown issued at the height of the last drought in 2015.

Under Brown’s mandate, water suppliers were required to conserve 25 percent statewide, with each assigned a specific conservation target depending on their existing use. Those that failed to conserve enough faced escalating consequences that could include fines.

This time, Newsom has taken a more localized approach, instead ordering water providers to activate stage two of their water shortage contingency plans.

Urban water suppliers are required to submit these plans for drought and other water shortages every five years, and they spell out how water systems will respond when their supplies dwindle.

Water systems step up their planned responses in six stages, depending on the severity of the water shortage. A stage one shortage reflects a 10 percent hit to the system’s water supply, and could trigger a range of actions including calls for voluntary conservation. A stage six shortage reflects a catastrophic cut to 50 percent of the system’s supply, and could trigger requirements to reduce water use by half including bans on landscape irrigation.

Felicia Marcus, a former chair of the State Water Resources Control Board, called the step welcome, yet “the least we can do…We need to put all of this on speed and change the expectation that this is a short-term moment to get through. I hope the water board and other agencies think big (versus) tinkering at the margins.” CalMatters data reporters Jeremia Kimelman and Erica Yee contributed reporting.

CalMatters | Contributed

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Newsom imposes water restrictions appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Daniel Macht | Contributed

Gov. Gavin Newsom on Tuesday announced a deal with legislative leaders to restore up to two weeks of supplemental paid sick leave for those ill with COVID-19, quarantining or experiencing vaccine side effects.

The benefit, which expired on Sept. 30, applies to those who work for employers with more than 25 employees.

It is aimed at people who are unable to work or telework because they caught COVID-19 or are experiencing symptoms and seeking a medical diagnosis, or caring for a child or another family member who was quarantining or self-isolating due to COVID-19. The benefit has also applied to people attending a vaccine appointment or experiencing vaccine-related side effects.

The new law would restore the benefit through Sept. 30, 2022, and be retroactively applied to Jan. 1, 2022.

Newsom announced its return as part of a slate of early budget actions, essentially new legislation to be enacted soon. The other actions include restoring business tax credits that were limited at the beginning of the pandemic and more funding for a small business COVID-19 relief grant program, as well as more money for testing capacity, booster efforts and actions to “battle misinformation.”

“California’s ability to take early budget action will protect workers and provide real relief to businesses reeling from this latest surge,” Newsom said in a joint press release with Senate President pro tempore Toni G. Atkins and Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon. “Throughout this pandemic, we have come together to address the immediate impacts COVID-19 continues to have on millions of California families, both at home and at work. By extending sick leave to frontline workers with COVID and providing support for California businesses, we can help protect the health of our workforce, while also ensuring that businesses and our economy are able to thrive. We will continue to work to address additional needs of small businesses through the budget – they are the backbone of our communities and continue to be impacted by COVID-19.”

The Service Employees International Union, which had pushed for the return of COVID-19 paid sick leave, hailed the new agreement.

“Make no mistake: today’s agreement happened because workers who are on the frontlines of the pandemic demanded safety for ourselves, our families and our communities,” said Bob Schoonover, the president of SEIU California. “We spoke up about the impossible choices we faced without enough sick time to recover from COVID-19 without our kids going hungry. We know we can’t wait for employers to keep us safe – we have to advocate for ourselves, and Governor Newsom and legislators listened.”

The new law would first allow 40 hours of supplemental paid sick leave for all workers of employers of 26 or more. Forty more hours would be provided if the worker or another family member tested positive after the first 40 hours were exhausted.

Employers must pay for and provide the test. If a worker refused to take a test or show a positive test result no additional sick leave would be granted.

For those using sick leave to recover from the side effects of a COVID-19 vaccine, the worker is allowed 24 hours in that case.

The supplemental paid sick leave bill’s expiration had left workers with three annual paid sick days, under California law.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Gov. Newsom announces legislative deal to restore COVID-19 paid sick leave in California appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) aims to provide full expansion of health care coverage for California residents.

In his 2022-23 state budget proposal, the California Blueprint, Newsom is proposing universal access to health care coverage, regardless of immigration status, and new investments to reduce costs and improve the lives of Californians.

“California is tackling the cost of health care head-on. Under the California Blueprint, our state will be the first to achieve universal access to health care coverage,” Newsom said, according to the official governor’s website. “Doubling down on our actions to reduce costs for middle-class families and expand access to important services, this proposal is a transformative step toward strengthening the health care system for all Californians. Everyone is healthier when everyone has access to quality, affordable care.”

Under the California Blueprint, an opportunity to provide a full expansion of Medi-Cal to all eligible Californians is being considered, according to Newsom’s website. This would include an estimated 764,000 undocumented immigrants.

In 2019, California became the first state to extend Medi-Cal coverage to all eligible undocumented young adults up to the age of 26.

The California Blueprint would allocate $1.7 billion to boost health infrastructure and support frontline health care workers.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Expanding Medi-Cal eligibility ‘a transformative step toward strengthening the health care system’ appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.