California leaders gathered in Oakland yesterday for a conference addressing climate change, hosted by billionaire activist Tom Steyer. Officials including Governor Brown and Assembly speaker Toni Atkins pledged to continue the state’s leadership in the fight against greenhouse gas emissions.
Senate pro tem Kevin de León went even further, saying he will propose legislation to divest California’s CalPERS and CalSTRS pension funds from coal. David Siders and Jon Ortiz have the story for the Sacramento Bee.
“’Coal is a dirty fossil fuel,’ de León said. ‘I think that our values should reflect, you know, who we are as the state of California.’
“It was unclear how far-reaching the proposal might be, or what firms other than coal-mining companies, if any, might be affected. The Los Angeles Democrat said he is ‘going through all of those details right now” and that “once we get down deeper in the weeds we can tell you how far it goes.’”
Reaction to the largely symbolic move was mixed, with the governor’s office taking a wait and see approach. Meanwhile, Bee columnist Dan Walters derided the idea on Twitter with the hashtag #pointlesssymbolism.
Forty-five years after five southern California Indian tribes filed a lawsuit to fight the diversion of the San Luis Rey, a settlement has been reached. J Harry Jones has the story at the San Diego Union Tribune.
“In 1969, the tribes sued, saying their rights were violated by the illegal taking of the river water.
“After decades of litigation, in 1988, an agreement was reached and Congress enacted the ‘San Luis Rey Indian Water Rights Settlement Act’ which recognized the need to provide a supplemental water supply for the benefit of the tribes. The deal stipulated that 16,000 acre feet of water — roughly the amount of water being diverted from the river — should be made available to the tribes annually. The problem was figuring out how.
“’Nobody knew it would take 20 years to find that water,’ said Bo Mazzetti, chairman of the Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians, one of the affected tribes. The others are La Jolla, Pala, Pauma and San Pasqual.”
A federal panel has ruled that the authority of the agency that has jurisdiction over California’s High Speed Rail line trumps California state environmental law. The implications of the decision are complicated, but it is largely seen as a win for proponents of High Speed Rail. Tom Verdin has the story for the Associated Press.
“In a decision made public Monday, the U.S. Surface Transportation Board ruled that lawsuits challenging the high-speed rail line under the California Environmental Quality Act conflict with its authority over railroads.
“The three-member board was acting on a request from the California High-Speed Rail Authority, which was seeking to clarify federal jurisdiction over the project.
“The authority faces seven lawsuits that use the state environmental law to challenge the bullet train plans. Officials were concerned that the lawsuits could delay construction of one of the initial sections of track, a 114-mile line between Fresno and Bakersfield…
“The ruling makes it clear that federal law has precedent over state law as it pertains to construction of the high-speed rail line, said Lisa Marie Alley, spokeswoman for the California High-Speed Rail Authority.”
Over at the LA Times, Marc Lifsher looks at Cal Facts, the biennial report published by the Legislative Analyst’s Office.
"Want a whirlwind tour of California's economy and to delve into the Golden State's often-baffling finances, demographics and social trends?
"Try Cal Facts. It's all there, jampacked in 72 pages of charts and graphs published every two years by the state's nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's office….
“Most Cal Facts pages — whether dealing with macroeconomics, tax policy or healthcare — provide fodder for legislators, lawmakers, legislative staffers and legions of public policy and government finance wonks working at the Capitol.
“‘Oftentimes you'll find a little nugget that motivates you to look deeper into an issue,’ said Geoff Long, policy director for Senate President Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles).”
And, bad news if you were planning to take your beloved cat to that hip New York tattoo parlor for a little work: not anymore, you’re not. (Aaron Moreno, we’re looking at you.)
Inspired by a Brooklyn tattoo artist’s photo of his tattooed dog that went viral earlier this year, New York legislators passed a law banning tattooing or piercing of your animal companions.
“’It’s simply cruel,’ said Assembly member Linda Rosenthal. The Manhattan Democrat sponsored the legislation. While people can choose the pain of tattoos or piercings to satisfy their own ‘aesthetic predilections,’ companion animals don’t have that luxury, she said.
“The law signed Monday by Gov. Andrew Cuomo takes effect in 120 days.”
Frankly, we’re surprised that New York beat California to this one…