Demonstrating at accused rapist Bill Cosby’s star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame, dozens of protesters advocated for the elimination of the statute of limitations on sex crimes. Laura J. Nelson reports in the Los Angeles Times:
“Eliminating the statute of limitations for rape, or at least extending it, would give assault survivors more time to heal, advocates said. Too often, they said, rape victims spend years grappling with the fear and shame of admitting what happened, only to learn that they’ve come forward too late.
“’When someone is ready to speak up, that’s when they find out that they can’t anymore,’ said Maya Paley, 32, an advocate with the National Council of Jewish Women who was sexually assaulted when she was 15. She said she only told her father last week.
“State Sen. Connie M. Leyva (D-Chino) has said that she will introduce a bill when the Legislature convenes in January to eliminate the statute of limitations for sex crimes, including rape, sodomy and sexual abuse of children.”
The LAO announced last week that California’s new rainy day fund is about $2.2 billion short due to conservative projections of California’s revenue. The state’s volatile capital gains tax overperformed expectations, leading to more revenue. Jim Miller explains in the Sacramento Bee:
“Less than six months after Gov. Jerry Brown and lawmakers approved the first deposit into the reserve approved by voters last November, the Legislature’s nonpartisan fiscal analyst estimated this week they were short by about $2.2 billion.
“That will lead to the first “true-up,” a key feature of last year’s Proposition 2 and money the Legislature would otherwise have available for different priorities next year…
“Championed by Brown and legislative leaders, Proposition 2 puts 1.5 percent of general fund revenue, as well as capital gains revenue that exceeds 8 percent of general fund taxes, into a new account. Half of the money goes to the rainy-day reserve. The other half goes to pay off debt, including retirement and health obligations.
“The 2015-16 budget approved in June included $3.7 billion in Proposition 2 payments. Under the the latest estimates from the analyst’s office, the Proposition 2 requirement for 2015-16 is $5.9 billion.”
As the national debate over the treatment of refugees continues, California candidates are pressed to make a choice. Cathleen Decker, LAT:
“California Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris, a Democrat and the frontrunner, said in an interview that she opposed the GOP measure because it set up an "untenable" system. Beyond the current 18-to-24 month vetting process, it would have required top federal officials to certify that individual refugees pose no threat….
…Republican Rocky Chavez, an Oceanside assemblyman running against Harris, sounded remarkably like her.
"’One, security is important, but two, we need to understand we are a country that has always been a home for those who are hungry and tired and oppressed,’ said Chavez, who said he was not sure, pending more research, how he felt about the House bill.”
“…Another Republican Senate candidate, former state party chief Tom Del Beccaro, was more comfortable with blocking refugees.
“…Democrat Loretta Sanchez, an Orange County congresswoman running for Senate, voted against the House refugee measure. In brief remarks before the Thursday vote, she indicated she was influenced by the history of her California district, heavy with refugees from Vietnam and neighboring countries. In an echo of today's circumstances, their arrival more than a generation ago was opposed by some.”
Landmark legislation passed last year will, for the first time, regulate groundwater throughout the state. The legislature created the framework, but, many of the details will be worked out on the local level – and probably in the courts. Ryan Sabalow, Sacramento Bee:
“California’s new groundwater legislation affects 127 basins that regulators have deemed to be medium or high priority because of their importance to the state’s water supplies. The basin management agencies must be formed by 2017. The agencies overseeing the 21 basins that have been deemed critically overdrafted have until 2020 to set up long-term management plans. The rest have until 2022.
“The legislation doesn’t specify the makeup of the basin management agencies, other than saying members should be local public officials. An existing entity, such as a water district or county board, could manage a basin, or they could be created from a combination of agencies. Their charge will be to ensure water use in their region is balanced – that what’s pumped out can be replenished over time.
“A critical unanswered question is how this process will mesh with long-standing California laws that protect water and property rights.
“The new groundwater legislation doesn’t prohibit unhappy water users from filing lawsuits hoping to circumvent the process. Under established water law, property owners can ask a Superior Court judge to settle groundwater disputes through a process known as adjudication, in which the judge ultimately rules on who has a right to how much water. Gov. Jerry Brown signed two bills this fall that aim to streamline the adjudication process and prevent litigants from using the courts to hamstring conservation efforts. But these lengthy, costly legal proceedings are left largely untouched by the new groundwater measures.”
Speaking of water, George Skelton looks at the backstory on the proposed ballot measure to take California’s High-Speed Rail budget and put it toward water storage. From the Los Angeles Times:
“While high-speed rail certainly will draw the headline focus, the proposal's primary purpose apparently is to reduce water for the environment and provide more for agriculture.
“It would amend the state constitution to make domestic use and crop irrigation the top priorities for California water. And those would be the only listed priorities.
“The water priorities provision is wonky and less rousing than train-terminating. But it would be historic.
"’It's a very sneaky attack on the environment,’ says Doug Obegi, senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council.
"’It overturns long-standing law, some of it dating to when the state was first created. It potentially undercuts environmental statutes. It seems intended to reduce protections for rivers and fisheries.’"
Is raising the minimum wage - a concept sweeping many California cities - a step toward alleviating poverty and income inequality, or a way to make the problem worse? Anthony York looks at the issue for CALmatters:
“Proponents for raising the minimum wage argue the 14 local California governments have taken an important step in the fight against poverty and the higher costs of living in their regions. They point to the latest U.S. Census Bureau figures that show about 16 percent of Californians live below the federal poverty level, making them eligible for government assistance. The census data also show that if the state’s higher cost of living was factored in, the percentage of Californians who could be considered living in poverty climbs to 23.5 percent.
“Opponents counter that raising the minimum wage alone will not address California’s poverty and cost of living issues, and may worsen the plight of low-wage workers.
“In an analysis of Los Angeles’ wage hike commissioned by the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce, Beacon Economics argued the wage ordinance could lead to businesses employing fewer low-wage workers, resulting in a higher unemployment rate among unskilled workers.
“’It doesn’t work,’ said Chris Thornberg, a founding partner of Beacon Economics.
“’Does a higher minimum wage reduce poverty? No. Does it reduce homelessness? No. Does it get more at-risk inner-city youth to work? No. So why are we doing it? We have to find a different plan.’”
And, finally, a story that warmed the cockles of our hearts here at the Roundup. Kudos to the suits at Taco Bell HQ for saving the modest Downey food stand building that birthed the fast food giant in 1962.
Dubbed “Numero Uno,” the small building was loaded onto a trailer and moved to a storage facility after a threat from the wrecking ball. (with photos).
“The “Numero Uno” building had a six-car police escort. And fans in about 20 cars tailed Numero Uno as it reached speeds of nearly 30 mph. The police blocked each intersection momentarily while the building rolled through.
“’I’d been following it on TV,’ said Shelby Brown of Anaheim. She was waiting on a street corner near her home to get a photograph. ‘I figured it would be going about 9 mph. But it’s going a lot faster.’
“Unlike the space shuttle Endeavor, the Taco Bell building did not inspire large crowds to gather along the street to cheer it on. But there were a few amateur photographers on street corners taking pictures. Chris Tolo of Torrance brought a drone, which he controlled to fly over and take pictures of the building as it turned onto Tustin Avenue.
“’It’s for my personal archive, and I love Taco Bell,’ Tolo said.”