Growing pains

May 2, 2013

The Golden State's population is growing, still, although not at the rapid pace of years past. Even so, we're nearing the 38 million mark.

 

From Greg Lucas in Capitol Weekly: California’s population grew by almost 298,000 residents in 2012 to 37,966,000 as of January 1, 2013, according to a population report released today by the Department of Finance."

 

"The report shows preliminary January 2013, as well as revised January 2012, population data for cities..."

 

"The San Francisco Bay area leads the state as the fastest growing region. Four out of the five fastest growing counties are in the Bay area. Santa Clara County is the fastest growing county in the state at 1.6 percent. Alameda, San Mateo, and San Francisco counties all had growth rates over 1 percent."
 

"The City of Los Angeles, California’s largest city, has a population of 3,863,839. Los Angeles grew by almost 37,000 persons during 2012. San Diego, California’s second largest city, now has a population of 1,326,238 and added over 11,000 persons during the year. San Jose, California’s third largest city, now has a population of 984,299 and added over 14,000 persons during the year."

 

California is suing a number of popular food retailers - including Trader Joe's, Target anjd Whole Foods -- for allegedly exposing customers to illegal levels of lead in their candied plum and ginger products.

 

From the Chronicle's Victoria Oliver: "The lawsuit, which was filed Tuesday in San Francisco Superior Court by the state attorney general's office, accuses the retailers of knowingly selling products that contain lead in violation of Proposition 65, which requires California businesses to warn consumers about chemicals in their products that are known to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm."

 

"The retailers and manufacturers named in the lawsuit "knowingly and intentionally" exposed people to unacceptable lead levels and failed to issue proper notification or put warning labels on the products as required by law, according to court documents."

 

"The Center for Environmental Health in Oakland started an investigation last fall by conducting tests of the products and formally notifying the retailers that they were in violation of the consumer protection law."

 

The federal courts in the Bay Area, never speedy and efficient at the best of times, are going to be closed on some days to save money -- a move that is likely to cause even more delays.

 

From the Mercury-News Howard Mintz: "The San Francisco and San Jose federal courts will close the first Friday of each month until September, starting this week, while the Oakland branch will do the same on the first Monday of the month, starting next week. The Northern California federal court system also will lock its Eureka satellite branch on the same Fridays."

 

"The drastic step was taken in response to an unexpected $350 million hit to the federal judiciary's overall budget as a result of the sequester, which clamped down on federal spending earlier this year. While not as high-profile as the recent impact on air travel, the budget cuts have sent federal judges scrambling from New York to Nebraska to pare their spending between now and the end of the fiscal year in the fall."

 

"Bay Area judges say they had no other options but to furlough court workers and shut down business for five days, a move reminiscent of a few years ago, when California's state courts took the same approach in response to deep state budget cuts."

 

An attempt to change the state's iconic environmental protection law, the California Environmental Quality Act, passed a key hurdle in the Senate.

 

From the Bee's Torey Van Oot: "Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg defended his Senate Bill 731, which passed the Senate Environmental Quality Committee Wednesday, as an attempt to cut down on project delays the business community has long blamed on the California Environmental Quality Act without undermining the environmental protections the 1970 law provides. He acknowledged that the current bill is a work in progress.

 

"I'm trying to find the middle path, not just to make a deal, because I'll walk away from it if it's just about that, but to substantively approve the statute, to modernize it and to make sure we are giving genuine streamlining incentives and priorities to the projects we want to see more of," Steinberg said.


"The bill focused on changes supporters say could boost prospects for "infill projects," especially in urban areas, such as the planned arena in downtown Sacramento, though what qualifies as an infill project is expected to be the subject of continued debate. It also makes changes to the paperwork and legal filing process Steinberg says could speed up CEQA-related lawsuits."
The potential move of the Sacramento Kings to Seattle has gripped the state capital for a couple of years, but it looks now like the Kings will stay in Sacramento. That whooshing sound you hear is a sigh of relief -- at least in Sacramento.
From the LAT's George Skelton: "They were almost out the door to bigger, more prosperous Seattle, a previously jilted city, until Mayor Kevin Johnson, a former NBA all-star, teamed with a squad of Sacramento political players to turn the game around."

 

"It's now the equivalent of a 15-point lead for Sacramento with one minute to go after a special NBA committee of owners voted unanimously, 7-0, Monday to recommend that the league reject the Kings' move to Seattle. All the owners — there are 30 — won't vote until mid-May, but Sacramento's lead looks insurmountable."

 

"The NBA apparently feels that it would send the wrong message to fans everywhere if it yanked a team away from a city that had been extraordinarily loyal — at one 19-year stretch selling out every game — and is planning to build a new downtown arena with a substantial public subsidy."

And from our "Keep Smiling" file we learn that, yes, money can buy you happiness. So forget all the cliches about having dough.
"We all know the sayings: Money can't buy you happiness; more money, more problems."

"But while those are nice little feel-good platitudes, they may not hold water in the real world, according to a new study from economists Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers."

 

"By mapping income versus self-described happiness in several countries worldwide, the study's authors found that the more money people had, the happier they tended to be. The trend was clear across the board, leading the economists to conclude that there's "no evidence of a satiation point," a theoretical level of contentment past which more cash doesn't translate into more happiness."

 


 
Get the daily Roundup
free in your e-mail




The Roundup is a daily look at the news from the editors of Capitol Weekly and AroundTheCapitol.com.
Privacy Policy