By Allen D. Payton

Some of the same unions backing Antioch Mayor Pro Tem Monica Wilson in the Assembly District 15 race on the March primary ballot have spent almost $253,000 attacking one of her three opponents, former Contra Costa County Supervisor Karen Mitchoff.

At least four mailers have been sent to Democrat voters in the district criticizing Mitchoff’s pay raise she voted for while on the board, and her votes against pay raises for county employees.

Two of the mailers obtained by the Herald show they were paid for by “Opportunity PAC – A coalition of teachers, health care givers, faculty members, school employees, and public and private employee organizations.” The political action committee’s Top Funders for the mailers are listed as SEIU (Service Employees International Union) California State Council, California Faculty Association (of the UC and CSU systems) and California School Employee Association.

When asked about the mailers Mitchoff said they’re all pretty much about the same issue. “The same group with the same message. My decision on the pay raise was made over 10 years ago because I wanted to make sure the county supervisors were paid enough to make it a full-time position.” She also pointed out that she did vote for pay raises for county employees, “in 2022, giving them 5% a year for four years, for a total increase of 20%.”

The interesting part is that some of the state teachers’ unions including college and university faculty and staff are helping pay for the mailers, even though as a member of the Board of Supervisors, Mitchoff had no say about education funding.

According to Cal-Access, the California Secretary of State’s campaign finance reporting website, so far, the PAC has made three expenditures of $46,446.03 each for three mailers opposing Mitchoff, two on Feb. 1 and one on Feb. 13, 2024. The cost for a fourth mailer that appear under the PAC’s Accrued Expenses show an additional $46,446.03. That totals $185,784.12. In addition, the PAC spent $37,000.00 on polling and consulting and $30,126.43 on research in their effort against Mitchoff.

Contributions to PAC Total Over $2.5 Million

The PAC is supporting and opposing a variety of candidates throughout the state. Their most recent Form 460 financial disclosure report dated Feb. 17, 2024, shows they have raised $1.715 million this year and their report ending Dec. 31, 2023, shows $803,500 was raised last year for a total of $2,518,500. They had cash on hand of over $1.1 million as of Feb. 17th.

Contributions include the following amounts and sources:

$750,000 from the California Teachers Association Independent Expenditure Committee;

$534,500 from SEIU California State Council for Working People;

$225,000 from PACE (Political Action for Classified Employees) of California School Employees Association;

$190,000 from Smart Justice California Action Fund;

$150,000 from United Food and Commercial Workers Western States Council Independent Expenditure PAC;

$150,000 from California Federation of Teachers COPE (Committee on Political Education);

$150,000 from Service Employees International Union Local 1000, Keeping California Healthy, Safe and Strong;

$100,000 from Service Employees International Union Local 721 CTW, CLC Workers’ Strength Committee;

$75,000 from SEIU United Healthcare Workers West PAC;

$59,500 from Faculty for Our University’s Future, a committee sponsored by California Faculty Association;

$59,500 from Standing Committee on Political Education of the California Labor Federation AFL-CIO;

$50,000 from the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay Bisexual & Transgender) Caucus Leadership Fund; and

$25,000 from SEIU California State Council (nonprofit 501 (c)(5))

Wilson’s Backers Funding Mitchoff Opposition Effort

Wilson’s campaign has been the beneficiary of support from many of those same unions. On her campaign website, Wilson shows endorsements by the California Faculty Association, SEIU California, National Union of Healthcare Workers (NUHW) and United Food & Commercial Workers Local 5, as well as unions that are members of the AFL-CIO.

Wilson and Mitchoff also face two others in the race, including County School Board Trustee Anamarie Avila Farias and Realtor Sonia Ledo in the March 5th primary election next Tuesday. The top two will face off in the November election.

Members currently voting on interest to authorize a strike; district says union’s budget figures incorrect

The two sides differ on amount available for pay & benefit increases by almost $18 million

“You can only get burned so many times before you stop believing them.” – AEA President Bob Carson

By Allen D. Payton

The Antioch Education Association (AEA) is planning to hold a “Rally for Student Success” on Wednesday, Feb. 21 as part of a larger effort of the East Bay Coalition for Student Success (EBCSS). In addition, the local teachers’ union members are voting on interest to authorize a strike.

In a Dec. 18, 2023 post on the Antioch Education Association’s (AEA) Facebook page they wrote, “District revenues have skyrocketed over the last few years but the % of those monies spent on educator’s salaries continues to decline??? How can we attract and retain the best educators for the students of Antioch when this is happening?”

Another post on Friday, Feb. 9, 2024 reads, “Antioch Unified School District Why???” and claims, “AUSD ended the year with $88M in unspent funds. After taking out restricted money and reserves…AUSD STILL has $34.4 million sitting in the bank that can be used for staff salaries and benefits.”

In another Facebook post that day, the AEA posted a flier about the rally which included what they’re seeking. The flier reads, “Join us as we raise our voices in support of/for: quality educators in every classroom, smaller class sizes and caseloads, salary increase reflective of the 8.22% COLA (Cost of Living Adjustment), fully paid medical benefits for all members and safe schools for our students and members.”

According to a June 2023 article on their website, the EBCSS was formed in September 2022, and “is committed to ensuring local school districts continue to prioritize funds to provide the best for student learning and educator retention and attraction. Locals and district management teams in the coalition have been working hard at the bargaining table to win agreements that focus resources on students and educators.”

Emails were sent to both Bob Carson, President of the AEA and a member of the EBCSS, and Antioch Unified School District Superintendent Stephanie Anello asking for more details about a possible strike.

Antioch Teachers’ Union President Offers Details

Carson responded, “No EBCSS association has authorized a strike. What many have done is have preliminary strike authorization votes. Antioch is doing one right now, as is Pittsburg. Other chapters like Piedmont, Pleasanton, Moraga and Dublin have already concluded their strike authorization votes. These are not votes on whether educators are going on strike but whether they will be supporting their negotiating teams until the end and be willing to participate in actions called on by the Association. A final strike vote could only occur after all the steps in the negotiating process have failed. In Antioch and these other locations, we are not there yet.

The goal of the EBCSS and its members is that each student find success. There are many ways to help make that happen. Smaller class sizes so students get more individual attention, the best technology, and safe schools are just some of things the EBCSS advocates for. We believe the most important need in a student finding success in school is to have a quality educator in every classroom. Paying competitive salaries, having full paid medical benefits (at the Kaiser rate), and good working conditions is how you get quality educators.

To be specific to what is happening in Antioch, the AUSD negotiating team presented AEA with their “best and final” offer in a December negotiating session. Since we found that offer lacking in many areas, we rejected it. We were then at “impasse”. We now have a state appointed mediator who is trying to find a way to get the 2 sides to reach an agreement. We have met 3 times with that mediator and have another meeting scheduled for 2/22. No specific offers being presented are allowed to be publicly discussed during mediation. I can tell you we have had no success to date. If the mediator at some point feels there is no hope in facilitating an agreement, either side can then move the negotiations to “fact-finding” where an appointed arbitrator receives information from both teams and writes a statement on their findings. After fact-finding, the 2 sides are required to meet for at least one more negotiating session where the district could again present their best and final offer. At that point, a strike vote could be called.

AEA is hopeful that an agreement can be reached but will not accept an offer that is not reflective of the 8.22% COLA increase the district received this year. Class size, caseloads for counselors and speech pathologists, medical benefits, and salary are the main issues right now.  As you saw on our FB page, we are planning a rally on 2/21, in conjunction with other EBCSS associations. We want to bring attention to the issues. One serious problem for us is the tremendous ending balances AUSD is carrying over every year. This is money provided by the state of California to be used on our students. Instead, its sits in the bank – year after year. This year AUSD had an ending balance of $34,000 million dollars in unrestricted funds (money that can be spent on anything) not used. They had close to another $40 million in restricted funds also not spent. This is after accounting for the prudent reserve required of them to have by the state. To me – and AEA members – that is crazy. That money could be used in many ways to help the students of Antioch and to help AUSD find quality educators.”

District Says Teachers’ Union Using Old, Incorrect Information

In response to the request for more details from Superintendent Anello and the claims by the AED, the school district’s Associate Superintendent for Business and Operations, Liz Robbins shared the following: “Their information is from the unaudited actuals report which shows how the District ended the 2022-2023 school year.

Our first interim budget report which was presented to the Board in December,  provides the most current financial information.

$46.2 million is restricted monies; $22.5 million is unrestricted. Of the $22.5 million, $18 million is allocated for potential salary and benefit increases. $4.5 million is allocated for school improvements and upgrades including HVAC, security, and technology. Lastly, $9.4 million of the ending fund balance is the set-aside required by the State for economic uncertainty. This leaves approximately $500k of unassigned funds in the ending fund balance.

The budget is not a static document, and an updated second interim financial report will be presented to the Board on March 13.”

$17.9 Million Difference Between District Budget & Teachers’ Union Figure

According to the 2023-24 First Interim MYP (Multi Year Plan) – Components of Fund Balance chart on page 80 of the 2023-24 First Interim Budget Presentation, provided to the school board at their meeting on Dec. 13, 2023, it shows $15,961,836 “Assigned for Potential Employee Negotiated Settlement”. That plus the $521,041 in Unassigned/Unappropriated funds results in about $16.5 million available for salary and benefit increases, which is $17.9 million less than what the teachers’ union claims is available.

AEA President Disagrees Says District Using Projected Estimates

That information was provided to Carson who was asked if he had a final response on the matter, for now. He provided the chart (above) and replied, “In September of each year the district presents to the school board their ‘unaudited actuals’. This financial report reflects the district’s final year end closing from the previous June (end of the financial year). The numbers I gave you are from that. Those numbers are what the district had left over from the previous year. Money not spent. That’s a fact – straight from their reporting.”

“The December (which Liz references) and March interim reports are estimates based on what the district says they are going to do. The September report is what they did,” Carson continued. “What they really spent. For example, last year the district said they would have $7 million in unrestricted funds left over in their December interim report but in September they had $34 million!!!!! Their estimate was way off. I will bet you a soda it will be way off again come September 2024. On top of all that, the district received an 8.22% COLA increase!!!”

“If this was a one-year bad projection, we would understand. It happens every year and it’s just getting worse. I will attach the ending balances over the past few years. You can only get burned so many times before you stop believing them. It’s frustrating. We want the students of Antioch to have quality educators in every classroom. Our proposals are fair attempts at making that happen. We are by no means trying to break the bank – not even close,” Carson concluded.

The teachers’ rally will be held from 4:00 – 5:30 p.m. at the corner of Auto Center Drive and Century Blvd.

The difference of $275 million will pay for interest; voters will decide on bonds adding $41 to $48 for each $100,000 in value per year for 35 years; survey shows 75% of voters believe things on wrong track in Antioch area

By Allen D. Payton

Following the narrow defeat of Antioch Unified School District’s Measure T in November 2020 asking voters for $110 million in improvements, this past November, the Antioch School Board voted unanimously to place a $195 million bond on the March 5th ballot. It is listed as Measure B and if passed will generate $13.5 million per year for the next 35 years. According  to Ballotpedia, Measure T lost by less than a half-percent receiving 54.62% of the vote, with 55% required to pass.

That followed a presentation by EMC research at the board’s October 25, 2023, meeting which showed that a survey of 500 voters of which 400 were likely March primary voters, 75% felt that things in the Antioch area are generally going in the wrong direction, 69% said taxes are too high, 59% don’t trust the AUSD to properly handle tax dollars, but 64% believe it’s important to have high-quality, local public schools even if it means raising taxes and 81% agreed AUSD schools were in need of  more funding.

However, the survey also showed just slightly over 55% of voters would support the bond after receiving information about it. Then when read an opposition statement which includes “This would cost the average homeowner $130 per year” the support decreased to just 51%. The recommendation by the survey consultants was for “A strong, independent outreach effort…emphasizing the accountability features if the measure along with how it will provide for necessary and overdue repairs and enhanced student safety.”

Official Ballot Language

The official ballot language for the measure reads, “To upgrade classrooms, labs and learning technology, improve school safety and emergency communications, repair leaky roofs and restrooms, upgrade heating, air-conditioning, electrical and plumbing systems, and make accessibility upgrades for people with disabilities; shall Antioch Unified School District’s measure be adopted, issuing $195,000,000 in bonds at legal interest rates, generating an average $13,500,000 annually until approximately 2059, at estimated tax rates of approximately $48 per $100,000 assessed value with annual audits, citizen’s oversight, and all funds staying local?”

According to the Tax Rate Statement for Measure B in the Voter Guide, there are no district-wide bonds currently outstanding that are being paid by taxpayers. However, voters in Antioch’s School Facilities District 1, have approved two separate bonds that remain outstanding including the 2008 Measure C to improve schools in the older part of the district and the 2012 Measure B which was specifically for improvements to Antioch High School. Both measures currently cost property owners $80.10 per $100,000 of assessed value. Measure C bonds will be paid off by the end of the 2035-36 tax year and the 2012 Measure B bonds will be repaid by the end of tax year 2046-47.

The proposed bond will add $41 to $48 per $100,000 in assessed value more per year to property tax bills. That amounts to $143.50 to $168 per year for a home valued at $350,000 and $246 to $288 more per year for a home valued at $600,000.

So, if the measure succeeds, property owners in Facilities District 1 will pay between $125.10 per $100,000 in assessed value for all three bonds through 2035-36, then $70.90 per $100,000 value until 2046-47.

Also, according to the Tax Rate Statement, “the best estimate of total debt service, including principal and interest” over the 35 years “if all the bonds are issued and sold will be approximately $470 million”.

Schools To Be Improved

According to information about this year’s Measure B, on the bond measures page on the AUSD website and the Jan. 24, 2024 Update Presentation the funds generated will be used to improve schools throughout the district. They include: Belshaw, Carmen Dragon, Diablo Vista, Fremont, Jack London, John Muir, Kimball, Lone Tree, Marsh, Mission, Mno Grant, Sutter and Turner Elementary Schools; Orchard Park K-8; Antioch, Black Diamond, Dallas Ranch and Park Middle Schools, as well as Antioch, Deer Valley and Dozier-Libbey Medical High Schools.

Proposed Improvements

The improvements covered by the $195 million include approximately:

$148.42 million for Safety & Security

$28.93 million for Upgrades & Improvements, and

$19.4 million for Enhancements

A message on the bond measures page offers additional details about the proposed improvements. It reads, “Antioch schools do not receive any funds from the state for facility improvements. Constant use and changing education needs require significant upgrades –way beyond our District budget. In the March 2024 election, voters in the Antioch Unified School District will be asked whether to approve a school facilities bond. This page contains information related to the proposed bond measure.

This bond has one goal: Improving the quality of Antioch Schools!!!

While there have been improvements in the quality of our schools over the past few years, the fact remains that our schools are old. Classrooms and restrooms need modernization, electrical systems are outdated, and HVAC and roofs are at the end of their life. Schools built years ago need significant updating.

Many of our schools are 60-70 years old. The Board of Education approved a bond measure to be placed on the ballot in March 2024 to address the most pressing needs of our district:

• Remove hazardous materials like asbestos and lead paint from school sites
• Repair or replace old worn-out roofs, floors, walkways, lighting, HVAC, plumbing, and electrical systems
• Improve school security and emergency communications systems
• Update instructional technology in classrooms for improved student learning
• Renovate restrooms to make them accessible for students with disabilities
• Upgrade and repair physical education facilities and playground equipment to meet current safety standards
• Make repairs and energy efficiency improvements to all schools
• Free up resources to improve the quality of classroom instruction in core subjects like reading, math, and science to prepare students for success in college and careers

This bond will update our aging schools, technology, and equipment. It will protect the health, safety, and security of AUSD students and staff. It will also:

• Add TK-K classrooms at John Muir Elementary
• Add a new gymnasium and cafeteria at Orchard Park
• Replace old portables with a new two-story building of classrooms at Park Middle School
• Modernize the gymnasium at Antioch Middle School”

To see renderings and a list of proposed improvements for each school click, here.

Part of the outreach effort includes a sample letter for principals to send out addressed to parents and neighbors, on the District’s bond measures page. It also includes a mailer sent to homes this week paid for by Improve Antioch Schools/Yes on Measure B. According to campaign committee member, Velma Wilson, they have not yet set up a Facebook page nor website for the effort.

A “yes” vote for Measure B supports authorizing the district to issue the $195 million in bonds for school improvements and levy a property tax and a “no” vote opposes the assessment. There is no organized opposition to the ballot measure and only an argument in favor appears in the Voter Guide signed by Scott Bergerhouse, Christine Pedraza, Louie Rocha and Velma Wilson.

The election is March 5th.

New flood-related regulations prioritize levee investments in the Delta and Suisun Marsh

By Delta Stewardship Council

SACRAMENTO – The new year has brought new flood protections for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The Delta Stewardship Council has successfully amended the Delta Levees Investment Strategy (DLIS), a tool the state uses to prioritize investments in Delta levee operations, maintenance and improvements, thus reducing the likelihood and consequences of levee failures.

The amendment assigns very high, high, or other priority to islands or tracts within the Delta and Suisun Marsh and directs the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) to fund levee improvement projects by order of priority. Additionally, it requires the DWR to submit an annual report to the Council describing Delta levee investments relative to the established priorities. The amended regulation took effect on January 1, 2024.

“Delta flood risk is one of the most urgent threats to California and will continue to worsen in the future with changes in sea levels and storm patterns,” says the Council’s Executive Officer Jessica R. Pearson. “Limited funding to address that risk demands clear priorities. The product of nearly a decade of public input and collaboration, the strategy represents one of the Council’s greatest milestone achievements.”

The amendment assigns very high, high, or other priority to islands or tracts within the Delta and Suisun Marsh and directs the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) to fund levee improvement projects by order of priority. Additionally, it requires the DWR to submit an annual report to the Council describing Delta levee investments relative to the established priorities.

“Flood protection is a key piece of DWR’s work to increase water resilience as California moves toward a hotter, drier future,” says DWR Director Karla Nemeth. “DWR stands in partnership with the Delta Stewardship Council across multiple initiatives, including the Delta Levees Investment Strategy. These efforts will provide needed protections to the diverse communities that call the Delta home.”

The Delta’s 1,100 miles of levees provide protection for residences, agricultural lands, and infrastructure, which need deliberate and sustainable maintenance and funding. Many of the levees date back to when the Delta was reclaimed for agricultural purposes in the late 1800s.

The updated strategy prioritizes the protection of people, property, and state interests and advances statewide water supply reliability and Delta ecosystem resilience in a manner that protects and enhances the Delta as a place where people live, work and recreate.

On September 21, 2023, the Office of Administrative Law approved the Council’s Administrative Procedure Act process to amend the California Code of Regulations, title 23, sections 5001 and 5012, to implement the Council’s Delta Levees Investment Strategy. The amended regulation took effect on January 1, 2024, and is available at on the Delta Levees Investment Strategy web page at deltacouncil.ca.gov/DLIS.

ABOUT THE COUNCIL

The Delta Stewardship Council was created by the California Legislature in 2009 to advance California’s water supply reliability and the Delta’s ecosystem resiliency in a manner that protects and enhances the region’s unique characteristics. It is composed of seven members, advised by an independent 10-member science board, and supported by a dedicated staff. For more information, visit the Council’s website at deltacouncil.ca.gov.

Visuals of the Delta can be found in DWR’s photo galleries (pixel-ca-dwr.photoshelter.com).

For more information, contact media@deltacouncil.ca.gov.

By Jon Coupal, President, Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association

The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act (TPA) is a proposed constitutional amendment which has already qualified for the November 2024 ballot. It is sponsored by taxpayer and business organizations to restore key provisions of Proposition 13 and other pro-taxpayer laws that give voters more control over when and how new tax revenue is raised.

Although TPA, unlike previous tax reform measures, doesn’t reduce or eliminate any state or local tax, it does impose both enhanced voter approval requirements for fee and tax increases as well as robust accountability and transparency provisions.

For obvious reasons, tax-and-spend interests hate TPA and have launched a multi-front assault hoping to either defeat it or keep it off the ballot entirely.

The motivation for these schemes is that politicians and their enablers are fully aware that TPA is highly likely to pass if it stays on the ballot. Californians are sick and tired of having the nation’s highest tax rates jammed down their throats, especially when these heavy tax burdens are not accompanied by higher levels of public services; in fact, the opposite is true, as evidenced by California’s high cost of living, crime, homelessness, hostile business climate, and other ills.

But now, there may be another reason why anti-taxpayer interests are waging this war on TPA. A recent report by the California Legislative Analyst’s office threw a bucket of cold water on progressives’ plans to continue to increase taxes with virtually no restraint. The LAO now estimates “2022-23 revenues to be $26 billion below Budget Act projections. Historical experience suggests this weakness is likely to carry into this fiscal year and next. Overall, our updated revenue outlook anticipates collections to come in $58 billion below Budget Act projections across 2022-23 to 2024-25.” (Note that in less than a week after this news, the LAO upped the shortfall from $58 billion to $68 billion).

If there is any saving grace to the current financial situation it is that California still has substantial budget reserves. That, plus some creative accounting, can probably blunt the negative impacts of a severe drop in revenues – at least for a while.

Nonetheless, if California’s tax revenue spigot is curtailed any significant amount, will the enemies of the Taxpayer Protection Act argue that this provides another justification for removing all restraints on raising taxes?

Economic growth in Texas and Florida is outpacing that in California, due in part to a top marginal income tax rate of zero. What is happening in other smaller states is less well known. The smart move would be to follow the lead of other states which are aggressively pursuing pro-growth strategies which in turn lead to more tax revenue.

Take Iowa for example. Defying critics who claimed that tax reductions would crush the state budget, Iowa’s Governor Kim Reynolds slashed top marginal tax rates, previously some of the highest in the nation. Not only did revenues not crash, but they shot up by huge percentage points. According to a report in Center Square, “Iowa led the ‘tax-cutting wave’ in 2022, with the most comprehensive and aggressive tax reform in the United States. This will gradually replace the nine-bracket, progressive income tax with a flat tax, bringing the top rate, which was close to 9 percent, down to a flat 3.9 percent by 2026.”

Other states have provided California with a roadmap for economic growth and healthy budgets by cutting taxes and pursuing other pro-freedom policies. However, the political realities in this one-party state – governed by hardcore progressives – render the odds of politicians even looking at the roadmap extremely slight.

That being said, if the Governor and the Legislature won’t do what’s necessary to prevent a budget disaster, the least they can do is get out of the way of those who have offered the Taxpayer Protection Act to the voters so that ordinary citizens can do what politicians won’t: impose fiscal discipline on a fiscally reckless state.

This column originally appeared in the Orange County Register. Republished with permission.

Says state can borrow over $91 billion

By Allen D. Payton

The California Legislative Analyst’s Office issued a report on Dec. 7, 2023, that the state faces a $68 billion budget deficit for the 2024-25 Fiscal Year. Entitled, “The 2024-25 Budget: California’s Fiscal Outlook”, the report’s Executive Summary read as follows:

“California Faces a $68 Billion Deficit.

Largely as a result of a severe revenue decline in 2022-23, the state faces a serious budget deficit. Specifically, under the state’s current law and policy, we estimate the Legislature will need to solve a budget problem of $68 billion in the upcoming budget process.

Unprecedented Prior-Year Revenue Shortfall Creates Unique Challenges.

Typically, the budget process does not involve large changes in revenue in the prior year (in this case, 2022-23). This is because prior-year taxes usually have been filed and associated revenues collected. Due to the state conforming to federal tax filing extensions, however, the Legislature is gaining a complete picture of 2022-23 tax collections after the fiscal year has already ended. Specifically, we estimate that 2022-23 revenue will be $26 billion below budget act estimates. This creates unique and difficult challenges—including limiting the Legislature’s options for addressing the budget problem.

Legislature Has Multiple Tools Available to Address Budget Problem.

While addressing a deficit of this scope will be challenging, the Legislature has a number of options available to do so. In particular, the state has nearly $24 billion in reserves to address the budget problem. In addition, there are options to reduce spending on schools and community colleges that could address nearly $17 billion of the budget problem. Further adjustments to other areas of the budget, such as reductions to one-time spending, could address at least an additional $10 billion or so. These options and some others, like cost shifts, would allow the Legislature to solve most of the deficit largely without impacting the state’s core ongoing service level.

Legislature Will Have Fewer Options to Address Multiyear Deficits in the Coming Years.

Given the state faces a serious budget problem, using general purpose reserves this year is merited. That said, we suggest the Legislature exercise some caution when deploying tools like reserves and cost shifts. The state’s reserves are unlikely to be sufficient to cover the state’s multiyear deficits—which average $30 billion per year under our estimates. These deficits likely necessitate ongoing spending reductions, revenue increases, or both. As a result, preserving a substantial portion—potentially up to half—of reserves would provide a helpful cushion in light of the anticipated shortfalls that lie ahead.”

Controller Cohen Calls for Calm

In a press release issued Tuesday, Dec. 19, State Controller Malia M. Cohen calls for calm in the wake of recent budget deficit announcements and issued the following statement after releasing the recent Cash Report on December 8:

“Despite reports from various sources indicating a budgetary deficit of approximately $68 billion, the state’s cash position remains strong, and, absent any unforeseen circumstances, the state has sufficient cash to pay its bills and meet its financial obligations through the end of the fiscal year.”

“As chief fiscal officer, one of my duties is to track and report on the state’s actual cash balance,” she continued. “In that regard, the state currently has more than $91.4 billion in available borrowable resources, due in large part to the Governor’s and Legislature’s foresight in building prudent rainy-day reserves in the Budget Stabilization Account. While legislators will have difficult choices to make in the new year, I am confident they will be deliberate in addressing the budget challenges before them, and I urge them to protect, to the extent possible, the health and social service programs designed to benefit those who are displaced, without shelter, or otherwise economically disadvantaged.”

About Controller Cohen

As the chief fiscal officer of California, Controller Cohen is responsible for accountability and disbursement of the state’s financial resources. The Controller has independent auditing authority over government agencies that spend state funds. She is a member of numerous financing authorities, and fiscal and financial oversight entities including the Franchise Tax Board. She also serves on the boards for the nation’s two largest public pension funds. Follow the Controller on X at @CAController and on Facebook at California State Controller’s Office.

About the Legislative Analyst’s Office

The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) has provided fiscal and policy advice to the Legislature for 75 years. It is known for its fiscal and programmatic expertise and nonpartisan analyses of the state budget. The office serves as the “eyes and ears” for the Legislature to ensure that the executive branch is implementing legislative policy in a cost efficient and effective manner.

Organization

The office is overseen by the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC), a 16-member bipartisan committee. Currently, the office has a staff of 43 analysts and approximately 13 support staff. The analytical staff cover several budget and policy areas: Criminal Justice, State Finance, Education (including K-12 and Higher Education), Health and Human Services, Natural Resources and Environment, General Government (including Local Government), Transportation, and Capital Outlay and Infrastructure.

By Josef Britschgi, Marketing & Communication Administrator, BAC Community Bank

BAC Community Bank recently helped secure funding for a nonprofit workforce development organization in Antioch.

Through a collaboration with the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco (FHLBank San Francisco) and its AHEAD economic development grant program, BAC Community Bank helped to provide $70,000 in funding to Antioch’s Opportunity Junction for the expansion of its mental health services. 

“It is a privilege to stand by Opportunity Junction and other grassroots community organizations,” said Dana Bockstahler, BAC Community Bank CEO. “We are honored to assist in providing the vital financial support that fuels their unwavering dedication to making a positive impact on local lives.”

With a mission to “help motivated Contra Costa County job seekers develop the skills and confidence to launch careers that lead to financial security,” Opportunity Junction provides no-cost job training and wraparound support to income-eligible individuals with barriers to employment. 

Opportunity Junction President and CEO Brianna Robinson said her organization’s Administrative Careers Training program has offered mental health services to participants since 2003, but this BAC Community Bank-sponsored grant will now make those services available to all individuals enrolled in the Healthcare Career Pathway and Career Counseling and Placement Assistance programs. 

“We are deeply grateful for this support,” Robinson continued. “We recognized in 2003 that addressing trauma was critical to helping job seekers overcome barriers to employment. As we have grown over the years and added more programs, we are excited to offer these services to all our job seekers with the goal of supporting high graduation and employment retention rates.” 

The AHEAD program enables FHLBank San Francisco members like BAC Community Bank to give a critical boost to local programs and projects that target pressing community needs and bring greater opportunity to underserved populations. AHEAD grants are awarded annually and delivered through FHLBank San Francisco member financial institutions to local community organizations for projects and programs that benefit lower-income and underserved communities. 

Since the program’s inception in 2004, FHLBank San Francisco has awarded more than $25 million in AHEAD grants to over 800 economic development projects in Arizona, California and Nevada. In 2023, the FHLBank San Francisco board of directors allocated $4 million to the AHEAD program, more than doubling the funding in prior years, and awarded grants to 75 projects. BAC Community Bank applied for the grant in partnership with Opportunity Junction and was awarded the $70,000 after a competitive selection process. This is the fourth year that BAC Community Bank has participated in the program.

“Each year, we are inspired by the wide range of impactful programs that are brought to us by our member institutions through the AHEAD grant program,” said Eric Cicourel, FHLBank San Francisco senior vice president and community investment officer. “We were particularly encouraged by the large number of unique members who participated in this cycle, including BAC Community Bank. These financial institutions are pillars in their communities and have an intimate understanding of the needs of the communities they serve. We are proud to partner with our members to extend a lifeline to so many compelling and deserving organizations.”  

For those interested in applying for the AHEAD Program in 2024, please contact BAC Community Bank or visit the FHLBank San Francisco website at www.fhlbsf.com to learn more. 

About BAC Community Bank

BAC Community Bank is California’s 10th oldest state-chartered bank. Established in 1965, BAC operates branch offices throughout San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and eastern Contra Costa counties. Centrally headquartered in Stockton, California, BAC is continuously recognized for its strength and banking excellence in the communities it serves. BAC Community Bank is an Equal Housing Lender and Equal Opportunity Employer. Member FDIC. More information is available online at www.bankbac.com. 

About Opportunity Junction

Opportunity Junction was founded in 2000 on the fundamental belief that everyone who works hard deserves the opportunity to succeed despite facing personal and systemic barriers. The organization provides training, support, work experience and placement assistance to empower Contra Costa job seekers to achieve financial security. More information is available online at www.opportunityjunction.org. 

About the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco

The Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco is a member-driven cooperative helping local lenders in Arizona, California, and Nevada build strong communities, create opportunity, and change lives for the better. The tools and resources we provide to our member financial institutions — commercial banks, credit unions, industrial loan companies, savings institutions, insurance companies, and community development financial institutions — promote homeownership and expand access to quality housing and boost economic development. Together with our members and other partners, we are making the communities we serve more vibrant, equitable, and resilient. More information is available online at www.fhlbsf.com.

Claims typical residential customer will pay $32.62 more for combined monthly electric and natural gas bill beginning January 1, 2024.

By CPUC

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) on Thursday, Nov. 16, 2023, resolved Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s (PG&E) General Rate Case (GRC), which covers its operational and infrastructure revenue requirement for 2023-2026. The decision marks a crucial step in fortifying the future of California’s electric grid while prioritizing customer affordability.

Based on the evidence presented, the CPUC today unanimously approved the Alternate Proposed Decision of Commissioner John Reynolds. This decision approves investments in the safety and reliability of PG&E’s energy services. Inflation and a significant investment in undergrounding electric lines ranked among the top drivers in PG&E’s request. Over the past year and a half, numerous parties reviewed PG&E’s GRC request and provided input on each cost category and related proposed expenditures.

“I am proud of today’s decision because it represents the CPUC’s commitment to finding a reasonable balance in the face of incredibly challenging circumstances and competing objectives,” said Commissioner John Reynolds, who is assigned to the proceeding. “This decision ultimately represents both an historic investment in PG&E’s electric and natural gas systems as well as an expectation that PG&E must continue to be safer and more efficient. I am grateful to the many parties, and the scores of CPUC staffers, for their help as we grappled with this decision.”

Today’s decision propels PG&E’s energy infrastructure and operations into the future, addressing critical objectives such as mitigating wildfire risk, enhancing safety and reliability, and anticipating evolving electric grid demands. This comprehensive approach not only ensures PG&E’s capacity to maintain a safe and reliable energy system with a dedicated workforce, but also positions California for a more resilient energy future in the face of climate change. Moreover, the decision reflects rigorous oversight over hundreds of programs, and reduces PG&E’s request to more accurately reflect forecasts for prudent use of ratepayer funds.

Among the key initiatives covered in the decision:

• Wildfire System Enhancement and Undergrounding
  • Approves 1,230 miles of electric line undergrounding, as well as 778 miles of covered conductor, totaling 2,008 hardened miles. This represents an historic opportunity for PG&E to invest in safer, reliable improvements for its customers while also achieving economies of scale to drive down costs; the revised undergrounding total also provides PG&E with a bridge to a future phase of undergrounding planning, through the Senate Bill 884 program.
• Vegetation Management
  • Approves PG&E investing approximately $1.3 billion in vegetation management to reduce wildfire ignition risk and improve reliability on PG&E’s electrical system.
• Capacity Upgrades
  • Approves PG&E investing more than $2.5 billion in upgrading the electric distribution system from 2023-2026, which will help prepare the grid to support initiatives for enhanced building electrification and new interconnections for electric vehicle charging stations and new housing and businesses.

“Today’s decision balances a myriad of competing interests—affordability, feasibility, safety, and reliability,” said CPUC President Alice Reynolds. “And in the face of increasingly turbulent climate-driven weather events, it gives PG&E the opportunity to prove it can underground electric lines at scale.  This will allow PG&E to achieve economies of scale, drive down costs, and reduce wildfire risk.”

Setting the pathway for critical investments in PG&E’s system

For PG&E customers, this approval by the CPUC translates to a continued commitment to safe, reliable, and affordable energy services. The GRC ensures that every dollar invested contributes to more resilient energy infrastructure, offering customers lasting benefits. Moreover, stringent accountability measures are embedded within the decision, assuring customers that their investment yields tangible and accountable improvements in PG&E’s operations and services.

PG&E requested $15.4 billion for 2023; Thursday’s decision cut that amount substantially, by $1.8 billion. Today’s decision sets the 2023 revenue requirement at $13.5 billion, reflecting an 11 percent increase from the authorized 2022 revenue requirement. For the typical residential customer, their combined monthly electric and natural gas bill will increase by $32.62 or 12.8 percent, compared to PG&E’s request of $38.73 or 17.9 percent increase.

PG&E’s 2022 Authorized Revenue Requirement		Proposed 2023 Revenue Requirement	Percent Increase	Dollar Increase
$12.2 billion	PG&E Request	$15.4 billion	26%	$3.2 billion
	Decision	$13.5 billion	11%	$1.3 billion

Customers can expect any changes to their bill to go into effect on January 1, 2024.

For further information on the proceeding, including today’s decision and a fact sheet, please visit the CPUC’s website.

About the California Public Utilities Commission

The CPUC regulates services and utilities, protects consumers, safeguards the environment, and assures Californians access to safe and reliable utility infrastructure and services. Visit www.cpuc.ca.gov for more information.