State could retain unpopular written literacy test

By Dana Lambert, EdSource.org – republished with permission

Newly proposed legislation sponsored by the California Teachers Association would eliminate all performance assessments teachers are required to pass, including one for literacy that it supported three years ago. The result could leave in place an unpopular written test that the literacy performance assessment was designed to replace.

Senate Bill 1263, authored by state Sen. Josh Newman, D-Fullerton, would do away with the California Teaching Performance Assessment, known as the CalTPA, through which teachers demonstrate their competence via video clips of instruction and written reflections on their practice. 

Eliminating the assessment will increase the number of effective teachers in classrooms, as the state continues to contend with a teacher shortage, said Newman, chairman of the Senate Education Committee.

“One key to improving the educator pipeline is removing barriers that may be dissuading otherwise talented and qualified prospective people from pursuing a career as an educator,” Newman said in a statement to EdSource.

The bill also would do away with a literacy performance assessment of teachers and oversight of literacy instruction in teacher preparation programs mandated by Senate Bill 488, authored by Sen. Susan Rubio, D-West Covina, in 2021.

The literacy performance assessment is scheduled to be piloted in the next few months. It is meant to replace the Reading Instruction Competence Assessment (RICA) set to be scrapped in 2025. 

New law could leave RICA in place

The proposed legislation appears to leave in place a requirement that candidates for a preliminary multiple-subject or education specialist credential pass a reading instruction competence assessment, said David DeGuire, a director at the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing.

“At this time, it is unclear what that assessment would look like, but it could be that the state continues to use the current version of the RICA,” he said.

Newman will present the legislation to the Senate Education Committee in the next few months. Discussions about whether the RICA remains in use are likely to take place during the legislative process.

Rubio recently became aware of the new legislation and had not yet discussed it with Newman.

“For three years, I worked arduously and collaboratively with a broad range of education leaders, including parent groups, teacher associations and other stakeholders to modernize a key component of our educational system that in my 17 years as a classroom teacher and school administrator I saw as counterproductive to our students’ learning,” Rubio said of Senate Bill 488.

Teachers union changes course 

The California Teachers Association, which originally supported Senate Bill 488, now wants all performance assessments, including the literacy performance assessment, eliminated.

“We are all scratching our heads,” said Yolie Flores, of Families in Schools, a Los Angeles-based education advocacy organization. “We were really blindsided by this (legislation), given the momentum around strengthening our teacher prep programs.”

The results of a survey of almost 1,300 CTA members last year convinced the state teachers union to push for the elimination of the CalTPA, said Leslie Littman, vice president of the union. Teachers who took the survey said the test caused stress, took away time that could have been used to collaborate with mentors and for teaching, and did not prepare them to meet the needs of students, she said.

“I think what we were probably not cognizant of at that time, and it really has become very clear of late, is just how much of a burden these assessments have placed on these teacher candidates,” Littman said. 

Teacher candidates would be better served if they were observed over longer periods of time, during student teaching, apprenticeships, residencies and mentorship programs, to determine if they were ready to teach, Littman said. This would also allow a mentor to counsel and support the candidate to ensure they have the required skills.

California joins science of reading movement

California has joined a national effort to change how reading is being taught in schools. States nationwide are rethinking balanced literacy, which has its roots in whole language instruction or teaching children to recognize words by sight, and replacing it with a method that teaches them to decode words by sounding them out, a process known as phonics. 

Smarter Balanced test scores, released last fall, show that only 46.6% of the state’s students who were tested met academic standards in English.

Last week Assemblymember Blanca Rubio, D-Baldwin Park, introduced Assembly Bill 2222, which would mandate that schools use evidence-based reading instruction. California, a “local control” state, currently only encourages school districts to incorporate fundamental reading skills, including phonics, into instruction.

 “It (Newman’s SB 1263) goes against not only the movement, but everything we know from best practices, evidence, research, science, of how we need to equip new teachers and existing teachers, frankly, to teach literacy,” Flores said. “And that we would wipe it away at this very moment where we’re finally getting some traction is just very concerning.”

Lori DePole, co-director of DeCoding Dyslexia California, said the proposed legislation would cut any progress the state has made “off at the knees.” 

Among her concerns is the elimination of the requirement, also authorized by Senate Bill 488, that the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing certify that teacher preparation programs are teaching literacy aligned to state standards and a provision that requires the commission to report to the state Legislature annually on how stakeholders are meeting the requirements of the law.

“It would be going away,” DePole said. “Everyone agreed with SB 488, all the supporters agreed, this was the direction California needed to go to strengthen teacher prep with respect to literacy. And before it can even be fully implemented, we’re going to do a 180 with this legislation. It makes no sense.”

Flores said teachers want to be equipped to teach reading using evidence-based techniques, but many don’t know how.

“We know that reading is the gateway, and if kids can’t read, it’s practically game over, right?” said Flores. “And we are saying with this bill that it doesn’t matter, that we don’t really need to teach and show that teachers know how to teach reading.”

Teacher tests replaced by coursework, degrees

California has been moving away from standardized testing for teacher candidates for several years as the teacher shortage worsened. In July 2021, legislation gave teacher candidates the option to take approved coursework instead of the California Basic Education Skills Test, or CBEST, or the California Subject Examinations for Teachers, or CSET. In January’s tentative budget, Gov. Gavin Newsom proposed eliminating the CBEST and allowing the completion of a bachelor’s degree to satisfy the state’s basic skills requirement.

Littman disagrees with the idea that there will be no accountability for teachers if the legislation passes. “There’s always been, and will continue to be, an evaluation component for all of our teachers in this state,” she said. “It just depends on what your district does and how they implement that. There’s always been a system of accountability for folks.”

SACRAMENTO, Calif.— California State Parks’ Division of Boating and Waterways (DBW) today announced plans to control aquatic invasive plants in the west coast’s largest estuary, the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and its southern tributaries. Starting March 6 through Nov. 30, 2024, DBW crews will begin herbicide treatments on water hyacinth, South American spongeplant, Uruguay water primrose, Alligator weed, Brazilian waterweed, curly leaf pondweed, Eurasian watermilfoil, coontail, ribbon weed, and fanwort in the Delta. Depending on weather conditions and plant growth/movement, treatment dates may change. Select areas of the Delta with high infestations or coverage of water hyacinth will be controlled using mechanical harvesting efforts through December 2024.

DBW works with local, state, and federal entities to better understand the plants and implement new integrated control strategies to increase efficacy. These aquatic invasive plants have no known natural controls and negatively affect the Delta’s ecosystem as they displace native plants. Continued warm temperatures help the plants proliferate at high rates. Plants are also known to form dense mats of vegetation creating safety hazards for boaters, obstructing navigation channels, marinas, and irrigation systems. Due to their ability to rapidly spread to new areas, it is likely that the plants will never be eradicated from Delta waters. Therefore, DBW operates a “control” program as opposed to an “eradication” program.

“Thank you to the public and partners for working with us on combating these aquatic invasive plants,” said DBW’s Deputy Director Ramona Fernandez. “Together we are mitigating their impacts on the lives of all who live, work, and recreate in the Delta.”

All herbicides used in DBW’s Aquatic Invasive Plant Control Program are registered for aquatic use with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the California Department of Pesticide Regulation. Treated areas will be monitored to ensure herbicide levels do not exceed allowable limits and follow EPA-registered label guidelines. The public may view the public notices and sign up to receive weekly updates on this year’s treatment season on DBW’s website.

Below is a list of proposed control actions for the 2024 treatment season:

Floating Aquatic Vegetation (Public Notice)

Water hyacinth, South American spongeplant, Uruguay water primrose, and alligator weed.

Herbicide Control

· Proposed Treatment Period
  All Sites: March 6, 2024 – Nov. 30, 2024

· Type of Herbicides: Glyphosate, 2,4-D, Imazamox, or Diquat

· Potential Treatment Areas: Initially in and/or around, but not limited to the following areas: San Joaquin River, Old River, Middle River, Fourteen Mile Slough, and Snodgrass Slough.

Mechanical Harvesting (If necessary)

· Harvesting Dates: March 2024 – April 2024 and July 2024 – December 2024

· Mechanical Harvesting Sites: Select areas of the Delta with high infestations or coverage of water hyacinth. See the Public Notice for potential mechanical harvesting control areas.

Submersed Aquatic Vegetation (Public Notice)

Brazilian waterweed, curlyleaf pondweed, Eurasian watermilfoil, coontail, ribbon weed, and fanwort.

Herbicide Control

· Treatment Period: Starting March 6, 2024, through Nov. 30, 2024, treatment period is based upon DBW field survey data, water temperatures and fish surveys.

· Type of Herbicide: Fluridone, Endothall or Diquat.

· Potential Treatment Areas: In and/or around the following areas (individual areas will be noticed prior to treatment application):

Anchorages, boat ramps and marinas: B & W Resort, Delta Marina Yacht Harbor, Grindstone Joes, Hidden Harbor Resort, Korth’s Pirates Lair, Oxbow Marina, Owl Harbor, River Point Landing, Rivers End, St. Francis Yacht Club, Tiki Lagoon, Tracy Oasis Marina, Turner Cut Resort, Vieira’s Resort, Village West Marina, and Willow Berm.
Near Old River: Berkeley Ski Club, Bullfrog Ski Club, Cruiser Haven, Delta Coves, Diablo Ski Club, Discovery Bay, Golden Gate Ski Club, Hammer Island, Italian Slough, Kings Island, Orwood Marina, Piper Slough, Sandmound Slough, Stockton Ski Club, and Taylor Slough.

Sacramento Area: French Island, Hogback, Long Island Slough, Prospect Island, Sacramento Marina, Snug Harbor, and Washington Lake.

Stockton Area: Atherton Cove, Buckley Cove, Calaveras River, Fourteenmile Slough, Mosher Slough, and Windmill Cove.

Mechanical Harvesting

This type of control method is not used for submersed aquatic vegetation. These plants are spread by fragmentation. Cutting the plants back exacerbates the problem, as shreds of the plants float away and re-propagate.

To report sightings, subscribe for program updates or more information regarding the control program, connect with us online at our website, via email at  AIS@parks.ca.gov, or by phone at (888) 326-2822.

Last year, DBW treated 2,377 acres of floating aquatic vegetation and 1,405 acres of submersed aquatic vegetation. No mechanical harvesting was conducted. A combination of herbicide, biological, and mechanical control methods were used to help control invasive plants at high-priority sites in the Delta.

In 1982, California state legislation designated DBW as the lead state agency to cooperate with other state, local, and federal agencies in controlling water hyacinth in the Delta, its tributaries, and the SuisunMarsh. The Egeria Densa Control Program was authorized by law in 1997 and treatment began in 2001. In 2012, spongeplant was authorized for control upon completion of the biological assessment. In 2013, DBW was able to expand its jurisdiction to include other invasive aquatic plants, and since then other aquatic invasive plants such as Uruguay water primrose, Eurasian watermilfoil, Carolina fanwort, coontail, Alligator weed, and Ribbon weed have been added to the AIPCP program.

Revenues from boaters’ registration fees and gasoline taxes (Harbors and Watercraft RevolvingFund), provide funding for DBW’s Aquatic Invasive Plant Control Program.

$202.7K from the Office of Traffic Safety

Contra Costa Health (CCH) announced today that it has received a $202,692 grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) to support its Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Program. This grant will allow CCH to promote safe practices for pedestrians and bicyclists and provide education about the importance of sharing the road.

Local data show an increase of nearly 30% in fatal crashes involving pedestrians over the past 10 years in Contra Costa County, and that pedestrians and bicyclists are 2.4 times more likely to be seriously injured or killed in a traffic crash compared to drivers. The OTS grant funds multiple efforts to improve safety for pedestrians and bicyclists.

“Everyone deserves a safe environment to travel, regardless of how people get to places,” OTS Director Barbara Rooney said. “The safety of people walking and biking on our roads is a high priority. Education plays a pivotal role in creating a strong road safety culture that prioritizes traffic safety, especially for our most vulnerable road users.”

Grant funds will support a variety of activities focused on bicycle and pedestrian safety:

• Support for local jurisdictions to include public health in road safety plans and address the community conditions that create unsafe environments for non-motorized road users.
• Local bicycle and pedestrian safety campaigns.
• Community bicycle and walk “audits” of streets with high rates of pedestrian or bicyclist fatalities and serious injury crashes.
• Bicycle training courses that teach youth on how to stay safe on the road.
• Community events that promote bicyclist and pedestrian visibility and the importance of sharing the road, slowing down, and staying alert to bicyclists and pedestrians while driving.

Area Goals for the OTS program include:

• Reduce the total number of pedestrians killed.
• Reduce the total number of pedestrians injured.
• Reduce the number of pedestrians killed under the age of 15.
• Reduce the number of pedestrians injured under the age of 15.
• Reduce the number of pedestrians killed over the age of 65.
• Reduce the number of pedestrians injured over the age of 65.
• Reduce the total number of bicyclists killed in traffic related crashes.
• Reduce the total number of bicyclists injured in traffic related crashes.
• Reduce the number of bicyclists killed in traffic related crashes under the age of 15.
• Reduce the number of bicyclists injured in traffic related crashes under the age of 15.
• Increase bicycle helmet compliance for children aged 5 to 18.

The grant program will run through September 2024.

Funding for this program was provided by a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety, through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — The California Department of Parks and Recreation (State Parks) has developed a five-year strategic plan to help shape the future direction of the state park system and the many recreational and conservation programs that serve California’s communities.

Named Path Forward, the strategic plan aligns with Governor Gavin Newsom’s Equity Executive Order N-16-22, 30X30 and Outdoor Access for All initiatives and will guide State Parks in strengthening operations to focus on key priorities and directing energy and resources toward meeting the goals and objectives. The themes, goals, and objectives in the plan are based on the foundational elements of access, inclusivity, and equity to provide optimal public service, strengthen partnership development, and empower the department’s workforce.

“The Path Forward strategic plan is about resilience and focusing on how we prepare the department for the century ahead,” stated State Parks Director Armando Quintero. “California needs these natural and cultural resources for everyone’s wellbeing. State Parks leadership, employees, and partners are committed to caring for your California. This is where you live.”

An employee workgroup composed of more than 100 frontline staff, managers, and supervisors representing all field regions, headquarters, and all program areas, was assembled to develop the Path Forward Plan. The vision, themes, goals, objectives, and core values were created and refined over several virtual meetings and reviewed by a partner and stakeholder advisory committee, employees, commissions, and executive staff along the way.

The input and perspective of stakeholders and partners helped to inform the final version of the plan and to ensure that the future of State Parks reflects the diverse experiences and priorities represented in the State of California.

Two factors set Path Forward apart from previous change efforts. Department staff from all levels developed the plan with input from partners, rather than an executive team taking a top-down approach. The second factor will begin in winter 2024 and involves an actionable implementation plan led by a committee made up of key leaders representing all program areas. The implementation plan includes interdisciplinary teams to carry out and manage projects tied to the goals and objectives of the plan. These teams will use a designated project management tool to develop specific plans, timelines, and evaluation metrics to achieve each goal. The teams will provide regular progress and status updates.

By using this strategic plan as a guide, a course of action has been developed to support State Parks in meeting challenges. The plan will also create new strategies for institutional growth and optimization.

With 280 park units, California’s State Park System is a world-class network of incomparable lands, waters, and features vitally important to the well-being of the state’s environment, economy, and people. State Parks manages these precious natural and cultural resources while providing hundreds of recreational and conservation programs and services for millions of Californians and visitors from all over the world.

The Path Forward Plan is available in English and is translatable to several other languages at parks.ca.gov/PathForward.

Pointing to dismal test scores, veteran lawmaker and a coalition of advocacy groups introduce AB 2222

By John Fensterwald, EdSource.org – Republished with permission

A veteran legislator who taught elementary school for 16 years introduced comprehensive early-literacy legislation Wednesday that would impose requirements on reading instruction and add urgency to the state’s patchwork of reading reforms.

Evidence-based practices, collectively known as “the science of reading,” would become the mandated approach to reading instruction for TK-5, if Assembly Bill 2222, authored by Assemblymember Blanca Rubio, D-Baldwin Park, becomes law.

The bill would shift the state’s decade-old policy of encouraging districts to incorporate fundamental reading skills in the early grades, including phonics, to demanding that they do so. This would depart from the state policy of giving school districts discretion to choose curriculums and teaching methods that meet state academic standards.

Between now and 2028, all TK to fifth-grade teachers, literacy coaches and specialists would be required to take a 30-hour-minium course in reading instruction from an approved list.

School districts and charter schools purchasing textbooks would select from approved materials endorsed by the State Board of Education in a new round of textbook adoption.  

The California Commission on Teacher Credentialing would receive money to add several experts for accreditation of teacher preparation programs in the science of reading. The bill would strengthen accountability for those programs that have not taught effective reading strategies, as required under recent state law.

Rubio and the advocacy nonprofits EdVoice,  Decoding Dyslexia CA, and Families in Schools, the bill’s co-sponsors, argue that another generation of California children cannot wait for districts teaching ineffective techniques using inadequate materials to come around.

“California is facing a literacy crisis,” the first sentence of the bill states. “There are far too many children who are not reading on grade level by the end of third grade and who will not complete elementary school with the literacy skills and language development they need to be successful academically in middle school and high school.”

Only 43% of California third graders met the academic standards in the state’s standardized test in 2023. Only 27.2% of Black students, 32% of Hispanic students, and 35% of low-income children were proficient, compared with 57.5% of white, 69% of Asian and 66% of non-low-income students.

“There’s always this delicate balance between local control versus let’s move forward collectively,” said Marshall Tuck, CEO of EdVoice and former candidate for State Superintendent of Public Instruction. “But when we have an issue that the vast majority of lower-income kids, who are disproportionately Black and Latino, are not reading at grade level, it requires urgency to do what we know works as fast as possible.”

Rubio, who recalled being handed coloring books instead of reading lessons in first grade as a non-English-speaking Mexican immigrant, said that data on the effectiveness of the science of reading convinced her to author the bill. However, her own experience as a fourth-grade teacher who previously taught kindergarten and first grade reinforced it. 

“When I have fourth graders that are at first- or second-grade reading, something’s wrong. I can tell you right then and there, if a kid doesn’t know phonics in the fourth grade, we screwed them up somewhere. If they’re not reading in the third grade, they may never recover,” said Rubio, who was first elected to the Assembly in 2016.

A piecemeal approach to literacy changes

The science of reading refers to research from neurology, psychology, and the cognitive and developmental sciences about how children learn to read. In the last decade, 47 states and Washington, D.C., have enacted laws to incorporate elements of the science of reading strategies. Fewer — Mississippi, Connecticut, Tennessee, and Virginia among them — have adopted and funded policies that coordinate multiple key elements: preparing and training teachers, supplying them with aligned instructional materials, testing for learning difficulties like dyslexia and engaging parents.

California is among the 47 states. Within the past three years, Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Legislature enacted discrete pieces of a state policy.

They funded $25 million to the University of California San Francisco to create a screening test for the risk of dyslexia and other learning difficulties; universal screening of K-2 students will begin in 2026-27.

They passed legislation to create a teaching credential for TK-3 that includes new literacy standards grounded in the science of reading; teacher preparation programs must introduce them starting next fall, and teachers will take a performance assessment as part of their new credential.

Newsom included $500 million in the last two state budgets for hiring and training of literacy coaches in the 5% of schools with the most low-income students. The Sacramento and Napa county offices of education, strong advocates of the science of reading, are overseeing the effort.   

At the encouragement of State Board of Education President Linda Darling-Hammond, a professor emerita at the Stanford University School of Education, Newsom included $1 million in the current budget for a “literacy road map,” which will serve as a guide, with online resources, for districts to implement evidence-based reading strategies. Leading that effort are two respected literacy experts, Bonnie Garcia and Nancy Brynelson, whom State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond named the state’s first state literacy co-directors.

Tuck credits the steps taken by the Legislature and Newsom, “who has been an anchor on early education.” But guidelines won’t ensure that students in all districts will receive effective reading instruction —especially high-poverty schools that may be “slower to make adjustments when they’re dealing with so many challenges and so much complexity.”

Megan Potente, co-state director of Decoding Dyslexia CA, points to her 20 years as a teacher, who, as a new teacher frustrated by the ineffectiveness of her reading training, took a course on phonics and fundamental reading skills. “You feel like you’re not good at your job, and you weren’t equipped. And that’s a terrible feeling for new teachers,” she said. “So I went back to school, and I learned what I needed.”

Years later, she became a coach, supporting teachers in districts using balanced literacy that de-emphasizes evidence-based practices. She found it difficult to apply what she knew, she said, “because the curriculum materials didn’t follow the science; the teaching methods didn’t follow the science.”

A piecemeal approach to reading reforms inevitably leads to a game of “whack-a-mole,” former Tennessee Education Commissioner Penny Schwinn, who is credited with implementing successful comprehensive policies in her state during the pandemic, told EdSource.

Newsom did not require nor explicitly encourage districts to use the $20-plus billion they received in federal and state Covid-relief funding on teaching training in the science of reading nor on updating reading texts and materials. Now that the state is heading into a lean budget year, a scarcity of funding, particularly for teacher training, could set back a timeline to implement the bill. Newsom’s proposed budget for 2024-25 includes no significant money for new TK-12 programs.

A spokesperson for the Newsom administration, which usually declines to discuss pending legislation, offered no further comment.

What’s in Assembly Bill 2222

AB 2222 would define evidence-based literacy instruction as “evidence-based explicit and systematic instruction in phonological and phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary and oral language development, fluency, comprehension, and writing …  that adheres to the science of reading.” (Phonics are rules that relate letters in words to the sounds of spoken language. A phoneme is the smallest element of a sound within spoken language. Phonemic awareness reflects the ability to understand that words combine multiple phonemes when pronounced.)

The bill sets requirements for three principal elements of literacy instruction:

Teacher training

Starting in March 2026 and no later than June 30, 2028, all teachers in grades TK to 5 must complete an approved professional development and training program satisfactorily. The California Department of Education would appoint one or more county offices of education with expertise in the science of reading and evidence-based literacy instruction to serve as the state literacy expert lead that would select the list of eligible training programs. Districts would have to notify parents if fewer than 90% of the required teachers failed to complete the course. 

Instructional materials

The last state textbook adoption for English language arts and English language development was 2015. The bill would require the State Board of Education to complete the next adoption cycle by Jan. 1, 2026, for TK through eighth grade. The materials would have to adhere to the science of reading. School districts would not be required to replace materials they’re currently using, but they would need a waiver to buy basic instructional materials that aren’t approved.

Textbooks like “Units of Study,” by noted literacy author Lucy Calkins, whose instruction relies on visual cues, including the three-cuing method of reading, would not be eligible for the approved list.

Teacher preparation

The bill would strengthen the accountability requirements of landmark Senate Bill 488, the 2023 law that requires instructing candidates for a TK-5 or elementary credential in evidence-based reading instruction. 

It would require the Commission on Teacher Credentialing to establish a probationary accreditation process for teacher prep programs that aren’t meeting the literacy instruction requirements. Faculty in those programs would have to complete professional development in the science of reading for the program to avoid a loss of accreditation.  

The bill would provide funding for the credentialing commission to hire experts in the science of reading to help with program accreditation. One of the dozen members of the Committee of Accreditation would have to be an expert in the science of reading.  

To generate at least $1 to $2 billion annually; priorities include transit, safer streets and roads, resilience

Commissioners considering a variety of tax options

By John Goodwin & Rebecca Long, Metropolitan Transportation Commission

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) on Wednesday, Jan. 24, 2024 voted to pursue legislation in Sacramento this year that would enable Bay Area voters to consider a transportation revenue measure as early as November 2026.

The proposed measure aims to advance a climate-friendly Bay Area transportation system that is safe, accessible and convenient for all. This includes preserving and enhancing public transit service; making transit faster, safer and easier to use; repairing local streets and roads; and improving mobility and access for all people, including pedestrians, bicyclists and scooter and wheelchair users.

The vote was approved unanimously by all members present. There are 21 commissioners with three non-voting members. Oakland Mayor Sheng Tao and San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan who are voting members were both absent during the vote.

State Sen. Scott Wiener of San Francisco earlier this month introduced what is known as a spot bill that will be used as the vehicle for authorizing placement of the proposed measure on a future ballot in each of the nine Bay Area counties. The first opportunity to amend Wiener’s Senate Bill 925 will be in mid-February.

While the Commission has not yet identified a revenue source for the proposed measure, MTC Chair and Napa County Supervisor Alfredo Pedroza noted that he and his colleagues are considering a wide range of options.

“Voters traditionally have supported transportation through bridge tolls or sales taxes. Bridge tolls are not an option in this case and we think it’s smart to look at more than a regional sales tax. We’re proposing a few options so we have enough flexibility and enough time to get it right.”

Tax Options & Projected Revenue

Legislators, and MTC staff and commissioners, will consider several options for generating revenue. These may include a sales tax, an income tax, a payroll tax, a square footage based parcel tax, a Bay Area-specific vehicle registration surcharge with tiered rates based on the value of the vehicle or a regional vehicle-miles traveled charge (VMT) charge subject to prior adoption of a statewide road usage charge not sooner than 2030.  

MTC staff recommend raising at least $1 billion to $2 billion per year for robust investments in safe streets and other capital improvements, to improve and expand transit service, and to help Bay Area transit agencies operate their services. 

Goals of the Regional Transportation Measure

The revenue measure’s core goal is to advance a climate-friendly transportation system in the Bay Area that is safe, accessible and convenient for all. Focus areas include:

1. Protect and enhance transit service. Ensure that current resources are maintained and used effectively; and enhance service frequency and areas served.
2. Make transit faster, safer and easier to use. Create a seamless and convenient Bay Area transit system that attracts more riders by improving public safety on transit; implementing the Bay Area Transit Transformation Action Plan; and strengthening regional network management.
3. Enhance mobility and access for all. Make it safer and more accessible for people of all ages and abilities to get to where they need to go. Preserve and improve mobility for all transportation system users, including people walking, biking and wheeling.

Proposed Expenditure Categories

1. Transit transformation: sustain, expand and improve transit service for both current and future riders; accelerate customer-focused initiatives from the Bay Area Transit Transformation Action Plan and other service improvements that are high priorities for Bay Area voters and riders; and help fund the transition to zero-emission transit. 
2. Safe streets: transform local streets and roads to support safety, equity and climate goals, including through pothole repair, investments in bicycle/pedestrian infrastructure, safe routes to transit and other safety enhancements.
3. Connectivity: fund mobility improvements that close gaps and relieve bottlenecks in the existing transportation network in a climate-neutral way.
4. Climate resilience: fund planning, design and/or construction work that protects transportation infrastructure and nearby communities from rising sea levels, flooding, wildfires and extreme heat.

Transportation Measure Highlights

This measure reflects feedback from Commissioners, key legislative leaders and other stakeholders, including:

• Improving transit coordination by strengthening MTC’s role as regional transit network manager;
• A focus on Bay Area Transit Transformation Action Plan (TAP) action items and other customer facing policies that would benefit from a regional approach, such as ambassadors to assist riders and support a safe atmosphere;
• Flexibility in the amount of revenue requested, as well as the way that funding could be generated;
• Flexibility in spending priorities as the region’s needs evolve with time; and
• The “North Star” vision statement, which includes greenhouse gas emission-reduction tools, such as:
  • A Transportation Demand Management mandate that encourages Bay Area employees to commute to work in ways other than driving to work alone; and 
  • A limitation on how money could be spent on highway-widening projects.

Just as MTC commissioners have proposed a range of tax options, so too have they identified multiple expenditure categories.

“We recognize that we’ll be asking voters to take on a heavy lift,” acknowledged Pedroza. “The big lesson from COVID is the need to transform both our transit network and the way we pay to operate it. But we also need to transform our local streets and roads to fix potholes and make the roads safer for walking and biking. We need to improve connectivity and do it in a way that doesn’t encourage people to drive more. And we need to make our transportation infrastructure more resilient to rising sea levels, flooding, wildfires and extreme heat.”

Measure Vision Statement

The Commissioners also adopted the following Vision Statement for the measure: “The Bay Area needs a world-class, reliable, affordable, efficient and connected transportation network that meets the needs of Bay Area residents, businesses and visitors while also helping combat the climate crisis; a public transit network that offers safe, clean, frequent, accessible, easy-to-navigate and reliable service, getting transit riders where they want and need to go safely, affordably, quickly and seamlessly; local roads are well maintained; and transit, biking, walking and wheeling are safe, convenient and competitive alternatives to driving; enhancing access to opportunity, lowering greenhouse gas emissions, strengthening the region’s economy and improving quality of life.”

To learn more about the proposed tax measure click, here. To read the supporting documents considered by the Commissioners click, here.

MTC is the transportation planning, financing and coordinating agency for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

By Jon Coupal

Note: This column first appeared in The Press-Enterprise. Republished with permission.

Daily news reports on the great “California Exodus” are not just from conservative outlets. Left-leaning publications such as the Los Angeles Times and San Francisco Chronicle have recently reported on the outmigration of upper-income citizens who, even if not billionaires, still generate a lot of income tax revenue.

Earlier this month the California Legislature held a hearing on Assembly Bill 259 which would lay the foundation for the imposition of a wealth tax. The companion legislation to AB 259 is a proposed constitutional amendment that would, among other things, effectively sweep away Proposition 13’s limits on taxing property.

Fortunately, the idea that California would be the first in the nation to impose a highly unpopular wealth tax is so radical that the proposal was rejected by Democrats as well as Republicans on the Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee. It didn’t take long for the Democrat chair of the committee to shuffle the bill to the “suspense” file where bad legislation goes to die.

Coincidentally, the wealth tax hearing occurred on the same day that Gov. Newsom released his proposed budget. Things got a little sparky during the presentation with Newsom pushing hard against the Legislative Analyst’s figure of a $68 billion deficit. Newsom contends that the deficit is “only” $38 billion. (But hey, what’s a $30 billion difference between friends).

Newsom saved his most animated criticism for those who highlight the state’s shortcomings, including the significant outmigration of California’s most productive citizens. He especially targeted the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal, which has never been reticent about commenting on the state’s well-deserved reputation for anti-business bias.

But to his credit, Newsom rejected the notion of a wealth tax – at least for now. For taxpayers, it matters little whether the governor’s stance is motivated by politics or a sincere policy position. Either way, we’ll take it.

The problems with the wealth tax proposal – even as half-baked as it is – are legion. But one issue should be especially troubling to anyone who believes both in fiscal restraint and basic constitutional freedoms. That is, could a wealth tax be applied to people who voluntarily leave the state for the specific purpose of avoiding California’s highest-in-the-nation income taxes? AB 259 contains a provision that applies the wealth tax to every “wealth-tax resident,” defined as someone who “is no longer a resident, and does not have the reasonable expectation to return to the state.”

The question here is not whether a resident of another state can be taxed when they have a “nexus” to California, for example income earned in California or owning property in the state. Rather, what about someone who no longer has any connection to California? The proposal to tax wealth on such people would likely be deemed to violate the U.S. Constitution’s Commerce Clause.

More fundamentally, an “exit tax” could be construed as an impairment to the right to travel. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed in 1958 in Kent v. Dulles that citizens have a liberty interest in the right to travel: “[t]he right to travel is a part of the ‘liberty’ of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment …”

Setting aside the practical and legal problems with this or any wealth tax proposal, a fundamental problem is the signal it sends to all productive California taxpayers as well as those in other states who might consider moving here.  California already has a horrible reputation for its treatment of taxpayers and businesses, why would we even consider another punishing tax?

The proponents of the wealth tax need to be reminded that, as much as they might want to prevent citizens from leaving, California is not East Berlin. The U.S. Constitution will not allow the state government to build a wall to keep citizens in, and then shoot tax bills at them when they try to escape.

Jon Coupal is president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.

About 1.2 million signatures needed by February 5th to qualify the Repeal the Death Tax Act for November’s ballot

Download your petition below to help

By Katy Grimes

This article was first by the California Globe. Republished with permission.

Last week when Gov. Gavin Newsom was sharing his proposed 2024-2025 budget, he insisted that he was opposed to a proposed wealth tax. And sure enough, Assembly Bill 259 by Assemblyman Alex Lee (D-Palo Alto), which will impose an annual “worldwide net worth” tax of 1 percent on net worth above $50 million, rising to 1.5 percent on net worth over $1.0 billion, was killed in committee that afternoon.

However, the governor has been mum about another type of wealth tax – California’s sneaky Death Tax, which adds a new tax on property inherited by a family member, which was already was taxed over the years of ownership.

In 2020, Proposition 19 resurrected the Death Tax on families whose property is left to loved ones when they die, putting their homes, property and businesses at significant risk. While the initiative was cleverly disguised as a benefit for the elderly and disabled communities, Proposition 19 caused far more harm than good.

In May, Senator Kelly Seyarto (R-Murrieta) introduced Senate Constitutional Amendment 4, to restore taxpayers’ property rights by reversing the state’s “death tax” written into in Proposition 19. Deviously titled “the Property Tax Transfers, Exemptions, and Revenue for Wildfire Agencies and Counties Amendment,”

SCA 4 would have reversed one of the largest property tax increases in state history, a little-noticed provision of Proposition 19 that revoked the ability of families and parents to pass property to their children without any change to the property tax bill, according to the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.

However, Democrats killed Seyarto’s SCA 4 in a legislative committee.

I remember when the Death Tax was first slayed.

“It was 1986 when the parent-child exclusion from reassessment was first added to the state constitution,” Susan Shelly recently wrote. “A growing number of Californians were angry to discover that state law treated death and inheritance as a “change of ownership” under Prop. 13, triggering reassessment to current market value just as if it was a sale. The legislature proposed a constitutional amendment that would allow parent-child transfers of a home and a limited amount of other property, such as a small business or a rental property, without reassessment.”

“The parent-child transfer protection passed by a unanimous vote in both houses of the legislature, and then was approved by 75% of voters statewide.”

Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association (HJTA) elaborates on how Proposition 19 hurts taxpayers:

Proposition 19 had two main elements. The first was expanded “portability” of base-year property taxes. Homeowners who are 55 years of age or older, who are victims of a wildfire, or who are disabled may now move to a replacement home anywhere in the state, of any value, and take the base-year property tax assessment of the old home with them to a new home up to three times.

Now to the other part of Proposition 19. Previously under the state constitution, property transfers between parents and children, and sometimes grandparents and grandchildren, were excluded from reassessment. These family members could transfer a home of any value and up to $1 million of assessed value of other property, such as a small business property, a vacation cabin, or a rental property, without any increase in the property tax bill. This taxpayer protection was added to the state constitution in 1986 by Proposition 58 (parents and children) and in 1996 by Proposition 193 (grandparents and grandchildren) with overwhelming public support.

Proposition 58 was approved by more than 75% of California voters, and Proposition 193 was approved by nearly the same margin. Now, these taxpayer protections are gone.

Proposition 19 has replaced 58 and 193 with a very narrow exclusion for family transfers of property. Only a principal residence that the inheriting child occupies as his or her permanent primary residence is eligible for an exclusion from reassessment. Unless the new owner can move in within one year, the property is reassessed to market value. Business properties and rental properties lose the protection entirely.

So, what can be done?

Susan Shelly continues, “the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, where I am on staff as VP of Communications, is collecting signatures to put an initiative on the ballot that would repeal the tax increase that was hidden in Prop. 19, without touching the other provisions in it. The official petition is available at RepealTheDeathTax.com and can be downloaded and printed on one sheet of ordinary letter-size paper. This enables instant distribution of the petition throughout the state. Theoretically, a million people could download the petition at the same time, fill it out and sign it, and have one other registered voter in the household also sign it.”

It’s easy. Click on RepealTheDeathTax.com and/or

Click here to DOWNLOAD the official petition RIGHT NOW

RepealTheDeathTax.com has more details HERE:

Read the Initiative here.

Please note: You must print and sign the petition with paper and ink. It’s not electronic.

Follow the easy instructions. And please note:

DEADLINE EXTENDED! Return signed petitions to HJTA postmarked by FEBRUARY 5

Download the official, legal petition to put the REPEAL THE DEATH TAX initiative on the November 2024 ballot.

Complete instructions are included in the pdf file.

Get your petition in the mail ASAP – before February 5th.

Katy Grimes, the Editor in Chief of the California Globe, is a long-time Investigative Journalist covering the California State Capitol, and the co-author of California’s War Against Donald Trump: Who Wins? Who Loses?