CA's Experiment with Redevelopment Agencies

California Governor Jerry Brown began deliberations with the Legislature over dissolving the state’s 400 redevelopment agencies in the winter of 2011, and by June of that year they finalized the legislation. The abrupt demise of California’s massive multi-billion dollar local planning instrument has left many cities with administrative gaps in their economic development initiatives, and nearly $2 billion remain in limbo while local governments struggle to keep funds in their jurisdiction. 

Sacramento contests that local redevelopment agencies were choking off much-needed revenue for state services with little benefit to the state at large, while local governments defended them as powerful tools for revitalizing urban centers and propagating ‘smart urbanism’. The move has pitted competing interests of public agencies against each other in a debate over who is best suited to take on their planning responsibilities.

What is a Redevelopment Project Area?

A redevelopment area is a special development district similar to enterprise zones, incremental tax finance districts, cultural districts and others, with several significant characteristics that set them apart. California redevelopment areas were designated by local municipal governments – typically a city or town, but sometimes counties as well – and they allowed the local government to capture a greater share of property taxes while reducing the private cost burden of new developments.

Bad News Bears for State's corrections agency, or "MORE Bad News Bears for the State's corrections agency"

The California State Controller's Office this morning released its most recent audit of the CDCR, and it wasn't a pat on the back. The State's prison system has become one of the nation's most expensive and worst funded, and in recent months several internal investigations have been launched to root out misspending and abuses (both financial and physical, which is doubly sad).

In the midst of the State's Realignment, and in the wake of SCOTUS's scathing review and injunction last month, Sacramento is finally taking a critical look at prison-corrections costs and detention policies in an effort to (a) not get sued again and (b) save some much-needed $moolah$.

The report this morning points to "grossly inadequate procedures... for collecting overpayment of salaries and travel advances made through the agency’s office revolving fund", says State Controller Chiang. The audit also identifies several cases of mis-appropriation and abuse of public funds. No good, CDCR. No good.

Our vacations are never simple

This adventure started July 1, then took a break for this past week while I worked in the city and my car was stuck in Valencia, CA. It now resumes. The last 650-mile leg will start and end ... ... TOMORROW!

Realignment and the Corrections Crisis, or "9 Fellows Walk Into a Bar..." (Pt.5)

I visited Sacramento four months ago with my fellowship cohort to meet with policy wonks, and to ask some uncomfortable questions about the state of the State. A $26B budget deficit, gridlocked politicians, a frumpy economy, a mess of jurisdictional mishaps and dozens of uncoordinated populist initiatives that don't look so hot the next morning had (and still have) all conspired to ruin everything.  Wild rumors had been flying about in San Francisco that the state was considering a wide-reaching reorientation of public services, and that local governments would expectedly "get the shaft" in these changes. That turned out to be true.

It was hailed as the great "Realignment" and in this shifting of authorities, monies and services, prison reform (kinda) made it onto the list. And rightly, considering that California has one of the largest prison populations out of any state in the Union, and that the Union has the highest per capita incarceration rate in the ENTIRE WORLD. That mean's we're the best!

My group has started working with the County Sheriff's office on a project to evaluate the levels of recidivism in San Francisco, the effectiveness of corrections programming and alternative sanctions, and CCSF's ability to adapt some of those services to a new population. It could not be timelier. The US Supreme Court last month upheld an injunction against California's Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation for civil rights violations like inadequate medical care and services, and violence, due to overcrowding (see Brown v. Plata). The number of prisoners incarcerated in California since the 1970s has increased sevenfold, and the system is now over 175% of its official inmate capacity with 143,000 prisoners (down from 173,000 in 2006). This was identified as a significant cause of the rights violations, and so the State was ordered to either (a) increase capacity and services or - since California’s annual budget is still short by several billion dollars - (b) to release or redistribute approximately 33,000 prisoners.

The ruling itself was no surprise. The case was pending for several years, and it was really a matter of time before the High Court followed up in the case - it was just a bit earlier than anyone thought. Unfortunately this means San Francisco and hundreds of other municipalities across California will be absorbing some of the State prisoners into their jails and local corrections programs. The official objective is to move low-level offenders closer to their communities, as this has shown to encourage rehabilitation and stabilization - but it's also about money and a federal injunction.

This is a new demographic for county sheriffs - more serious crimes, different affiliations, somewhat more radical behaviors, and parolees. Counties are generally ill-equipped to manage these offenders, but we have to learn. The City's expecting at least 700-800 new state prisoners next year. It's hard to know a definite number, though; the state doesn't share all inmate records that signify who's eligible for the transfer.

As a state, we need to ask some important questions, foremost of which is how our already enormous corrections system has swelled to nearly twice its official capacity. Is it the judges, or lawyers, or the police? Whoever it is, they're clearly crazy. Unfortunately the problem isn't that simple. There does not seem to be any single mechanism to blame or switch to flip that would resolve this crisis - and with costs skyrocketing, a structural state deficit, abuses gaining public attention, report after report indicating that the prison systems are often overtly and procedurally racist, and with a new court injunction, it really is a crisis for the state. 

But if I were to dismiss nuance and point to something as a fundamental structural flaw, I would start with California's infamous Three Strikes Law.

Liu's 9th Circuit nomination blocked by GOP (again), withdraws

"Oh, come oooooonnn!"

In the latest round of GOP obstructionism, Republican representatives in the Senate have blocked through fillibuster the nomination of UC Berkeley law professor Goodwin Liu to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. Liu was first nominated in February of 2010 by President Obama. He is a Rhodes Scholar and Supreme Court clerk, and he has received the highest rating possible from the American Bar Association.

Republicans protested his history with the American Constitutional Society, of which he served as Chairman. The ASC was first formed at the Georgetown Law Center in 2001 as a "liberal" research institute ('think tank'). It has pursued such crazy liberal issues as individual rights and liberties, access to legal resources, and structural inequalities in public institutions, and even publishes the Harvard Law & Policy Review (ew gross!). Liu has also spoken out on legal issues surrounding same-sex marriage and affirmative action, which he seems to support.

Republicans also voiced concern over his age and experience (ummm...). Liu is 39 years old, and would have been among the youngest appointees to the 9th Circuit. However, among the 18 youngest candidates nominated to the federal appellate courts since the Reagan administration, ALL OF THEM have been Republican nominees.

The vote to cut off debate through super majority was held last Thursday, but the final vote fell to 52-43. On Wednesday, Liu asked President Obama to withdraw his nomination in an effort to end the senseless controversy. Liu suggests that the recent fighting over his candidacy may be holding up other nominees from getting proper reviews. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals covers 9 western states and Guam (jurisdiction), and has been short-staffed with judges for several years running due to delayed reviews and protests over nominees. The problem is only getting worse.


Read more from the SF Chronicle on SFGate.

States uncertain of impact from looming federal shutdown

As the U.S. legislators fail to come to an agreement on the FY 2010-2011 federal budget, states begin to wonder what will happen to their own budget negotiations and services.

Legislators were unable to agree on a budget by Wednesday evening after a lengthy meeting between Senators Boehner, Reid and Schumer. Legislation must be proposed 72 hours before a final vote, which that a another continuing resolution to extend temporary funding beyond Friday night would had to come before Thursday.

Most expect that most services will not be interrupted by a short-term government shutdown, but state and local workers employed with federal dollars may have to be furloughed. A short-term shutdown of up to a couple of weeks would expectedly have minimal impacts on state governments without too much harm to their own operations or financial integrity. However, many counties have come to rely on frequent and rapid transfers of resources from the federal government in social services such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), or food stamps. The increasing use of computerized data and electronic transfers in these programs since 1995 (the last shutdown) make it unclear what would happen, specifically.

Sen. Boehner and Sen. Reid are still optimistic that a deal can be reached before the Friday deadline, but others are less certain. The Democrats have now agreed to as much as $33 billion in cuts to the budget, while the Republicans have stood by their proposal of $61 billion in cuts. After weeks of stonewalling by the GOP, Boehner reportedly conceded to reduce the cuts to as low as $40 billion, but Democrats have complained that the terms of a compromise keep moving further back.

Read more from the NYTimes article States Fear Local Effects if Shutdown Cuts Off Cash.

ADENDUM: Well clearly federal legislators and Pres. Obama were able to come to an agreement before the deadline Friday night, a with a whole hour to spare! What they actually passed was sort of an emergency place-holder bill that allows the specific text of the fiscal bill to to sit for 3 days (as per rules) without shutting the government down. If any of you have finished a term paper the "morning-of", you know how this goes.

Why good evening, Madam! "9 Fellows Walk into a Bar... (Pt. 4)"

Ryan and Elaine love Corgis. Of course corgis are basically chubby foxes with tiny little legs and a forever-happy demeanor, so it’s easy to understand. But I mean they LOVE corgis, as in they send videos to us of baby corgis slipping on hardwood floors, and with their political slant they obviously share a particular fondness of the Governor’s own corgi named Sutter – who has an inexplicable cult following in San Francisco and a regular column in the Chronicle. Odd perhaps, but we really enjoy our up-to-date news on anything.

And so the story continues. On our late night stroll back to the hostel from Spin – which is a burger joint bar with street bikes wired to a computer and projector for the purpose of digital wind-sprint races – several of the Fellows and I suddenly stumbled upon an enormous, fanciful building (like a splice of museum, synagogue and 1780 colonial brick architecture) that we slowed down to inspect out of curiosity. It was incredible, but unexpectedly large buildings often seem incredible after 3 open-bar receptions and a night out with politicos.

As Chance would have it, a woman in a fine coat was taking a corgi out for a late-night walk along this building at the same time, and Ryan and Elaine noticed. “Oh my god a corgiiiiiiiieeeeeeiiieeiee!!” they screamed as we all pounced on the dog. The flurry of shouting and baby talk was actually met with a happy invitation to play with the excited dog. Of course we did, and the pup just ate it up.

“Oh look at you, you’re so cute! And such a little attention whore, aren’t you!” Ryan exclaimed at the corgi rolled around on its back, pretentiously.

“Oh, he is such an attention whore!” the woman laughed. “He does this all the time.”

Meg eventually looked to Elaine, smirking. “Wouldn’t it just be great if this were Sutter?” she said not-quite-quietly and everyone laughed. This was Elaine’s dream, of course. “He is so adorable. So what’s his name?” She asked.

“Sutter.”

“Wait…… like the governor’s dog Sutter?”

“Well, he IS the governor’s dog Sutter.”

@__@

"... ... ... OMG YOU’RE SUTTER!!!!!” Everyone went crazy, and I’m absolutely certain we looked nothing less than crazy to this poor woman standing next to us. It took a few moments for someone to ask the obvious question. “So why are you out this late walking the dog? Like, how do you know Jerry Brown?”

“Oh, I’m his wife.”

We stared at her. And then suddenly, a photo clipping of her face from an article I once read popped into my mind. Yep, it was her.

This was very exciting and all, but when you recognize the First Dog before the First Lady, and the First Lady is also effectively the Governor’s Chief of Staff, and it’s very late at night and you’re trying to get home, there’s not a lot you can do to recover a sense of professionalism. But fortunately, she thought our resulting shock and fumbling of gracious words were hilarious.

"So lemme guess, you're out here this late to avoid the paparazzi that love your dog?" Dani laughed.

"Well, yes. That was the idea."

"And then you ran in to us? Lucky you!"

"Oh, so it would seem...".

The Realignment, or "9 Fellows Walk Into a Bar... (Pt. 3)"

“Yes, you’re right to think this is a bunch of bullshit.”

Such was the political sentiment in Sacramento, a town that only exists because of indecisive planners, cheap land and shady 19^th century business deals.

The rest of our afternoon was filled by meetings with various bureaucrats and politicos including Assemblymembers Ma and Ammiano, Senator Leno and Senator Leland Yee’s Chief of Staff. As is often the case, our time with the staff was the most educational, as they were more familiar with the technical challenges of legislation and the Sacramento political process. Nonetheless, all of the reps were engaging and outspoken about otherwise sensitive political issues. Fiona Ma shared her perspectives on transitioning from San Francisco politics to Sacramento, which mostly boiled down to “omg there are real Republicans here” and that old adversaries from the City are now political allies. It turns out that outside of San Francisco our representatives don’t actually differ that much on wider issues, and indeed agree on 95% of all matters addressed by the state. Relativity. Huge surprise.

Perhaps the most interesting bunch that we met with on our trip to the capitol was a budget consultant group called Lynn Suter & Associates. Their relatively few staff members are experts on a plethora of state issues with no particular partisan alliances and no interest in running for office, and they're mostly from San Francisco. They are California’s technocrats.

League of Cities! or "9 Fellows... (Pt. 2)"

The bus was delayed. BART rail to Walnut Creek was delayed. The ride from Walnut to Creek to Sacramento SHOULD have been delayed, but somehow Marielle, Eliot, Whitney and I made it through any traffic and across the Central Valley in an hour 0_O thanks Rocco!

All of the fellows were booked for one room in a huge 1880’s Victorian home-turned-to-hostel just a few blocks from the Capital building. Way back in the day it was owned by a wealthy family making bank on the industries sprouting up around the Gold Rush, but it was later purchased by a hostel company and moved a few blocks down the road (yeah, that’s right. The whole thing.), perhaps because buying another building and simply keeping it on its foundation would have cost too much. Our check-in lasted about 5 minutes – hardly enough time for a superfast suit-up – and then we were off to the California League of Cities.

The League stands up to state government tyranny!

Defends the Integrity of Redevelopment Agencies!

Protects the way of the public sector lobbying institutions!

And fights for the good of all Cities! (except for Vernon. They actually want to dis-incorporate Vernon.) *(1)

The League today is essentially a government PAC. Ideally it consolidates the interests of over 480 member cities in California, and affects issues that impact those members through the state's legislative process and rule-making bodies. LoCAC also offers consultation and expertise to these institutions on matters affecting local government, as well as to each other. In reality Los Angeles, San Francisco and - oh, let's say El Cerrito - differ on a lot of issues. The 10 largest cities are permanent members of the Board, but each municipality gets one vote in their general Assembly. This makes for some good arguments about state priorities.

Our speaker laid out 3 critical areas of an effective organization in their field:

The Heretic, or "9 Fellows Walk Into a Bar... (Pt.1)"

The air was crisp, and dark, and it bit at my fingers.

My fingers, as it happens, were decisively wrapped about the handle of a wheelie-bag filled with expensive clothing, while the rest of me just waited for a bus. My mind was sloshing around some part of my brain trying to avoid the idea of “morning”. It was succeeding splendidly, as there was certainly no sunlight to argue otherwise. And everything was damp.

And so, I sat at my favorite bus stop on a Tuesday morning with a valuable suitcase, slowly collecting dew, staring at a spot of coffee I had spilled on the bag and trying to avoid eye contact with the homeless man next to me as the digital display informing passengers how soon the bus would arrive counted upwards. I was concerned because the bag wasn’t really mine, per se, and because the generic, scruffy San Franciscan homeless man seemed more interested in the bag than anything else.

The bus eventually came 15 minutes late. I stepped through the doorway and thought of my poor little breakfast sandwich sitting on a plate in my apartment, all alone with no one to eat it, forgotten and abandoned by its creator. I frowned.

I swiped my MUNI card and trundled toward the back of the bus, and only then did I realize – despite the fact I had sneaked in just 3 hours of sleep before my alarm went off (thus denoting, obviously, that it was very, very early) – that this bus was inexplicably packed to the brim with strangers.

WHY?!!

This seemed nothing short of an insurmountable challenge as my eyes still squinted from the brightness of the lights. I turned back in the off-chance that a new seat had just appeared in the doorway behind me by some impossible magical means, but my eyes fell only upon the scruffy man, who had mysteriously produced an enormous orange in his hands. His eyes met mine and he gestured toward me with a piece of the orange, palm up, as though an offering. I waived my own hand passively and shook my head at the fruit. Scruffy was suddenly very upset, his eyes widening and disbelief filling his gaze. He had not been offering me the orange at all, I would shortly learn, but was gesturing for me to move forward; and yet I can only reason that my denial of this treat that he was not even offering to begin with was so audacious to this man that it was an affront to his very being. He exited the bus two stops later, shouting and cursing and glaring at me the whole while with shifty, focused eyes fit for a confrontation with heresy.

Thus began my journey to Sacramento. . . .