Effort by lobbyists, unions to stop Fair Elections Act ballot initiative fails

SACRAMENTO -- A lawsuit filed by a coalition of lobbyists and public safety unions aimed at stopping an experiment in public finance of a statewide public office was abruptly shut down Tuesday, clearing the way for Golden State voters to make the final decision on the matter during the June 2010 election.

The original legislation, Assembly Bill 583 and known as the California Fair Elections Act, was authored by former Assemblywoman Loni Hancock and was signed into law by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger last September.

If approved by the voters in June 2010, the initiative will publicly finance the elections for Secretary of State in November 2014 and 2018. The effort, which is billed by proponents as a pilot project, would be paid for by an increase fees on registered lobbyists in the state. The fees would rise from the current $25 to $350 per year. 

Hancock, who is now a state senator representing Senate District 9, said the ballot measure ask voters if they want to limit the financial influence of lobbyists and special interests in campaigns by allowing candidates for secretary of state to receive public funding for those two elections. Since it amends Proposition 9, the Political Reform Act, it has to go before voters next June in order to take effect.

The lawsuit was filed by a coalition of critics, including the Institute of Governmental Advocates (IGA) (a professional association for lobbyists), Jericho: A Voice for Justice (a non-profit agency representing the impoverished) and two public safety unions, the Los Angeles Police Protective League and the California Professional Firefighters. The opponents argue that the fee increase amounted to an "unfair tax" that singles out lobbyists and which violated their 1st and 14th amendment rights under the U.S. Constitution.

An attorney representing IGA did not return a phone call Tuesday seeking comment.

But the Attorney General's office, in defending Secretary of State Debra Bowen, argued in legal papers that the suit was premature because the voters have not yet had a chance to vote on the ballot measure.

Late Monday night federal district Judge Frank Damrell, Jr. agreed with the Attorney General and dismissed the lawsuit. The announcement was made Tuesday.

"The court's ruling clears the way and I'm excited that the voters will be able to voice their opinion on this pilot project," Hancock said through her Chief of Staff Hans Hemann.

And while Bowen did not advocate or oppose the bill, she too said through spokesman Evan Goldberg that she was glad the final decision on the experiment will rest with the voters in June 2010.

"(The secretary) is pleased that the court agreed that it was inappropriate to decide the constitutionality of the issue prior to the voters getting an opportunity to review and vote on the matter," spokesman Evan Goldberg said.

Governor targets one of Sacramento's ultimate patronage prizes for cuts or elimination

SACRAMENTO -- Although he recently appointed his own scheduling assistant and former San Francisco lawmaker Carole Migden to the panel, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said the state Integrated Waste Management Board -- long considered a top prize in the world of Sacramento patronage -- must go during a speech before a joint session of the California Legislature on Tuesday.

The speech, a mini "state of the state" on the California's yawning $23 billion budget deficit crisis, was designed to make clear to lawmakers that the situation calls for unprecedented levels of cuts to vital state programs, like welfare, health and education.

"...I’m also proposing once again to eliminate and consolidate more than a dozen state departments, boards and commissions. These include the Waste Management Board, the Court Reporters Board, the Department of Boating and Waterways and the Inspection and Maintenance Review Committee and so on," Schwarzenegger said, adding that the waste board and others are "redundant."

"We should not and I will not, cut a dollar from education or a dollar from health care or a dollar from public safety or a dollar from our state parks without first cutting the Waste Management Board and other boards like it. Every dollar that we save from those boards and commissions is a dollar that can help vulnerable citizens," the governor added.

Appointees to the board -- the governor gets to name six, Senate and Assembly leaders name the other two -- receive $132,178 annually and meet about a dozen times a year.

Critics have long argued that the board, which has an annual operating budget of about $230 million and chiefly guides what the state does with the 92 million tons of trash produced here yearly, should be consolidated into its parent agency, the California Environmental Protection Agency. The board is one of about 300 such panels and commissions in the state with regulatory authority.

An earlier study commissioned by the governor's office showed that if the waste board was shut down, the state would realize about $3 million in savings from garbage and recycling fee revenues paid to the agency annually. About 450 people work for the board.

Created by Gov. George Deukmejian in 1990, the board has become a last bastion for termed-out, beaten and retired politicians and friends of the powerful in Sacramento. Margo Reid Brown, Schwarzenegger's former scheduling director, was appointed to the panel by the governor three years ago. Just last year Assembly and Senate leaders appointed two other termed-out lawmakers, Sen. Sheila Kuehl (D-Los Angeles) and Assemblyman John Laird (D-Santa Cruz), to the board.

"It's become a senior-fellow program for favored legislators," Jamie Court, president of Consumer Watchdog, told the Wall Street Journal last December. The public-advocacy group is based in Santa Monica.

Tuesday's call by the governor to kill or pare down the waste board wasn't his first. In 2004 Schwarzenegger tried eliminating the panel and some 88 other boards but was beaten back by lobbyists and other advocates. To date only a small handful of the boards have actually been eliminated.

An e-mail from BAPolitix.org to the waste board's media relations department seeking comment and information went unreturned Tuesday.

Governor's offshore oil drilling proposal rejected by State Lands Commission -- again

SANTA MONICA -- For the second time this year, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's proposal to reopen oil drilling operations in the Santa Barbara Channel was sharply slapped down during a contentious and briefly emotional meeting of the State Lands Commission Monday.

Commission members Lt. Gov. John Garamendi and state Controller John Chiang, cast two of three possible votes in favor of a resolution condemning the governor's new drilling proposal. Contained in the governor's May revised budget is a proposal to launch legislation that, if successful, would override the Lands Commission's Jan. 29 rejection of a plan by Houston-based Plains Exploration & Production (PXP) Co. to begin oil drilling operations at Platform Irene off the Traquillon Ridge area of Santa Barbara County.

Commissioner Tom Sheehy, the governor's chief deputy director of finance, left the meeting in tears after learning that his father in law had been killed in a car accident earlier Monday morning. He departed without casting a vote.

But before he was notified of the death Sheehy sparred verbally with Garamendi over the merits of the Schwarzenegger's proposal which, if authorized, would overturn a 41-year-old moratorium on offshore oil drilling in California. Garamendi and Chiang complained that the governor's plan would also weaken the commission's authority and send the wrong message to federal regulators in Washington, D.C.

"This a naked end-run around the authority of this commission," said Garamendi, who is running to replace outgoing U.S. Rep. Ellen Tauscher in the 10th Congressional District. "(This proposal) is not in the best interest of this state."

Sheehy countered that the governor and the state Finance Department were indeed acting in the best interest of Californians who are facing a yawning $23 billion state budget deficit. PXP promised that the state would receive an immediate $100 million at the start of drilling and a total of nearly $2 billion in revenues over the life of the project.

"We couldn't turn a blind eye to the fiscal benefits of this project. We disagree with this commission's earlier decision. I understand that you don't like it (but) we believe that having 120 people (in the legislature) weigh in on this is better than two," Sheehy said, referring to Garamendi and Chiang.

Garamendi then opened the meeting to public speakers, virtually all of which criticized Schwarzenegger's proposal.

"This is nothing but a blatant power grab by the governor to override an independent commission's authority," said Susan Jordan of the California Coastal Protection Network.

But just as the second speaker began talking, a tearful and red-faced Sheehy interrupted her.

"I've had a death in the family and have to go. I'm happy to debate this with you ... I'm sorry," Sheehy said before leaving the dais.

Representatives of the governor have argued that the project does not violate the terms of the state's oil drilling moratorium language in the Coastal Protection Act because the act contains a provision saying drilling is permissible at any state site where oil happens to drain naturally onto federally-controlled lands. Platform Irene, which sits just outside state-controlled waters, is such an oil field.

The initial PXP proposal had garnered the support of Santa Barbara-area environmentalists who agreed to lobby for the project in exchange for the oil company providing immediate revenue to the state and by agreeing to completely shut down all of its drilling operations across the county by 2022.

Linda Krop, chief counsel for the Santa Barbara-based Environmental Defense Center, told the commission while her clients still believe in the merits of the core deal with the company, the idea of legislating an oil drilling project via a budget revision was a mistake.

Lisa Page, a spokeswoman for Schwarzenegger, said later Monday in a statement that the governor continues to vigorously support the project and that he will pursue legislation for the proposal despite the commission's actions earlier Monday.

"Yes, he's going forward with the legislation," Page said.

East Bay man named to disability access commission that may never meet

An Alameda man was among seven people Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger appointed this week to the brand new state Commission on Disability Access, but it remains unclear whether the panel will ever meet or receive funding given California's massive budget deficit.

The governor on Tuesday nominated Michael Anthony Dean, 67, to the commission which is a product of Senate Bill 1608, which was signed into law Sept. 28, 2008. The bi-partisan legislation was endorsed by disabled rights advocates as well as the California Chamber of Commerce. The chamber supported the bill, in large part, because it contains curbs on frivolous or vexatious lawsuits filed against businesses who may or may not be in violation of state and federal disability access laws.

The commission is also designed to conduct studies and make reports to the Legislature regarding disability access issues. The panel is also charged with providing information regarding compliance with disability access laws and to coordinate with other state and local agencies to ensure that the information provided regarding disability access requirements is complete and uniform. The commission is expected to establish and maintain a checklist for building inspectors to use in determining compliance with disability access laws. Finally, the law creates a continuing education requirement for California architects as a condition of licensure.

Dean, a Republican, is a partner in the Oakland-based law firm Wendel, Rosenblack and Dean and has been with the firm since 1967. He is a member of the California Business Properties Association Board of Directors and is a member of the International Council of Shopping Centers. Dean could not be immediately be reached for comment on Thursday.

The governor also named these people to the commission:
--Rocky Burks, 56, of Rohnert Park. Democrat. Disabled advocate.
--Catherine Campisi, 60, of Sacramento. Democrat. Disabled advocate.
--Richard Luehrs, 62, of Newport Beach. Republican. Business advocate.
--Mark Martinez, 43, of Stockton. Republican. Business advocate.
--Mitchell Pomerantz, 59, of Pasadena. Declined to state. Disabled advocate.
--Betty Wilson, 73, of Los Angeles. Democrat. Disabled advocate.

In total, there are to be 11 voting members and six non-voting members on the panel. Additional appointees are to be named by Senate and Assembly leaders. Each appointee must first undergo confirmation by the Senate. Commissioners will be paid $100 for each meeting they attend.

But whether the panel actually meets, is staffed or receives any operational funds remains a question. On Tuesday -- the same day the governor released the names of his nominees -- he told a gathering of small business owners in Sacramento some state commissions and boards could face zero-funding, consolidation or outright elimination as he attempts to cut his way out of a massive $23 billion budget deficit.

The commission has yet to schedule its inaugural meeting.

Bay Area man named to ambassadorship

President Barack Obama has named key California fundraiser and Silicon Valley power lawyer John V. Roos to become the nation's next ambassador to Japan.

On Wednesday the president nominated Roos to the high-profile diplomatic post, pending confirmation by the U.S. Senate. Roos was among a dozen people the president named to ambassadorships around the globe.

"I am grateful that these distinguished Americans have agreed to help represent the United States and strengthen our partnerships abroad at this critical time for our nation and the world. I am confident they will advance American diplomacy as we work to meet the challenges of the 21st century. I look forward to working with them in the years and months ahead," Obama said in statement.

Roos, who is chief executive officer and a member of the board of directors of Palo Alto-based Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, served as co-chairman of Obama's multimillion-dollar Northern California fundraising operation during last year's campaign and is said to be a personal friend of the president.

Here's the White House's mini-bio on Roos:

Mr. Roos serves as Chief Executive Officer at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, where he has overseen and managed the global, technology-focused law firm since 2005. Mr. Roos has been a partner at the firm since 1988 and also served in a number of other senior leadership roles. Throughout his tenure, Mr. Roos helped lead the firm during the various waves of innovation in Silicon Valley, from the growth of software and communications to the Internet Age, the emergence of biotechnology to the present focus on clean technology and renewable energy. He has been a leader in cultivating the firm's diversity initiatives, which recently resulted in its number one ranking in the country. Mr. Roos has been responsible for building consensus across all geographies and practice disciplines to develop, communicate, and execute on strategic priorities and growth initiatives for the business. Mr. Roos is a Member of the Dean's Advisory Council at Stanford Law School and at the Stanford School of Education. He holds a Bachelor's degree from Stanford University and a J.D. from Stanford Law School.

Perata cleared in federal corruption probe

SACRAMENTO -- Finally bringing to a close a five-year-long investigation, federal prosecutors announced Wednesday that they will not file corruption charges against former state Senate President Don Perata -- ostensibly clearing his way for a less politically clouded run for Oakland mayor in 2010.

Acting U.S. Attorney Lawrence G. Brown said late Wednesday morning from Sacramento that the U.S. Attorney’s Office and the criminal division of the U.S. Department of Justice completed their review of the investigation Perata and will not file any criminal charges against him.

“Prosecutors from both this office and the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice have reviewed the matter involving Senator Don Perata and have determined not to pursue criminal charges. This office and the Criminal Division in Washington, D.C. worked collaboratively in undertaking this review. Each office reached its decision independently based on our respective analyses of the facts and the law. Beyond that, in accordance with departmental policy, we cannot disclose our deliberative process" Brown stated.

Brown did not provide any further details as to why the high-profile probe of the senator, who represented Oakland and Alameda in SD-09, was dropped. He did, however, defend the propriety of the investigation which has cast a cloud over Perata and his family dating back to 2004 when federal agents raided his Oakland home.

"Our review of this investigation was consistent with the sound exercise of our prosecutorial discretion,” Brown stated.

The former lawmaker said the decision just just proved his long-held claims of innocence.

"This is a complete affirmation of everything I've maintained for the last five years - that I've acted appropriately in both my professional life and my career in public service," Perata, 64, told the Associated Press. "Ultimately, I knew that I had done nothing wrong and the truth would win out."

Forced from the state Senate because of term limits last year, Perata, a former high school civics teacher in Alameda, publicly announced his intention to run for mayor of Oakland in 2010 in March. Mayor Ron Dellums has so far not said whether he will seek re-election.

The federal investigation of Perata started in 2004 when agents raided his home and the home of his son, Nick. Nick Perata ran a political consulting firm that had received tens of thousands of dollars from his dad's campaigns. The probe widened over time and began to examine the senator's relationships with campaign donors and whether any of that money made its way back to him in the form of kickbacks.

Same-sex marriage proponents vow to repeal Prop. 8 in 2010

SAN FRANCISCO -- Within minutes of Tuesday's announcement by the state Supreme Court ruling that it would uphold Prop. 8 and California's ban on gay marriage, two leading political groups launched a statewide campaign vowing to repeal the controversial ballot measure.

Voting 6-1 with Justice Carlos Moreno dissenting, the court majority reasoned that since the state already provides same-sex couples the same legal protections that opposite-gendered couples enjoy, there was no legal reason to overturn the voters' desire to make a semantic distinction of who can legally apply the word "married" to their relationship and who cannot. The panel, likewise, rejected arguments that the proposition itself represented an illegal "revision" (as versus an "amendment") of the state's constitution. Actual revisions of the constitution cannot be made via the ballot box.

The panel also ruled that the 18,000 same-sex marriage licenses that have been issued in California since its previous May 2008 ruling which legalized gay marriage will remain valid.

The decision wasn't exactly unexpected by two young but powerful political groups, Equality California and Courage Campaign, who said Tuesday that they would immediately begin work to overturn Prop. 8 by qualifying another voter initiative to appear on the 2010 general election ballot.

“Despite today’s setback, Equality California is committed to restoring the freedom to marry. We believe, as do the majority of our members, that 2010 is the best time to return to the ballot to repeal Prop. 8. We must take full advantage of the momentum and commitment people now have to do the work required on the ground. However, we will make the final decision on when to return in collaboration with our coalition partners and allies throughout the state," Marc Solomon, Equality California's marriage director, said in a statement. "We have already launched a mobilization campaign to reach more than 300,000 Californians in the next 100 days in places where we need the most movement — Los Angeles County, San Diego, Orange County, the Inland Empire, the Central Valley and Sacramento, and over the coming weeks we will expand our efforts with our partners and tens of thousands of volunteers."

Courage Campaign Founder Rick Jacobs said that shortly after the court issued its ruling, the group began broadcasting this commercial in TV markets across the state.

"Last week, we asked our members to vote on which year -- 2010 or 2012 -- the Courage Campaign should support going back to the ballot to restore marriage equality. The response was overwhelming -- 82.5% support a 2010 ballot measure," said Jacobs. "As a result, the Courage Campaign is announcing today its strong support for a 2010 initiative, while respecting that partner organizations are still discussing and deliberating this very important question. While we were hoping the Court would rule in favor of equality, we have been building the infrastructure to win marriage equality rights at the ballot box. Our members are ready to do the hard work needed to win."

To read the actual text of the court's decision, go here. The case is called Strauss v. Horton, No. S168047.