MOORLACH UPDATE — 2018 Top 20 Veto Worthy Bills — September 13, 2018

For the fourth year in a row, I’ve been asked to partner with a fellow Republican Legislator to provide the 20 worst bills that made it to the Governor’s desk by the conclusion of the Legislative Session that are begging for his veto (see MOORLACH UPDATE — 2017 Top 20 Veto Worthy Bills — September 22, 2017).

The best advice I could give the Governor is that he veto every bill I voted against and consider vetoing those where I laid off (abstained). But, that won’t happen. In fact, he will sign the majority of the bills provided below in the FlashReport. Governor Brown has until September 30th to veto, sign or ignore, thus putting into law, what seems to be at least 1,000 bills that flew out of the Senate and the Assembly Chambers during the last two weeks of August.

Brown was quick to sign a few bills, so SB 100 was not included in our compilation. Obviously, the list could be much, much longer. But, again, I would refer you to those that I voted “No” on. I’ll try to keep you current over the next two weeks as to how many of the top 20 were vetoed in future UPDATEs.

Jon Fleischman

FlashReport 2018 Top Bills

Worthy of Governor Jerry

Brown’s Veto

Introduction from FlashReport Publisher Jon Fleischman

Since 2006, the FlashReport has presented for your viewing displeasure the worst pieces of legislation sitting on the governor’s desk. Of course, there are a great many bills on the governor’s desk – most of them worthy of a veto. Thus the task of trying to cull through those bills and single out just the twenty worst is not easy. This year’s list comes to us courtesy of both State Senator John Moorlach and Assemblywoman Melissa Melendez. I will add that this session in particular was over-the-top with noxious legislation, and limiting this list to twenty bills was no easy task. – Flash

The FlashReport Top 20 Bills Worthy Of The Governor’s Veto

As compiled and described by Assemblywoman Melissa Melendez and State Senator John Moorlach.

California has critical managerial and spending problems which the legislature continues to ignore. However, Sacramento continues to produce bills that don’t solve the pressing fiscal concerns facing this state. Here are 20 bills, in alpha-numerical order, which we believe the Governor should veto (and, yes, we could provide you with 20-plus more). His denial of implementing these proposed laws would show Californians that he’s serious about leaving a significant legacy after serving 16 years as governor.

1) AB 186 (Eggman) Effectively legalizes the use of illegal, injectable narcotics by authorizing sanctuaries for “safer drug consumption programs” as “overdose prevention programs” within the City and County of San Francisco. Permits supervised injection services for adults who can then consume pre-obtained drugs, use sterile consumption supplies, and obtain referrals to addiction treatment. But, assisting is condoning.

2) AB 1184 (Ting and Chiu) Imposes a tax of up to 3.25 percent on each ride provided by a self-driving or driverless vehicle — even though no self-driving or driverless cars offering ride-sharing are in existence. “If it moves, tax it” (satire from President Ronald Reagan).

3) AB 1231 (Weber) Provides for automatic salary increases of 5% for each support staff employee of the California State University after completion of the first year in a position and each year thereafter if the employee meets the standards for satisfactory job performance. This sidesteps collective bargaining and mandates that these salary increases be included within current and future collective bargaining agreements. So much for the overused “meet and confer” argument and trying to prevent tuition increases.

4) AB 1884 (Calderon) The plastic straw ban. Would prohibit a facility where food may be consumed on the premises from providing single-use plastic straws unless requested by the consumer. Fining food servers for prematurely giving plastic straws?

5) AB 1947 (Low) Bans the practice of paying petition circulators per signature by making it a criminal offense to pay initiative, referendum, or recall petition circulators based on the number of voter signatures obtained. Makes proponents liable for a fine of up to $25,000, or a year in jail, or both. When did paying commissions become a crime?

6) AB 2361 (Weber) Requires the Regents of the University of California to record and publicly report specified information about service work performed by a contractor pursuant to an outsource contract, including employee pay and benefit information. Disqualifies contractors who fail to provide this information, or who provide false information, from bidding on any UC contract for two years. UC management believes this hamstringing mandate will increase its operating costs by $26-$75 million per year over the next three years. Why do this to a system that has an unrestricted net deficit between $19 and $38 billion? Can you say “tuition increases”?

7) AB 2601 (Weber) Adds charter schools to the list of schools that must provide instruction on comprehensive sexual health and HIV prevention. Really? What about focusing on the three R’s?

8) AB 3034 (Low) Makes supervisory employee units of the San Francisco BART District subject to the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, which generally governs collective bargaining for local governments. That would allow unfair labor practice charges to be filed at the union-friendly Public Employment Relations Board, rather than in Superior Court. Can you say “Who’s your Daddy?” The public employee union stranglehold continues to get tighter with each passing year, as BART management did not make this request and opposes it.

9) AB 3080 (Gonzalez Fletcher) Significantly expands employment litigation and will increase costs for employers and employees by banning settlement agreements for labor and employment claims, as well as arbitration agreements made voluntarily as a condition of employment. It would likely be preempted under the Federal Arbitration Act, thereby delaying the resolution of claims. Banning such agreements benefits the trial attorneys, not the employer or employee.

10) SB 174 (Lara) Provides that a person, regardless of citizenship or immigration status, is eligible to hold an appointed civil office if the person is 18 years of age and a resident of the state, and may receive any form of compensation associated with carrying out the duties of that office that the person is not otherwise prohibited from receiving pursuant to federal law. So much for “citizen” involvement.

11) SB 320 (Leyva) Requires certain public university student health centers to offer abortion by medication techniques. The College Student Health Center Sexual and Reproductive Health Preparation Fund will be established to solicit at least $9,600,000 in private funds by January 1, 2019 to theoretically cover the costs of this mandate. This, again, forces taxpayers with a different perspective to condone behavior that they disagree with.

12) SB 328 (Portantino) Prohibits middle schools and high schools (including charter schools) from beginning their school day before 8:30 a.m. Provides an exception for rural school districts. But, this is a local control issue. School district boards can determine the start times that their constituencies wish.

13) SB 822 (Wiener) Imposes net neutrality rules recently repealed by the Federal Communications Commission on internet service providers. However, the requirements go much further than no blocking, no throttling, and no paid prioritization. The World Wide Web should not be regulated by a patchwork of state governments. Period. Under the U.S. Constitution’s Interstate Commerce Clause, the federal government and Congress have this under control and can and will regulate as necessary. Hopefully, such actions will be as little as possible, so we don’t lose the freedom of the web.

14) SB 826 (Jackson) Imposes gender-based quotas on boards of directors for private California-based corporations. Requires a minimum of one female on the board by the end of 2019. Increases the minimum number to two female directors if the corporation has five authorized directors or to three female directors if there are six or more authorized directors by the end of 2021. “Female” means an individual who self-identifies her gender as a woman, without regard to the individual’s designated sex at birth. And the author said with a straight face, “It’s not a quota.” California’s corporations should benefit from the value of women directors because they want to, not because they have to.

15) SB 835 & SB 836 (Glazer) Bans all smoking, including e-cigarettes in “state park units.” Includes all parks, public campgrounds, state coastal beaches, monument sites, landmark sites, and sites of historical interest established or acquired by the state. Would require posted signs and possible designated areas exempt from the ban. Isn’t allowing drug addicts to shoot up in the middle of San Francisco, but not using tobacco (which is legal) in state parks and beaches going too far?

16) SB 964 (Allen) Requires CalPERS and CalSTRS to publicly report on the climate-related financial risks in their portfolios, along with an analysis on how their funds align with the Paris climate agreement and California’s climate policy goals. Legislatively mandated divestment or investment micro-management imposed on pension system Chief Investment Officers is unacceptable. Smart money invests for value, not the politically mandated fad of the day, which is usually a money loser (something these two systems do not need at this dire point in their history).

17) SB 1014 (Skinner) Basically requires Uber and Lyft drivers to purchase zero-emission vehicles. Again, one wildfire wipes out all gains from GHG cuts. But yes, regulate Uber & Lyft cars because all their drivers can afford zero-emission vehicles. Besides, they might be out of jobs anyway if these companies have to designate them as employees.

18) SB 1085 (Skinner) Requires public employers to grant a leave of absence to their employees to participate in union activities without loss of compensation or benefits. Guess who is bitter about the U.S. Supreme Court’s Janus decision?

19) SB 1100 (Portantino) Raises the age to purchase all legal firearms from 18 to 21. Californians are already barred from purchasing handguns until age 21. Why postpone yet another constitutional right based on age? Go defend your country in war at 18, but not your family when you return?

20) SB 1172 (Beall) Exempts the High-Speed Rail Authority’s property acquisitions, plans, and construction contracts from oversight by the State Public Works Board, Department of General Services, and Department of Finance. Eliminates review and approval steps to accelerate the timeline for obtaining property appraisals, initiating eminent domain proceedings, and starting construction. Less oversight for a boondoggle? How tone deaf does the Authority get?


This e-mail has been sent by California State Senator John M. W. Moorlach, 37th District. If you no longer wish to subscribe, just let me know by responding with a request to do so. Also follow me on Facebook & Twitter @SenatorMoorlach

MOORLACH UPDATE — Spewing Carbon Into The Air — August 8, 2018

The air quality in Sacramento continues to be awful, with the heavy smoke in the area caused by fires in Northern California. Consequently, the media attention to this tragic state of events and addressing it in the future continues.

My 2016 bill, SB 1463, started with a simple request from within my District from Laguna Beach. It enjoyed a healthy review by committees in both chambers and never received a vote of opposition. But, it was vetoed by Governor Brown. So, we did another SB 1463 this year (using the number again on an intentional basis).

Katy Grimes of the FlashReport covers it in the piece below. Which prompts me to provide the substantive UPDATEs covering both bills over the last three years, in reverse date order. For a couple of them, I provide my frustrations expressed in the postings, as I know you can’t possibly link to them all (but, the evidence is here that shows my diligence to this critical topic):

MOORLACH UPDATE — Fire Tornado Funding — August 2, 2018

MOORLACH UPDATE — Reducing Wildfires — July 31, 2018

MOORLACH UPDATE — SB 1297 – COO — April 19, 2018

Let the record show that I tried to address the global warming concerns with SB 1463. I would conclude that the state’s efforts to truly address greenhouse gases are, at best, a joke, and at worst, a fraud. Not including the greenhouse gases generated by wildfires and not approving the provision of a simple way to address the hardening of electrical power lines is, in my opinion, legislative malpractice by the majority party.

MOORLACH UPDATE — SB 1463 Redux — March 30, 2018

MOORLACH UPDATE — Haven for Hope — January 19, 2018

MOORLACH UPDATE — Burning Year End Issues — December 15, 2017

A few days of wildfires generate as much in greenhouse gases as all of the cars in California operating for an entire year. [Governor Brown’s] not addressing the real root causes of “climate change” makes him look like a flimflam man. Consequently, I’ll try to help him out in his last year of office by crafting legislation that directs cap and trade tax revenues towards addressing the state’s aging and vulnerable utilities infrastructure and electrical power distribution.

With more than 40 casualties, most of them 70 years of age or older who could not flee, this state needs to get serious about reducing wildfires. Blaming climate change is embarrassing and it’s a misdirection of the most disingenuous type.

MOORLACH UPDATE — Secretive and Expensive Union Deals — November 3, 2017

MOORLACH UPDATE — Fire Safety Concerns — October 27, 2017

MOORLACH UPDATE — Bonuses and Bogusness — October 21, 2017

MOORLACH UPDATE — Conflagration Legacy — October 12, 2017

MOORLACH UPDATE — Governor’s 2017-18 Proposed Budget — January 11, 2017

MOORLACH UPDATE — Thank you, Vin Scully — September 28, 2016

MOORLACH UPDATE — Rejection/Disappointment — September 27, 2016

MOORLACH UPDATE — First Veto — September 24, 2016

MOORLACH UPDATE — Moving Down the Line — August 31, 2016

MOORLACH UPDATE — SB 1463 — March 25, 2016

Not to belabor this topic, but CalMatters is back with a piece on this topic in “As California burns, climate goals may go up in smoke–even after the flames are out,” by Julie Cart (see Here are the opening paragraphs:

As crews across California battle more than a dozen wildfires—including the largest in state history—the blazes are spewing enough carbon into the air to undo some of the good done by the state’s climate policies.

What’s even worse: Climate-warming compounds that will be released by the charred forests long after the fires are extinguished may do more to warm up the planet than the immediate harm from smoky air.

Scientists say that only about 15 percent of a forest’s store of carbon is expelled during burns. The remainder is released slowly over the coming years and decades, as trees decay.

That second hit of carbon, experts say, contains compounds that do more to accelerate climate change than those from the original fire. And future fires over previously burned ground could make climate prospects even more bleak.

“The worst possible situation is the fire that comes through and kills everything,” said Nic Enstice, regional science coordinator for the Sierra Nevada Conservancy. “Then, ten or fifteen years later, another fire comes through and releases all the carbon left in the trees on the ground. That’s really bad.”

It’s a scenario that could explode at any time. Enstice cited a research paper published this year that laid out a chilling tableau: California has more than a 120 million dead trees strewn around its mountain ranges, with the southern Sierra hardest hit.

When fires hit those downed trees, the state will begin to experience “mass fires” spewing plumes of carbon. The resulting conflagrations, according to the researcher, will be almost unimaginable.

“The emissions from those fires will be unlike anything we will have ever seen,” Enstice said. “And you won’t be able put it out.”

And today’s The Wall Street Journal opines in “Fire and Water in California” (see

Here are the concluding paragraphs:

Another challenge is state politicians who’d rather spend money on green pork. This year the Democratic legislature appropriated a mere $30 million of cap-and-trade revenues for fuel reductions on 60,000 acres of forest land. They allocated $335 million for electric vehicle subsidies. Democrats have also spent billions on high-speed rail, but only this year did they get around to appropriating $101 million to replace a dozen or so Vietnam War-era helicopters unequipped with modern technology that enables night-flying for fire-fighting.

Imagine the damage that could have been averted—and lives saved—if the state had replaced the antiques earlier and cleared millions of dead trees in lieu of building the train whose costs are careening toward $100 billion and may never be finished. But instead of examining their own priorities, the state’s politicians will blame the damaging fires on climate change and Donald Trump.

Katy Grimes

CA Gov. Jerry Brown Vetoed Bipartisan Wildfire Management Bill in 2016

Posted by Katy Grimes

Last year, as all Hell was breaking loose in California as residents were burned out of their homes, neighborhoods and businesses, Gov. Jerry Brown was jetting around the world spouting climate change propaganda, and calling this California’s ‘new normal.’


“With climate change, some scientists are saying Southern California is literally burning up, and burning up as maybe a metaphor or a description not just to the fires right here, but what we can expect over the next years and decades,” Brown said.Today, as California burns once again under torrential wildfires, many Californians have been asking why the dramatic increase in wildfires in the last five years… that is everyone except Governor Jerry Brown. Governor Brown claims that year-round, devastating fires are the “new normal” we must accept.

Megan Barth and I reported Monday:

“Supporting Obama-era regulations have resulted in the new normal: an endless and devastating fire season. Obama-era regulations introduced excessive layers of bureaucracy that blocked proper forest management and increased environmentalist litigation and costs– a result of far too many radical environmentalists, bureaucrats, Leftist politicians and judicial activists who would rather let forests burn, than let anyone thin out overgrown trees or let professional loggers harvest usable timber left from beetle infestation, or selectively cut timber.”

Mismanaged, overcrowded forests provide fuel to historic California wildfires, experts say. The 129 million dead trees throughout California’s forests are serving as matchsticks and kindling.

Jerry Brown, busy mulling ways to prevent the end of the world, took the Clinton and Obama-era gross regulations a step even further when he vetoed a bipartisan wildfire management bill in 2016.

At the request of the City Council of Laguna Beach, Sen. John Moorlach (R-Costa Mesa), authored SB 1463 in 2016, a bipartisan bill which would have given local governments more say in fire-prevention efforts through the Public Utilities Commission proceeding making maps of fire hazard areas around utility lines.

Laguna Beach went through four fires sparked by utility lines in the last ten years, and has done as much in the way of prevention as they could afford. The bill would have allowed cities to work with utilities to underground utility lines, and work with the Public Utilities Commission to develop updated fire maps by requiring the PUC to take into consideration areas in which communities are at risk from the consequences of wildfire — not just those areas where certain environmental hazards are present.

Moorlach’s bill came about when on February 2, 2016, the PUC served the final version of Fire Map 1, and the City of Laguna Beach was not placed within the low-risk margins of the Utility Fire Threat Index.

Gov. Brown vetoed SB 1463, despite being passed by the Legislature, 75-0 in the Assembly and 39-0 in the Senate. That tells you this was political. The Governor’s veto message did not properly address why he vetoed the bill. Brown claimed that the PUC and CalFire have already been doing what Moorlach’s bill sought to accomplish. How on earth could Brown kill this bill when the state was burning down?

“SB 1463 would have not only safeguarded Laguna and other high fire-risk communities in Orange County, but would have helped other vulnerable communities throughout the state that are often threatened by wildfires caused by sparks from shorted or fallen utility lines,” Sen. Moorlach said in a statement following the surprise veto. “The Governor’s veto impedes the necessity to more urgently address the California Public Utilities Commission’s focus on identifying high risk areas that should be prioritized for appropriate mitigation measures.”

California fires produced as much pollution in 2 days as all the state’s cars do in a year.

After SB 1463 was killed by Gov. Brown, Sen. Moorlach and his brilliant staff had an epiphany: Redirect the state’s accumulated cap-and-trade funds into wildfire prevention.

Authored in 2018, the new Senate Bill 1463, aptly named “Cap and Trees,” would continuously appropriate 25 percent of state cap-and-trade funds to counties to harden the state’s utility infrastructure and better manage wildlands and our overgrown and drought-weakened forests, Moorlach recently wrote in a San Francisco Chronicle op ed.

The idea was to actually reduce the state’s highest source of greenhouse gas emissions, curb the impacts of future wildfires and prevent unnecessary damage to life and property, the new SB 1463 fact sheet reported.

However, SB 1463 was killed in the radical Senate Environmental Quality Committee by Democrats, even though there was no opposition to it. The killing was purely political, with no regard given to the people of the state.

Cap and Trade was a scheme born out of the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, known as AB 32, which charged the California Air Resources Board with lowering greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. In addition, AB 32 requires the ARB to inventory GHG emissions in California, and approve statewide GHG emissions limits.

As important, Sen. Moorlach’s second version of SB 1463 would also have required the California Air Resources Board to include greenhouse gas emissions from wildland and forest fires in their updated Scoping Plan. The ARB does not actually track GHGs – they just estimate. The ARB is extorting millions of dollars from California businesses on their best guesses.

It is estimated that “for every 2 to 3 days these wildfires burn, GHG emissions are roughly equal to the annual emissions from every car in the entire state of California,” USA Today/Reno Gazette reported in 2017. Last year, there were more than 9,000 major wildfires which burned over 1.2 million acres. Several of the large fires were caused or exacerbated by sparking utility lines.

The problem is that the Air Resources Board Scoping Plan ignores the most egregious of all GHG emission problems – manmade wildfires. Instead, the ARB spends a substantial amount of cap and trade funds on high-speed rail, which literally increases GHG emissions and eliminates large carbon sinks. The ARB has a history of diverting funds to pet projects and programs that have little or nothing to do with actually reducing GHG emissions.

The Senate Environmental Quality Committee, responsible for killing Moorlach’s SB 1463, has a radical environmentalist/preservationist as the committee consultant. In the only bill analysis done on SB 1463, this is the drivel she wrote:

“…natural disasters that emit GHGs (such as wildfires) occurred before climate change, will continue to occur as the climate continues to change, and will persist even if mankind ultimately solves the problem of climate change.”

“While science can now conclusively attribute individual extreme events to climate change, it is important to distinguish that extreme events like the recent wildfires in California are a symptom of climate change, not the cause.”

“The overwhelming consensus of climate scientists is that climate change is anthropogenic, meaning human activity has caused the rising GHG concentrations in the atmosphere and, therefore, increasing average global temperatures and the extreme events climate change causes.”

“To include GHG emissions from natural disasters in the state’s inventory that tracks progress towards California’s climate goals, even ones that are made worse by climate change, betrays the fundamental scientific understanding that human activity is responsible for climate change.” (Her emphasis, not mine) 04/19/18- Senate Environmental Quality

Jerry Brown’s Exploitation of California Events

“There is no hope for the truth when world leaders like Governor Brown of California (he runs the 19th largest economy in the world) can present such utterly false information in pursuit of a political agenda,” Dr. Tim Ball wrote about Brown’s recent screed on the fires:

“Since civilization emerged 10,000 years ago, we haven’t had this kind of heat condition, and it’s going to continue getting worse and that’s the way it is.” — Jerry Brown

“Civilization began more than 10,000 years ago and, in my opinion, it hasn’t reached California yet,” Dr. Ball added in a guest opinion at Watts Up With That, an outstanding website dedicated to actual science (no emotions) about global warming and climate change.

In his introductory climatology class, Dr. Ball tells his students to “watch for a sequence of events from California. This will begin with complaints about drought and threatened water supplies. In the Fall, we will have stories about fires decimating the landscape and burning up communities. The next in the sequence is rain and mudslides. Welcome to sunny southern California. I don’t recall a year in which that sequence did not occur. The only differences were the intensity of the events, the hysteria of the media and the degree of political exploitation.”

Dr. Ball concluded: “Exploitation of the California events is just another example of the standard ploy of environmentalists to take normal events and present them as abnormal.”

Jerry Brown’s Real Legacy

Remember when Gov. Jerry Brown said the world needs ‘brain washing’ on climate change. Sounding indeed brainwashed, Brown said, “The problem … is us. It’s our whole way of life. It’s our comfort … It’s the greed. It’s the indulgence. It’s the pattern. And it’s the inertia.”

Brown screeched in 2015 that California has an overpopulation problem, and the ongoing drought was proof that the explosion of population in California has reached the limit of what the states’ resources can provide. “We are altering this planet with this incredible power of science, technology and economic advance,” Brown told the publisher of the Los Angeles Times. “If California is going to have 50 million people, they’re not going to live the same way the native people lived, much less the way people do today.… You have to find a more elegant way of relating to material things. You have to use them with greater sensitivity and sophistication.”

Brown has managed to divert the fawning, slobbering California media away from his actual responsibilities as California Governor, and instead has them focused on hysteria, doom, gloom, and intangibles like “climate change.”


This e-mail has been sent by California State Senator John M. W. Moorlach, 37th District. If you no longer wish to subscribe, just let me know by responding with a request to do so.

Also follow me on Facebook & Twitter @SenatorMoorlach

MOORLACH UPDATE — Millionaires and Billionaires — July 17, 2018

Yesterday afternoon, my staff had the privilege to meet and listen to Orange County resident Robert Arnott. I’ve known Rob for years through my role as a trustee of the Orange County Employees Retirement System while I served as the Orange County Treasurer-Tax Collector from 1995 to 2006.

His page on the PIMCO website says the following:

Mr. Arnott is the founder and chairman of Research Affiliates, a subadvisor to PIMCO. In 2002, he established Research Affiliates as a research-intensive asset management firm that focuses on innovative asset allocation and alternative indexation products. He previously served as chairman of First Quadrant, as president of TSA Capital Management (now part of Analytic Investors), and as vice president at The Boston Company. He also was global equity strategist at Salomon Brothers. He has published more than 100 articles in journals such as the Journal of Portfolio Management, the Harvard Business Review and the Financial Analysts Journal, where he also served as editor in chief from 2002 through 2006. He graduated summa cum laude from the University of California, Santa Barbara, in 1977 in economics, applied mathematics and computer science.

Mr. Arnott wrote me recently to inform me that he is leaving a beautiful and massive ocean view home overlooking Newport Harbor to relocate to a new home in Miami, Florida.

So I asked him to visit with me and share why. He not only shared his personal story, he also shared his good fortune and career history in California, and his concerns about the unfunded pension liabilities facing U.S. citizens in every state.

To appreciate the discussion, read his piece, “The Great Tax Migration,” at

For background on the justification of his move, see MOORLACH UPDATE — SB 227 — January 15, 2018 .

For more fun, here is a PowerPoint slide that I have been using in recent speeches that California Democrats should let sink in:

Or maybe the majority should ponder on what has been occurring in Connecticut:

Better yet, New Jersey has a similar situation to that of Mr. Arnott:

I share this to point out that the Flashreport piece below is not an exaggeration. It is not hyperbole. And, while the good ship California has a massive leak, its Democratic legislators have not been willing to even put a cork into it. The closest they have come is the embarrassing attempt to make state tax payments deductible as contributions (see the link above).





Katy Grimes

CA Dems Paint Rosy Picture of Failing California

Posted by Katy Grimes

The future of California is not looking as rosy as the state’s Democrat Party politicians want us to believe. Whenever challenged on the stability of his economy, Gov. Jerry Brown’s knee-jerk retort is, “California is the fifth largest economy on the planet,” as if the size of the economy in the most populous state in the nation is relevant. With nearly 40 million people, California now feels and looks like a Banana Republic in the cities, as well as rural areas in the state.

A homeless camp at Market Street and 5th Street is photographed on Thursday, May 18, 2017, in Oakland, Calif. (Aric Crabb/Bay Area News Group) (camp 20)

Whether you are forced to check the public defecation map to navigate the streets of San Francisco, are on the 57 freeway in Santa Ana looking at miles of homeless tent cities and camps, or you are dodging heroin-addicted homeless zombies around the State Capitol and on residential streets in Sacramento, the results are the same — Nearly one-third of the nation’s homeless population lives in California.

California today is not the California I grew up in. And our Democrat politicians keep telling us to just get used to it.

Too many tax-paying Californian earners are leaving California for lower tax, higher-liberty states, willing to forgo the beautiful California weather for more freedom. This does not bode well for California’s future any longer, with the tone deaf Socialist-Communist-Democrats saying we’d all better get used to this. And lest I forget to mention it, this is Jerry Brown’s California where our four-term governor wants to outlaw private ownership of automobiles, supports universal single-payer health care, and issues in-state “visas” for illegal aliens… and constant tax increases are the only way the state and its largest cities seem to operate.

Even while watching the significant outmigration of the middle class, as well as hundreds of millionaires and billionaires, nearly every city has a tax increase on the November ballot.

Solving Growing City Budget With Tax Increases – AGAIN

In 2012 when Jerry Brown was getting his Proposition 30 sales and income tax increase on the wealthiest Californians, Sacramento city voters also passed Measure U, a “temporary tax” to allow the City to enact a half-cent sales tax for six years with all revenue going to the City’s General Fund.

Proponents claimed the “temporary measure” was needed to stop the loss of city services and jobs blamed on the recession. The City of Sacramento said Measure U was needed to restore and protect City services. “The intent was to restore police and fire services, park maintenance and other essential services that were cut between 2008 and 2013.” The city made it appear unthinkable that voters would deny police, fire and parks their rightful budgets.

Most city residents already noticed the loss of city services along with skyrocketing city utility/services bills.

“Budget officials initially projected the tax would generate $31.8 million in the current fiscal year,” reported in 2015. “Instead, Measure U dollars are now expected to reach $41.5 million this year and remain nearly $10 million above original projections for the next four years.”

But Measure U is set to expire in March 2019. So what does Mayor Darrell Steinberg and the City Council do? They put Measure U back on the ballot for November, to double the size of the tax and make it permanent, saying “inclusive economic growth” makes it necessary. “I’m confident when people see what we can do with a full penny, they will respond favorably,” Steinberg said.

If you aren’t familiar with “inclusive economic growth,” you may want to pour a whiskey when you read,”Inclusive growth is economic growth that is distributed fairly across society and creates opportunities for all,” according to many “Sustainable growth” organizations. It’s largely used in third-world countries, so I’m curious why Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg chose this feel-good wording… unless perhaps he agrees that Sacramento is turning into a third world city.

In 2017, a city report found a 30 percent spike in homelessness over the past two years, which many in the region felt underestimated the problem.

And to our south, L.A.’s homelessness surged 75% in six years .

At the root of the financial problem in nearly every California city, as well as at the state, is swelling pension obligations, — though no one in Sacramento City Hall wants to admit this is what the Measure U tax increase is really about. “As the costs of pensions and employee salaries increase, the city of Sacramento is forecasting budget deficits beginning next year, reported. “Those gaps are expected to reach $25 million by 2022.”

In April, legislative Democrats killed three bipartisan bills that would have made significant changes to the future of California’s pension system. Rather than agreeing to reduce the risk taxpayers face in the $1.2 trillion public pension and health obligations, particularly if we face another recession, Democrats killed the bills, opting to grow the state employee pyramid scheme instead. “Sen. Connie Leyva, D-Chino, countered that she wanted to find ways to encourage more people to join pension programs instead of 401(k) plans,” reported. “I just think we need to do everything we can to get our young people into defined-benefit plans,” she said, proving that their only plan is to bring in more state employees.

“CalPers, CalStrs and the State health plan have a total of $1.2 trillion in unfunded liabilities. For years CalPERS has been lying about their return on investment, claiming it to be 7.5%. Instead in 2014-15, per State Senator John Moorlach, it is actually 2.4%.”

The pension overhaul bills the committee rejected were:

 Republican Sen. John Moorlach’s Senate Bill 1032, which would make it easier for local governments to separate from CalPERS without paying the hefty termination fees that CalPERS charges to fund pension obligations for defunct agencies. If an agency quits CalPERS without paying the fees, CalPERS slashes the pensions it provides to the agency’s former workers.

Moorlach’s SB 1031, which would prohibit pension funds from providing cost-of-living adjustments to retirees if the pension fund has less than 80 percent of the assets it would need to pay the benefits it owes. Most retired public employees can receive cost-of-living adjustments of 2 percent each year, but some contracts allow up to 5 percent. Moorlach’s proposal would have applied only to state workers hired after Jan. 1, 2019.

Democrat Sen. Steve Glazer’s SB 1149, which would have allowed new state workers to opt for a 401(k) plan instead of a pension. The concept is attractive to younger workers who do not intend to be career civil servants. The University of California is offering a similar plan, and 37 percent of new workers are choosing 401(k) plans instead of pensions.

Which came first – the explosion of homeless on California streets, rivers, parkways and highways, or the unfunded pension crisis? Irresponsible politicians created both.

There is so much that’s wrong with California, but not so much that it could not be fixed if we could just rid ourselves of the irresponsible, selfish, malignant, unstable Democrats in government – the same Democrats who put labor unions over people, illegal aliens over citizens, and their own power over the well-being of their constituents. Even New York Magazine agrees: Democrats Must Be More Ruthless — When They Have Power – NYMag.

For more information about California’s public pension crisis, visit Sen. John Moorlach’s PENSION CRISIS page – the only CPA in the California Legislature tells the unvarnished truth.

This e-mail has been sent by California State Senator John M. W. Moorlach, 37th District. If you no longer wish to subscribe, just let me know by responding with a request to do so.

Also follow me on Facebook & Twitter @SenatorMoorlach