gets pass on We need a progressive in the Senate

By Joe Sanberg Special to CalMatters

It’s been more than 30 years since California voters had the opportunity to vote in a competitive race for the U.S. Senate. There’s no question in my mind: Californians will elect a true champion for working people to fill the open seat.

A lot has changed since Sen. Dianne Feinstein first took office. This isn’t a 1990s, Blue Dog Democrat state anymore.

Latinos now represent the largest racial group in California. More than 10 million residents are immigrants. Instead of living out the Brady Bunch fantasy of owning a home with a green lawn and white picket fence, almost half of households are renters. The cost of living has exploded and only 17% of Californians think that young people are doing better than previous generations.

Voters have also become laser-focused on electing leaders and advancing policies that work for working families. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders swept California during the 2020 presidential primaries; Gov. Gavin Newsom was elected on the back of a (since reneged) promise to bring single-payer healthcare to the state. Progressive activists and organizers are radically reshaping city councils and municipal elections across California, with a mission to bring unhoused people indoors, end the criminal industrial complex, transform our economy away from fossil fuels, and eschew the payto-play politics of the past.

Sure, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy lives here, but even the Central Valley is trending bluer.

President John Adams, one of the architects of our American political system, famously said “The Representative Assembly, should be an exact Portrait, in Miniature, of the People at large.”

If Adams is right, it is easy to sketch out the profile of our next senator based on the priorities of the Californians they will represent.

The next California senator should support a minimum wage of at least $20 dollars an hour. New polling from Ben Tulchin shows that a strong majority of 7 in 10 California voters support raising the minimum wage to a living wage.

They should fight to tax extreme wealth. At a time when many Californians are working two or three jobs to feed their families, the three wealthiest people in this country own more wealth than the bottom half of the American population combined.

To reduce the outrageous level of inequality, California’s next senator needs to ensure that the ultra-rich pay their fair share.

They also should not have authored or supported legislation that has grown our system of mass incarceration or increased the criminalization of poverty. They should have a plan to address police brutality.

They should stand up to the powerful special interests that have dominated the halls of Washington D.C. for far too long, and protect the needs of our struggling working families.

They shouldn’t take money from big corporate donors.

Eradicating poverty and tackling our homeless crisis should be top priorities.

So, too, should be their unequivocal commitment to a Green New Deal that helps America reach 100% renewable energy, mitigates the effects of drought and pollution in the Golden State, and ensures justice for frontline communities.

California voters should elect someone who believes in economic justice — and reflects the momentum and policy priorities of progressives on the ground.

Most importantly, they should capture the optimism of California. Residents here believe that we can do better. We just need a senator that is finally willing to side with the people he or she represents. We need a senator who is prepared to put it all on the line to deliver cleaner air, affordable housing and better schools to our families — not another career politician.

— Joe Sanberg is a progressive business leader, anti-poverty advocate and founder of CalEITC4ME. He is the lead proponent of a 2024 ballot measure to raise California’s minimum wage.

The guerrilla war between Gov. Gavin Newsom and some of California’s 482 cities over housing policy is heating up.

The state has imposed quotas on local governments to provide – on paper –enough land for muchneeded housing, particularly projects for low- and moderate-income families, and streamline permits for projects.

While most are complying, albeit with some reluctance, others are trying to thwart the mandate. Resistance is strongest in small suburban cities dominated by wealthy residents who live in spacious homes on very large lots and don’t want dense condo or apartment projects to spoil the bucolic atmosphere of their neighborhoods.

That said, the sharpest conflict in California’s housing war pits a not-so-wealthy Orange County city, Huntington Beach, against the state. The city has basically declared it won’t meet the state’s demands, and Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta are suing to force compliance.

“The City of Huntington Beach continues to attempt to evade their responsibility to build housing, but they will simply not win,” Newsom said last week, just before Huntington Beach formally declared its rebellion. “City leaders have a choice — build more housing or face very real consequences — including loss of state funds, substantial fines, and loss of local control.”

“The city has a duty to protect the quality and lifestyle of the neighborhoods that current owners have already bought into and for the future sustainability of Huntington Beach,” City Councilman Pat Burns wrote in a letter to his colleagues prior to their action. “Radical redevelopment in already-established residential neighborhoods is not only a threat to quality and lifestyle, but to the value of the adjacent and neighboring properties.”

Afterwards, Newsom’s office tweeted, “Tonight, Huntington Beach leaders decided that their residents don’t need affordable housing. This is a pathetic pattern by politicians more focused on taking down pride flags than on real solutions. CA needs more housing. Time for Huntington Beach to start acting like it.”

It’s at least noteworthy that the affluent suburbs seeking ways around their quotas, mostly in the San Francisco Bay Area, are overwhelmingly Democratic in their political orientation while Huntington Beach is a Republican stronghold.

Interestingly, while the battle over land use and housing continues elsewhere, residents of arguably California’s most exclusive community don’t have to worry about multi-family housing projects spoiling their ambiance because of a quirk in the law. That would be Montecito, home to celebrities galore, including Oprah Winfrey, Rob Lowe, Ellen DeGeneres and, most recently, expatriate British Prince Harry and his wife, actress Meghan Markle.

Montecito lies next to the Santa Barbara but is not a city. Rather, it is an unincorporated community governed by the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors.

The county’s cities have their own quotas, but all of its unincorporated territory is folded into one quota of 5,664 units. The county’s plan, unveiled last month, identifies potential building sites, mostly near the cities of Santa Barbara and Santa Maria and the communities of Orcutt, Goleta, Isla Vista and Carpinteria.

Some of the sites are vacant while others are occupied, including some shopping centers and churches. None are in Montecito or an adjacent enclave called Summerland, even though the county’s inventory of vacant land includes about a dozen parcels, some of them fairly large, in those two communities.

When county officials outlined their plan at a public meeting this month they were asked why no sites in Montecito were included. County planning director Lisa Plowman said only sites whose owners were interested in development were chosen and no one in Montecito or Summerland was amenable to dense multifamily housing.

That’s why Oprah and her neighbors won’t be bothered. — CalMatters is a public interest journalism venture committed to explaining how California’s state Capitol works and why it matters. For more stories by Dan Walters, go to Commentary.

Truth matters

People may differ on opinions, but questions of the health and safety of children should always rest solidly on the facts. This is as true of trans and genderexpansive children as it is of cisgender children.

This is why all major, respected medical institutions have endorsed supportive and affirming care for these children as best practice, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine, the American Nurses Association and the American Psychological Association.

It is a fact that trans and genderexpansive children who are not supported by their families, their schools or their communities are at significantly higher risk for suicide than their cis gender peers. An American Academy of Pediatrics study found their risk to be up to 34 percent higher.

Speak out

President

The good news is that a University of Washington studynin the journal Pediatrics found that this discrepancy can be reduced to zero when these children are affirmed; when trans kids are supported in their identities, their suicide risk goes down to the same level as their cisgender peers.

The rights of trans children are being attacked in the ongoing “culture wars,” waged by conservative politicians in their campaigns for votes. Trans kids’ rights to healthcare and participation in sports is being politicized, along with other topics such as refugees immigrating to the U.S. and the teaching of Black history in our schools. This campaign is no different than the attacks on gay marriage less than a decade ago. Conservative media such as Tucker Carlson’s Daily Caller, Breitbart News and the Libs of TikTok social media account spread misinformation and outright lies about trans kids to stoke fear and outrage. The attack on the drag show in Woodland by right-wing extremists was prompted by a post on Libs of TikTok.

Differences in opinion are only valid if those opinions rest on the same basis of fact. But as we have seen in recent years, opinions derived from misinformation

Building, Washington, D.C., 20510; 202224-3553; email: https://www.padilla. senate.gov/contact/contact-form/

House of Representatives and lies can quickly have dangerous realworld consequences. Truth matters when children’s lives hang in the balance.

Anoosh Jorjorian Davis

What’s in a name?

What’s in a name? Consider Community Pool, sounds like something for everyone. But the City Council recently considered leasing the Community Pool to a private group due to the unprofitability of maintaining the facility. Like another community pool in town, this one will become a private facility for use by a specific group of individuals (they do propose opening it for public use on July 4th).

It is disturbing that the only solution is to allow a private group to control a public facility. Public pools should be public as are public parks. Maybe the council should consider a bond measure that would cover costs of maintaining and replacing the public pools, giving all citizens of Davis the opportunity to enjoy them.

John Clark Davis

Foy S.

President and CEO R. Burt

Publisher

The Hon. Joe Biden, The White House, Washington, D.C., 20500; 202-456-1111 (comments), 202-456-1414 (switchboard); email: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact

U.S. Senate

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C., 20510; 202-224-3841; email: https://www. feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/ e-mail-me

Sen. Alex Padilla, 112 Hart Senate Office

Rep. Mike Thompson, 268 Cannon Office Building, Washington, D.C., 20515; 202225-3311. District office: 622 Main Street, Suite 106, Woodland, CA 95695; 530-753-5301; email: https:// https:// mikethompsonforms.house.gov/contact/

Governor

Gov. Gavin Newsom, State Capitol, Suite 1173, Sacramento, CA 95814; 916-4452841; email: https://govapps.gov.ca.gov/ gov40mail/