State Legislative 2019

 

Top Priorities
  • Support SB 16 (Roth) for increased funding to address the severe shortfall of judicial resources.
  • Support the Governor’s budget proposal for higher education, as well as SB 56 (Roth) and AB-1740 (Medina) which would provide for construction and operation of a dedicated facility at the UCR School of Medicine.
  • Oppose SB 567 (Caballero & Skinner), Workers’ Compensation Changes, which would define “injury” in a way which would increase individual indemnity payments by hundreds of thousands of dollars.
  • Support administrative/legislative action and State funding to keep the California WaterFix on schedule and oppose SB 204 (Dodd) and any other bill which could delay new Delta conveyance.
  • Oppose SB 732 (Allen), Transactions and Use Tax, South Coast Air Quality Management District, which authorizes a new tax for the District.
  • Protect the original intent of SB 1 funding for local transportation projects and oppose infill and density funding criteria which will decrease funding for the Inland Empire.
  • Support AB 192 (Mathis), the California Integrated Community Living Program, which will provide funding for housing for people with disabilities.

Economic Development
  • Support AB 192 (Mathis), the California Integrated Community Living Program, which will provide funding for housing for people with disabilities.
  • Support legislation and State regulations to provide sufficient funding to ease the California housing crisis and boost housing supply.
  • Support AB 11, Community Redevelopment Law of 2019, which would authorize creation of Affordable Housing and Infrastructure Agencies.
Education
  • Support the Governor’s budget proposal for higher education, which includes 2% enrollment growth for the California State University (CSU) and contains an additional investment of $240m for University of California (UC).
  • Support SB 56 (Roth) and AB-1740 (Medina) which would provide for construction and operation of a dedicated facility at the UCR School of Medicine.
  • Support AB 1307 (Rubio) which establishes a formula for the Cal Grant award for new students in the Independent California College and University (ICCU) sector.
  • Support SB 461 (Roth) which would expand the Cal Grant program by allowing the Cal Grant A & B students to receive an additional Summer Cal Grant award for two summer terms of up to 9 units of enrollment.
  • Support SB 14 (Glazer), the Higher Education Facilities Bond Act, which would place a bond on the March ballot for CSU and UC facilities.
  • Support AB 1725 (Carrillo) After School Education and Safety Program to help increase the daily rate from $8.19 to $9.75.
  • Support AB 1085 (McCarty) After School Programs, which would authorize activities that promote healthy choices and behaviors in order to prevent and reduce substance use and improve school retention and performance.
Environment
  • Support administrative/legislative action and State funding to keep the California WaterFix on schedule and oppose SB 204 (Dodd) and any other bill which could delay new Delta conveyance.
  • Oppose SB 732 (Allen), Transactions and Use Tax, South Coast Air Quality Management District, which authorizes a new tax for the District.
  • Support funding for continued management of the Salton Sea.
  • Support SB 669 (Caballero) which funds safe, clean drinking water.
  • Support SB 414 (Caballero) which facilitates consolidation of public water systems.
  • Support AB 533 (Holden) which will incentivize turf replacement programs.
  • Support a comprehensive legislative strategy to address California’s wildfire problem.
Health Care
  • Oppose SB 567 (Caballero & Skinner), Workers’ Compensation Changes, which would define “injury” in a way which would increase individual indemnity payments by hundreds of thousands of dollars.
  • Concern about the Governor’s Executive Order directing the State Department of Health Care Services to negotiate prescription drug prices on behalf of the 13 million people using MediCal.
  • Support AB 890 (Wood) – Nurse Practitioners, which under certain conditions would authorize a nurse practitioner to practice without the supervision of a physician and surgeon.
  • Support SB 66 (Atkins) which would authorize reimbursement under Medi-Cal for Federally Qualified Health Center and Rural Health Clinic Services.
  • Oppose AB 1611 (Chiu), Balanced Billing Measure, which would prohibit hospitals from balance billing patients and eliminate negotiation for fair payment.
  • Support improved access to health care in the Inland Empire.
  • Support the Governor’s budget for health care priorities.
Judicial
  • Support SB 16 (Roth) for increased funding to address the severe shortfall of judicial resources.
Transportation
  • Support an accurate census, critical to transportation funding, and that an Administrative Community-Based Organization office be established in San Bernardino County.
  • Protect the original intent of SB 1 funding for local transportation projects.
  • Oppose infill and density funding criteria which will decrease funding for the Inland Empire.

Economic Development

Support AB 192 (Mathis), the California Integrated Community Living Program, which will provide funding for housing for people with disabilities.  When State Developmental Centers are closed, this bill will capture any sequestered savings associated with that closure, as well as from the sale or lease of that property (excluding the Sonoma Developmental Center) and use that money to fund integrated and affordable housing developments for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

This bill ensures that the funding currently provided to our developmentally disabled community remains with the clients, rather than reverting to the general fund. This will ensure access to affordable housing for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities or residents currently in need of affordable housing options.  Without the proactive approach outlined within this measure, these individuals will continue to be ostracized.

Support legislation and State regulations to provide sufficient funding to ease the California housing crisis and boost housing supply. California faces significant housing affordability and supply challenges.  In the past decade, there have been an average of 80,000 homes a year built in California, which is 100,000 units below what is needed to keep pace with population growth through 2025, according to a California Department of Housing and Community Development report.

The consequences of this housing shortage are growing affordability issues, regional overcrowding, and homelessness.  While several factors helped create the current situation, the massive withdrawal of State funding for affordable housing has certainly contributed to the affordability crisis.  Since the State eliminated redevelopment agencies in 2011, local agencies have lost over $5 billion for affordable housing.  Despite the State budget flourishing in recent years due to infusions of income tax, no significant funds (other than some cap-and-trade dollars) have been allocated for affordable housing.

Inland Action urges the Governor and Legislature to pass legislation and State regulations to provide sufficient funding with reasonable flexibility to help ease the California housing crisis and boost housing supply.

Support AB 11, Community Redevelopment Law of 2019, which would authorize creation of Affordable Housing and Infrastructure Agencies.  The elimination of redevelopment agencies in 2012 was a significant hit (and loss of funding mechanisms) to California cities and counties.  AB 11 would allow cities and counties to form new agencies, to be known as affordable housing and infrastructure agencies, to capture tax increment within certain agency boundaries for the purpose of providing funding and development for housing and infrastructure projects, including the issuance of bonds.  If passed, AB 11 would create agencies similar in purpose and power to the former redevelopment agencies that existed prior to 2012.  Oversight of this program would be administered by the Governor’s Strategic Growth Council.

Education

Support the Governor’s budget proposal for higher education, which includes 2% enrollment growth for the California State University (CSU) and contains an additional investment of $240m for University of California (UC).  Governor Newsom’s 2019-2020 spending plan for the State includes an unprecedented investment in the California State University.  Newsom’s proposed budget for CSU calls for a $562 million increase.  If funded, the Governor’s budget would allow the CSU system to:

  • Increase enrollment by 2%, or 7,000 students system-wide, to help meet California’s future workforce needs;
  • Maintain momentum in improving graduation rates;
  • Provide 21st century facilities for our students; and
  • Keep pace with operational costs.

What does this mean for California State University, San Bernardino?

  1. Increase Enrollment. A 2% enrollment increase will allow the San Bernardino campus to enroll an additional 600 students, most of whom will come from the Inland Empire region, which has one of the lowest four-year baccalaureate degree attainment rates in the nation.  Should the Legislature choose to support a 5% enrollment increase as requested by the CSU Board of Trustees, the San Bernardino campus could enroll an additional 1,400 students.
  2. Improve Graduation Rates. An additional $75 million as requested by the CSU Board of Trustees will allow the system and its San Bernardino campus to continue progress toward reducing equity gaps and improving four-year graduation rates.  CSUSB’s four-year graduation rate nearly doubled from 2015 to 2019.  Last year, CSUSB graduated its largest class ever, awarding 5,000 bachelor’s and master’s/doctoral degrees.  Nearly 70 percent of CSUSB alumni work in the Inland Empire, helping to drive the region’s economy by filling high-demand jobs in healthcare, logistics, computer engineering, education and business.
  3. Reduce the Maintenance Backlog. CSUSB’s deferred maintenance backlog is more than $234 million and growing.  If the Legislature supports the Governor’s budget proposal for deferred maintenance projects, the San Bernardino campus will be able to: (1) replace aging roofs for three major buildings; (2) replace and modernize elevators across campus that no longer are serviceable; and (3) update obsolete heating and ventilation systems in five classroom/laboratory buildings.

Governor Newsom’s budget proposal also contains $240 million in ongoing funding for University of California (UC).  UC would like to continue discussions with the Legislature and Governor for the balance of the ongoing State funding needs ($182.6 million).  If funded, the Governor’s budget would allow the UC system to:

  • Produce 200,000 more degrees by 2030 to meet California’s workforce needs.
  • Improve graduation rates and close the graduation gap for low-income, first generation, and underrepresented students.
  • Invest in the next generation of faculty and research to ensure California remains a leader in higher education and an economic powerhouse, driving innovation and growth.

What does this mean for the University of California, Riverside?

  1. Ongoing Investment to Maintain Instruction and Programmatic Support. UC received $70 million in one-time funds in lieu of a tuition and fee increase during for the 2018-19 academic year.  UCR, as one of the most tuition dependent UC campuses (approximately 40% of portioning budget) relies on ongoing funds to support students. Converting these one-time funds to ongoing support is critical to sustaining UCR’s investments in faculty, instructors, teaching assistants, and campus-based programs.
  2. Growing Access and Supporting Students. Additional funds will enroll more California undergraduates and graduate students in 2019-20.  Funds will also be used to recruit and retain highly skilled employees to support the approximately 24,000 California undergraduates enrolled in 2018-19.
  3. Capital Outlay Debt Service. Funds will be used to support State-approved capital projects and much-needed deferred maintenance.

Support SB 56 (Roth) and AB-1740 (Medina) which would provide for construction and operation of a dedicated facility at the UCR School of Medicine.  SB 56 and AB 1740 will provide support for the UC Riverside (UCR) School of Medicine to help continue its mission in expanding and diversifying the region’s and State’s physician workforce.   These bills would appropriate $80 million for the construction of a dedicated facility for the UCR School of Medicine and an additional $25 million in operational support.

Inland Southern California faces a looming healthcare crisis due to a critical lack of primary and specialty care physicians. The University of California Riverside (UCR) School of Medicine is a key partner in addressing this crisis, by graduating students who choose to remain and practice locally as primary care physicians.  This bill provides funding to double the number of its medical students to 500.

Support AB 1307 (Rubio) which establishes a formula for the Cal Grant award for new students in the Independent California College and University (ICCU) sector.  The Cal Grant award amount has been subject to budget negotiations for nearly 20 years, and during that time it has lost 48% of its value.

The lack of growth in the award for students has led to stagnation in the number of Cal Grant students who choose local private institutions, despite the fact that these institutions have the capacity to take them at a time when public institutions continue to experience capacity constraints and graduate Cal Grant students at a high rate.

The graduation rates of these students, especially Cal Grant recipients, exceeds that of public segments for a fraction of the cost to the State.  This investment in our students by the State is well-placed.  The State has long recognized the role of private, nonprofit institutions in meeting the State’s goals via the Master Plan for Higher Education.  As a result, the Independent Sector annually enrolls over 332,000 undergraduate and graduate students, producing 22% of all undergraduates and 55% of graduate professionals into the workforce each year.

Today, the University of Redlands serves more than 600 Cal Grant students. These students are not only economically diverse, but also ethnically diverse.  Of first year Cal Grant recipients in a recent entering class, 65% were students of color and 70% were among the first generation in their family to attend a four-year university.   First-year retention and four-year graduation rates of Cal Grant students have outperformed overall student body consistently.

Consider that the Cal Grant award is the only State investment in students attending ICCU institutions, whereas the State invests significantly more in Cal Grant students attending public institutions through a combination of Cal Grant tuition awards and General Fund support for institutions’ operations ($27,600 at UC, $14,200 at CSU – compared to just $8,550 at an ICCU).

At the end of the day, AB 1307 is truly about helping low-income students, by providing access and equity for low-income students that seek to attend an independent, nonprofit college or university—especially local or regional ones that are close to their homes and families, that offer the programs of interest to them that will propel them into the workforce.

Support SB 461 (Roth) which would expand the Cal Grant program by allowing Cal Grant A & B students to receive an additional Summer Cal Grant award for two summer terms of up to 9 units of enrollment.  Expanding Cal Grant eligibility to summer sessions will allow students to afford summer courses, reduce their financial burden, and graduate in a faster timeframe, without incurring additional debt. Currently, students at UC and CSU do not have access to State financial aid resources to attend summer courses.

On average, students who attend summer courses at UC and CSU are more likely to graduate in four years.  Faster graduation opens capacity for enrolling more California students, thereby helping to address the State’s desire to close the gap between workforce needs and statewide degree production.  Pell Grant recipients who are not able to enroll in summer due to existing barriers have a six-year graduation rate of 72%.  Compare that to an 86% graduation rate for those students who took just one summer term, and a 91% graduation rate for Pell Grant recipients who accessed two summer terms.

Allowing students to accelerate their time to degree completion through summer courses would reduce the overall cost of education for many students at UC and CSU.  Allowing for an additional two summer terms of Cal Grant-supported enrollment will also mean that these students are more likely to graduate sooner and enter the workforce earlier.

 

Support SB 14 (Glazer), the Higher Education Facilities Bond Act, which would place a bond on the March ballot for CSU and UC facilities.   If approved by voters, this bill would authorize $8 billion in bonds to be equally divided between the CSU and UC for the construction, reconstruction, and remodeling of existing or new facilities.  The last facilities bond approved by voters in 2006 provided $690 million for the CSU; however, by 2012, all those funds were exhausted.  A 2016 education facilities bond approved by voters did not include funding for higher education.  Maintaining capital assets and infrastructure, modernizing buildings, and ensuring adequate capacity are all essential to increasing access and improving student outcomes.

What does this mean for California State University, San Bernardino?

  1. Expansion and renovation of the Performing Arts Building. One of the top capital project priorities in the CSU, this would allow the campus to expand, modernize, and vastly improve instructional spaces for the University’s theater, music, dance and K-12 teacher preparation projects, while also positioning the campus to serve as a performing arts hub for the Inland Empire region.
  2. Science Laboratory Expansion. This project will allow the campus to address a severe shortage of adequate lab space for STEM student instruction and faculty research, helping the campus to expand enrollment in its science programs, as well as attract and retain high-demand STEM faculty.
  3. Library Addition and Renovation. An expansion to the Pfau Library will allow the University to consolidate academic support services for students, improve distance learning capabilities, relieve overcrowding in the library, and address badly needed building system deficiencies and code violations in one of the oldest buildings on campus.

What does this mean for University of California, Riverside?

The University’s fundamental mission is teaching, research, and public service. Facilities that support this mission are aging, seismic standards have tightened, and deferred maintenance needs have increased. With continued growth in the University’s operations, additional space is needed. UCR cannot sustain its capital program on debt or non-state funds or rely on fundraising for capital projects. Without an infusion of additional funding, the ability to fully implement the capital program is uncertain and, in many cases, unlikely.  This funding gap highlights the urgency for new State funding.

A new State General Obligation Bond would provide much needed resources to support the University’s important mission including funding an undergraduate class lab and teaching facility, professional school education building, and School of Medicine educational building, as well as renovations to Physics, Boyce Hall and Webber Hall. State-eligible projects also include UC Riverside’s Clean Energy Technology Park, as well as carbon neutrality modernization of the campus’s central plant.

Support AB 1725 (Carrillo) After School Education and Safety Program to help increase the daily rate from $8.19 to $9.75.  Currently over $64 million in funding comes to the Inland Empire, with Riverside County School Districts receiving $32,687,776 and San Bernardino County School Districts receiving $32,241,483 annually.  Effective afterschool programs bring a wide range of benefits to youth, families and communities.  Afterschool programs can boost academic performance, reduce risky behaviors, promote physical health, and provide a safe, structured environment for the children of working parents.

This bill would continuously appropriate an additional $112,800,000 from the General Fund to the State Department of Education in the 2019–20 fiscal year for purposes of the program. The bill, in each fiscal year thereafter, would continuously appropriate to the State Department of Education an amount necessary to fund an increase in the daily per-pupil rate equal to the higher of either 50% of specified increases to the minimum wage or the percentage increase to the California Consumer Price Index, as determined by the Department of Finance. The bill would require the State Department of Education to increase the maximum grant amounts and daily per-pupil funding rates in accordance with the total amount appropriated for the program in the 2019–20 fiscal year, and in each fiscal year thereafter.

Support AB 1085 (McCarty) After School Programs, which would authorize activities that promote healthy choices and behaviors in order to prevent and reduce substance use and improve school retention and performance.  The Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA), an initiative statute approved by the voters at the November 8, 2016, statewide general election as Proposition 64, among other things, requires the Controller, by July 15 of each fiscal year beginning in the 2018–19 fiscal year, to disburse 60% of the funds deposited in the California Cannabis Tax Fund during the prior fiscal year into the Youth Education, Prevention, Early Intervention and Treatment Account, to be disbursed by the Controller to the State Department of Health Care Services for programs for youth that are designed to educate about and to prevent substance use disorders and to prevent harm from substance use.

AUMA authorizes the programs to include, but not be limited to, certain components, including grants to schools to develop and support student assistance programs, or other similar programs, designed to prevent and reduce substance use, and improve school retention and performance. AUMA requires the State Department of Health Care Services to enter into interagency agreements with the State Department of Public Health and the State Department of Education to implement and administer these programs.

Environment

Support administrative/legislative action and State funding to keep the California WaterFix on schedule and oppose SB 204 (Dodd) and any other bill which could delay new Delta conveyance.  Inland Action continues to support administrative/legal action and State funding to keep California WaterFix on schedule to advance conveyance and ecosystem improvements to help achieve the coequal goals of water supply reliability and Delta ecosystem restoration. Water reliability is a vital issue for the Inland Empire region.  Inland Action supports upgrading the State’s infrastructure to improve conveyance in the Delta; supports ensuring more reliable long-term water deliveries for the State Water Project, which provide 30% of Southern California’s water; supports State efforts for funding groundwater cleanup, surface and groundwater storage, conservation, and recycled water projects.

SB 204 gives the Legislature the opportunity to delay the Delta Conveyance Design Construction Authority (DCA) approval of design, planning, and construction contracts for new Delta conveyance.  While the author’s intent to further transparency and share information regarding future State Water Project contract amendments and DCA contracting is understood, SB 204 could delay solutions to protect drinking water reliability for two-thirds of the State’s population, millions of acres of irrigated farmland, the State’s economy, and the environment.

Oppose SB 732 (Allen) Transactions and Use Tax, South Coast Air Quality Management District, which authorizes a new tax for the District.   SB 732 would authorize the South Coast Air District (SCAQMD) Board to impose a transactions and use tax within the boundaries of the south coast district (Orange, Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino) with the moneys generated from the transactions and use tax to be used to supplement existing revenues being used for District purposes.  As amended, Senate Bill 732 would authorize a majority of the SCAQMD board, made up of 10 elected officials and three state appointees, to put a sales tax of up to 1% on the ballot for voter approval.

Currently, California sales tax is the highest in the nation at 7.25 %, and as of now, State law limits combined local sales taxes to 3% on top of that.  SB 732 would lift the cap to allow for the SCAQMD’s tax increase.  In some cities, the sales tax would exceed 10.25 percent.  SCAQMD wants to secure additional funding to help fund incentive payments to companies that convert their diesel fleets to electric vehicles.

Inland Action supports improved air quality and public health for the residents of the Inland Empire. Providing incentives to replace dirty diesel trucks with clean zero- and near-zero emission trucks will improve air quality and public health but asking voters to pay a higher tax and creating another tax to pay for it is not the way to go.  SCAQMD already has a revenue source for clean-vehicle projects and the incentive program could be funded from other programs, such as cap-and-trade.  Since implemented, the program has generated tens of millions of dollars that is supposed to be addressing the negative impacts of carbon use, climate change, and pollution issues.  Those funds could be used to fund the program.

Support funding for continued management of the Salton SeaFew projects in our region come anywhere near the Salton Sea in terms of the potential for calamity or, conversely, enormous gain.  The Salton Sea is impacted by rising salinity of the Sea, as well as changes in runoff from irrigated agriculture (supplied by Colorado River water).  Reduced water flows to the Sea could result in the exposure of nearly 100 square miles of dry lake bed, resulting in diminished habitat, significant air quality problems, and a damaged economy.

A key issue at the Salton Sea is exposure of previously submerged lakebed, known as playa, as the lake surface shrinks.  This playa exposure is subject to wind erosion and can be a source of fine airborne dust smaller than 10 micrometers, known as particulate matter 10, or PM10; as well as a source of PM 2.5.  The dust is a significant health hazard and can contribute to respiratory illness in humans.  It can also damage agricultural crops and wildlife and harm the region’s tourism industry.  Areas downwind from the Sea are already suffering from severe non-attainment for PM 10 under the Clean Air Act.  These areas suffer the highest rates of childhood asthma in California, with emergency room admissions for children under four years of age roughly twice the State average.  In the near future, tens of millions of citizens downwind from the Sea could be impacted by dust blown from the playa into densely urbanized areas throughout Southern California.

In recent years, local, State, tribal, and federal governments have achieved significant progress in addressing the long-term management of the Salton Sea.  These efforts have resulted in the development of the Salton Fee Funding and Feasibility Action Plan, a living document and framework for the future management of the Salton Sea, and Phase I of the Salton Sea Management Program 10-Year Plan, which guides investments at the Salton Sea in line with a Memorandum of Understanding between the United States Department of the Interior and the California Natural Resources Agency.  Current efforts are designed to address playa exposure by developing habitat or dust suppression projects on exposed playa.

With a plan in place, and funding generally available to the projects through the recently adopted 2018 Farm Bill at the federal level, and through the passage of Proposition 68 at the State level, it is critical that funding be delivered to these projects in a timely and efficient manner.  At the State level, the following steps are suggested:

  • Reform Governance Structure: The current structure through the State Salton Sea Management Plan (SSMP) has made contracting on projects costly without delivering timely results.  A working model that follows the guiding principles of the Salton Sea Authority, State policy on watersheds, and State law AB 71 (which directs the State to work in cooperation and consultation with the Salton Sea Authority) would be to recognize the SSMP as a functional equivalent of an Integrated Regional Water Management Plan. Under this model, the State could then still maintain an oversight role while recognizing the Salton Sea Authority as a qualifying agency to implement this plan according to state set criteria.
  • Renewable Energy Development: Development of renewable energy resources at the Salton Sea is important in order to provide potential revenue streams to help fund revitalization projects and activities.  Efforts to promote geothermal energy development in the Salton Sea Known Geothermal Resource Area (estimated to potentially generate 2,000 MW of carbon-free baseload power) and policies that encourage recovery of valuable minerals in geothermal brine could be a key part of this.

Support SB 669 (Caballero) which funds safe, clean drinking water.  SB 669 establishes an irrevocable Safe Drinking Water Trust to provide a perpetual source of funding to assist chronically noncompliant community water systems in disadvantaged communities gain access to safe drinking water.

Support SB 414 (Caballero) which facilitates consolidation of public water systems. SB 414 Creates the Small System Water Authority Act of 2019 and authorizes creation of small system water authorities that will have powers to absorb, improve, and competently operate noncompliant public water systems. Small water systems consolidated into regional authority could benefit from increased economies of scale and access to public financing.

Support AB 533 (Holden) which will incentivize turf replacement programs.  AB 533 exempts any rebates, vouchers, or other financial incentives issued by a water service provider for expenses incurred to participate in a water efficiency program from personal state income tax. California currently has a patchwork of tax exemptions for different water conservation programs, including water efficient appliances and turf replacement, some of which have expired.  AB 533 will incentivize and encourage participation in water agency turf replacement programs designed to increase water use efficiency throughout California.

Support a comprehensive legislative strategy to address California’s wildfire problem.  California has a unique and complex set of issues related to its wildfire problems.  Ten of the 20 most destructive wildfires in the California have happened since 2015, and 2018 was the deadliest and most destructive year on record.  Wildfires threaten lives, property, the environment and the economy.  Additionally, wildfires harm air quality and increase greenhouse gas emissions.  Massive wildfire losses have been tied to unusually high wind events and extreme weather patterns.  Extreme wind events paired with the millions of dead and dying trees create a tinderbox where a small spark can grow quickly to a massive wildfire.

The 2017 and 2018 wildfire seasons have demonstrated the increased threat and magnitude of wildfires in California. Wildfires threaten not only our homes, our lives, but also our economy. Wildfire jeopardizes the State’s economy with ripple effects that reverberate through every sector, including housing and insurance costs.  Factors increasing wildfire risk are broad and complex.  It is critical to take a holistic approach to wildfire risk, response, and recovery.  In order to properly address the various factors that contribute to wildfire losses, the State must take a leadership role.  Inland Action supports the State’s actions to broadly protect communities, consumers, and the economy from the risks posed by wildfires.

Wildfires undo the work being done to improve our air quality and reduce harmful greenhouse gases by continuing a vicious cycle of releasing heat-trapping carbon dioxide that worsens the effects of climate change – making California hotter, drier, and susceptible to even more wildfires.  In 2017 alone, California’s wildfires released more greenhouse gases than the whole State’s residential and commercial sectors combined.  California needs comprehensive policy and resource solutions soon.  The Inland Empire has extremely high fire risk areas near high population centers.  The wildland forests include local, State and federally managed lands.   The Inland Empire has a high population of low-income communities disproportionally susceptible to wildfire risks due to lack of resources and information.  The economy in the mountain communities is dependent on tourism, which is susceptible to high economic impacts created by wildfire.

Wildfire risk reduction is key to protecting communities.  Focus must first be on Community Risk Reduction (CRR).  Inland Action supports comprehensive wildfire prevention efforts and Community Risk Reduction programs focused on fuel reduction and community education. Equipment, technology and personnel must better reflect the increased heightened risk of wildfires.  To ensure emergency responders are better prepared to save lives and property and to prevent future devastation, additional resources are needed to:

  • To collaborate on the Community Risk Reduction paradigm, shift from responsive to preventive.
  • To provide adequate funding to local jurisdictions (i.e., county fire marshals and fire protection districts) to implement CRR successfully.
  • Improve the health of the State’s forestlands and California’s fire protection capabilities by enhancing fire prevention, including funds for fuel reduction and implementation of the wildfire prevention and recovery legislative package from 2018.
  • Increase funding to local jurisdictions (i.e. county/city) in high fire risk areas to implement their Community Risk Reduction Programs.
  • Waive fees for disposal of green waste from households for defensible space clearing in high fire risk areas by improve emergency response and preparedness capabilities, updating the State’s 911 system, investing in the Mutual Aid System and prepositioning, providing public education around disaster preparedness and safety, increasing funding for the California Disaster Assistance Act to help local governments recover from disasters, updating aviation resources to support firefighting activities, and improving technology including satellite data and installing new wildfire detection cameras.

Additionally, California must protect the local and State economies:

  • Ensuring there is adequate investment in the highly trained and qualified women and men who are on the front lines of energy resilience and wildfire prevention.
  • Increasing the number of line workers and line clearance tree trimmers.
  • Promoting an environmentally friendly forest management economy whereby biologist and foresters select and allow for commercial management of trees to support sustainable fuel reduction to protect communities and the environment.
  • Restoring market confidence in the California’s regulatory framework to promote a financially sound electric utility industry.
  • Ensuring regulators hold utilities accountable for complying with wildfire mitigation plans as required by Senate Bill 901.
  • Implementing a fair, more efficient allocation of wildfire cost recovery tied to substantial compliance wildfire mitigation plans.
  • Ensuring fairness and assistance to hasten recovery for wildfire victims and affected communities.
  • Establishing a statewide wildfire fund to ensure victims are fairly compensated for their losses and to help rebuild communities faster.
Healthcare

Oppose SB 567 (Caballero & Skinner), Workers’ Compensation Changes, which would define “injury” in a way which would increase individual indemnity payments by hundreds of thousands of dollars.  SB 567 would define “injury,” for the purposes of workers’ compensation, for a hospital employee who provides direct patient care in an acute care hospital to include infectious disease, cancer, musculoskeletal injuries, post-traumatic stress disorder, and respiratory diseases.  This would impact situations in which employees seek a full range of workers’ compensation benefits which can reach hundreds of thousands of dollars in indemnity payments and medical costs for a single case.  SB 567 is concerning for two key reasons:

  • There is no evidence that valid claims are being denied. This bill would allow the first-ever presumption in the private sector without any evidence to justify that expansion.  It would set a troubling precedent and has the potential to significantly alter the State’s workers’ compensation system.
  • Any increase in workers’ compensation costs will directly and immediately impact hospitals’ financial ability to protect access to high-quality care. The cost of this new mandate, while difficult to quantify, would likely be astronomical.  One cancer claim, which could be filed up to 10 years after employment ends, could be valued in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Concern about Governor’s Executive Order directing the State Department of Health Care Services to negotiate prescription drug prices on behalf of the 13 million people using Medi‑Cal.  The Governor’s executive order/proposal to move the Medi-Cal prescription drug benefit to a statewide fee for service program is of significant concern. This move, if not designed appropriately, could result in loss of critical care coordination, putting patients at risk.  It could also result in increased fraud, waste, and abuse.  The administration is encouraged to carefully evaluate this proposal and seek feedback from health plans and hospitals closest to the patients.

Inland Action supports continuation of the federal 340B drug discount program, which has been in existence since 1992 and is supported wholeheartedly by safety-net hospitals and community-based clinics like those located in the Inland Empire.  The 340B program enables these providers that serve low-income, vulnerable patients to purchase outpatient medications at a discount from drug manufacturers.

Support AB 890 (Wood) which would authorize a nurse practitioner to practice without the supervision of a physician and surgeon under certain conditions.  AB 890 would authorize a nurse practitioner who holds a certification as a nurse practitioner from a national certifying body to practice without the supervision of a physician and surgeon if the nurse practitioner meets specified requirements, including having practiced under the supervision of a physician and surgeon for an unspecified number of hours.  The bill would also authorize a nurse practitioner to perform specified functions, in addition to any other practices authorized by law, including ordering and interpreting diagnostic procedures, certifying disability, and prescribing, administering, dispensing, and administering controlled substances.

Support SB 66 (Atkins) which would authorize reimbursement under Medi-Cal for Federally Qualified Health Center and Rural Health Clinic Services.  SB 66 would authorize reimbursement at a federally qualified health center for a maximum of two visits taking place on the same day at a single location if, after the first visit, the patient suffers illness or injury requiring additional diagnosis or treatment or if the patient has a medical visit and a mental health visit or a dental visit.

Oppose AB 1611 (Chiu), Balanced Billing Measure, which would prohibit hospitals from balance billing patients and eliminate negotiation for fair payment.  AB 1611 would prohibit hospitals from balance billing patients who receive emergency and post-stabilization services and sets a default out-of-network reimbursement rate tied to the higher of average contract rates or Medicare.  While the measure offers important patient protections, it would set an unnecessary default rate, eliminating hospitals’ ability to negotiate fair payment from payors.  California Hospital Association and Inland Empire hospitals are working together to address the issue of balance billing without eliminating hospitals’ ability to negotiate fair contracts.  The bill is set to be heard in Assembly Health Committee on April 23.

Support improved access to health care in the Inland Empire.  In the Inland Empire, access to physical and mental health care is a challenge that needs to be addressed for the residents of the region.  Access issues are often the result of funding allocation disparities and inadequacies, provider shortages, and the geographic challenges of delivering health care across the 27,000 square miles of the region.  Although we have two of the most populous counties, the Inland Empire counties rank near the bottom in certain funding allocations, including health and mental health realignment.

The current distribution of health and mental health realignment allocations vary by county and does not account for the two counties’ more recent population growth.  The Inland Empire also has the greatest primary care physician shortage in the State and was recently designated as a critical shortage region.  Funding inadequacies, provider shortages, and geographic disparities create unique and significant challenges for the Inland Empire.  Health care providers look for areas to increase the health care workforce, to provide adequate revenue tied to value, and to explore models for care delivery in rural areas.  Inland Action urges leaders in the Legislature and administration to look for opportunities to improve access to health care for the region.

Support the Governor’s budget for health care priorities.

  • Support proposed expansion of the State’s Medi-Cal program to income-eligible undocumented individuals between the age of 18 and 26, beginning July 1, 2019. The Governor’s proposal is for $194 million, and the estimate assumes 138,000 individuals will receive full-scope benefits.
  • Support the continuation and expansion of subsidies under the Affordable Care Act for families who currently receive them and expand them to people with higher incomes than allowed under current law. A cost estimate is not currently available.
  • Sustain the Existing Health Care Workforce – Provides $33 million annually beginning in 2021-22 to sustain the three-year commitment of $100 million in the 2017 Budget Act to support health care workforce initiatives. It is to be administered by the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development and “encourages universities and primary care health professionals to provide health care in medically underserved areas by providing financial support to a variety of medical education programs throughout California.”
  • Mental Health Workforce – Provides $50 million to increase mental health workforce training, administered by the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development.
  • Proposition 56 Value Based Purchasing (VBP) – Provides $180 million to establish a VBP program through Medi-Cal managed care plans that will provide incentive payments to providers meeting specified metrics in areas such as behavioral health integration, prenatal/post-partum care, and chronic disease.
  • Whole Person Care Housing – Provides $100 million for whole person care pilot programs that provide housing services. Funding will focus on the homeless mentally ill population and be available through 2025.
Judicial

Support SB 16 (Roth) for increased funding to address the severe shortfall of judicial resourcesThe bill would appropriate $37,032,500 from the General Fund to fund 25 Superior Court judgeships already authorized by the Legislature but not presently funded.  The newly funded judgeships would then be allocated by the Judicial Council pursuant to its uniform criteria, resulting in several new judges for the Inland Empire.

 The Superior Courts serving the Inland Empire (both San Bernardino and Riverside Counties) face severe shortages of judicial officers.  Pursuant to the Judicial Council’s most-recent study of judicial needs, based on its statewide study of weighted caseloads, San Bernardino County needs an additional 38 judicial officers and Riverside County needs an additional 36.  The Legislature has already created many judgeships that could begin to address this need, but those positions have never been funded.

The Inland Empire is comprised of two of the largest, and fastest-growing, counties in the State – San Bernardino and Riverside.  San Bernardino County is the largest in the State. (In fact, it is the largest in the contiguous 48 states.) Riverside is the fourth largest in the State.  The combined population in the region exceeds 4.5 million.  According to the Judicial Council, San Bernardino County has experienced a 13% growth in population in the last decade, and Riverside County has experienced a 30% growth in population in recent years.  This population increase in the region – and with it the courts’ caseloads – has far outpaced the allocation of judicial resources to the area.

As stated in the California Judicial Council’s Preliminary 2018 Update of the Judicial Needs (November 2018), “Although the statewide assessed judicial need has been declining in recent years, many courts, particularly in the Inland Empire, continue to experience chronic judicial officer shortage  . . .  In 2018, two highly impacted courts, San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, received two judgeships each, which were reallocated from the superior courts of Alameda and Santa Clara Counties.  In addition, the Budget Act of 2018 gave the Superior Court of the County of Riverside two newly funded judgeships.  Despite these changes, Riverside and San Bernardino courts continue to have a large unmet need for new judgeships.”  To address this need, that report went on to determine the need for 38 new judgeships in San Bernardino County and 36 new judgeships in Riverside County, based on the Judicial Council’s weighted caseload analysis.

While the funding of all 74 new judgeships needed by our region is not immediately feasible considering other important competing budgetary interests, SB 16 would go a substantial way to address this need.  It appropriates funds for 25 superior court judgeships that the Legislature has already authorized but has not yet funded.  These newly-funded positions would be allocated by the Judicial Council pursuant to each county’s need under the uniform standards for determination of such needs, resulting in severely needed help to the San Bernardino and Riverside Superior Courts.  We strongly support SB 16 to begin to address our region’s judicial resource needs.

Transportation

Support accurate census critical to transportation funding and that an Administrative Community-Based Organization office be established in San Bernardino County.  In just a short time, the 2020 Census will be underway.  Inland Action recognizes the vital importance of an accurate count and wants to make sure that the Inland Empire receives its fair share of funding based on Census data.  As a substantial amount of the transportation funding for the Inland Empire is based on Census data, we expect that an accurate count will demonstrate the substantial increase in the population of the Inland Empire and result in increased funding over the next 10 years for the many critical projects needed in our area.

Inland Action is aware of the efforts which have already been made by California Complete Count, the Assembly, and the Senate to assure that every person is counted.  The Community Foundation (which serves the Counties of Riverside and San Bernardino) has been designated as an Administrative Community-Based Organization (ACBO) which will work with the State of California to ensure a complete county of California residents.  The administrative offices for The Community Foundation are located in Riverside.

Inland Action urges that an administrative office be established in San Bernardino County so that efforts to count hard-to-count populations in San Bernardino County are coordinated from a local office.  Inland Action also urges that adequate funding and personnel be allocated to establish public locations for internet access and to provide assistance to people who do not have access to the internet or who are not familiar with computerized forms.

Protect the original intent of SB 1 funding for local transportation projects.  Recent proposals coming forth to tie the release of SB 1 funds for local transportation improvements to non-transportation State policy issues (such as affordable housing) compromise the original intent of SB 1’s funding formulas and is inconsistent with the intent of the voters who voted against repeal of SB 1. Such proposals would impair local transportation agencies’ ability to fund the many badly needed local projects to repair streets, highways and other capital transportation improvements that voters have made clear they desperately want delivered in a timely manner.  Legislative and administrative attempts to encourage cities and counties to achieve goals established for non-transportation related purpose should be done through State approved incentives which relate specifically to the intent of those programs, not by using the threat of lost transportation funding and/or grants.

Inland Action urges the Legislature and the Governor’s office to resist any temptation to stray from the original legislative intent of SB 1 and avoid all attempts to tie the receipt of SB 1 transportation funds to other State policy issues.

Oppose infill and density funding criteria which will decrease funding for the Inland Empire.  There is a general trend toward allocating transportation dollars to areas where there is infill development, high density and opportunities for transit-oriented development.  Outlying areas such as those in the Inland Empire are still suburban in nature and lack the infill development opportunities and densities to compete with transportation funding that will be allocated based on infill development and high-density development near public transit.

One of Inland Action’s goals in meeting with Inland Empire State representatives is to educate them as to the competitive disadvantage that the Inland Empire will have in competing for grants that are ranked based on these criteria.  As more and more grants utilize density and infill criteria, the result will be that the Inland Empire will receive an even smaller share of transportation dollars, which share is already disproportionately low compared to Los Angeles County and the Bay Area.