Rain is coming in south San Diego, which means higher water levels in the polluted Tijuana River — and, potentially, even worse air quality.

Now, residents worry that the home air filters newly provided by San Diego County won’t be enough to curb the noxious air from the rising river.

And despite increased federal and state attention in recent weeks, local officials and residents say that solutions are still elusive and distant in the wake of the November elections and Gov. Gavin Newsom’s refusal to declare a state of emergency over the situation.

Last month, Newsom visited the decrepit facilities at the South Bay International Wastewater Treatment Plant in San Diego and the refurbished San Antonio de los Buenos plant in Baja California for the first time.

After years of deferred maintenance, the plant in San Diego received an additional $103 million in the 2024 federal budget for repairs that will take years. The Baja plant is expected to start processing sewage soon, and once both plants are online and fully operational, sewage flows are expected to be reduced by 90% when combined with other measures.

Other federal agencies are also investigating the health concerns of nearby residents who have been suffering respiratory illnesses and unexplained stomach bugs. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention arrived last month to conduct a health survey. Local officials and more than 500 residents have signed a petition asking the Environmental Protection Agency to declare the river a Superfund site and look into the presence of hazardous waste in the riverbed.

“Thanks to our partnership with international, federal, and local partners, we are making real progress,” Newsom said in a statement last month after his visit.

For its part, the county Board of Supervisors voted last month to purchase $2.7 million worth of air purifiers for residents, with the money ultimately coming from the California Air Resources Board.

Unanswered calls for a state of emergency

Some critics argue that the politicians haven’t acted with the necessary sense of urgency. Newsom met with Baja Gov. Marina del Pilar Ávila Olmeda, San Diego County Supervisor Nora Vargas and the International Boundary Waste and Water Commission, but local officials and residents felt snubbed.

“It feels like it was just a photo op,” said Marcus Bush, a council member for National City and a member of the Air Pollution Control District who signed the petition to the EPA. No San Diego County mayors or media outlets were invited to Newsom’s news briefing; when asked, the governor’s office offered no explanation.

“I would like to give our governor the benefit of the doubt,” Bush said, but added, “Why aren’t you taking calls or info?” He wondered aloud whether Newsom was dodging questions about his refusal to declare a state of emergency for the region.

All 18 San Diego County mayors signed a letter this year asking Newsom to declare a state of emergency. The California Coastal Commission also voted unanimously to ask the Biden administration to declare a federal state of emergency, but under federal law, such requests must come from the governor. Newsom has rebuffed those entreaties, and the White House seems no closer to making any significant moves forward.

In letters addressing the California Coastal Commission and mayors of San Diego County, Newsom’s office asserted that declaring a federal state of emergency would not accelerate the repairs needed at the sewage plant. The office also said that it did not consider the situation at the river to fit the definition of a natural disaster under federal law.

Residents have argued that a state of emergency could bring the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to clean up and divert the river. Last year, heavy rainstorms washed into the river thousands of tons of debris that took nearly five months to clear and broke several pumps in the sewage system. Some have asked for more efficient trash skimmers that could help prevent waste from clogging the treatment plant.

“Everyone agrees that raw sewage in a river is an environmental and health emergency in crisis, but [Newsom and Vargas] are also actively doing things that undermine the emergency,” Bush said.

The Superfund split

Muddying matters further, the county supervisors voted last month to delay consideration of a petition asking the EPA to declare the river a Superfund site. Vargas, who represents the south San Diego district most affected by the noxious odors, voted in favor of the delay.

The petition was introduced by Supervisor Terra Lawson-Remer, who represents the area along the coast just north of the Tijuana River’s mouth. After the vote, Lawson-Remer joined other local officials to file the petition anyway.

“I moved forward because I think it’s urgent,” she said in an interview. It “would be nice for the Board of Supervisors as a whole to act, but it’s not necessary.”

In the board meeting last month, Lawson-Remer said she was concerned about more pollutants in the river than just sewage. Toxic chemicals and heavy metals have been detected that could be leaching into the sediment — something local officials are not equipped to clean up on their own. A petition is the first step in a lengthy process that could take years, even if the EPA decides the river is eligible for a Superfund designation.

Vargas did not agree to be interviewed. But in the Board Meeting and in public statements, she cited concerns that moving too hastily to petition the EPA could negatively affect property values and local businesses.

The Voice of San Diego news site reported that Vargas voted against the EPA petition out of concern that a Superfund designation could halt her project to clean up the South Bay to create parks for underserved communities.

“I support the spirit of this board letter,” Vargas said last month. But “this has the potential to delay local efforts already in progress and negatively affect the limited recreational space that we already have in South County.”

The board voted voted 3 to 2 to extend consideration of the petition by 90 days and have the county gather feedback and information.

Lawson-Remer said the reasons Vargas cited for the delay don’t hold water. “The health of our families and health of our children is by far the No. 1 concern,” she said. “Property values are secondary.”

An uncertain future

Imperial Beach Mayor Paloma Aguirre has been to the White House twice to speak with Brenda Mallory, the chair of President Biden’s Council on Environmental Quality, to ask for assistance. She plans to make one last plea in person next month.

President-elect Donald Trump previously authorized $300 million to stop the cross-border pollution as part of the U.S-Mexico-Canada trade agreement in 2020. But Trump’s vow to cut federal budgets when he takes office in 2025 has Aguirre concerned about a reduction in disaster relief funding. Lee Zeldin, Trump’s choice to lead the EPA, is also expected to scale back regulations.

“If he dismantles the EPA … good luck to all of us, because I don’t know what the strategy will be,” Aguirre said.

A damaged local economy

Meanwhile, residents say that the pollution has already hurt the local economy. Visitors to Imperial Beach have steadily fallen with beach closures due to the contamination, according to numbers provided by the mayor’s office — to just under 700,000 in 2023 from 2.1 million in 2018.

Local restaurateur Gabriel Uribe has run Baja Oyster and Sushi Bar for 25 years in Imperial Beach, a few miles from his ranch, where he also hosts outdoor parties for quinceaneras and graduations.

Guests have left Uribe’s parties early because the air reeks of rotten eggs, he said, and the air filters from the county won’t solve all his problems. “That is like just a Band-Aid on a wound that needs stitching,” he added.

Uribe, who signed the EPA petition, worries that his property’s value could be affected if a Superfund site is declared, or even that his property could be taken through eminent domain. But he wants officials to act urgently to address his health concerns.

“My chest is wheezing. I have an irregular heartbeat,” said Uribe, who’s gone to the emergency room because he couldn’t breathe.

Deborah Vance, who runs a real estate agency in Imperial Beach, said her business has already been affected by the pollution as prospective buyers have been unwilling to purchase property in the city. She struggled to sell four listings in Imperial Beach this last year, a slowdown that had been unheard of in the past.

“It’s beyond impactful,” she said of the pollution. All of the agents who worked with her, she added, have quit or moved on. “It’s devastating.”

The number of abortions in the U.S. only slightly dropped in 2022, the year the Supreme Court overturned Roe. v. Wade, returning the power to make laws on abortion access back to the states.

Abortions declined by just 2% in 2022 compared to 2021, according to new surveillance data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The abortion rate also dipped by 3% and the abortion ratio decreased by 2%.

The total dropped from about 622,000 abortions in 2021 to 609,000 in 2022, the data revealed.

PRO-LIFE GROUPS CAUTIOUS ON RFK JR. NOMINATION AFTER EVOLVING ABORTION VIEWS

This, as Republican-led states have enacted abortion bans with some exceptions such as medical emergencies after the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling.

Most of the abortions were reported before nine weeks of pregnancy and more than 70% were early medication abortions, which was similar to the numbers from before Roe v. Wade was overturned, according to the data.

Anit-abortion activists hold signs outside the US Supreme Court after the overturning of Roe Vs. Wade, in Washington, D.C., on June 24, 2022. (Stefani Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images)

More than 6% of abortions happened between 14 and 20 weeks of pregnancy while about 1% were done either at or after 21 weeks of pregnancy, the CDC said in its report.

Women in their 20s made up more than half of abortions, the CDC said.

WYOMING JUDGE STRIKES DOWN STATE ABORTION LAWS, RULING THEM UNCONSTITUTIONAL

The number of abortions in the U.S. only slightly dropped in 2022, the year the Supreme Court overturned Roe. v. Wade. (AP Photo/Mariam Zuhaib)

The report also said that nearly 60% of the women who had abortions had also given birth before, the data revealed.

The CDC data includes numbers from 47 areas of the U.S. that have published data from 2013 until 2022.

Russell Vought, one of the chief architects of Project 2025 — a conservative blueprint for the next presidency — is no fan of the federal government that President-elect Donald Trump will soon lead.

He believes “woke” civil servants and “so-called expert authorities” wield illegitimate power to block conservative White House directives from deep within federal agencies, and wants Trump to “bend or break” that bureaucracy to his will, he wrote in the second chapter of the Project 2025 playbook.

Vought is a vocal proponent of a plan known as Schedule F, under which Trump would fire thousands of career civil servants with extensive experience in their fields and replace them with his own political loyalists, and of Christian nationalism, which would see American governance aligned with Christian teachings. Both are core tenets of Project 2025.

Throughout his campaign, Trump adamantly disavowed Project 2025, even though its policies overlapped with his and some of its authors worked in his first administration. He castigated anyone who suggested the blueprint, which polls showed was deeply unpopular among voters, represented his aims for the presidency.

But last week, the president-elect nominated Vought to lead the Office of Management and Budget, which oversees the White House budget and its policy agenda across the federal government.

Trump called Vought, who held the same role during his first term, an “aggressive cost cutter and deregulator” who “knows exactly how to dismantle the Deep State and end Weaponized Government.”

The nomination was one of several Trump has made since his election that have called into question his claims on the campaign trail that Project 2025 was not his playbook and held no sway over him or his plans for a second term.

He selected Tom Homan, a Project 2025 contributor and former visiting fellow at the Heritage Foundation, the conservative organization behind the blueprint, as his “border czar.” Trump named Stephen Miller, an immigration hard-liner also linked to Project 2025, as his deputy chief of staff for policy. Both also served in the first Trump administration.

He also named Brendan Carr to serve on the Federal Communications Commission. Carr wrote a chapter of Project 2025 on the FCC, which regulates U.S. internet access and TV and radio networks, and has echoed Trump’s claims that news broadcasters have engaged in political bias against Trump.

Trump named John Ratcliffe as his pick for CIA director and Pete Hoekstra as ambassador to Canada. Both are Project 2025 contributors. It has also been reported that the Trump transition team is filling lower-level government spots using a Project 2025 database of conservative candidates.

During the campaign Trump said that he knew “nothing about” Project 2025 and that he found some of its ideas “absolutely ridiculous and abysmal.” In response to news in July that Project 2025’s director, Paul Dans, was leaving his post, Trump campaign managers Chris LaCivita and Susie Wiles — whom the president-elect has since named his chief of staff — issued a statement saying that “reports of Project 2025’s demise would be greatly welcomed.”

Asked about Trump’s selection of several people with Project 2025 connections to serve in his administration, Trump transition spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt responded with a statement, saying Trump “never had anything to do with Project 2025.”

“This has always been a lie pushed by the Democrats and the legacy media, but clearly the American people did not buy it because they overwhelmingly voted for President Trump to implement the promises that he made on the campaign trail,” Leavitt wrote. “All of President Trump’s cabinet nominees and appointments are whole-heartedly committed to President Trump’s agenda, not the agenda of outside groups.”

Leavitt too has ties to Project 2025, having appeared in a training video for it.

In addition to calling for much greater power in the hands of the president, Project 2025 calls for less federal intervention in certain areas — including through the elimination of the Department of Education. It calls for much stricter immigration enforcement and mass deportations — a policy priority of Trump’s as well — and rails against environmental protections, calling for the demolition of key environmental agencies such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Weather Service.

It calls for tougher restrictions on abortion and for the federal government to collect data on women who seek an abortion, and backs a slew of measures that would strip rights from LGBTQ+ people.

For Trump’s critics, his selections make it clear that his disavowal of the conservative playbook was nothing more than a campaign ploy to pacify voters who viewed the plan as too far to the right. It’s an argument many were making before the election as well.

“There are many of us who tried to sound the alarm bell before the election,” when voters still had the power to keep such a plan from coming to fruition, said Ben Olinsky, senior vice president of structural reform and governance at the liberal Center for American Progress.

Now, he said, he expects many of the more “draconian pieces” of Project 2025 to start being implemented given the nominees Trump has put forward. That includes Vought’s plan to eviscerate the career civil service, the core of American government, by doing away with merit-based staffing in favor of loyalty-based appointments, Olinsky said.

“We know what happened before there was a merit-based civil service. There was cronyism in American government, and we can look back through history and see that kind of graft and cronyism,” Olinsky said.

Filling the government with Trump loyalists will clear the way for more policies of Project 2025 to be implemented without resistance, Olinsky said.

Olinsky said the Supreme Court and the Republican-controlled House have already proved they are not willing to stand up to Trump.

There are “still some institutionalists” in the Senate — soon to be controlled by Republicans, as well — who could leverage their power to push back, he said, but it is not clear that they will.

Incoming Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) has signaled that he may be willing to do so: According to reports from his home state, he said at a local Chamber of Commerce event Tuesday that all presidents try to push policy through executive action, and that Congress “sometimes will have to put the brakes on.”

In the end, Olinsky said, real resistance might come only once Americans start realizing that Trump’s new government, stripped of all of its experts, is failing them in serious ways.

“They do care about their Social Security checks being delivered. They do care about the nation being defended properly. They care that, when they turn on the faucet, they will drink water that won’t sicken them and their kids,” Olinsky said. “And that’s what requires expertise.”