Connect with us

California

Elias: California water agency supply estimates should be more realistic

Published

on

Elias: California water agency supply estimates should be more realistic


The thousands of drivers traversing Interstate 5 on any given day this winter can see for themselves: Nothing even remotely like a water shortage currently plagues the State Water Project.

This is completely obvious from the major viewpoint off the east side of the interstate between Gustine and Patterson, from which it’s clear that all major canals of the project just south of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta are full to capacity or nearly so.

It’s much the same a few dozen miles to the southwest, where the water project’s largest manmade lake, the San Luis Reservoir, is chock-full. Sand-colored margins that grew steadily larger during the decade of drought from 2010 to 2020 have long since been inundated, with the artificial lake shining bright blue on crisp, sunny winter days.

Water officials also promise the San Luis Reservoir will soon be expanded. So why does California’s Water Resources Department persist in providing preliminary farm water allocations that can only be described as small?

Advertisement

It may be due to insecurity, a sense that the Pacific Ocean is due for a long-running “La Nina” condition that could produce a new drought and lower State Water Project and federal Central Valley Project water volumes to the dangerously dry levels of seven and eight years ago.

It may also simply be bureaucrats reminding farmers that they control the lifeblood of America’s most productive agricultural region, also one of the five largest industries in California.

The reality, though — especially after heavy “atmospheric river” rains in mid-November and December drenched Northern California — is that farms will receive far more water than the 5% of requested amounts promised them in late December, when state officials behaved as if the November downpours would be the water year’s last precipitation.

Yes, it is the duty of water officials to husband California’s water supplies to make sure neither cities nor farms ever run completely dry. But 5% made no real sense. It’s as if the bureaucrats who work for Gov. Gavin Newsom wanted to put the lie to his post-election pledges to pay more heed to the Central Valley and its interests, whose sense of being disrespected was one reason that region was the only major part of California carried by President Trump in last fall’s election.

This adds up to a need to change some practices, including a few outlined by Karla Nemeth, the Water Resources Department’s director. “We need to prepare for any scenario, and this early in the season we need to take a conservative approach to managing our water supply,” she said.

Advertisement

That makes planning crops difficult, though, if not impossible, for farmers unless they depend greatly on ground water, a resource becoming increasingly depleted while ground levels above aquifers subside, which they have, as anyone can deduce from seeing onetime irrigation pipes that now rise several feet above current ground levels.

Compromising a bit would be better in years following a few seasons of heavy rain, today’s situation. Another way to put this might be to ask why state bureaucrats push a number and then essentially wink at farmers to tell them what they’re hearing is nowhere near what will eventually govern.

That’s what happened last year too, when the initial estimate of what farmers would get was 10% of requests and the ultimate amount was 40% — still using conservative allocations to make sure, unnecessarily, that reservoirs and canals remained full all year round rather than just partially full.

Even now, after a 2024 that was much drier than 2023 and an early winter with virtually no rain in Southern California, drinking water reservoirs remain nearly full. Diamond Valley Lake, near Hemet, the largest such potable water storage facility in Southern California, was at 97% of capacity shortly after Christmas.

All this makes the time high for California water bureaucrats to cut out their act and provide farmers and other citizens with realistic supply estimates, rather than constantly reserving the right to leave water districts and their people and industries high and dry, even when supplies are copious.

Advertisement

Email Thomas Elias at tdelias@aol.com, and read more of his columns online at californiafocus.net.

Originally Published:



Source link

California

Gavin Newsom proposes $350B California budget — kicks the can on debt

Published

on

Gavin Newsom proposes 0B California budget — kicks the can on debt


California Gov. Gavin Newsom unveiled a record-high $350 billion state budget Friday that makes “historic” investments in areas like education — but kicks the can on paying down federal debt, foisting costs onto struggling employers.

Newsom’s budget incorporates a $43 billion windfall tied to the stock market that he touted in his State of the State speech Thursday, bringing his office’s estimated deficit down to $3 billion — the state’s fourth deficit in a row. The budget plows billions into maintaining education, health care, and other programs but ignores a $20 billion federal loan for Covid unemployment payments — a situation one legislator called “alarming.”

Ignoring the loan means small businesses are on the hook for the state’s debt, said state Sen. Roger Niello of Fair Oaks.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom unveiled a record-high $350 billion state budget Friday REUTERS

“We already have the highest unemployment in the nation and we’re putting this additional burden on our employers. It makes absolutely no sense,” Niello said.

Advertisement

The budget includes $662.2 million in mandatory interest payments, but there is no money going towards the principal.

Since July, the total balance has ballooned to $21.3 billion, and private employers in California pick up the tab under federal rules. Employers pay an $42 extra per employee this year and growing, per KCRA

Every state expect California has paid off the Covid-era loans.

“That is an alarming thing because [Newsom is] basically saying that businesses and employment are not a priority to him and that’s troubling,” Niello added.

At 5.5%, California’s unemployment rate was the highest in the country as of November.

Advertisement

Newsom’s $350 billion budget proposal is about $30 billion higher than this year’s budget, thanks largely to federal healthcare cuts that forced costs onto the state and mandatory set-asides in areas like education.

Newsom’s finance director Joe Stephenshaw highlighted record spending on education. California Governor Gavin Newsom

At a budget briefing Friday, Newsom’s finance director Joe Stephenshaw highlighted record spending on education— amounting to a record $27,418 per K-12 student, $5.3 billion for the University of California system, $15.4 billion to community colleges, and $1 billion to needy schools — along with $500 million towards local homelessness prevention, $195 million in new public safety spending, $3 billion for the state’s rainy day fund and $4 billion for school reserve funds.

The budget includes some cuts to climate-related spending and housing and homelessness, per Calmatters. And it does not include any direct funding for Prop. 36, the anti-crime measure supported by nearly 70% of voters in 2024 — a move Republicans blasted.

But even with Newsom’s unexpected windfall, analysts expect deficits to grow to as high as $35 billion in the coming years as expenditures outpace even optimistic revenue projections.

Newsom and the state Legislative Analyst create separate budget projections, and the governor’s has historically been far rosier on the revenue side. The legislative analyst projected a $18 billion deficit in the coming fiscal year, while the governor calculated $3 billion.

Advertisement

Under Newsom, the state’s general fund spending has increased by 77% partly owing to new programs spun up when the state was flush with cash, according to Republican legislators.

Newsom’s $350 billion budget — the last before he leaves office next year — does little to confront ballooning expenses, dumping the problem on the future governor and Legislature, according to Senate Minority Leader Brian Jones.

“This is more of the same from a lame-duck governor content on leaving the rest of us to pick up the financial pieces when he leaves office,” Jones said in a statement.  

Democrats in the legislature were more measured in their responses.

Advertisement
Newsom’s $350 billion budget proposal is about $30 billion higher than this year’s budget, thanks largely to federal healthcare cuts. California Governor Gavin Newsom

“During these times of uncertainty, we must craft a responsible budget that prioritizes the safety and fiscal stability of California families,” said State Senate Leader Monique Limón in a statement.

Newsom and legislators will refine the budget in the coming months towards a final proposal in May.

One major unknown is how California will handle a loss of about $1.4 billion in funding due toTrump administration changes to low-income health care and food programs.

Last year, Newsom was force to scale back a controversial plan to provide Medicaid coverage for illegal immigrants after costs spiked, forcing California was forced to borrow $3.4 billion, Politico reported.

Newsom’s budget didn’t fully explain what would happen to immigrant health care under federal cuts, and Stephenshaw struggled to answer detailed questions from reporters — saying Newsom’s office was still awaiting guidance from the feds.

Advertisement

“As we work through the May revision, this is something we’ll be well aware of and we’ll make those decision at that time,” he said.



Source link

Continue Reading

California

How Trump’s tariffs ricochet through a Southern California business park 

Published

on

How Trump’s tariffs ricochet through a Southern California business park 


  • Tariffs impact businesses in Rye Canyon differently
  • Supreme Court may rule on Trump’s emergency tariffs soon
  • Some businesses adapt, others struggle with tariff costs

VALENCIA, California, Jan 9 (Reuters) – America’s trade wars forced Robert Luna to hike prices on the rustic wooden Mexican furniture he sells from a crowded warehouse here, while down the street, Eddie Cole scrambled to design new products to make up for lost sales on his Chinese-made motorcycle accessories.

Farther down the block, Luis Ruiz curbed plans to add two imported molding machines to his small plastics factory.

Sign up here.

“I voted for him,” said Ruiz, CEO of Valencia Plastics, referring to President Donald Trump. “But I didn’t vote for this.”

All three businesses are nestled in the epitome of a globalized American economy: A lushly landscaped California business park called Rye Canyon. Tariffs are a hot topic here – but experiences vary as much as the businesses that fill the 3.1 million square feet of offices, warehouses, and factories.

Advertisement

Tenants include a company that provides specially equipped cars to film crews for movies and commercials, a dance school, and a company that sells Chinese-made LED lights. There’s even a Walmart Supercenter. Some have lost business while others have flourished under the tariff regime.

Rye Canyon is roughly an hour-and-a-half drive from the sprawling Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. And until now, it was a prime locale for globally connected businesses like these. But these days, sitting on the frontlines of global trade is precarious.

The average effective tariff rate on imports to the U.S. now stands at almost 17%–up from 2.5% before Trump took office and the highest level since 1935. Few countries have been spared from the onslaught, such as Cuba, but mainly because existing barriers make meaningful trade with them unlikely.

White House spokesman Kush Desai said President Trump was leveling the playing field for large and small businesses by addressing unfair trading practices through tariffs and reducing cumbersome regulations.

‘WE HAD TO GET CREATIVE’ TO OFFSET TRUMP’S TARIFFS

Rye Canyon’s tenants may receive some clarity soon. The U.S. Supreme Court could rule as early as Friday on the constitutionality of President Trump’s emergency tariffs. The U.S. has so far taken in nearly $150 billion under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. If struck down, the administration may be forced to refund all or part of that to importers.

Advertisement

For some, the impact of tariffs was painful – but mercifully short. Harlan Kirschner, who imports about 30% of the beauty products he distributes to salons and retailers from an office here, said prices spiked during the first months of the Trump administration’s push to levy the taxes.

“It’s now baked into the cake,” he said. “The price increases went through when the tariffs were being done.” No one talks about those price increases any more, he said.

For Ruiz, the plastics manufacturer, the impact of tariffs is more drawn out. Valencia makes large-mouth containers for protein powders sold at health food stores across the U.S. and Canada. Before Trump’s trade war, Ruiz planned to add two machines costing over half a million dollars to allow him to churn out more containers and new sizes.

But the machines are made in China and tariffs suddenly made them unaffordable. He’s spent the last few months negotiating with the Chinese machine maker—settling on a plan that offsets the added tariff cost by substituting smaller machines and a discount based on his willingness to let the Chinese producer use his factory as an occasional showcase for their products.

“We had to get creative,” he said. “We can’t wait for (Trump) to leave. I’m not going to let the guy decide how we’re going to grow.”

Advertisement

‘I’M MAD AT HIM NOW’

To be sure, there are winners in these trade battles. Ruiz’s former next-door neighbor, Greg Waugh, said tariffs are helping his small padlock factory. He was already planning to move before the trade war erupted, as Rye Canyon wanted his space for the expansion of another larger tenant, a backlot repair shop for Universal Studios. But he’s now glad he moved into a much larger space about two miles away outside the park, because as his competitors announced price increases on imported locks, he’s started getting more inquiries from U.S. buyers looking to buy domestic.

“I think tariffs give us a cushion we need to finally grow and compete,” said Waugh, president and CEO of Pacific Lock.

For Cole, a former pro motorcycle racer turned entrepreneur, there have only been downsides to the new taxes.

He started his motorcycle accessories company in his garage in 1976 and built a factory in the area in the early 1980s. He later sold that business and – as many industries shifted to cheaper production from Asia – reestablished himself later as an importer of motorcycle gear with Chinese business partners, with an office and warehouse in Rye Canyon.

“Ninety-five percent of our products come from China,” he said. Cole estimates he’s paid “hundreds of thousands” in tariffs so far. He declined to disclose his sales.

Advertisement

Cole said he voted for Trump three times in a row, “but I’m mad at him now.”

Cole even wrote to the White House, asking for more consideration of how tariffs disrupt small businesses. He included a photo of a motorcycle stand the company had made for Eric Trump’s family, which has an interest in motorcycles.

“I said, ‘Look Donald, I’m sure there’s a lot of reasons you think tariffs are good for America,” but as a small business owner he doesn’t have the ability to suddenly shift production around the world to contain costs like big corporations. He’s created new products, such as branded tents, to make up for some of the business he’s lost in his traditional lines as prices spiked.

He pulls out his phone to show the response he got back from the White House, via email. “It’s a form letter,” he said, noting that it talks about how the taxes make sense.

Meanwhile, Robert Luna isn’t waiting to see if tariffs will go away or be refunded. His company, DeMejico, started by his Mexican immigrant parents, makes traditional-style furniture including hefty dining tables that sell for up to $8,000. He’s paying 25% tariffs on wooden furniture and 50% on steel accents like hinges, made in his own plant in Mexico. He’s raised prices on some items by 20%.

Advertisement

Fearing further price hikes from tariffs and other rising costs will continue to curb demand, he’s working with a Vietnamese producer on a new line of inexpensive furniture he can sell under a different brand name. Vietnam has tariffs, he said, but also a much lower cost base.

“My thing is mere survival,” he said, “that’s the goal.”

Reporting by Timothy Aeppel; additional reporting by David Lawder
Editing by Anna Driver and Dan Burns

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab



Source link

Continue Reading

California

Up to 20 billionaires may leave California over tax threat | Fox Business Video

Published

on

Up to 20 billionaires may leave California over tax threat | Fox Business Video




Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending