NVR Logo
Has California finally hit the wall?
Friday, April 17, 2009
Save and Share Share
In a recent interview with Jason Clemens, Economist and Director of Research for the Pacific Research Institute, he explained that California’s budget problems are not really about taxes or the costs of illegal immigration. PRI is near completion of a large detailed study on California’s prosperity, or the lack thereof, and one of the main conclusions is that the state is broke because the economy is deteriorating and has been for some time.

In a state with tremendous economic diversity, excellent weather, a highly educated and well trained labor force along with the bonus of a lot of low paid immigrant labor, it is mystifying that California should be one of the most damaged states in the current downturn. But with unemployment near the top in the nation and budget deficits that are almost surreal in their depth, California finds itself in deep economic trouble. We are even on a par with lowly Michigan which is relying on a dying auto industry for its economy. How can this happen? This is just not the result of the current economic downturn, because this has been building for years and state deficits were happening even in good economic times.
For many years conservatives have complained that excessive regulation, especially environmental, was going to hurt the economy. They have also complained that high taxes would add to that and eventually tank us. For just as many years, the liberals who favor such policies said, no, we can afford it, and really, can we afford not to? And up until lately, the liberals have mostly been proven right, as California has been so strong economically that despite the high taxes and thick regulations, the economy has produced good results and given us a good lifestyle.

It looks like the wall has finally been hit, however. Even if the ballot propositions pass, the Legislative Analysts Office says we will have an astounding $26 billion budget deficit in 2013-14.
This is going to have huge impact on us locally. Most of the cities and counties in the state depend for a significant portion of their budgets on money from the state, money that is now in serious jeopardy. There is no doubt that funds are going to be cut, and for years. For example, most counties including Napa get most of their health and human services money from the state, and those are big dollars. Cities also get funds for police and other grants including road maintenance and improvements.

Over the next two years you are going to see Cities and Counties in California one by one running deficits, making big spending cuts, and some may go bankrupt.
On the economic front, unemployment continues to grow, the economy continues to shrink, and even if the optimistic predictions of the Obama administration and others come true and growth resumes at the end of this year, it is going to take years to get back to where we were a year ago.

And an even bigger problem with the upcoming economic scenario is that for many years now our economy has been fueled by debt, a level of debt that we may never be able to go back to. The implication of that is chilling, because tax collections and expectations of salaries and benefits have been based on an economy that essentially had debt sawdust in its engine, and that engine has now frozen up. What that means is that there will be a permanent loss in revenues for government compared to the debt fueled economy. That may eventually be made up by strong economic growth, but the likelihood is that it is going to take quite some time.

What are we going to do? We are going to have to fundamentally change the way we do business and government regulations in California, or we will never pull out of this. The sooner we recognize this the less harmful the long term results will be.

Regulations, especially environmental regulations, are killing the economy here. So much of what goes on that passes for helping the environment actually does little or nothing to help the environment.

One shining example of that is CEQA. Everyone who works on CEQA plans know that it is mostly a pile of paperwork that does little to help the environment. It has become a political football that left wing environmentalists can use to throw back and forth with developers in order to shut them down. The conservation department is huge in Napa County because of all that paperwork, it harms business and the cost is passed on to all of us.

Can you imagine the impact if every time the fire department wanted to buy a new fire engine, that any citizen could drum up objections and force them to answer each and every one and somehow mitigate every concern? And that there was a whole group of people that wanted to stop the purchase of a fire engine no matter how silly the reason? The cost of a fire engine would quadruple.

For instance, right here in Napa County, every project that comes up for development is immediately hamstrung by CEQA regulations. Activists work the system to stop any development projects using the CEQA law. Something as simple as planting 2 new acres in vineyard, something that is supposed to be easily allowable in Napa County, can involve literally books and books of descriptions of possible impacts and mitigations, when all that is pretty much known already before this game begins.

At one Supervisors meeting I attended, David Graves, co-owner of Saintsbury Winery, complained that in order to plant a new vineyard he spent seven years and hundreds of thousands of dollars on obtaining a permit, and what eventually got planted was almost identical to the original engineering drawings that they started with.

CEQA is just one of many, many examples of this, and in previous articles I have also suggested a number of spending cuts that are needed. The point is that California cannot afford to do business this way any more, and we have to start looking at making government more efficient and limit all this waste from our process.

This means many things, using more part time workers to save on expensive benefits, privatizing more services, eliminating the layers of bureaucrats overseeing everything, many of these things that I have discussed in previous articles and will again in the future.

We are in a crisis that is not going to go away any time soon and everything must be put on the table to be reexamined. I dare say that everything is going to be put on the table whether anyone likes it or not, because the money is just not going to be there. Government tax collections are going to shrink and we are no longer going to be able to borrow our way out of it.

We are in a position where we must do what is necessary for California's long term economy to improve, and that means getting the weight of high taxes and absurd levels of regulations off our back. It doesn't mean all regulations are bad, or that all taxes are bad, but it does mean that we have gone overboard and we have to examine everything to make our economy more efficient. What it really means is that we all have to step out of our partisan boxes and do what is best for the state and for our local governments overall.

Michael Haley is president of the Napa Valley Taxpayers Association. He blogs weekdays at NapaValleyRegister.com on a variety of local, state and national issues. He can be reached at michael@napablogger.com
20 comment(s)

another voice wrote on Apr 17, 2009 7:28 AM:

" I agree with you, Michael. I just can't envision the mindset changing. So then what happens? "

city resident wrote on Apr 17, 2009 7:37 AM:

" Sounds like your plans to expand your vineyard in the county, ran into a bit of a snag "

freeport56 wrote on Apr 17, 2009 8:28 AM:

" So while thepolicies of the liberals work in the very short-term, over the long run they fail. For the first time in 53 years people are leaving California because of the ridiculous taxes, environmental rules.

Obviously more taxes are not the solution. first, we must balance the legislature, Next, clear the books of restrictive enbvironmental rules, fix the tax code, reduce salary and benefit packages that are breaking the state, cities, and counties.

Drill for domestic oil, build nuclear power plants, solar and wind generators, capture more water from the sierras and fix the infastructure. we can do all this without overspending, polluting, and giving away jobs to illegal immigrants. Let us put Californians to work first! "

Alter Ego wrote on Apr 17, 2009 8:58 AM:

" ?? "And up until lately, the liberals have mostly been proven right, as California has been so strong economically that despite the high taxes and thick regulations, the economy has produced good results and given us a good lifestyle."

And what exactly "good results" would that be, NB?

Our schools rank dead last and have for years. (Of course to add insult to injury, our teachers are the highest paid in the country.)

Our roads are a mess and high gas tax revenue continues to go to everything but fixing them.

Our police and fire deptments are going bankrupt over 3% retirement systems that allow retirees to forever collect 90% of their top pay after 30 years (ie 50 years old if you start at 20!)

Agriculture is being killed by regulations as you clearly point out, but most other industries are virtually gone.

The "hearings" on renewed offshore oil drilling were clearly a joke to the participants at yesterday's meeting in SF. They State officials couldn't care less how many jobs or how much revenue it would bring in.

You don't see the connection between Michigan and California?

Long term Democrat Party controlled governments elected by strong union financial backing. An incestuous relationship that results in the goverment approving even stronger union benefits (and thus even more campaign contributions).

Obviously a recipe for disaster every time it's tried! "

alucawanza wrote on Apr 17, 2009 2:35 PM:

" Alter Ego:
Our governor is a Republican. Has been for quite a while.

On the subject of schools: It's not the schools that are failing. It's the students. What is the percentage of students who can't read the language in which the tests are written? How many don't do their homework? How many don't have supportive parents who don't require respect of school and teachers? How many skip school at least once a week? How many aren't given breakfast before school? How many are on drugs? How many have parents on drugs? How many come to school prepared with paper and pencil? How many have lost their textbooks? How many are late to class? Why does there have to be a police officer on campus?

BTW: Teachers' salaries here in California relate to the cost of living in this state. There are many teachers in Napa who can't afford to live in Napa. They live in Fairfield or Benicia and commute.

I'll take as fact your statement about police and firemen retirement. After 30 years of putting their lives on the line every day, they deserve that retirement. When you call 911 and the good guys come to the rescue....

You want revenue coming into this state? Legalize marijuana and tax the heck out of it. Regulate it like alcohol and cigarettes. Save a lot of money on prison population too. You forgot to talk about the cost of prisons in your post... "

Bill wrote on Apr 17, 2009 6:29 PM:

" Some times trying to get a handle on Chicken Little can prove most exasperating especially for the gloom and doom prognosticators. If its not taxes and spendthrifts it’s the strangulation of regulations. Instead of examining just exactly what regulations and their enforcement or lack of enforcement lets just blame the lefty liberal mindless beasts.

I don’t object to the PRI or the Heritage foundation but it is a stretch to associate current economic crisis’s to environmental regulations. Are there bureaucratic situations that need to be done away with? Certainly. To blame regulation especially after more than thirty years of worshiping at the altar of deregulation, by both liberals and conservatives, as the culprit for California “hitting the wall” is a poor argument. We will just forget about subprime lending, the housing bubble and relying on bubble economies to push us along.

Better we should have the air and water quality of China. Deregulation brought about the current crises or have you forgotten ENRON, World com, the Andersen accountants and a myriad of failed financial schemes overlooking hedge funds and shadow banks.

There is a much better example of poor government in today’s letters to the editor where a lady describes her dealings with the city over how to use her garage. It highlights not only what can be wrong with bureaucracies but demonstrates that certain action can make them respond appropriately. Yet here we have nothing more than attack drivel.

Just what the devil is CEQA and how do you know what everyone who works on them knows? It is clear that this is most likely something you work with but it is so obscure and unsupported that it fails as evidence to support reasoning that environmental regulations have slammed California into the wall. "

kevin wrote on Apr 17, 2009 10:10 PM:

" CEQA also runs up the cost of GOVERNMENT projects. The same environmental extremists that use it to stop private construction projects also use it against government projects.

It makes things extremely expensive to build. Which is why they do it. Think blackmail or shakedown. There are ALWAYS negative environmental effects to ANY project. Most are inconsequential. All end up costing big bucks if the right people complain to the right agencies at the right time.

BTW, today's financial crises is due specifically to the housing bubble produced by our government run enterprises Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac. The trade deficits and the spending deficits didn't help, but they are not the prime cause of the collapse. "

LMW wrote on Apr 18, 2009 1:47 AM:

" I'll dedicate "A new day" to Ca. "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Apr 18, 2009 3:02 AM:

" I've read 'napablogger' for a fair time.

Not much has changed.

The same old song, 'Tax cuts cure everything, and what tax cuts won't cure cutting regulations will.'

Go far enough in that direction turns beautiful Napa Valley into ugly San Jose.

Taxes have been cut and cut. Crumbling schools are what we have to show for it.

You want to cure school problems? Do what my daddy did for me and what I did for my kids.

Pay the students for getting good grades on top of paying them a small amount to attend. Feed students, ALL of them, for free.

Pay teachers for having reasonable-sized classes that get good grades. Every school has challenged students, but paying something for each student will give good teachers good pay.

Concentrating wealth in fewer hands results in lowered DEMAND, the problem with California and the nation.

Let's go back to Eisenhower tax rates with generous deductions for creating jobs in the USA. Those were the 'good old days' back when taxes were high, regulations forced re-investment in America and jobs paid well enough that many families only needed one person working to support them.

Mom can't stay at home if pop can't pay the bills with his job alone.

The economy of the state and the nation will remain in decline until working class people have money to spend.

Bailout after bailout won't help when people don't have jobs paying enough to buy homes and cars.

Let's rediscover the system that worked well for America at the peak of our economic power.

The Wall Street Weasels can go on a diet to feed Main Street jobs.

~Ruff "

Bill wrote on Apr 18, 2009 12:53 PM:

" Freddy and Fannie were not responsible for the real estate bubble although complicit in swallowing the idea of sub prime lending that the shadow banking system of insurance companies and financial institutions not regulated by the Fed chose to initiate.

We are in this fix not because a few dupes and lazy administrators at Fannie and Freddy bought into hedge funds but our banking system was not conservative in its policies. We are here because we trusted leaders like Alan Greenspan and began to worship free market theology instead of prudent conservation.

Even Republican gubernatorial hopeful Tom Campbell recognizes that if we were to have followed Gray Davis’s budget we would have been in much better shape today. The Los Angeles Times op/ed?

As an avowed left outer I would remind N.B. that those eco freaks are principally responsible for the quaint vintage life style he enjoys in the Napa valley. All those strangling regulations have promoted the advance of vineyards and wineries at the expense of manufacturing, diversified agriculture, home development (ala San Jose) and intensified the gentrification of this valley.

I take offense at having the name lefty besmirched with the so called green revolution. I am much more dangerous as a social lefty finding many theories propagated by eco activists to be anti human, pro use and thrown aside the idea of conservation as a sustainable policy while faux conservatives be little any attempt to conserve what we all hold in common.

California Environmental Quality Act: Ok I had to Google it to figure out what you are talking about. Why not dedicate the few words you are allowed to a precise argument instead of such a shotgun manner of deliberate misinformation and name calling? "

kevin wrote on Apr 18, 2009 4:37 PM:

" LOL, Bill. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac issued or guaranteed HALF of ALL the mortgages in the country as of 2008!

Obviously they were the prime players in the mortgage bubble.

Banks and mortgage companies were NOT going to trade sub prime mortgages without the "full faith and force" of the US government backing them... "

Bill wrote on Apr 19, 2009 4:21 PM:

" LOL Kevin, the censor didn’t like my last post. All you present are partisan talking points religiously cut and pasted from your party line propaganda mill. Fannie and Freddy did not invent sup prime loans, even if they swallowed them, with the full knowledge and aid of the Republican administration and the Republicans in congress. I realize that the many fans of redlining would like to place a racial face on the housing bubble but it just won't wash.

Every Democrat from FDR to the present is the cause of the present situation according to many of your posts and no one from your own narrow base has taken any responsibility. It just gets old and rather boring to read such unconvincing dogmatic drivel. If one tells the story often enough maybe a certain percentage will believe it and an old pol like your self knows that you only need to fool 5% of the people all the time. A lesson the last administration knew quite well.

The luck of that 5% has run out. Not to worry the oligarchs and plutocrats are still around so you still have great hope. Blaming Carter and Clinton is really getting a little old not to mention uninteresting. Jeez I gave up blaming every thing on Nixon a long time ago. Your last leader makes me pine for old tricky.

If you are able to ignore the evidence of poorly regulated financial and capital markets, the role of hedge funds, the past administrations and the Republican Party’s complicity in the housing bubble then you mislead yourself. Innocence is one thing but gullibility is another and I don’t believe you to be either innocent or gullible.

Please don’t take me for being either. "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Apr 19, 2009 4:26 PM:

" kevin- Freddie/Fannie may only buy securities that have a very high quality rating.

That rating was supplied by Wall Street's top credit ratings agencies, who were flat out lying about the quality of these securities because there was big money being made uprating the junk quality securities that were being fraudulently peddled to Freddie/Fannie.

Please dig a little deeper than the superficial pap being being peddled to those ignorant of the fraud.

~Ruff "

WORD wrote on Apr 19, 2009 11:47 PM:

" The author claims that environmental reviews, required as a part of every development proposal, lead to blocking of lots of development and are a major reason for economic downturn in the state. This demonstrates a lack of understanding of the purpose, requirements, and effect of state law (specifically, CEQA - the CA Environmental Quality Act).

First of all, most people are not required to do studies or prepare the expensive documents that the author refers to when they seek a permit for their project. Under CEQA, numerous categories of projects are deemed exempt because they typically don’t have significant impacts on the environment. This is typical of home or park renovation, road paving, urban redevelopment projects and vineyard replantings. Only those projects that are likely to cause substantial, negative effects on the environment are subjected to studies or environmental impact reports. The percentage of total projects is low.

Reports that are required under CEQA are designed to reveal the severity of environmental impacts so that decisionmakers can require improvements to projects. In effect, CEQA requires project proponents and elected officials to rethink project designs so that they cause the least impact to the environment. The beauty of CEQA is that citizens are allowed to comment on the anticipated impacts, to let their elected officials know which are most important to them.

In reality, the percentage or projects that undergo expensive CEQA review is very small and the number that end up being rejected over time is miniscule. The author makes a number of overblown claims with regard to environmental review but offers nothing to substantiate them. "

freeport56 wrote on Apr 20, 2009 1:32 PM:

" Bill-

Nice statement, can I get you a shovel. I have copies of the accounting audits done on Freddie and Fannie show the fake account set up to give the Clinton era appointees their bonuses with 10th's of a percent.

It's hard to believe the Lilly white virginal snow like quality of the Democrats especially with a cabinet full of tax cheats "

Bill wrote on Apr 20, 2009 2:00 PM:

" Frpt, I notice you do not list a source.

I also have in my possession a list of fellow travelers from the 1950's.

No one is saying that Freddy and Fanny were not stupid but you have another RNC fable to keep passing off after ignoring that both Freddy and Fanny are over looked by HUD (run by the last administrations appointees) and are quasi private entities much supported by both parties. so much for non regulated oversight.

Making the them the scape goat for all that is coming to pass calls into question the reasoning ability of people who would claim expert knowledge from what they read but will not directly source. "

Alter ego wrote on Apr 20, 2009 2:10 PM:

" From wiki:

CEQA's lack of clear definitions often lead to litigation, both by groups that support development and those against such development. CEQA provided no threshold for what constitutes a significant environmental impact although the state does include definitions of possible significant impacts. Often challenges are made to projects with negative declarations, on the grounds that EIRs should have been carried out. Litigation also occurs on the grounds that EIRs are too brief or overlooked possible impacts, as there are no guidelines for the length or content of the EIRs. "

napablogger wrote on Apr 20, 2009 10:57 PM:

" A few comments on the thread--just because there weren't enough regulations on Wall Street or on Freddie/Fannie doesn't mean we need more in all areas, especially in California.

California's situation is unique when compared to the Federal government and I think we are going to see that being played out more and more clearly over the next few years--we are in even worse shape than the country as a whole.

Word is basicially correct that it affects a small percentage of projects, but what he/she misses is that those few projects add up to millions of dollars, even hundreds of millions in lost economic activity. The fact that the threat is there with any project adds costs as well.

The "beauty" of CEQA that any citizen can comment for any reason is also its downfall, comments have become a way to just stop projects or harass developers, not help the environment.

Also, this article is not really meant as an article about CEQA so much as the fact that California's economy is dying the death of a thousand cuts, and CEQA is just one of them.

When you reach the point that one third of the transportation dollars in the state are being spent due to environmental regulations, and that we can't even build our own Bay Bridge because the regulations are so onerous it would never get done so instead we have to get China to do it, you have a real problem.

How long are we going to keep our heads in the sand? "

napablogger wrote on Apr 20, 2009 11:06 PM:

" another voice, I think right now the likelihood is that we are going to hit the wall, and we will be forced to change. We see that happening all over now, we are just at the beginning of major changes and I think we are all going to be floored at what happens over the next few years.

The sunken economy is taking us places that in fact we need to go but so far have refused because people feel so entitled to their pork that they refuse to give anything up. Now that is being taken away from them by events.

For instance, I can see Cal Pers going insolvent and the taxpayers refusing to raise taxes to bail them out. That the state is strapped because they have the highest taxes in the country and still have multi billion dollar deficits and no one will lend them any more money and the rates are over 10% anyway. And effective unemployment in the state is 20%.

What happens then? They start cutting pensions anyway, because there is no money to pay them.

People don't believe this can happen but it can. Right now that is the course we are on, and it has happened in other countries. It is foolish to think it can't happen here. It can and it might if we don't stop what we are doing. "

jersey guy wrote on Apr 23, 2009 9:18 AM:

" "napablogger", I agree with almost everything that you said. However, the only way that we can get out of this mess is to convene a Constitutional Convention and start all over again from scratch. "

Comment Guidelines
The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.
What gets your comment posted?
• Staying on topic
• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less
• Avoiding name-calling
• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger
What gets your comment deleted?
• Personal attacks
• Derogatory remarks
• Name-calling of any sort
• Going off-topic
• Hate speech
• Racially-insensitive comments
• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict
• Posting e-mail addresses
• Posting comments of a commercial nature
• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS
• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.
The fine print
- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.
- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.
- Comments may take several hours to be posted.
- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.
- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.
- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.
Search:
Web Search Powered
By Yahoo! Search
Napa Valley Register on Facebook
Copyright © 2009 Napa Valley Publishing, a member of Lee Enterprises, Inc.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy