The information in this newsletter is being distributed among allied associations that form the California Alliance for Golf (CAG), the organization that speaks with one voice in the Capitol regarding legislative and regulatory issues of statewide scope.
PERMANENT DAYLIGHT-SAVING TIME?
By a wide and very bipartisan margin this week the US House of Representatives passed a version of the "Sunshine Act" that would take the entire nation to permanent daylight-saving time, preempting states from either flipping clocks or going to permanent standard time. While the US Senate passed the same Act in 2022 per a unanimous vote, there are credible reports that Senator Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas) may block the House bill in the Senate. Given that the Senate version is also bipartisan (Florida's Rick Scott is the author and California's Alex Padilla is one of 19 co-sponsors from both Parties) and President Trump is an active supporter, it remains to be seen whether he indeed will do that. Stay tuned. If nothing else, were the Sunshine Act to become national law, we would not be faced every year in California with having to deal with Senator Niello's (R-Roseville) annual attempt to take California to permanent standard time, and given that Senator Niello followed this year’s failure with another Resolution to put the legislature on the record regarding the greater sleep health benefits of permanent standard time, it’s clear that absent federal preemption, we are looking at another run in 2027.
Given some of the shots sent the golf industry’s way for its engagement on the daylight-saving versus standard time issue, it is important to note that golf did not advocate for permanent daylight-saving time when Californians went to the polls in 2018 to express their preference for it. Nor did golf take a position on the “Sunshine Act” when in 2022 the United States Senate entertained the enabling of that expressed California preference. As National Golf Course Owners Association CEO Jay Karen made crystal clear when he testified before the Senate last year, it is ONLY because others have forced a choice between permanent standard time and permanent daylight-saving time that golf has elected to make clear its preference for permanent daylight-saving time.
Four (4) things have become clear since 2022: 1) When 340 million Americans all experience the same 1-hour jet lag on the same day each spring, the impacts, while negligible on a per capita basis, are significant when spread among 340 million souls; 2) a vast majority of Americans wants to eliminate the practice of biannual clock flipping; 3) that same vast majority wants to eliminate it by going to permanent daylight-saving time, and 4) while there is one factor that militates in favor of eliminating it by going to permanent standard time (sleep patterns/studies), there are many more factors, many of them directly affecting health and public safety, that militate moving in the direction of permanent daylight-saving time.
CAG’S BILL CONTINUING TO MOVE
AB 1954, sponsored by CAG and authored by Assemblymember Chirs Ward (D-San Diego), a bill that would make listing, advertising, promoting, selling, or transferring tee time reservations without the express permission of a municipal golf course owner or operator an unfair business practice in California's Business & Professions Code, has now made it successfully through every Assembly hurdle and both of the Senate policy committees to which it was referred and faces three (3) more hurdles before it becomes a law. When the legislature reconvenes after its summer break on August 3, it will be heard in Senate Appropriations, after which it next goes to the Senate floor for a vote before being sent to Governor Newsom for his signature or veto. While CAG is very optimistic on getting through all three remaining hurdles, an optimism born of having received significant support from some of the state's largest municipal interests, no opposition, and a state budget that ended up in surplus, one can never be 100% sure about these kinds of things until the Governor affixes his signature and a bill is enrolled in California law.
COLORADO BASIN
As California, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Utah, Wyoming and Colorado come off their hottest January through June periods on record and conditions rapidly worsen in the Colorado Basin, here is where everything stands.
Before any new federal agency action—such as adopting new guidelines—can move forward, it must go through a federal environmental review. The draft Environmental Impact Statement, or EIS, was released in January. It outlined five possible approaches and drew more than 18,000 public comments before the comment period closed in March.
Since then, the Interior Department has been narrowing its focus toward a single approach, which it has called the preliminary preferred alternative. The final EIS is expected later this month, followed by the Secretary of the Interior signing the Record of Decision, or ROD, in late July.
On July 10, the seven basin states received a working copy of a document that includes operational provisions for power releases and Lower Basin operations, including how access to banked water would be managed in 2027 and 2028. Metropolitan staff is reviewing those provisions and planning meetings with the Lower Basin and Reclamation over the next few weeks to work through issues with the proposal.
This marks a significant departure from how the Colorado River has been managed in the past. The previous approach set detailed operating rules that remained in place for 20 years. For the post-2026 guidelines, Reclamation is instead proposing a 10-year framework that is relatively sparse. It lays out a set of principles and “sideboards”—the outer limits within which the system would operate.
That 10-year framework would become the Record of Decision. Reclamation would then adopt guidelines within that framework every two years, with annual operating plans used to implement them each year. The proposed alternative is a federally structured framework, rather than a negotiated consensus among the seven Basin states.
Of course, before all that comes to fruition, the seven states could come to a negotiated agreement among themselves. While the federal government has long held out hope that the states could reach consensus, that “hope” appears to be on life support.
In part to perhaps keep that hope alive and in part to simply keep Lake Mead above dead-pool status for the additional time necessary to pursue that “hope,” the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) has agreed to sell back 200,000 acre-feet of its allocation to the Bureau of Reclamation.
Bottom line: Much to happen in the next few weeks and much to happen before the calendar turns to 2027 – all of it consequential for the golf community in California.
ANOTHER “GOLF & WATER TASK FORCE”
CAG, SCGA, and GCSAA met last week with the Municipal Water District of Orange County and three (3) of its retail agencies in an effort to establish in that golf-rich region a "Golf & Water Task Force" along the lines of the many others that now operate in Southern California (e.g., Coachella Valley, Los Angeles, Inland Empire) — "lines" that entail the establishment of long-term dialogues that lead to long-term relationships that lead to good results for both golf communities and the water wholesalers and retailers who service them. The "effort" was successful. Look to be contacted by one of these entities to participate in an inaugural meeting sometime later in the year (probably mid-November). Look also to be surveyed about what most interests and/or affects your specific facility in one of these OC service areas before that inaugural meeting — potable water, recycled water, non-potable connectivity, groundwater, infrastructure, cost, etc.
NOVEMBER BALLOT
There are fourteen (14) initiatives on this November’s state ballot. Among them the following that deal directly with taxes of one sort or another:
Proposition 40: “Billionaire tax”
This measure would apply a one-time 5% wealth tax on the assets of roughly 200 California billionaires, to be paid over five years. Ninety percent of the revenue would go to pay for healthcare for low-income Californians and 10% toward education and food assistance programs.
Proposition 41: Audit new tax spending
This measure was filed in direct response to the billionaire tax proposal. It would require state audits of programs funded by new taxes. It would also apply revenue from new taxes to the state’s spending cap, which requires that spiking revenue go back to taxpayers or toward education. That would effectively cancel out Proposition 40. If voters approve both measures, the one with more votes prevails.
Proposition 42: Prohibition on new personal property taxes and retroactive taxes
This measure is also aimed at undercutting the wealth tax proposal. It would prevent new taxes on personal property, which would offset the wealth tax. If both pass, the one with more votes prevails.
Proposition 3: High-earner income tax to become permanent
The measure seeks to make a temporary income tax on high earners that voters approved in 2012 permanent. It is now set to expire in 2031. It applies to household income over $721,000 for couples and over $360,000 for individuals.
Proposition 43: Higher threshold for local special taxes
This measure would close the exception carved out by the California Supreme Court for citizen-driven special tax ballot initiatives by requiring the same two-thirds majority required for special taxes that are placed on ballots by governments. Currently, such citizen-driven special tax initiatives require a 50% + 1 majority to pass.
Among them is the following initiative dealing with the state budget:
Proposition 2: “Rainy day” fund
This is a constitutional amendment that would allow the state to deposit up to 20% of its general fund tax revenue into its rainy day fund each year, instead of the current 10%.
Among them also is the following initiative dealing with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA):
Proposition 45: Expedited environmental review
This measure would amend the state’s Environmental Quality Act to create deadlines for environmental reviews of most housing, transportation, water, health and clean energy projects to speed up permitting and limit the court’s ability to stop or delay developments.
To the degree to which there has been recent publicity about a parcel tax measure that did not make it on this November’s Los Angeles City ballot, please know that if Proposition 43 were to pass statewide this November, such measures, whether qualified through legislative action or through citizen-driven petitions, would require 66.67% of the vote to pass.
As for the proponents and opponents of each as well as the arguments pro and con for each, we’ll leave all that to the ballot arguments and this November’s campaign. Those ballot arguments will be finalized August 11 after which the County Registrars will begin mailing election materials to the state’s voters. After that, game on – a “game” that is always a solid informer of where public opinion is headed, albeit only an informer for a frozen moment in time.
# # # # # # # # # # #
The legislature went on summer recess just before the Independence Day Holiday and doesn’t return until August 3, but if you have read this far, you understand that the legislature doesn’t have to be in session for much to happen where golf and public policy intersect. Even more to come when the legislature comes back, including the final disposition of AB 1954 (Ward; D-San Diego).