This story was reported for San Diego News Network on December 29, 2009.
California Sen. Christine Kehoe is looked to for a lot of matters.
First, she’s a woman and has been involved in various women organizations since coming to the Golden State – causing other female politico hopefuls to look to her for guidance (Toni Atkins). Second, as a lesbian senator at the hype of the same-sex marriage debate, she’s forced to address a personal aspect of her being. Third, she’s simply a progressive in a town that’s still relatively conservative.
But my hour-long interview with Kehoe would ignore what has been already widely-discussed in the past with the senator – instead, we focused on quandaries hitting California hard: like the budget and all things green.
Sitting with her in her decorative Banker’s Hill office right across the street from scenic Balboa Park – complete with her partner’s artwork and plenty of red-white-and-blue décor – I start with the basics to understand her better as an elected leader.
SDNN: How did you get involved in politics?
Kehoe: I came to San Diego in 1978 so I just passed my 30-year mark, and I slowly got involved in feminist politics – I worked for the Center for Women’s Studies and Services and I did some journalism there and all kinds of different projects. Gradually became involved in the gay community with gay pride and things like that and just neighborhood organizations. In 1989, I went to City Hall to work for Councilmember John Hartley and I loved it from the very beginning. It interested me, it was exciting — I loved the issues. Once I got to City Hall with that staff position, I kind of had been bitten by the bug.
What has been the biggest challenge you’ve faced in your career?
I’d say over the 15 years I’ve been in office and 16 years now, I’d say the biggest real fundamental challenge – whether it’s the economy or national politics — there seems to be more frustration with the government on the part of voters, a lot of skepticism about big government, the cost of government and really a reluctance to get involved in the civic process and I find that a little disturbing. I think politics can make things happen for good – intervene on behalf of people who don’t have a voice.
OK, let’s talk about green issues. You’re big on the environment. Where do you see the state’s energy policy going in the next few years?
I think we’ve got a lot of challenges but I’m proud to say, California is a role model when it comes to environmental policy. Whether it’s energy efficiency, we have done marvelous work there. California’s energy consumption per capita is half that of the United States. So we’ve been on the front pushing things. And some will think, “Oh, I have to buy a different refrigerator what does that mean?” Well, it means in this state, that we have probably avoided the need to build 12 full scale power plants at a cost of $2 of $3 billion each. So that is money we have used elsewhere.
Tell me more about the “greenway” you are proposing.
The greenway initiative, I think that’s going to be my favorite bill this year. As you know, it’s a beautiful piece of property just slightly inland from the Del Mar beach. We’re proposing a greenway of public access along the south edge of that property from the railroad tracks to I-5, roughly. What our legislature will probably do, we haven’t done it yet, will direct the proper agencies to define that greenway and to give us the definition of how wide will it be, what the geographic make up will be. What we will require in the bill is that greenway is permanent public access, we’ll allow for multiple uses – hiking, walking, maybe equestrian access, bird watching and will require a functioning wetlands at the water’s edge so bird life, fish, the natural habitat that should be there will be restored.
How did you get the idea of the greenway? And will the value of the Del Mar Fairgrounds depreciate to a private developer if the state kept a portion of the land?
We started to think about it when the Governor said he was considering selling high value property. The Del Mar Fairgrounds would be very high value property.
I don’t know about that [value depreciating] because I don’t know if that portion of the Del Mar Fairgrounds would be developable anyway because it’s in a wetlands. I think a sensible, smart developer would want to do some sort of natural edge there anyway and have whatever you’re going to do, look out at a beautiful river vista rather than a buildings that are used for exhibits or some other regular function.
What other types of green initiatives are you working on?
We are putting together our bill package right now and I think it will be one of my highest priorities next year. We generally try to do also what needs to be done relative to energy, efficiency policy and electricity conservation, things like that. Those are top incentives for me. Although California is a leader we need to always find a way to conserve our energy and electricity usage. It’s better for the economy and for the environment. We also might be working on some water policy issues that will enhance water conservation and emphasize water conservation as a state wide initiative.
When talking about our water supply, the Carlsbad Desalination project is interesting. For one, having a desalination plant produces more water for the state but environmentalists are really concerned it’s going to hurt marine life and the carbon emissions released from the plant will hurt too.
I support the Carlsbad Desalination Plant being developed by Poseidon. There’s a balance with our water needs and our water policies and the Poseidon plant is a good example of that. When it is up and running it will supply a little less than 10 percent of our local water supply. Most importantly, it here is in San Diego County. So in the event of an earthquake, I will say when not if because we will have an earthquake here and it could cut off our water supply from Los Angeles – we have very little local water supply. The emission from the plant – that’s an important issue – the Poseidon company believes they have the commitments to go through the proper litigations to offset the environmental impacts and the emissions.
On the topic of California’s budget, what is the status of fixing the structural deficit that is facing California and that, really, has faced California for the several years?
We need to do much more work on fixing the structural deficit. The discussions that we have in Sacramento on the budget, that you report on and that others read about, are usually dealing with the budget for that year. Our structural deficit is, I think, more our inability to either decrease programs to the level we can afford spending, or increase revenue to the programs Californians need. So our chronic, structural deficit is about $5 to $7 billion. The other part of that $21 billion shortfall mostly due to the economic crash that is heard around the world; say $15 billion difference is due to the recession. So the budget we’re talking about now is one thing and the structural deficit is in there but the structural deficit is a little bit different and will go on even after the economy and we got to do more to address that. But doing more to address that is hard.
A lot of issues are stalled at the state level because of partisan politics and it can be difficult to work in groups sometimes, but if it were solely up to you, what programs would you amend to address the structural deficit?
I think there are several steps we can take to make our state more financially secure – some of them are just administrative. I think a multi-year budget – a two year budget cycle that would help us plan over the course of two years — we’d be able to predict our spending and our program performance. It would give us time to smooth out the peaks and the valleys.
I think we need to look at our tax system, is our sales tax at the right amount? And is it on the right products and services? A sales tax was originally put on something you buy: a car, a television set, a pair of shoes. But as our economy has become more of a service economy, a lot of the jobs and work done in California are services – it’s accounting, it’s medical, it’s architecture, things like that – we could look at how to revise our sales tax over the broader part of the economy and sort of, spread it around and develop a more consistent source of revenues.
What is the likelihood of ideas such as your own being implemented?
I have to admit it’s unlikely they’ll be implemented in the near term because almost all the things I’ve suggested would require a two-thirds vote in Sacramento. All but one or two of my Republican colleagues have signed a pledge in Washington D.C. to never raise taxes. So many of my Republican colleagues believe they can’t vote for anything that increases revenue to the state.
Hoa Quach is the political editor for the San Diego News Network.