UCLA violence changes the picture on CA campus protests

The student encampments to protest the Gaza war started April 17 at Columbia University, where Tuesday night New York City police stormed an occupied building and arrested more than 100 pro-Palestinian protesters.

The movement quickly spread to California campuses. At the University of Southern California, Los Angeles police arrested nearly 100 protestors last week and the university canceled its main commencement ceremony. The protest prompted California U.S. Senate hopeful Steve Garvey to say that “demonstrations that allow people to build encampments… is terrorism.”

After weeklong demonstrations at Cal Poly Humboldt led administrators to close the campus, 100 officers arrested at least 32 protestors Tuesday. Demonstrators occupied buildings, and were told by police that they “could face rubber bullets and chemical spray,” according to the Los Angeles Times, though no injuries were reported.

Then at UCLA, the university Tuesday night declared a “Palestine solidarity encampment” illegal. Soon after, violent clashes involving fireworks and pepper spray broke out between the pro-Palestinian demonstrators and pro-Israel counter-protesters. In the aftermath, 15 people were injured and all classes were canceled Wednesday.

Gov. Gavin Newsom deployed California Highway Patrol officers to the campus early Wednesday morning. 

• Newsom, in a statement: “The law is clear: The right to free speech does not extend to inciting violence, vandalism, or lawlessness on campus. Those who engage in illegal behavior must be held accountable for their actions — including through criminal prosecution, suspension, or expulsion.”

Until the violence at UCLA, one reason why many University of California campuses were calmer is because of policing changes made after the George Floyd demonstrations in 2020, explains Atmika Iyer of CalMatters’ College Journalism Network.

To curb potential violence on campus, UC President Michael Drake released the UC Campus Safety Plan in 2021, which included guidelines to “minimize police presence at protests, follow de-escalation methods in the event of violence and seek non-urgent mutual aid first from UC campuses before calling outside law enforcement agencies.”

But haphazard adherence to these guidelines is partly the reason, writes Atmika, that law enforcement officials failed to take action and to stop the escalating violence at UCLA. And with protest encampments cropping up on at least five other UC campuses, the updated safety plan has come under scrutiny. Drake himself has ordered an independent review of UCLA’s “mutual aid response.”

Strong reactions to UCLA’s response have come from all sides of the issue. 

The California Federation of Teachers and some lecturers called for UCLA Chancellor Gene Block to resign immediately for “his failure of leadership.” (He is set to retire July 31 and has been summoned to testify to Congress about campus antisemitism.)

Leaders of the Legislative Jewish Caucus said Wednesday they were “appalled” by what they called the “total failure” of UCLA’s leadership in protecting Jewish students. They also condemned the assaults on pro-Palestinian students.

• The statement: “The violent actions of a few agitators does not represent our community and is antithetical to our Jewish values.”

Meanwhile, legislative Republican leaders plan today to call for budget actions “to reduce funding to help restore order on state college and university campuses and hold school administrations accountable for doing nothing to protect student safety and ensure lawful conduct.”

Learn more about the campus protests in Atmika’s story.

Last week, the Assembly passed a bill that would allow candidates and elected officials to use more campaign funds for personal security for themselves, family members and staff. As the proposal awaits the Senate, CalMatters Capitol reporter Sameea Kamal dives into why its author is doubling down after Gov. Newsom vetoed similar legislation last year.

Assemblymember Mia Bonta told Sameea that her own experience, as well as what local candidates and fellow legislators have faced, proves the need for the bill.

• Bonta, an Oakland Democrat: “I’ve had an instance of being on my front lawn, and having somebody text me from an unknown number to say that I looked really good on my lawn. Those are all things that make us, just, not feel very safe.” 

A report from the University of San Diego found that of 328 local elected officials surveyed, 75% reported being threatened or harassed — with female officials being disproportionately targeted. Last spring, Democratic Assemblymember Isaac Bryan of Culver City said he received a letter calling for him to be lynched after he proposed a bill to change how ballot measures are presented to voters.

When Newsom vetoed Bonta’s proposal in 2023, he said the bill did not “clearly define ‘security expenses’” and could lead to “expenditures far beyond” what donors expect. This year’s bill clarifies what can be considered a security expense (funds can’t be used for firearms, for example) and also requires officials to keep detailed records.

For more about the bill, read Sameea’s story.

In other election news:

Recount complete: After all the votes were tallied a second time in the 16th Congressional District, Assemblymember Evan Low edged Santa Clara Supervisor Joe Simitian by five votes and advanced to the November election. 

In the March 5 primary, Low and Simitian tied for second with exactly 30,249 votes each, behind former San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo. But a voter, who has some ties to Liccardo, requested a recount and agreed to pay for it, with help from a super PAC. Low tried to stop the recount. But with Santa Clara County finishing on Tuesday and San Mateo wrapping up on Wednesday, Low gained 12 votes and Simitian added 7.

A new super PAC: Battleground California announced Wednesday it will spend $15 million in eight competitive congressional districts in the state to help Democrats retake control of the U.S. House in November. Of particular note: The effort will be led by a mix of Black, Latino and Asian and Pacific Islander leaders in those districts: the 3rd, 13th, 22nd, 27th, 40th, 41st, 45th and 47th. The PAC is led by the California Donor Table and also includes progressive groups and unions.

Another one bites the dust: A proposed statewide initiative to require government IDs to vote failed to gather enough signatures to make the Nov. 5 ballot. If you’re counting, that’s now 13 measures that have failed or been withdrawn for 2024. So far, 10 are on the November ballot, but that could change before the final list is set in late June.

Less than a year after a new law protecting California Joshua trees took effect, a legislator from a Southern California desert district where the trees grow wants to carve out an exception.

As CalMatters Digital Democracy reporter Ryan Sabalow explains, last July, California passed a law limiting how many of the iconic trees can be cut. As many as 11 million grow across Southern California, but they are endangered by droughts and wildfires.

To spur more housing and businesses in his district, Assemblymember Juan Carrillo is leading a bill to lift some of these restrictions for commercial developers. Despite opposition from nearly every major California environmental group, the Assembly’s committee on ​​water, parks and wildlife passed the measure last week.

• Carrillo, a Palmdale Democrat, to CalMatters: “Local governments deserve an equal shot at economic development in the region. The high desert has been forgotten for decades, and that’s one of the reasons I decided to run for office.”

Supporters of the bill include the California Building Industry Association, which donated at least $300,000 to sitting legislators’ campaigns in the past two years. In comparison, Sierra Club, which opposes the bill, has only donated around $19,000 over the same period.

Read more about the bill in Ryan’s story.

Also at the Legislature: CalMatters Capitol reporter Alexei Koseff writes that with another high-profile effort to help the ailing news industry parked in committee since last year, Sen. Steve Glazer on Wednesday unveiled a tax credit proposal to support the hiring of more local journalists that he said are “vital to the survival of American democracy.”

Senate Bill 1327 would generate an estimated $500 million annually for California media by requiring the largest companies that sell user data to advertisers — basically Amazon, Google and Meta — to pay a “mitigation fee” of 7.25% of their state revenues above $2.5 billion.

• Sen. Catherine Blakespear, an Encinitas Democrat and former journalist who is supporting the bill, at a press conference: “This is really where government should step in. When the free market cannot deliver something that society needs, we need to intervene.”

Local newsrooms have hollowed out over the past two decades as their advertising revenue migrated to tech companies, but those corporations are stridently opposed to proposals that would force them to subsidize journalism. Glazer’s bill also faces the additional challenge of requiring a two-thirds vote from a Legislature that will be more focused this year on minimizing program cuts from a massive budget deficit than on generating new revenues.

• Glazer, an Orinda Democrat: “These companies have done very well. If someone can afford to help this crisis that our news media community is under, these folks are the places to look to for that help.”

From CalMatters Capitol reporter Jeanne Kuang:

More than a month after Gov. Newsom’s administration delayed a workplace indoor heat rule because it might be too expensive for the state prison system, state officials are refusing to release records showing how they made that decision. 

The Department of Finance, followed by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, said Wednesday they’re withholding records of any cost estimates of the proposed workplace rule, or records received from other state agencies, plus communications between prison and finance officials over those costs. 

CalMatters requested those documents under the state’s public records law on March 22 after the rule was delayed. In response, the departments said withholding the records is justified under “the Governor’s and Director of Finance’s deliberative process privilege.” 

• The finance department response: “The public interest served by not disclosing these records outweighs the public interest served by their disclosure.” 

The long-awaited indoor heat rule, developed for years by California’s workplace safety agency to try to address the risks of heat illness in indoor workplaces such as warehouses, was widely expected to be approved in March at a meeting of the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board. 

But in an eleventh-hour move the evening before the scheduled vote, the finance department withdrew a required fiscal sign-off after apparently learning that the rule could cost state prisons billions more dollars than the workplace agencies had estimated. 

Last month, Cal/OSHA’s deputy chief of health Eric Berg announced the agency plans to revise the proposal to exempt state prisons and local jails so that it can get an official approval before the Standards Board and the rules can go into effect sometime this summer. That process could take several weeks. 

The agency also plans to later propose a separate indoor heat rule for workers in correctional facilities. 

Lorena Gonzalez, head of the California Labor Federation, said she hopes some of those details will become clear when the rule for correctional workers is proposed and undergoes its own public hearings and fiscal analysis. 

• Gonzalez: “We do believe there has to be transparency; it was always unclear about what the cost was.”

Read more in the story.