S1: Coming up on KPBS roundtable. Polls have closed , and the majority of votes are counted in the county Board of Supervisors special election. The contest now heads to a runoff.
S2: This race is going to decide whether Democrats or Republicans have a majority on that county board of supervisors.
S1: We'll take a closer look at the two South Bay mayors who will face off in July. Then state legislators are looking to reform a longstanding environmental law. They claim it's hindering desperately needed housing production in California. All that , plus the roundup. That's ahead on KPBS roundtable. Polls closed Tuesday in the special election for the district one seat on the San Diego County Board of Supervisors. The race now moves to a July runoff between Chula Vista mayor John McCann , a Republican , and Imperial Beach Mayor Paloma Aguirre , a Democrat. In December , former Supervisor Nora Vargas abruptly stepped down from the seat that left residents in the district from downtown to the South Bay without a representative on the board for months. The special election drew a crowded field of candidates and a lot of outside spending. After all , the political balance of power on the board is up for grabs. Here to discuss the race is KPBS , South Bay and Imperial Valley reporter Corey Suzuki. Corey , welcome back to roundtable.
S2: Hi , Scott. Thanks for having me.
S1: The county's registrar's office has been tallying tens of thousands of votes in recent days. What's the latest vote count ? Yeah.
S2: So as of yesterday evening , we have more than 60,000 ballots counted already. There are less than 5000 ballots left , so this is pretty close to final turnout. So far , it sounds like we're looking at about 17% turnout overall in the district and in the lead , like you said. Our John McCann from Chula Vista and Paloma Aguirre from Imperial Beach. John McCain has around 42% of the vote so far , 42 to 43% with close to 27,000 votes. And Paloma Aguirre has close to 20,000 votes , with around 32% of the votes counted so far.
S1: I do want to dig into the two candidates heading into the runoff in July , but first , tell us more about what's at stake in this race.
S2: I mean , on its face , this race is about who's going to represent district one. The South Bay , parts of the city of San Diego on the county Board of Supervisors , which is already a really big deal. It's an influential position. It's an influential county county board. But we're talking about a seat on on the leadership of the county. So that's that's no small thing. But on top of all of that , this race is going to decide whether Democrats or Republicans have a majority on that county board of Supervisors. So that's going to mean that's really going to mean that , um , the the board is going to vote in specific ways , depending on who , uh , is the the one who makes it to the end of that race. I mean , when we're talking about some issues , um , like the the Tijuana River Valley sewage crisis , for example , that might not there might not be as much of a difference there. But on other issues like homelessness , um , and like , uh , when it comes to , um , the , the way that the county is approaching immigration policy , those could be , um , there could be some really big differences that emerge depending on whether McCann or Aguirre are the one who , um , who take that seat in July. Right.
S1: Right. And whichever one wins is going to tip that balance of power. And I think it's important to note a lot of people , when they think of governing their minds , often go straight to either federal or state government or hyperlocal cities. Counties often get kind of lost in the mix in between , but they are hugely important. There's so much money that flows through them , typically from the federal government or through the state and their spending related to homelessness. And of course , if you think back to the pandemic on public health , they pull so many levers on so many important issues. And so this empty seat is going to be critical in thinking about how San Diego County governs moving forward. You reported on the how political control of the board has shifted over time. Tell me a little bit more about that.
S2: Yeah , I think that's so true. And that's right. Um , political control of the board has shifted over time for a long time since at least the 1990s. Republicans held a majority on the Board of Supervisors , so the board leaned more conservative. It was. It was more hesitant to , um , to to spend the , the amount of money that it oversees. Um , it was more , more fiscally and socially conservative. But , um , all of that changed in 2020 when a Democratic majority was elected to the Board of Supervisors , including Supervisor Terry Lawson Remer and the former district one supervisor , Nora Vargas. And that Democratic majority changed a lot of things , and also since then has made in some ways we've seen sort of a more intense focus on the supervisory elections in re-election bids that have happened since then , when Supervisor Nathan Fletcher resigned suddenly and there was an election that was set to fill his seat. That race drew more than $1 million in outside spending. When Supervisor Tara Lawson Riemer pursued a bid for re-election last year. That race and the race between her and her Republican challenger , Kevin Faulkner , drew close to $5 million , and in total spending that included the amount of spending happening by the campaigns and outside spending. But there was a there was a really big increase in , in the amount of money flowing into that race , too. So I think what the political analysts that I've talked to , you have said , is that they put this in kind of the context around as control of the board shifted from Republicans to Democrats , there's been just this increasing focus on these races and the question of whether or not , uh , Republicans will be able to , uh , regain a majority on the board during one of these elections , or whether the board will continue to to stay in the hands of a majority of Democratic supervisors. For now.
S1: When the political balance of power is up for grabs , the money will certainly flow. Let's talk about the two candidates heading to the runoff in July. Chula Vista mayor John McCann , a Republican , and Imperial Beach Mayor Paloma Aguirre , a Democrat. Crap.
S2: He's been a key figure in local politics in Chula Vista for. I mean , we're going on 20 years now. He is a has been a council member for a long time. And he was elected mayor and has since. I think over the course of those years has really just remained someone that a lot of people in Chula Vista know. He was sort of there at the beginning of some of the really big projects that the city is sort of seeing finally come to fruition now , like the the Bayfront resort , for example , the big resort and convention center that's going to be going up and is opening this year on Chula Vista Bayfront. That was something that , you know , was a discussion when John McCann was in high school and that he was involved in very early on as a council member , a project that he sort of has been there to see as it's passed between different iterations of the City Council of local leadership in Chula Vista. So McCann has been part of Chula Vista for a long time. He's also , like you mentioned , he's a Republican. Um , and he has in more recent years , really , as mayor , placed a big focus on issues like homelessness , for example. Um , he was a big supporter of Chula Vista , a ban on encampments , which the city passed. Um , so he has sort of has been a big presence in the city for a long time. And as mayor has certainly taken a strong role in guiding sort of the the leadership of the city in some ways. Um , and then Imperial Beach Mayor Paloma Aguirre , you know , she has been in local government for a little less long. But I think arguably she has really become , uh , in some ways , a presence that rivals McCann when it comes to San Diego politics. I mean , Aguirre has a background in environmental advocacy , in environmental conservation work and environmental justice. And when she was elected to the city council and as mayor , now she has really become probably the single most vocal politician when it comes to the Tijuana River Valley sewage crisis. I mean , she has become an outspoken voice , pushing for stronger public health measures , pushing for more evaluation of the kinds of risks that the cross-border sewage flows are having for the residents of Imperial Beach and San Ysidro. Néstor. These are the the flows of , in some cases , run untreated sewage that are resulting from the City of Tijuana's broken wastewater system and some of the structural issues that have come from both the US and Mexico's failure to rebuild the plants that should be treating that sewage. But when it comes to Aguirre's leadership , she has really just been a relentless voice as mayor. She's made this her , um , her her real focus. And it's something that , you know , is really is on the minds of so many people in her city and Imperial Beach , this small beachfront town , and is on the minds of a lot of people in , you know , south San Diego , in Chula Vista , even National City , and reaching to other parts of the South Bay like Coronado. Although Coronado is not part of district one , the district one county district. So I think , you know , they both have really , really long resumes. They both , I think , have a lot of trust from a lot of the people that they've they've governed so far. And they both are certainly really large presences in the South Bay.
S1: And one of the big issues facing the district that the candidates focused on in the race. Yeah.
S2: Yeah. Well , I mean , I think we've we've already been touching on some of them , but probably at the top of that list is the Tijuana River Valley sewage crisis. I think that that is something that a lot of people are thinking about. Um , and , you know , it's hard to it's hard to say when you compare some of these different issues. I mean , a second issue I'd say is affordability and the rising cost of living , especially in South Bay , which this isn't true for all of South Bay , but parts of South Bay certainly have been seen as more affordable parts of the county. But I think many people have the sense that that's sort of also starting to to change all of these different issues. The sewage crisis , the rising cost of living are very large issues that have been at the forefront of people's minds going into this race and then especially to more recently , as the Trump administration has has begun to move forward since the inauguration in January. I think that immigration policy is also something that's at the forefront of people's minds now. It was before I mean , I don't think it's it's something that has , you know , the the South Bay and district ones communities are , um , probably at the heart of the San Diego , Tijuana binational region , sort of the way that life flows back and forth across the US-Mexico border. I think really in some ways the South Bay is at the heart of that relationship. So this isn't something that I don't think most residents have ever stopped thinking about or that hasn't been on residents minds. But I think with this intense focus on immigration and on immigrants rights that the Trump administration is drawing , that has really brought this issue to the forefront for a lot of people , too.
S1: Let's take cost of living. Where do the two candidates land on that issue ? Sort of.
S2: Um , let's take maybe , uh , John McCann first. Um , McCann , I think , uh , you know , this is sort of one area where he kind of thinks , um , in , uh , he , I think he , as a county supervisor , would be looking for ways to reduce the ways that the county is asking for money for , from residents. For example , he's talked about looking at ways to reduce county fees and looking at ways to reduce county taxes. Um , there have been proposals by the Board of Supervisors to look at , um , implementing county wide sales taxes that would help the board potentially fill some of the gaps in the county's budget , especially if there are future federal funding cuts or other losses of revenue. Um , that is one thing that McCann has said that he opposes. He doesn't think that the county should be raising taxes. So that's sort of one of the big places where McCann is looking to try and , in his view , help people help find ways to to make life less expensive for people from his perspective. And then when it comes to IGT , there's sort of a couple things that she has mentioned. Um , she is thinking a lot about the workers who are part of the county government. You know , the county of San Diego employs thousands of workers. And , um , she is thinking specifically about their cost of living and raising their wages , making sure that , um , the folks who work for the county are making a living wage. I think one thing that she's talked about is , for example , bringing around new policies on housing and specifically around looking at , uh , evictions and renters. That's one thing that , as Mayor Aguirre in Imperial Beach has supported strongly is , uh , stronger protections for renters. Um , that's been something that's been a big focus in Imperial Beach , and that's something that I think is on Aguirre's mind , as she is looking at the seat , too , is looking for ways to help people stay in their homes. Help , help longtime residents of the South Bay stay in the places where they grew up , where their families are and , um , trying to find ways to make sure that as much as possible , people aren't being forced out by these rising costs and by other , other forces related to things like housing.
S1: We're going to have to leave it there. The runoff is in July , so I anticipate that we're going to have you back on to discuss , I'm sure , the race , uh , in just a few months. I've been speaking with KPBS , South Bay and Imperial Valley reporter Corey Suzuki. Corey , thanks.
S2: Thanks so much , Scott. Thanks for having me.
S1: After the break , we discussed the push by state lawmakers to reform one of California's landmark environmental laws with the goal of increasing housing production. That's ahead on roundtable. You're listening to KPBS roundtable. I'm Scott rod. The California Environmental Quality Act , also known as Sequa. Maybe you've heard of it , maybe you haven't , but you've probably felt its effects. The 55 year old law is meant to preserve California's natural habitats , protect its sensitive species and minimize pollution. But critics argue the law has had serious unintended consequences in recent decades. They claim project opponents can weaponize the law to slow or stop essential housing production and infrastructure development. Now , a bipartisan group of state lawmakers is looking to scale back the California Environmental Quality Act when it comes to housing development in urban areas. Here to discuss this proposal is Deborah Brennan. She's a reporter with Calmatters and the Voice of San Diego , where she writes the weekly Sacramento Report. Deborah , welcome back to roundtable. Hi.
S3: Hi. Thank you for having me.
S1: Let's start with the basics.
S3:
S1:
S3: It doesn't set out a formula for what you have to do. If you have , for instance , an air pollution impact or an impact on a species. But it does require government agencies and project proponents to describe potential environmental impacts and then to say what they will do to minimize them. So they have to come up with a list of possible solutions to those problems. It also has a detailed process for public input , with opportunities for written comment and public hearings , where members of the public can state their concerns and raise their recommendations for how to resolve them. And then the agencies have to respond to those and say how they're going to deal with it. So it's both an environmental protection law and also a public transparency law.
S1:
S3: Yeah. It often takes years to get through Sequa review , especially if an EIR is required an environmental impact report. Mhm.
S1: Mhm. The law is pretty far reaching. Right. Um , can you give us a sense of some examples of projects that have needed to go through Sequa.
S3: It can cover almost anything that you can build. It involves housing , construction , commercial buildings , roads , highways. Even environmental projects themselves sometimes have to go to see through sequa , such as toxic cleanup or renewable energy projects like solar or wind farms. They can all require seek review. It can really be anything from a sports arena to a gas station.
S1: And I think that's important for people to understand. Right. Again , the California Environmental Quality Act. I think a lot of times when people hear names of laws like that , their eyes gloss over and they think , well , this is probably something way in the background doesn't impact me. But again , this has an impact on so many projects. I mean , take a look outside and you're probably going to see some projects that have or some development in buildings that have had to go through the California Environmental Quality Act. The law tries to balance development with environmental concerns , and that often means projects can take longer. But meanwhile , some have argued that people opposed to development can weaponize the law to delay projects or scuttle projects. Right. Yeah.
S3: Yeah. So the lawmakers that I spoke to use the word weaponize to describe what they consider frivolous uses of the law to attack proponents for non environmental reasons. Sometimes that's Nimby objections , where neighbors don't want a project. Other times it can involve labor issues , opposition from competitors. Some of the prominent projects that have been subject to that , one of the one of the most notorious was in Berkeley , California. At UC Berkeley , there was a student housing project that would house 1200 students in 1200 units , and the neighbor sued under Sequa , saying that the noise of the undergraduates could be considered pollution. And that was a three year process for the lawsuit , and the California Supreme Court ultimately ruled that they could not object to it under Sequa , and they rejected what they called the people's pollution argument. So that's kind of an example of how Sequa has been used to block projects that are really direly needed , in some cases over what the proponents consider non crucial environmental issues. In San Diego , there have been some Ceqa lawsuits brought against housing development , including what called the Junipers and Rancho. It's a 55 plus community and the trails in Carmel Mountain Ranch , which included 1200 market rate units and 180 affordable housing units. So oftentimes , lawmakers are saying these sequa challenges are used to block housing that California really needs.
S1: And when you're talking about lawmakers , right , they're weighing in on this because there's now a proposal to create an exemption for the California Environmental Quality Act when it comes to housing developments in urban areas. Right. This is Assembly Bill 609.
S3: So the state is facing a severe housing crunch in San Diego is ground zero for that. So what AB 609 , the bill that Assembly member David Alvarez authored , would do is it would exempt housing projects of 20 acres or less in urban areas or within city boundaries from Sequa review. So this wouldn't necessarily exempt the big mega housing developments in undeveloped areas that we often associate with sprawl development. It's primarily for urban infill housing.
S1: And you said under 20 acres. So that could still get fairly big , but not these mega developments , right ? Exactly.
S3: Not these many planned cities , but that could still be a pretty big apartment building or a number of single family homes.
S1: Certainly we're talking about areas considered urban. And of course , there are places all over the all over the state that would fall under that categorization. Sequa has an interesting political history. Now , I know this bill has bipartisan support. I want to get into that in a moment. But I first want to talk about the history of SCL. Right. So tell me about how the law has evolved over time and just this political support or opposition that it's faced over the last few decades ? Yeah.
S3: So the interesting thing is that Sequa was signed in 1970 by then-Governor Ronald Reagan , shortly after former President Nixon signed the National Environmental Policy Act. So it had its origins with the Republican administration here. But it's become a sacred cow for Democrats. But now some Democrats are trying to get more housing off the ground , and they see drawbacks , too. I mean , for a long time , this was considered a landmark environmental bill. It was intended to protect California's open spaces , its sensitive habitats and species , as well as to protect urban communities from pollution and traffic and other urban environmental ills. But some of the Democratic lawmakers are saying that it's being exploited or misused to block housing that we need. So I was kind of to be honest , I was kind of surprised to see Democrats that vehemently in favor of reforming this , because for a long time it's been a sacred cow. They have not wanted to touch it. It's been kind of the third rail of California politics. But upon reflection , I thought , well , we have San Diego Democrats here , and this is one of the areas most impacted by the housing crunch in California , if not the nation. So it kind of makes sense that they're trying to see a way to protect the environment , but also allow housing construction.
S1: It's interesting how you have overlapping issues that at times can flow in the same direction , but then at times can be at odds with each other.
S3: There have been other attempts to reform Sequa , and there's other ones in the works right now. Assembly member Buffy Wicks has been a proponent of streamlining regulations , including Sequa authored another bill , AB 607 , with Assembly member Scott Wiener , that would provide even broader exemptions to Sequa and allow government agencies to grant more exemptions. And the little. The California Little Hoover Commission report said that they think that secret reforms should include raising the requirements for filing a vehicle lawsuit , a restriction on late submission of public comment and a broad exemption for infill housing , which is what AB 609 David Alvarez Bill would do. Mhm.
S1: Mhm. And so you mentioned a couple Bay area lawmakers , but as well as Assembly member David Alvarez , a local lawmaker. So I'm curious , you spoke to some other local legislators , including Senator Catherine Breakspear , who represents parts of north San Diego County. She's also the chair of the Senate Environmental Quality Committee. What did she say about the proposed changes to the California Environmental Quality Act under Assembly Bill 609 ? Right.
S3: So that's an interesting uh , that's an interesting situation because she is the chair of the Environmental Quality Committee. She has made environmental issues her signature and including coastal environmental issues. But on this particular issue , she's saying she thinks there needs to be reform. She said Sequa has been treated as a holy grail in Sacramento , but she rejects that. She thinks the state needs to reform Sequa to allow exemptions for important projects like housing. But she doesn't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. She wants to maintain the original intent of environmental protection and transparency and public accountability.
S1: You also spoke with Republican State Senator Brian Jones , who represents parts of eastern and northern San Diego County and Republicans. In recent years , they've been more vocal in their inconsistent in their criticism of Sequa. What did he have to say about supporting Assembly Bill 609 this Ceqa reform effort ? Right.
S3: Republicans have , for a while now complain that Sequa is part of what they consider kind of overbearing government regulations that restrict business and housing development in particular. Brian Jones told me he's firmly in favor of local land use control. He thinks cities should decide how much to develop and when and how to develop. But he thinks outside groups and law firms are getting in the way of that by filing secret challenges to projects that the city wants and that their constituents want. So he said , um , he thinks that that needs to be reformed as well.
S1: The state has approved piecemeal , sequa exemptions in recent years. Notably , lawmakers have exempted certain sports arenas from review , like the Golden One Center in Sacramento. Legislators have also decided to skip Sequa for their own new Capital Annex building. And a few years ago , the state exempted certain transportation projects such as bicycle and pedestrian initiatives. The exemptions proposed under Assembly Bill 609. There would be a much broader impact there , potentially to many , many housing development projects across the state.
S3: When I spoke to Brian Jones , he told me he finds it incongruous that the state can exempt big projects such as the Golden One Center in Sacramento , the Capitol Annex , as you mentioned , also SoFi Stadium in Los Angeles and yet still apply it to smaller , really badly needed housing developments. So it's kind of part of a growing trend of realizing that sequa has already been used somewhat inconsistently , and sometimes for purposes for which it wasn't intended.
S1: Recently , there have been calls , including from Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom , to limit the power of the Coastal Commission. This state commission was cemented under another landmark environmental law that was passed in the 1970s. But this , again , perhaps you could say Sacred Cow is getting some scrutiny. Do you see a connection here between these two efforts at trying to potentially reform these landmark environmental initiatives ? Definitely.
S3: I think there is an attempt to thread the needle between protecting California's environment and also allowing development and and find ways to resolve the housing crisis. Um , the California Coastal Act is another landmark California law that has protected our coastline from pollution , high rise developments and it's preserved public areas. Again , the intention of this was to preserve public access and transparency. But some lawmakers think we need to ease restrictions so more people of different income levels can live near the coast. Um , and some of the lawmakers I talked to actually have have made attempts on that front. A lobbyist , uh , Catherine Blake Spear last year requires the commission to help cities and counties update local coastal programs to simplify the permits for accessory dwelling units , often called granny flats or ADUs in the coastal zone , which has been a little bit harder to do than similar units in other areas of the state. So she's saying they need to streamline that and make it a little easier so that people can afford to live there. That law passed last year , David Alvarez also introduced a bill that tackled the state's housing density bonus law. So this allows developers to add extra housing units to something they build in exchange for building affordable housing. And he believes that the Coastal Act gets in the way of that. His bill would have exempted those projects from coastal lock protections , but ultimately he withdrew it because there were amendments he wasn't happy with. But there are various lawmakers that are looking at that as well and saying , how do we make this work for what we wanted it to do , which was to keep California's coastline open and beautiful without keeping people completely out of the coastal zone or making it inaccessible for people to live there.
S1: Assembly Bill 609. The reforms to Sequa as it relates to urban housing development. That's still pretty fresh. That's still pretty new. It hasn't even gotten a hearing yet , right ? Right.
S3: That was just recently introduced. It hasn't gotten to hearing.
S1: Yet , so it's still early on.
S3: For instance , the California Native Plant Societies has said that Sequa has been a scapegoat for the housing crisis. They don't actually believe it's blocking housing the way people think it does , and they think that weakening it could weaken a lot of other aspects of the bill that may undermine its original purpose. And the center for Biological Diversity and other groups wrote an open letter challenging the Wicks and Wiener bill. They called it a dangerous bill that would severely weaken a landmark environmental law that had helped protect the state's natural resources , public health and biodiversity. So I think they're warning that that some of these efforts to chip away at Sequoia could wind up carving out more than than we intend to , and leaving the law kind of vacant and unable to do its job of protecting the environment. Right.
S1: Right. And so some of that commentary was on the the bill introduced by Bay area lawmakers Scott Wiener and Buffy Wicks. So they've been commenting on that proposed school reform. But it seems like that could also apply to this proposed reform under AB 609. Right.
S3: Right. I didn't see that. I didn't see any comments from them on 609. But I think the the broader issue that they're raising is that if we're chipping away at Sequa in order to get these infill projects in , you could wind up hollowing out the law.
S1: The process for a bill to become a law can be long and windy. I'm going to ask you to put on your speculation hat , which I know reporters don't often like to do.
S3: I most of the lawmakers that I speak to say housing is a top concern. Even people who are very active on the environmental front also say they want to enable housing. So there may be some will to amend this or reform it in some way. That makes housing a little easier without completely gutting the law. On the other hand , it has been a sacred cow for half a century. So there could be reluctance to change that.
S1: Well , you're reporting on this topic has been very helpful , and we look forward to reading more of it in the future. Deborah Brennan is a reporter with Calmatters and the Voice of San Diego , where she writes the weekly Sacramento Report. Deborah , thank you for joining roundtable.
S3: Thank you for having me.
S1: Coming up , we discuss this week's other big stories in the roundup. Stay tuned. Roundtable will be right back. Welcome back to KPBS roundtable. I'm Scott rod. It's time now for our roundup , where we chat about a few stories from this week's news. Joining me is KPBS producer Andrew Bracken. Hey , Andrew. Hey , Scott.
S4: This is from Voice of San Diego's Lisa Halberstadt. As we know , the city has been facing this budget deficit for $250 million. One of the ways that they've been trying to tackle it is through eliminating certain positions , the most high profile of which was the city's CEO chief operating officer once held by Eric Dargan. And earlier this year , the mayor announced the elimination of that and a couple other positions as a , you know , way to alleviate the budget deficit. But that story is kind of shifting a little bit here as we're learning more. And Eric Dargan now has filed a lawsuit against the city arguing discrimination. Dargan , who is black , said he didn't receive his severance package and now the city saying he was fired for cause. And I think , you know , now there's kind of back and forth between the mayor's representatives and Darren's lawyer , Michael Conger says his client never received formal negative feedback. Generally , when you get fired , it's much different than than getting laid off , for sure. Yeah.
S1: Yeah. These are two very different things , right ? An elimination of a position for budgetary reasons is very different than firing someone , because , again , the CEO position no longer exists at the city. Right. So that that typically doesn't happen if you just fire someone , the position doesn't evaporate. Right. But that's the case here with the city. I found this very interesting for a number of reasons , one of which is with the elimination of the CEO position. The mayor , as this is right under the city charter , will be taking over responsibilities for a number of things that the CFO formerly oversaw. And with all of this happening now , all this messiness , that means , like this transition , this shift of power is going to be happening while they're also trying to sort out what happened with the former CEO. It just seems like a very hairy situation. Yeah.
S4: Yeah. And I kind of went back. I mean , Mayor Gloria did talk about this back in February. He did comment on the elimination of this position. And here's a little bit of what he had to say. And this is in February.
S5: I'm not going to discuss personnel issues here in public. Erdogan is a good man. I've enjoyed serving with him , and this is just a decision we have to make.
S4: He later said , you know , I think he reinforced that it was budgetary. Informed was the language. But you can kind of hear that little , I don't know , dance back and forth there. But I guess the question. Yeah. Is it was he fired or was he laid off ? And we'll see where this goes but darkens. Attorney Congar , you know , after the mayor's office added these comments , now say they now are considering adding defamation to the lawsuit in addition to the discrimination.
S1: I look forward to seeing where that one goes. Super interesting. More to come , right ? Definitely more to come , I'm sure , on that lawsuit. I'm going to stick with politics here. Up in Huntington Beach , voters passed a measure that would basically allow for the requirement for a voter ID when folks go to the ballot box. And it's it's been a controversial Measure. It was challenged and including by the state. The state attorney general challenged it , but a judge has sided with Huntington Beach and said this plan can move forward. This. You know , this law is above board. Now , of course , the Attorney General's office has said , look , we we don't think so. We're , we're we're definitely going to challenge this and appeal it to a to a higher court. So that's still very much in motion. But I thought it was fascinating to see because you have this local effort , right , for voter ID. And then at the federal level , you also have the Trump administration that's talking about let's implement a voter ID system , again , a very controversial , um , a very controversial proposal , because the argument is if you have a voter ID , it could , um , dissuade folks from being able to vote. It could impose certain restrictions where if someone can't get a valid ID , they may not be able to cast their ballot. So there could be certain restrictions that are placed on people. But it's so interesting to see that it's happening at the local level and the federal level. More to come on that case as well. But a big development in it this week. Yeah.
S4: Yeah. And you're right , there is this is happening in other parts of the country. I think Wisconsin just passed a voter ID law. But , you know , you were talking with Cory Suzuki earlier about the special election in South Bay. And as we know , the special elections , voter turnout is so , so important , right. It's hard to get folks out in those special elections , and even a small amount in certain communities can can make a big difference.
S1: Yeah , that can sway an election one way or the other. Certainly a special election for sure. I'm going to hop over to Sacramento now , where state lawmakers are considering extending last call in California to 4 a.m. now. Currently , state law requires restaurants and bars to stop serving alcohol at 2 a.m. this proposal would allow for cities to basically extend those hours for certain areas. And I think the idea is to target specific pockets. Where there are bars , there's nightlife where the night would keep going , the booze would keep flowing , so to speak , and it essentially would enable those businesses to to thrive , to have longer hours to essentially boost their business after coming , coming out of a few years that were pretty rough during the pandemic.
S4: It's interesting. I mean , honestly , in some ways I'm surprised. I mean , I don't go anywhere near the 2 a.m. hour in bars anyway , so this won't really impact me personally at this point in my life. But , you know , as someone that did live in New York , I mean , yeah , having bars open to 4 a.m. is a pretty common thing. So in some ways , when you're thinking of like Gaslamp or something like that , I don't know , it seems like it would make sense to me in some ways. It is interesting that because there have been efforts to reform this in the past , I think , that have failed before.
S1: Yeah , in 2018 , there was a push. There was a bill that was passed that would have also that would have extended last call. But then governor Jerry Brown actually vetoed it. And he said at the time , basically , we have enough mischief from midnight to two without adding two more hours of , quote , mayhem. That was his characterization of it. But who knows , maybe Governor Newsom would be more friendly to extending last call. Let's switch from booze to bagels. Is that.
S4: Right ? Yeah. Axios San Diego's Kate Murphy she published a little piece about just kind of San Diego's evolving bagel scene , and it's something that I haven't thought a lot about. I mean , I do remember first moving here a long time ago , trying to find a bagel shop , and I did find one. And now it's a neighborhood I live in.
S1:
S4: You know , I like bagels , but I'm not , like , as obsessed as I think some folks are. But it's a big thing , you know , to find to find bagels in town. I don't always equate San Diego and bagels. But she's saying that's kind of. It's kind of changing a little bit. Pop up bagels. It's like a popular they're popular in New York City , and they're expanding in Southern California. I think they're opening one in PPB , maybe La Jolla as well as others. But she notes the founders , I guess , are San Diego State alums , so that's kind of cool.
S1: I grew up in Connecticut , so pretty close to New York City. Love bagels , sesame , poppy , everything. Hit me with a plain bagel , and I'll still be happy. Bacon , egg and cheese on a toasted bagel. Doesn't get much better than that.
S4: Sounds good. LOX ? No. Lox.
S1: Lox. Not so much. But I do love a schmear. Let me tell you. Uh , I , I kind of say , when I first moved to San Diego several years ago , I had a similar reaction. I was like , man , the bagel game here is kind of weak. I have found some since then that definitely are very solid , but I love to hear that. Uh , there's a push right now to really expand , uh , the bagel scene out here in San Diego.
S4: Yeah , there's and she , she mentions a couple other bagel shops. So , you know , hopefully , depending on where you live. New bagels coming your way.
S1: Oh , yeah. Well , from booze to bagels to. Now , let's wrap it up with baseball. The season has started. We're a few weeks in. How are you feeling ? I know you're , uh. You're a Padres fan. Uh , maybe a secret Cubs fan , too. Yes.
S4: Yes. Yeah. And they're about to come to town , actually. But , um , Padres , as of the time of this recording , they're in first place. It's a really competitive division. We'll see. But I think it's just really cool to see everybody's super hyped up and optimistic and just feeling good about the Padres. I think this town takes on a , like new life when that spirit is flowing , when the padres are rolling. 100% , yeah. So it's early yet , but it's cool.
S1: Oh , I mean , they're looking hot , though. They're looking good. They've got a good squad. A couple of them got banged up in recent days , but I think they'll be fine. Uh , I'm a Mets fan. Uh , the Mets are also looking good. Have you heard of a man named Juan Soto.
S4: As many Padre fans do ? Yes.
S1: Well , he's looking good. He's showing up for the Mets , so I'm happy so far. I want to talk about the Athletics , though. Sand's no longer Oakland. Just the Athletics , apparently. Now there's a story. Yeah. I mean , look , it definitely is sad. Got a feel for the Athletics that were in Oakland for a long time. There was a story in the LA times. There's been a lot of other coverage looking at how the A's are now playing in technically West Sacramento , but I'm just going to say Sacramento , where I used to live for about five years , and they're playing at a minor league ball field where the River cats play. And it's it's been an interesting experiment. I think it's a maybe not a good thing because I hate to see what happened to Oakland , but in terms of Sacramento and how they welcome the team and how they've , you know , done their best to try to set up the Athletics for , you know , with a good venue for the next few years. I like to see it. Um , you know , the fans have been coming out. Uh , it seems like they've been selling a lot of tickets to games. And let me tell you , Sacramento embraces a team , even if it's a team that they're only going to have for three years , they're definitely going to come out and show some love.
S4: Well , I had a friend that that went to a game there and actually mentioned that it seems like a lot of the away team fans kind of go there and check it. It might be almost like a destination for a lot of fans. And I know the Padres were there and there was like a game there that seemed like it was. A lot of Padres fans. Were there something like that ? But to me , it's just , I don't know. I feel bad for Oakland fans. East Bay fans are great.
S1: Yeah , well for sure. Well , they , you know , the the Warriors went to San Francisco you know. Yeah. It's been tough there for sure. And hey I loved going to the Coliseum to see games. Uh you know athletics games. So I do hate to see that. But I do think Sacramento has , uh , welcomed the team with open arms. And that's been that's been fun to see. I'm going up there. Uh , actually , in a few weeks , going to catch a game , so.
S4: Oh , cool. Because it's I mean , it's a tiny stadium , right ? So it must.
S1: Be 14,000 , 14,000 fans or something. 14,000 seats. So , uh , definitely an intimate , a cozy setting for baseball. But I'll report back. I'll let you know how it goes.
S4: I'll stick with Petco.
S1: I've been speaking with KPBS producer Andrew Bracken. Andrew , thanks.
S4: Thank you. Scott.
S1: Thanks for listening to KPBS roundtable. You can listen to the show anytime as a podcast. Roundtable airs on KPBS FM at noon on Fridays and again Sundays at 6 a.m.. If you have any thoughts on today's show , you can email us at roundtable at pbs.org. You can also leave us a message at (619) 452-0228. Roundtable's technical producer this week was Brandon Troopa. This show was produced by Andrew Bracken. Brooke Ruth is Roundtable's senior producer. Supervising audio producer is Quinn Owen. I'm Scott Rodd. Have a great weekend. Thanks for listening.
