Latest news with #CaliforniaResourcesCorporation
Yahoo
27-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Is California Resource Company's 10% FCF Yield a Bargain or a Warning Sign?
When I evaluate a company, I don't think in terms of stock charts, quarterly earnings beats, or Wall Street narratives. I think about businesses. Specifically: Would I want to own 100% of this company at this price and hold it for the next 5-10 years? In that spirit, let's take a closer look at California Resources Corporation (CRC). It's an upstream oil and gas company operating in one of the most misunderstood marketsCalifornia. On the surface, this company produces oil. But beneath that, there's something else: a deeply undervalued asset base, durable cash flows, and an intriguing second enginecarbon capture and storagethat just might turn CRC into a long-term compounder hiding in plain sight. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 6 Warning Sign with LNG. CRC is not your typical shale operator. It holds long-life, conventional oil fields in the San Joaquin and Los Angeles Basins, including names like Elk Hills and Kern Front. These aren't high-decline, capital-hungry assets. These are slow-and-steady producers that have been pumping for decades and still have decades to go. As of year-end 2024, CRC reported 545 million barrels of oil equivalent in proved reserves, with over 80% in oil. That equates to nearly an 11-year reserve life, which is unusually long for an independent producer. Importantly, CRC owns its infrastructurepipelines, steam generation plants, even mineral rights in many of its operating areas. This vertical integration creates both operating efficiency and margin stability. And in a business where the price of the commodity can swing dramatically, any degree of cost control is a significant advantage. Think of it as owning not just the oil, but the entire value chain through which that oil flows. But oil isn't the only thing buried in CRC's asset base. Through a business unit called Carbon TerraVault, the company is turning depleted reservoirs into carbon storage sites. With the U.S. government now offering $85 per metric ton of CO? stored (under the 45Q tax credit), CRC has a shot at transforming geological leftovers into a regulated, cash-flowing service business. It's a free call option on energy transition infrastructureand few investors seem to be paying attention to it. CRC stands out as a rare case where the quality of the underlying assets is matched by the quality of its leadership. The business generates steady, durable cash flowsand management has shown a clear commitment to disciplined, shareholder-focused capital allocation. After emerging from Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2020, CRC didn't go on a spending spree or chase high-risk growth. Instead, the company cleaned up its balance sheet, focused on capital discipline, and made a few smart movesmost notably, acquiring the remainder of Aera Energy, which came with synergistic cost reductions now expected to save the company $65 million annually. But the best evidence of management quality comes from how they treat shareholders. In Q1 2025 alone, CRC returned $258 million via dividends and share buybacks. That's over 6% of its market cap in just one quarter. In full-year 2024, around 85% of free cash flow was returned to shareholders. They're not trying to become Exxon or drill in far-flung frontiers. They're doing what I wish more public companies would do: generate surplus cash and give it back to the owners. If I can buy a dollar for fifty centsand the dollar is growingthat's a business I want to own. CRC generated around $355 million in free cash flow in 2024, and added another $131 million in Q1 2025, bringing its trailing 12-month free cash flow to over $450 million. Right now, its market capitalisation sits at roughly $4.2 billion. That gives the stock a free cash flow yield of approximately 10.7%, calculated as $450 million $4.2 billiona figure that speaks directly to the company's ability to return capital while remaining self-funded. When a company is throwing off this much cash relative to its sizeand returning most of it to shareholdersthat's the kind of setup worth paying attention to. It also trades cheaply at 4.2 times EV/EBITDA and only 8.2 times earnings. Now here's the kicker: CRC's proved reserves carry a PV-10 value of $8.9 billion, assuming around $80 Brent crude. That's nearly double the company's current enterprise value. This is what I call a real margin of safety. Even if you haircut the PV-10 by 25% to be conservative, the adjusted asset value still comes in well above the current stock price. And this doesn't account for the carbon business at all. If Carbon TerraVault becomes even a moderately successful carbon sequestration platform, that's hundreds of millions in future earnings being given away for free today. When insiders and seasoned investors make moves, I pay attention. James Chapman, the company's director, has been quietly increasing his stake. And he's not the only one leaning in. Howard Marks (Trades, Portfolio)' Oaktree Capital may have trimmed its stake, but still holds 1.38 million shareshardly a vote of no confidence. Jeremy Grantham (Trades, Portfolio) boosted his position by nearly 38%, now holding 1.22 million shares. Ken Griffin's Citadel ramped up its stake by over 90%, now sitting on 1.16 million shares. And Renaissance Technologies (Trades, Portfolio)? They more than doubled downraising their position by over 185% to more than 590,000 shares. The signal is clear: CRC isn't just cheap. It's attracting the kind of capital that tends to be earlyand usually right. Many investors avoid CRC for one reason: it operates in California. The Golden State's regulatory environment is tough on oil producers. Permitting is slow. Environmental opposition is fierce. And long-term state policy is tilted toward renewables. This California discount is realand it's precisely why CRC trades so cheaply relative to its assets. But what if that discount is backward-looking? CRC already operates under the strictest oil rules in the countryand still generates 10%+ free cash flow. Its assets are permitted. Its reservoirs are mature. It doesn't need to grow production. In fact, it's better off not growing, just maintaining stable output and maximizing returns. Ironically, California's aggressive climate stance may become a tailwind for CRC's carbon capture business. The same regulatory system that makes drilling difficult also supports carbon sequestration. With 45Q credits, state incentives, and access to industrial CO? emitters, CRC could end up being one of the most profitable climate infrastructure plays in the countryhidden inside an oil company. Of course, CRC isn't without risk. Oil prices are volatile, and CRC's earnings are sensitive to Brent crude. If prices fall to $50 or below, cash flows will compress. That's the nature of a commodity business. And while the CCS business is promising, it's still early. There's execution risk, regulatory complexity, and market uncertainty. Not every CCS project will succeedor scale profitably. But here's where CRC is different from speculative startups or over-leveraged E&Ps: even without CCS, it's a healthy business. Its existing oil fields, infrastructure, and free cash flow give investors a solid floor. The upside from CCS is just thatupside. The best use of capital is to reinvest at high rates of return. But if you can't do that, you should return it to shareholders. CRC appears to be doing both. It continues to invest modestly in CCS and other internal improvementsprojects with a clear path to economic return. At the same time, it is aggressively returning capital through buybacks and dividends. Unlike many in its industry, it's not chasing growth for growth's sake. That's rare. With net debt only $882 million and operating cash flows more than covering capex and dividends, this is a self-funding business that doesn't rely on capital markets or leverage to survive. That's a trait I value deeply. Let's put it all together. If I could buy CRC for $4 billion, I'd be acquiring: Nearly $9 billion in PV-10 value of proved reserves (even more if oil prices stay strong). A carbon storage platform with substantial optionality and favorable federal tax incentives. A vertically integrated infrastructure network that lowers operating costs. A management team that acts like owners and returns cash instead of hoarding it. Even with conservative assumptionshaircutting reserve values and assuming zero value for CCSCRC still looks like a business selling at a 3040% discount to intrinsic value. Add in the fact that shareholders are being paid over 10% annually in cash while they wait, and it's hard not to see the appeal. Warren Buffett (Trades, Portfolio) once said: Price is what you pay, value is what you get. In CRC's case, the price is modest. The value is real. And the optionality is free. This article first appeared on GuruFocus. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
18-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Newsom Proposes to Ease Permits for Oil Drilling in California
(Bloomberg) -- California Governor Gavin Newsom is proposing a bill to streamline permitting for new oil wells that environmental groups say would wipe out scrutiny of the industry. The Dutch Intersection Is Coming to Save Your Life Mumbai Facelift Is Inspired by 200-Year-Old New York Blueprint Advocates Fear US Agents Are Using 'Wellness Checks' on Children as a Prelude to Arrests LA Homelessness Drops for Second Year Manhattan, Chicago Murder Rates Drop in 2025, Officials Say The bill would establish 'plug-to-drill' permitting until 2036 where two wells would have to be plugged and abandoned before a new one is drilled. In addition, drillers no longer would need well approval from the Geologic Energy Management Division, known as CalGem, so long as certain conditions are met. Shares of in-state drillers climbed on the news, with California Resources Corporation jumping 4.8% and Berry Corp. up 6.9%. The draft bill text — seen by Bloomberg News and portions of which were leaked by environmental groups — is the latest in a series of recent shifts Newsom has made in approaching the oil and gas industry after years of regulatory scrutiny. The governor is softening his stance toward the industry this year after refineries operated by Phillips 66 and Valero Energy Corp. decided to shut operations in the state and California's legislature placed a greater emphasis on reducing costs of living for the state's 40 million residents. A spokesperson for the governor said environmental groups are circulating only partial text from the bill. 'We continue to work with the legislature on policy that will help stabilize California's petroleum market while ensuring a safe, reliable, and affordable supply of transportation fuels,' the governor's office said in a statement. In a statement accompanying their leaked text from the bill, 12 environmental justice groups said the proposal amounts to a blank check for unlimited drilling across the state for the next decade. (Adds share price reaction in the third paragraph.) What the Tough Job Market for New College Grads Says About the Economy A Rebel Army Is Building a Rare-Earth Empire on China's Border Godzilla Conquered Japan. Now Its Owner Plots a Global Takeover How Starbucks' CEO Plans to Tame the Rush-Hour Free-for-All Why Access to Running Water Is a Luxury in Wealthy US Cities ©2025 Bloomberg L.P.
Yahoo
18-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Newsom Proposes to Ease Permits for Oil Drilling in California
(Bloomberg) -- California Governor Gavin Newsom is proposing a bill to streamline permitting for new oil wells that environmental groups say would wipe out scrutiny of the industry. The Dutch Intersection Is Coming to Save Your Life Mumbai Facelift Is Inspired by 200-Year-Old New York Blueprint Advocates Fear US Agents Are Using 'Wellness Checks' on Children as a Prelude to Arrests LA Homelessness Drops for Second Year Manhattan, Chicago Murder Rates Drop in 2025, Officials Say The bill would establish 'plug-to-drill' permitting until 2036 where two wells would have to be plugged and abandoned before a new one is drilled. In addition, drillers no longer would need well approval from the Geologic Energy Management Division, known as CalGem, so long as certain conditions are met. Shares of in-state drillers climbed on the news, with California Resources Corporation jumping 4.8% and Berry Corp. up 6.9%. The draft bill text — seen by Bloomberg News and portions of which were leaked by environmental groups — is the latest in a series of recent shifts Newsom has made in approaching the oil and gas industry after years of regulatory scrutiny. The governor is softening his stance toward the industry this year after refineries operated by Phillips 66 and Valero Energy Corp. decided to shut operations in the state and California's legislature placed a greater emphasis on reducing costs of living for the state's 40 million residents. A spokesperson for the governor said environmental groups are circulating only partial text from the bill. 'We continue to work with the legislature on policy that will help stabilize California's petroleum market while ensuring a safe, reliable, and affordable supply of transportation fuels,' the governor's office said in a statement. In a statement accompanying their leaked text from the bill, 12 environmental justice groups said the proposal amounts to a blank check for unlimited drilling across the state for the next decade. (Adds share price reaction in the third paragraph.) What the Tough Job Market for New College Grads Says About the Economy A Rebel Army Is Building a Rare-Earth Empire on China's Border Godzilla Conquered Japan. Now Its Owner Plots a Global Takeover How Starbucks' CEO Plans to Tame the Rush-Hour Free-for-All Why Access to Running Water Is a Luxury in Wealthy US Cities ©2025 Bloomberg L.P.
Politico
24-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Politico
Don't touch that sound dial!
Presented by California Resources Corporation QUIET ON SET: State Sen. Tom Umberg just wants to watch TV without being subjected to blaring commercials. Hollywood's biggest streaming platforms wish he'd keep his hands off the volume dial. The Santa Ana Democrat wants to ban platforms like Netflix and Hulu from airing ads louder than the shows and movies they accompany. His SB 576, would close a loophole in a 2010 federal law (authored by former California Rep. Anna Eshoo) that already bans ear-splitting ads on cable and broadcast TV but doesn't cover streaming services. Umberg argues it's a simple way to solve a recent spike in volume complaints and preserve peace of mind for people like Zach Keller, his legislative staffer who said loud streaming commercials are waking up his infant daughter. 'The golden rule is you've got to keep the baby asleep, and anything that wakes that baby up should be closely scrutinized — as should streaming services,' Umberg testified today, minutes before his bill cleared the Assembly Privacy Committee. And given California's outsized sway in the entertainment industry, there's a chance Umberg's bill could set a de facto nationwide standard if he emerges victorious. 'It's disruptive and an annoyance,' Umberg told California Decoded in an interview. 'If we can [ban] it at the federal level … we certainly can do it for streaming services.' Hollywood begs to differ. The Motion Picture Association and Streaming Innovators Alliance, which together represent entertainment giants including Disney, Paramount, Amazon and Netflix, have barged in with last-minute objections, urging lawmakers to derail Umberg's effort. In a four-page letter sent last week, the groups argued they're already exploring ways to address ad volume issues. Yet they also said streaming platforms have 'no ability' to control volume settings on every device where their content is offered — much less regulate 'ready-to-watch commercials sourced from thousands of advertisers.' 'Unlike in the broadcasting [and] cable network environment, where advertisers sell their ads directly to the networks, streaming ads come from several different sources and cannot necessarily or practically be controlled by streaming platforms,' Melissa Patack, the MPA's vice president of state government affairs, testified Tuesday. So can streamers control ad volumes, or can't they? Patack told the committee that's beyond streamers' grasp for now, but that platforms could address the issue if given time to work on a solution with audio engineers, free from legal repercussions outlined in Umberg's bill. But Umberg thinks streamers are more than capable of turning down the volume — it's just a question of whether they want to. 'They know how old I am. They know what cereal I like,' he testified. 'They can figure out how not to increase volume.' A version of this report first appeared in California Decoded, POLITICO's morning newsletter for Pros about how the Golden State is shaping tech policy within its borders and beyond. Like this content? POLITICO Pro subscribers receive it daily. Learn more at IT'S TUESDAY AFTERNOON. This is California Playbook PM, a POLITICO newsletter that serves as an afternoon temperature check on California politics and a look at what our policy reporters are watching. Got tips or suggestions? Shoot an email to lholden@ WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW TODAY PUT IT IN WRITING: Legislative leaders and Gov. Gavin Newsom reached a budget agreement that delays cuts to Medi-Cal and safety net programs while closing a $12 billion spending gap, our Eric He reports for POLITICO Pro subscribers. One unresolved piece of the deal, a housing proposal by state Sen. Scott Wiener to exempt many types of urban housing projects from environmental review, will be taken up by legislators later this week. The rest of the budget agreement, which lawmakers are expected to approve on Friday before sending to Newsom for his signature, largely reflects the priorities of the Democratic supermajority in the state Legislature that rejected many of the governor's proposed slashes. Amid fierce backlash from progressives and advocacy groups, Democratic state lawmakers sought to stave off many of Newsom's proposed cuts, turning instead to deferrals and borrowing from state reserves. They are banking on California's economic outlook improving in future years, allowing the state to reduce the severity of the reductions. 'Under very difficult circumstances, we passed a solid budget that protects California's values,' Wiener said in an interview. 'And I'm proud of the result.' IN OTHER NEWS TAKING CHARGE: California Rep. Robert Garcia won his bid to become the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, beating out Massachusetts Rep. Stephen Lynch in today's caucus vote, our Nicholas Wu reports. Garcia, 47, secured a first-ballot majority after winning the backing of the caucus' powerful Steering and Policy Committee on Monday evening. 'We'll get immediately to work,' he told reporters following the vote. First on the agenda, Garcia added, was meeting with the Oversight Committee staff 'to let them know that we're ready for consistent leadership.' MILEAGE MAY VARY: Senate Democrats introduced a bill today that would significantly overhaul how California regulates transportation fuels amid concerns about high gas prices and closing refineries, our Alex Nieves reports for Pro subscribers. State Sen. Tim Grayson, a moderate Bay Area Democrat, amended SB 237 — which previously dealt with property transfers — into a sweeping proposal that would cap the price of credits that fuel manufacturers can buy and sell through the state's low-carbon fuel standard. It would potentially transition California away from its unique gasoline blend and instead align gas specifications with other western states. State Sens. Melissa Hurtado, Jerry McNerney and Laura Richardson are signed on as joint authors. WHAT WE'RE READING TODAY — Members of Congress continue to buy pharmaceutical stocks, even as President Donald Trump's administration slams the industry. California Rep. Ro Khanna leads his party in purchases. (POLITICO) — A DoorDash executive was among the eight people killed on Lake Tahoe after a powerboat capsized during a sudden storm. (San Francisco Chronicle) — Soldiers and their families have been calling the GI Rights Hotline with concerns about Trump's deployment of the California National Guard to Los Angeles. (Los Angeles Times) AROUND THE STATE — The San Diego City Council finalized compromise budget funding for brush management, flood prevention and recreation programs that Mayor Todd Gloria tried to veto. (San Diego Union-Tribune) — A state audit revealed that a charter school in Sacramento received more than $180 million in state funds that it was not eligible for following little oversight by state and local educational agencies. (Sacramento Bee) — The San Mateo County Board of Supervisors used for the first time its newly granted power to remove an elected sheriff for misconduct, among other violations. (East Bay Times) — compiled by Juliann Ventura
Politico
23-06-2025
- Business
- Politico
The newest political fight taking over Los Angeles
Presented by California Resources Corporation NO KINGS, MANY SIGNATURES — For tens of thousands of Angelenos, this month's 'No Kings' protests were a way to peacefully register discontent with the Trump administration. For some in their midst, the protests represented something else entirely: a bonanza of potential signers. The June 14 demonstrations turned into an unexpected battleground for those organizing on both sides of a roiling, pre-Olympic conflict between Los Angeles' formidable travel industry and powerful unions. After the city council passed a $30 minimum wage law in late May for workers in the airline, hotel and hospitality industries, a group of business interests — signed by players in the local hospitality industry and funded by major airlines like Delta, United, Marriott and Hilton — launched a referendum effort to challenge the new law. 'We're giving everything we have to make this business work, to claw out of the hole that was created by COVID,' Greg Plummer, a referendum proponent who runs a 250-employee concession company at LAX, told Playbook. 'Our airports are still down substantially in traffic. Tourism is completely down, and the fires didn't help … it gets to a point where it's going to crumble a lot of small businesses.' Unions countered with two initiatives of their own last week, one that would increase the citywide minimum wage to $30 per hour for workers across sectors and another that would require voter approval for the construction of large hotels, significant hotel expansions and 'event centers' like sports stadiums. 'Hotels and the airlines are spending millions of dollars to make sure their workers don't get a raise,' said Kurt Petersen, head of Unite Here Local 11, which filed the initiatives. 'We think that the city of Los Angeles should be very careful about providing subsidies and benefits to those particular industries.' The timing of the long-planned 'No Kings' protest proved fortuitous for those facing urgent ballot deadlines. As crowds gathered at a series of protests across the city, from downtown's City Hall to Playa Vista in the west, signature-gatherers fanned out amid sign-touting protesters to pull together the 92,998 signatures the LA Alliance for Tourism, Jobs and Progress will need by the end of month to qualify a referendum. Initiative and amendment committees seeking a spot on California's 2026 statewide ballot will soon begin sending petition carriers out to farmers' markets and strip malls, where they will have to convince unwilling shoppers to think politics when their minds are on produce. But in Los Angeles, campaigners are taking advantage of an often-apathetic city roused by President Donald Trump's aggressive immigration-enforcement tactics to help move the minimum-wage conflict from the city council to the ballot. 'You have a lot of civically minded, peaceful protesters at No Kings — these are the kinds of folks who are looking to be engaged politically, so it makes perfect sense … to show up there,' said Robb Korinke, a San Diego-based strategist who specializes in local ballot measures. The tactics that the industry-funded coalition has used to capture signatures have come under fire from backers of the $30 minimum wage law. Labor-friendly members of the LA City Council filed a motion to investigate what they said were misleading tactics on the part of the referendum effort's signature-gatherers, while unions have filed a similar complaint with Attorney General Rob Bonta, Los Angeles County DA Nathan Hochman and City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto. The referendum campaign denies the allegations. Now it's labor's turn to take to the streets. Unions have 120 days to gather around 140,000 valid signatures — and labor leaders are confident that they won't struggle to find the support they need. 'We poll on raising the minimum wage — the only thing that polls higher is the belief in God,' said Petersen. 'That has been our experience all along, in every one of these initiatives that we've either tried through the ballot and or through the law … and so I think we will be fine at the ballot.' NEWS BREAK: President Donald Trump announces Israel-Iran ceasefire … Lawmakers in Sacramento still deep in budget negotiations … San Francisco Sheriff's chief of staff arrested for alleged hit and run. Welcome to Ballot Measure Weekly, a special edition of Playbook PM focused on California's lively realm of ballot measure campaigns. Drop us a line at eschultheis@ and wmccarthy@ or find us on X — @emilyrs and @wrmccart. TOP OF THE TICKET A highly subjective ranking of the ballot measures — past and future, certain and possible — getting our attention this week. 1. Bay Area regional transit tax (2026): The business groups expected to finance a transit ballot measure campaign are telling state lawmakers to ignore a progressive effort to flip the measure's funding mechanism from a sales tax to a gross receipts tax. The Bay Area Council and San Francisco Chamber of Commerce vowed 'strong and sustained opposition' to the switch and said the process was too far along to 'interject an unnecessary fight over the revenue mechanism,' as they put it in a letter to legislators. 2. CEQA reform (2026?): Last-minute budget negotiations have major stakes for those considering a California Environmental Quality Act rewrite via the ballot. Gov. Gavin Newsom has said he wants to see housing bills from Assemblymember Buffy Wicks' AB 609 and state Sen. Scott Wiener's SB 607 as part of the budget deal, but as of this afternoon it's still not clear whether that will happen — and if the bills falter, rumblings about ballot measures to address CEQA are likely to get louder. 3. AI consumer protection (2026?): California Common Cause executive director Jonathan Mehta Stein has floated an initiative that would force legislators to address AI concerns like deepfakes and scams – although who would fund such a measure and when they would pursue it is unclear. 'The longer Sacramento can't take clear and decisive action, the more likely it is that other stakeholders take matters into their own hands,' Stein wrote today in a Tech Policy Press opinion piece co-published with the former research manager for Meta's Responsible AI team. 4. Voter ID (2026?): Assemblymember Carl DeMaio and his grassroots organization Reform California have set a June 30 fundraising deadline for the 'initial costs' of a proposed initiative to require government-issued identification in order to vote. DeMaio aims to have at least 7,500 volunteers handwrite a million personalized mailers containing the petition, which he expects to file in mid-July. 5. Local tax thresholds (2026): The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association is just weeks away from receiving a title and summary for the two versions of its proposed constitutional amendment to make it harder to pass local taxes. The anti-tax group filed small tweaks and filed amended versions of both last week in the hopes of winning favorable writeups from the Attorney General's office. 6. Charter reform (Oakland, 2026?): The Oakland Charter Reform Project is pushing Mayor Barbara Lee to move quickly on her stated goal of strengthening the strong-mayor system delivered by predecessor Jerry Brown's Measure X in 1998. The group, including a longtime city manager, is calling for a task force to be in place by mid-August to begin the process. 7. Prop 35 (2024): Congressional Republicans may preempt the debate over what California should do with $9 billion in annual revenue from a tax on managed healthcare plans. Last fall, Californians voted to send it to Medi-Cal, a move that faces continued resistance from Newsom, but now the money could disappear entirely due to proposed cuts in federal matching funds. An unlikely ally for California's medical establishment emerged Monday: Senator Josh Hawley, who said House Republicans would likely not support the change. I'M JUST A BILL SUPREME COURT JUDGE ELECTIONS: Assemblymember Gail Pellerin is looking to amend the constitution to allow California Supreme Court judges to extend their terms without an election. But in addition to pitching it as a good-government reform that will free judges from unnecessary politicking, Pellerin is hoping penny-pinching legislators will see her ACA 8 as a chance to save money. Pellerin's proposal would change the default for incumbent judges seeking an extra term, allowing them to file a declaration of candidacy and putting the burden on voters who want to force a retention election to collect signatures. Drawing on her experience as chief elections official of Santa Cruz County, Pellerin argues most voters either rubber-stamp or ignore judicial contests altogether. Since 1932, 794 of 797 judges facing a retention vote have been reelected. The amendment was referred to the assembly committees on elections and appropriations late last week, although no hearing date has been set. Pellerin is likely to make the case that her bill will save the state election-administration costs at a time when Sacramento is looking for creative budget solutions. 'It's a lot of time, money and prime real estate on the ballot for an issue that doesn't benefit voters,' she told Playbook. POSTCARD FROM ... … FRESNO COUNTY: Politicians typically do everything they can to get into elected office and stay there as long as possible. But in the Central Valley, where a court's decision to invalidate a 2024 ballot measure is giving two countywide officials a free two-year job extension, one of them says she doesn't want it. Lisa Smittcamp was elected to a four-year term as Fresno County's district attorney in 2022, with the expectation that she would either leave office or seek reelection in 2026. But earlier this month, a Superior Court judge invalidated Measure A, a charter revision voters approved last year to move elections for county law-enforcement posts so that they align with California's gubernatorial cycle rather than the presidential one. That would keep Smittcamp and Sheriff John Zanoni in their offices until 2028 — a two-year extension that both suggest they are not so happy to be receiving. 'Every single person who voted for me voted for a four-year term, not for a six-year term,' said Smittcamp, who was first elected in 2014 and said she is willing to stay on as a 'placeholder.' (Zanoni's office did not respond to a request for comment, but he was also critical of the situation in a joint statement with Smittcamp earlier this month.) The judge in the case ruled that Measure A, which passed with 55 percent of the vote, violates a state-level provision the Legislature passed in 2022 requiring both county positions to be elected in presidential years. While the county has 'authority to set the terms of its elected officials,' the judge wrote, 'it is not authorized under the California Constitution to set the dates on which the elections of local officials will be held.' Fresno County's Board of Supervisors has appealed the decision, arguing that counties have some rights to push back against statewide laws and that the decision defies the will of Fresno County voters. 'We believe that this state measure that was passed is an eroding of local control,' Supervisor Nathan Magsig told Playbook. 'Voters also have weighed in on this, and have said that they want to keep it in the gubernatorial cycle.' Neither Smittcamp nor Zanoni has said whether they would seek reelection when their terms are now up in 2028. Clovis-based political consultant Tal Eslick said both Smittcamp and Zanoni are popular in the county and, given that and Republicans' slight edge in the 2024 presidential election, probably wouldn't have trouble winning reelection with either electorate. 'I would say the likelihood of either of those particular seats — whether it's the district attorney or the sheriff — switching hands from a partisan standpoint is very low,' he said. Smittcamp, despite having supported Measure A, disagrees with the decision to appeal the case. She told Playbook she has concerns with AB 759, the state-level bill that shifted DA and sheriff elections to presidential years, but that the judge in the case issued a 'very reasoned and well-documented opinion.' 'Just because it didn't go our way doesn't mean that's a reason to appeal,' she said. 'If the law is the law, then you have to abide by it.' ON OTHER BALLOTS Idaho's Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the state's attorney general must revise the title and summary for a proposed abortion rights constitutional amendment for the 2026 ballot after the group behind the effort sued … A proposed 2026 constitutional amendment that would ban nearly all abortions in Missouri would also make permanent a temporary ban on gender-affirming care for transgender youth … A coalition of former lawmakers and civic groups in Massachusetts are backing two potential ethics-reform initiatives, one to change the state's legislative stipend system and the other to create independent legislative research and fiscal analysis bureaus … Oklahoma's Supreme Court will hear oral arguments tomorrow on a proposed constitutional amendment that would establish a top-two primary system following a legal challenge from the state Republican Party … An anti-tobacco group in North Dakota is launching an initiative effort to ban smoking, including e-cigarettes and vapes, in all indoor workplaces and outdoor stadiums … And Sahra Wagenknecht, the leader of a populist far-left party in Germany, is calling for a national referendum among voters under 30 on the question of whether Germany should reintroduce a military draft. PROP CULTURE VACCINE REQUIREMENTS: A Centers for Disease Control advisory panel will vote next week on recommendations for two vaccines, its first move after Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. replaced the committee's 17 members with eight new ones he said would be 'unafraid to ask hard questions' about immunization. Just over a century ago, hard questions about California's vaccination policy fell not to a small cadre of medical professionals but all of the state's voters. In 1889, the Legislature empowered school districts to reject any students who did not provide a smallpox vaccination certificate, while requiring them to keep a list of unvaccinated students. In 1911, lawmakers turned that into a compulsory requirement for anyone attending or working at a California school, while also crafting exemptions for those who had a doctor's note claiming a vaccine would be harmful or a statement from a parent declaring the family 'conscientiously opposed.' After enduring the 1918 influenza outbreak,public-health officials began to focus on one of the few contagions for which they could immunize people in advance: smallpox, which ravaged California in waves towards the end of the decade. The paternalistic tone of the pro-vaccination campaigns triggered a backlash, which as the website Santa Rosa History has detailed was driven in large part by chiropractors, who found themselves in constant battle with the medical establishment,including at the ballot. In 1919, an anti-vax coalition calling itself the Public School Protective League began collecting signatures for a citizen-initiated amendment that would add language to the California constitution granting unvaccinated students the right to attend public school. 'If vaccination has all the merits which are claimed for it no compulsion should be necessary on its behalf,' league president Lewis P. Crutcherwrote in a ballot argument for Prop 6. Opposition came from the League for the Conservation of Public Health, a politically savvy coalition of doctors who had first come together to defeat a 1918 amendment that would have established a public health-insurance system in California. (Winning message: 'It is a dangerous device, invented in Germany, announced by the German Emperor from the throne the same year he started plotting and preparing to conquer the world.') Prop 6 failed, with 56 percent voting against it in November 1920. But when the Legislature came back into session the next January, lawmakers revisited the smallpox vaccination requirement. School districts, swamped by requests for exemptions and losing per-pupil state funding for every student they were compelled to turn away, now lobbied for a change in the laws. In a twist, they were joined by the state board of health — whose president had signed ballot arguments against Prop 6 — which told legislators that the hard line on smallpox jeopardized efforts to vaccinate against other communicable diseases, like typhoid. In 1921, Gov. William Stephens signed a bill that killed the vaccine mandate, letting California school districts set their own rules.
