Saturday, October 25, 2025
spot_img
spot_img
Home Blog Page 355

Rancho LPG Sale Could Put An End to 50-Year Threat

The same day that a $230 million class action settlement was approved against Plains All American for the 2015 Refugio Oil Spill on the Santa Barbara coast, homeowner activist Janet Gunter received an email heralding Plains’ likely sale of the dangerous Rancho LPG facility, which Gunter has been fighting to close for at least a decade and a half.

Plains has been selling off assets in California since that spill, and rumors about Rancho being sold have been circulating for some time, but the email from Jason Hines, a partner with Torrance-based Overton Moore Properties, is the first tangible evidence that a sale is in the works — a sale that would convert the site to a harmless industrial use. However, the plans are “not a done deal” he subsequently told her.

But the first Rancho-related news that day was a new report, “Backyard Mega-Bombs,” from USC highlighting the vast understatement of risk Rancho posses, not just to the immediate community, but to the nation as a whole, given the potential destruction of the LA/Long Beach port complex.

“Were the dangerous substance to be ignited, the energy released would be on par with a nuclear bomb,” the report by USC student Tim Saunders notes. “Key infrastructural pieces — the Port of Los Angeles and the Port of Long Beach — would be decimated by the resulting explosion. Forty percent of the United States’ ability to import goods would be lost, the thousands of jobs supported nationwide would be affected, and overall, the economy of the country would fall into recession. This makes the danger of the facility a national concern.”

This extreme danger has been consistently downplayed for decades, but now finally may be coming to an end.

“We have plans to acquire the San Pedro LPG/Butane facility and close it down and redevelop the site with a high quality, state of the art, industrial development,” Hines told Gunter in his email, “ I would like to plan a time to meet with you and share our plans while getting your feedback.”

OMP has dozens of similar completed developments in California listed on its website. But Hines didn’t provide further information. Rather, he complained that the story had “leaked to the press,” Gunter told Random Lengths. “”He said the sale has not been completed. It’s not a done deal, and any further information should be kept in confidence” she explained. And she agreed to do that. But their plans to meet appear unaffected, and even if OMP’s plans do fall through, this confirms months of rumors that Rancho LPG is for sale, and that the dangers it posses could finally be coming to an end.

Rancho reported an affected area .5 miles in itstheir risk management assessment, but when Saunders followed the identical procedure, “I got 3 miles,” he told Random Lengths, and that was just for a single 12.6 million-gallon butane tank. But there are two such tanks at the site, plus five 60,000 gal propane tanks, and an explosion of any one would trigger an explosion of them all, yielding a radius of 10 ½ miles. “The truth is probably somewhere in between that,” he said. “But at this scale it doesn’t really matter whether we’re talking about 100,000 individuals or a million individuals within the affected area, the number is still so astronomically large. In contrast, Rancho claimed ‘There’s only 722 people in the area,’ but even that is still substantial,” Saunders said. “There’s a school that’s .2 miles away, there’s kids going in every day and families putting their lives in danger without even knowing it.”

But the reality would be far worse. “A catastrophic event at Rancho LPG would be unparalleled in terms of devastation in United States history,” the report notes. “Although ‘9/11’ is considered to be the most tragic loss of life in recent US memory, an incident at Rancho LPG would eclipse it 50 times over.”

LA’s Urban Oil Fields
In addition, Saunders noted, “LA is the largest urban oilfield in the entire United States and if you have an explosion really close to a lot of oil sources, those are also going to blow up.”

His report also highlights the minimization of earthquake threat. “It’s not directly on a fault line, but it’s within an earthquake rupture zone,” Saunders said, and was built to withstand a 5.5 magnitude earthquake, while the Palos Verdes fault — the main local fault line — “supports magnitudes of up to 7.3,” which is 63 times bigger than a 5.5 quake. [New research announced after we spoke ups that to magnitude 7.8, 199 times bigger than a 5.5 quake.] “So if we have an earthquake in California on that line, which is not super uncommon, thean the tanks could easily be disrupted or displaced.”

In fact, Saunders said, when he’s asked what he’s been studying, he says, “There are like these nuclear bombs that are on a fault line.”

But at least there was some consideration of earthquake risk. But when it comes to ground stability issues, “It’s just not addressed at all,” Saunders said. Rancho did consider earthquake and tsunami zones, but “They didn’t address that it also sits on a liquefaction zone and a landslide zone, which is obviously unstable ground.”

Also not considered is the threat of terrorism, which is extremely hard to quantify, but very easy to see. “There was already an attempt to blow up a nearly identical facility,” Saunders said. It was known as the ‘Twin Sisters’ plot in Elk Grove, California, just south of Sacramento, foiled by the FBI in 1999. “The targets were two large, 12 million-gallon propane tanks, which sounds eerily familiar to the Rancho LPG configuration,” the report notes. “The goal of the terrorist plot was to cause enough death and destruction to destabilize local government,” Saunders said.

There’s obviously a much higher threat level now than there was then. But nothing’s been done to address it. “The tanks are classified as a Tier 1 soft target. So they are the most dangerous in terms of the destruction that they can present as a target, while they require no defense whatsoever,” he said. “If you were to shoot the tank with a high-powered rifle or launch an RPG, that would disrupt the tanks and lead to an explosion.”

The report also addressed “historical and political obstacles” that have prevented dealing with Rancho’s danger, most notably the power of big oil: “The vast political power mounted behind Rancho LPG makes even addressing it as a threat problematic.”

“The battle is always going to be uphill,” Saunders said. “That’s just what oil does in the United States.”

A second major obstacle he cited was “Grandfathering, where there’s a precedent that’s been set that instead of constantly updating facilities to meet new building codes, because it would be really expensive, it is allowed to exist as they were when they were constructed.” It’s particularly bad in Rancho’s case, because of the relaxed standards and relaxed enforcement at the time it was built.

On top of all else, the report notes, “As the tanks were seen as a temporary solution and constructed quickly, they were not meant to last very long. They were built to last 25-years, seeing as other fuel options would be more accessible by that point. Obviously, it’s well past that date now.”

At long last, the facility may be about to close, if OMP’s deal goes through. But if not, Saunder’s’ report makes clear that public officials should be prepared to act quickly to close it some other way.

“It’s a waiting game, day in and day out,” the report warns. “Will everything go on as it has for decades, or will today be the day hundreds of thousands of people lose their lives?”

Story Map:
https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/4d2e48410fd74b6bbfc787bb029264f9

Potential Long Beach City Council Members Collide

By Anealia KortKamp, Contributor

Los Angeles County is a juggernaut, not just in California but nationally. It has a gross domestic product roughly that of Saudi Arabia on its own, and makes up 3.8% of the U.S. economy, the largest contribution of any county, and beating out all but the five biggest states. The county has a disproportionate influence on national politics because of this; in many ways, it helps to set the mood for economic politics across the western half of the nation. It is for this reason that politics in the county matter, even when the city in question does not bear the county’s name.

Long Beach, the second biggest city in the county, one-half arbiter of the massive port complex, and the most diverse major city in the country is once again in its election season. Its city council of nine has three of its seats up for grabs, putting a large realignment of city priorities on the table. Normally this would be five seats instead of three, but in district one and seven the race was secured in the June primaries by the incumbents. Incumbent Mary Zendejas secured over 50% of the vote in district one and incumbent Roberto Uranga did the same in district seven. This leaves districts three, five, and nine up for grabs with two candidates fighting it out in each come Nov. 8, though the latter two were almost won in the primaries as well.

District three is composed of the affluent Belmont, Naples, Alamitos Heights, and Peninsula communities, the highly regimented Bixby Village, and the various middle-income neighborhoods of the eastern half of the eastside, with Pacific Coast Highway forming the border of its most northern half. The class aspect of this race is brought up because it sits at the core of what divides the two candidates’ policies. The race itself is remarkably quiet at present. In the primary, it began with the most crowded field, and with no clear incumbent, it was quite hard to get the airtime needed to truly stand out in the field. This is reflected in the primary’s result where margins were quite tight, with no candidate pulling more than 5 points ahead or below their nearest competitors, and Kailee Caruso only beating out third place Nima Novin by less than 100 votes.

With only Caruso and Kristina Duggan remaining, the contrast between the two becomes more evident, with the two breaking from each other quite hard along political rifts all too common in urban LA county politics. Duggan falls incredibly neatly into the tradition of the reactionary / conservative Democrat, with policy brethren in the likes of LA mayoral candidate Rick Caruso and City Councilman Joe Buscaino. Contrasting this is Long Beach’s Kailee Caruso, who, unlike Brentwood’s Rick, also fits quite comfortably into a niche, this time along the progressive strain.

In policy terms she falls somewhere between the likes of LA mayoral candidate Karen Bass and LA city controller candidate Kenneth Mejia, skewing moderate reformist. The big break between the two is what seems to be the big three of politics in the county: housing costs, unhoused neighbors, and the power and money we collectively allocate to the police. Caruso wants to increase housing supply and potentially legislate against rent gouging, she basically tows the current line on unhoused people, pushing for basic shelter and transitional living, not really shaking the boat much there, however on police she is is slightly novel, advocating for the idea of tackling the sources of crime, such as housing, health, and job stability, rather than pumping even more money into police departments.

Where Caruso is fairly bog standard, Duggan plays the part of a subtle hardliner, dressing up hard positions behind modest language. The best example of this is her stance on the city building more housing. Duggan has argued for a process that would grant local businesses, neighborhood character, and oversight committees an active role as she did in her interview with the Long Beach Post. Such oversight groups in wealthier neighborhoods are known for their willingness to block any new construction.

Local business does seem to sit at the heart of her campaign, to the point where it’s one of only three policy pillars on her website, the others being policing and the unhoused. As the self-titled owner of such businesses, it’s not hard to imagine why she centers around small business advocacy.

On unhoused Angelenos, she is much the same as Caruso, but more upfront in the call to enforce anti-camping rules, not really expounding on where they should go instead. As for the police she says the city must maximize its tight budget, but that in the long term their budget and number of officers need to be increased.

If these two were running in a different district, under different conditions, it would be fairly safe to call Kailee Caruso the favored candidate. However, looking at district three, the high wealth and whiteness of it hint at a voting pattern more in line with the conservative Democrats of places like the valley, or indeed the westernmost tip of San Pedro into Palos Verdes. This combined with the relatively low-intensity campaigning and the packed primary means that no candidate appears a clear favorite now.

District five and its neighborhoods are largely a product of the ’20s to ’50s era of subdivisions, stereotypical suburbia in many ways, but with the large Long Beach Airport straddled neatly in between them all. District five neighborhoods include California Heights, Bixby Knolls, South of Conant, Plaza, Rancho Estates, Lakewood Village, Los Cerritos, Carson Park and tiny Old Lakewood City. Five is an upper-middle-income neighborhood, with a wealth of around $70,000 to $100,000 as its yearly average. While District five is majority White, it is not uniformly so across all neighborhoods in District five. The district becomes more racially and ethnically diverse from the airport to California Heights, Bixby Knolls, and Los Cerritos. To understand the politics and voting behavior of a place, it is always necessary to first understand who lives in a place, and moreover who doesn’t.

Running in district five, fresh from the primaries, are Ian Patton and Megan Kerr, neither of whom are incumbents, but each with a history in the district. The primaries were quite skewed, with Kerr almost winning outright with 48% of the vote, and Patton coming in 18 points below at 30%. An 18-point difference would be considered a devastating loss in any general election. Patton is a landlord and political consultant living in the district. At the same time, Kerr has served on the Long Beach School District board twice and sits on the boards of the Los Cerritos Historic site and the California Conference for Equality and Justice.

Patton seems to be banking heavily on the suburban mindset, quite a bit of his policy surrounds empowering small businesses, poli,ce and anyone seeking to stop an increase in housing density or hold landlords engaging in rent price gouging accountable. He also prides himself on trying to cut back on city corruption. However, with his policies, it’s most likely that the corruption, if present, simply moves from public to private organizations. On unhoused neighbors, his approach is a mix of carceral police-centered policy, obvious reforms that are needed, and a complete refusal for the construction of desperately needed social housing.

Kerr takes the more liberal approach, vaguer, but more centered on the most important step, making sure there is a home. This being shelter-focused policy, rather than again the long denial of very needed social housing, focusing on getting the unhoused an income via jobs training, noble enough, but failing to ask the question of why one needs an income in order to access a home, which is a basic need. Still, Kerr’s approach centers around the unhoused rather than law enforcement, an act that sets her apart from far too many politicians in LA county. Patton’s policy on economics is entirely focused on the small business owner, ignoring the worker, Kerr’s, in contrast, is only mostly centered on the business owner.

While district five is a relatively new district, it’s still old U.S. suburbia. With an 18-point difference in the primary, it would be shocking if Kerr did not win. I could not imagine a politician who more embodies the liberal milquetoast policy of a LA county suburb, and while Patton certainly represents a long tradition of the more carceral, reactionary suburbanite, ultimately he seems doomed to obscurity.

The northernmost district, district nine, is fascinating. It’s a largely low and middle income neighborhood with a diverse makeup, largely Latino and African American. The district has no incumbent, with former councilman of nine, Rex Richardson and former district three’s Susan Price off to a closely contested mayoral race. The void left here creates, while not the most even, one of the interesting races in the city council. Here you have two incredibly well-educated, community-oriented and progressive women going toe to toe. Ideologically speaking, Ginny Gonzales and Joni Ricks-Oddie are the two most similar candidates running against one another of the races mentioned. What then separates these two is how said progressive vision is implemented and how the two candidates present themselves to the public.

Gonzales is very personable, she speaks no different than a random person at a diner or bus stop would. It gives her interviews and policy a very down-to-earth, concerned citizen feel, very refreshing to those who listen to politicians on the regular. She centers conversation on policy around family, and her own experience, which while relatable does lead to her policy proposals being imprecise. An exceptional example of her status as somewhat of an outsider candidate can be found in her relationship with the Citizen Police Complaint Commission. Gonzales tore into the organization, calling it a disgrace, citing the legal battle between it and her, since deceased, whistleblower husband. Gonzales continues, calling the current state of the broader legal system a threat to democracy. This relationship to the CPCC is especially worth consideration when it’s considered that her opponent, Ricks-Oddie, is a former member of this exact group.

Ricks-Oddie is another matter entirely, concerning her run, she is extremely articulate and specific. Her endorsement list is massive, including groups like the California Democrats, Congresswoman Nanette Barragán, the Long Beach Police Union, the AFL-CIO, former district nine representative Rex Richardson, and the list goes on. She is without a doubt the favored candidate, with 1% more of the vote, she would have won the primaries outright. With her policy this trend continues, it is progressive, yes, but it is also very by the books and very incremental. Nothing in her policy book seems to deviate from established Democratic Party doctrine in the state, with the exception of healthcare. A doctor of epidemiology, she endorses the statewide push for Medicare For All, deviating from the establishment politics that killed Assembly bill 1400, the bill in February that attempted universal healthcare at the state level. Still, with a very safe, incrementalist, policy book at the council level, endorsements from nearly every establishment group one could think of, and an absolutely crushing 25-point lead in the primaries, Ricks-Oddie is by far the more likely of the two candidates to win, as aside from the humanistic element and more progressive outlook, Gonzales has nothing she can leverage against her well-endorsed opponent.

Surveillance Education Cycle: Finding Ways to Protect Privacy in Schools

 

By Nolan Higdon & Allison Butler https://tinyurl.com/privacy-in-school

In August, 2022, two important acts of resistance hinted at a sea change in attitudes toward invasive surveillance technologies. First, New York University’s Brennan Center sued the Department of Homeland Security for violating a Freedom of Information request regarding how the agency utilizes social media to monitor U.S. citizens. Days later, it was announced that the Federal Trade Commission or FTC is suing data brokerage company Kochava for the sale of geolocation information that may violate the privacy of women seeking reproductive health care.

In The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires, technology scholar Tim Wu argues that throughout U.S. history, communication technologies progress in a cycle from a universally accessible medium that brings pandemonium and creativity, to an homogenized, sanitized, and pasteurized vehicle that serves industrial interests. At the start of the cycle, the public has a positive view of the medium, believing it will deliver a utopian future, but by the end of the cycle, the public is left with skepticism and scorn toward the medium.

Digital technologies have followed this trajectory, going from an information superhighway that promised individual autonomy to a monopoly of platforms that surveil and exploit users. Indeed, responding to the revelations from whistleblowers and investigations that revealed the ways in which tech companies mislead the public, amplify false information on their platforms, engage in inconsistent content moderation practices, knowingly exacerbate mental health issues for users (particularly young girls), ignore privacy concerns when it comes to sharing user data, and prioritize profits over user safety, users have soured the public on tech companies. Only 34% of the public has a positive view of big-tech companies.

Surveillance technologies in schools do not seem to foment the same collective ire. Students, families, administrators, and community members are deeply concerned about the inclusion of these invasive technologies in classrooms. Within moments of publishing an article on the connection between surveillance technologies and book burning, we received copious messages from concerned readers with examples of educational surveillance infractions in their communities noting that they feel isolated in their knowledge of surveillance invasion and powerless in how to respond.

Schools use digital technology such as facial recognition software and school issued devices to monitor students’ social media use, mental health, mood, and almost every movement on campus. Big-tech companies have long tried to enter the classroom, and have found success by offering economic incentives to educators and ‘free’ devices for students such as laptops and Chromebooks. Big-tech has exploited loopholes in the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act or FERPA of 1974 and Children’s Internet Protection Act or CIPA, by adding and collecting data from monitoring tools to all school issued devices. Under the auspices of helping schools Gaggle, GoGuardian and Securly offer packages to filter content on school issued devices.

These data collected from these devices can be sold to third parties such as the U.S. Military and intelligence agencies, both of which are known to receive and share data with big-tech. Student data also becomes available through data breaches, which occur frequently — 1850 breaches since 2005, or about 108 per year. Data can be used by law enforcement to prosecute students, data brokers and advertisers to predict or modify student behavior, stalkers to target individuals, and by powerful institutions to disrupt activism.

The shift to online learning during the COVID-19 saw privacy advocates voice concerns for teacher and student privacy, but the subsequent response has ramped up student surveillance. For example, a Washington State a program aimed at screening young people for mental health concerns was sharing extremely sensitive information captured from the students with third partners. Unfortunately, most current pushback is largely weak and toothless legislation. This is typified by a Maryland proposed policy that aimed to set boundaries for data collection, but left students vulnerable to data breaches.

As a 2019 judgment against Google reveals, there is little incentive to end problematic practices. Even when legislation holds companies financially responsible for compromising user privacy, – such as Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule or COPPA or California’s Children’s Online Safety Bill — the profits made from collecting and analyzing student data far outweighs the fees paid for the violation.

Some of the student awareness and frustration with digital surveillance in schools has actually thwarted the learning process because they practice resistance in the form of less classroom engagement and self-censorship. In a rare example of resistance, in August, 2022, a federal judge ruled that Cleveland State University violated the U.S. Constitution when it allowed instructors to use video and other third party software to scan a student’s home while taking an exam. The lawsuit was brought about by Aaron Ogletree, a matriculated student, and represents a major win for students and privacy in schools.

It remains to be seen if these are the early stages of the final phase of Wu’s cycle, but these collective efforts represent significant resistance to big-tech’s efforts to normalize surveillance and user isolation.

Nolan Higdon is a Project Censored national judge and university lecturer at Merrill College and the Education Department at University of California, Santa Cruz.

Allison Butler is vice president of the Media Freedom Foundation and director of the Media Literacy Certificate Program in the Department of Communication at the University of Massachusetts Amherst

Political MudSlinging

When Rick Caruso and Karen Bass started throwing mud at each other in their last debate for mayor of Los Angeles I could just feel it coming. This is where the political horse race turns into mud wrestling ― some people feel we deserve better and others just like to watch from ring side seats without getting splattered. The big takeaway from it all is that the University of Southern California is the epicenter of corruption. That corruption is perhaps more to the point of the mudslinging even if it’s not the main issue in the mayor’s race. After all, USC was allegedly where H.R. Haldeman, who was made infamous in the Watergate scandal many years ago, got his start crafting political dirty tricks in student government elections there.

The reputations of politicians have been in decline ever since President Richard Nixon resigned in disgrace (we should have been so lucky with No. 45).

So political mudslinging has become as ubiquitous in politics as infotainment is to news. Is it all about ratings? One would hope that we could actually hear some real debate on the issues, but at least we are not being offered the QANON version of surrealism here in the Lost Empire of the Angels.

Frankly though, Caruso represents the monied class of LA and Karen Bass does not. Caruso is a wannabe Democrat and Bass is the real thing no matter how many TV ads the former shows us with him standing around making friends with people of color.

Regardless, this election cycle is a curious one, but not because of what is being reported in corporate media here. The real contests are down ballot between the establishment Democrats and the progressives. Republicans, not even moderate ones, aren’t in the equation except for Caruso. It’s a division that’s been boiling up since Bernie Sanders (that social democrat) ran for president and nearly beat Hilary Clinton in this county. This is unusual because it places the Democratic party in a less than a liberal stance in a majority Democratic city and in a more conservative position than the progressive upstarts challenging the status quo. And progressives are not your traditional “liberals.”

These include Council District 1 candidate Eunisses Hernandez (who won in the primary), Council District 11 candidate Erin Darling, Council District 13 candidate Hugo Soto-Martinez, Faisal Gill for City Attorney, Kenneth Mejia for City Controller and of course Danielle Sandoval running against Tim McOsker in CD 15. The LA power structure has been wedded to what some would call the Neoliberal model since the end of the Tom Bradley era ― a city run by big monied interests of development, industry and finance. And the results have created a chasm between the rich and working class and working poor that resembles much of the rest of America for many of the same economic reasons―income inequality.

What is shocking here in the LALA Land of liberalism is that neoliberalism has failed to adequately address the homeless crisis, port pollution and infrastructure traffic congestion, as it has elsewhere, try as they may. And LA residents have noticed and are not impressed with the establishment. They know it’s time for a change. But now they are being asked to choose: more cops or less homeless people?

On the one hand, the more rightwing leaning Dems like Joe Buscaino are clamoring for more enforcement on homeless encampments (something he’s been prone to his entire time in office). But now in his waning days in office, he has succeeded in convincing the majority of the LA City Council to vote with him. This is a sad ending as Buckets Buscaino has never proved that chasing the homeless around the block has ever worked.

Now Buckets has an heir-apparent in Tim McOsker, who he has recently endorsed against the progressive outsider, Danielle Sandoval. Let the mudslinging begin.

Last week, David Zahnizer at the LA Times, wrote a scathing piece accusing Sandoval of wage theft from a restaurant she ran and closed some eight years ago. Just how did Zahnizer discover this? He didn’t say, but more than likely than not by some opposition research dropped off by a McOsker operative. You have to ask yourself, “how is it that a wage claim from that long ago wasn’t resolved by the Labor Board before now?” I’m curious and skeptical as it appears to have only recently been filed.

I got a call from someone during the primary asking about one of the other candidates ― the guy wouldn’t say who he was working for but….

So now Sandoval has been slandered in the press, the same one that endorsed her by the way, and the response is her campaign revealing McOsker’s lobbying business at the TraPac terminal that eliminated hundreds of union jobs with automation. This is all about the union votes. He denies this of course, but there is documentation and, in all fairness, we’ve let her explain her case in these pages because it’ll take weeks before the LA Times does a follow up.

Let’s get to the point though. This isn’t about the mud. This is about power and which direction the future of Los Angeles and CD15 is headed. From the multi-million-dollar port terminals, the billions in international trade and its largest source of air pollution ― the Port of Los Angeles is the epicenter of economic and environmental injustice for the entire city. It’s worse than Venice; worse than Echo Park or East LA. Who is going to fix this?

Before writing this column today, I got a phone call from one of McOsker’s “friends,” a guy who never calls me, asking if I was switching my endorsement of Sandoval after the Times story ran. I really didn’t have time to explain why my answer was “NO,” but I guess he’ll just have to read it here.

Cal Rep Solidly Delivers Flawed Chicano Reimagining of Electra Myth

0

In Greek mythology, Electra avenges the murder of her beloved father and king by abetting her brother’s killing of their mom and new stepdad. In 2003, MacArthur “Genius Grant” recipient Luis Alfaro hit upon the idea of repurposing the myth as a present-day meditation on the vicious cycle of revenge and gang warfare in Los Angeles.

Thus, Electricidad, which sees Alfaro less concerned with being faithful to his sources (no stepdad, for example) than borrowing/augmenting them to tell a tale as new as it is old. It doesn’t always work, but Cal Rep does well with what does.

Electricidad (Stefanie Chavez) is a dyed-in-the-wool chola who loved loved loved her papa, rey de el mundo del cholo, and vows to kill her mother (Jasmine Alcala) for his murder. Sister Ifigenia (Jacqueline Reza) is a chola, too, but a year in a convent has taught her about love and forgiveness, which she’s trying to put into practice, hard as that may be. Their hermano Orestes (Ulyses Chavez), after years away in Vegas getting his cholo training from old-school cholo Nino (Matthew Fernandez), returns to the barrio crushed that papa esta muerto. But is he cholo enough to avenge this murder most foul?

If the choloing above seems a bit much, wait’ll you get a load of the dialog. The characters say it, I dunno, two hundred times, twice in single sentences, like Alfaro’s got an auctorial tic: “You are a stubborn chola. … You don’t know shit, chola.” “You are a baby chola. … You have no idea what it means to be a chola.” “The same reason we all do, chola. Where do cholos go in a world that won’t have us?” “Listen, chola, if you want to follow the way of the chola …”

But there may be a method to this madness. Electricidad is in a Spanglish that to my unschooled ear (I get most of the meanings here but have been exposed to little real-world Spanglish-speaking) often sounds affected — but the gods know that’s true of the Greek of Sophocles and Euripides (OG Electra writers, holmes). Quizás Alfaro is updating the tradition with a Chicano twist (como lo hace with his Greek chorus of broom-wielding vecinas)?

Pero hay otros problemas. Alfaro hasn’t sufficiently retooled his myth of choice for our times. Why, por ejemplo, is everything played out like guns don’t exist? Even if we believe vengeful Electricidad wouldn’t just march inside the unlocked house (she’s camping in the frontyard with papa’s corpse) and shoot her murderous mama en la cabeza, she doesn’t have so much as una pistola for self-defense? Did I mention she’s a chola? And mama, who’s just moved on both el rey AND her own hijo to take control of the East Side Locos, doesn’t roll with even uno bodyguard?

Nonetheless, there’s lots to like in both Alfaro’s writing and Cal Rep’s staging, particularly the humor. It’s here the cast shines brightest, particularly the supporting players, who get the bulk of Alfaro’s best lines. Matthew Fernandez as Nino and Sofia Barerra as Electricidad’s abuela come off as quite weathered for such young’uns as they sell their little punchlines with quiet attitude and wax nostalgic about when cholo life was so fine. Respeto. Ulyses Chavez is funny in the one real humorous stretch he gets, short but sweet, and Jasmine Alcala brings alguna nefarious sass.

This is all served up on a thoughtful sketch of a set, sparing and smart (a pair of tennis shoes dangling off a power line), efficient, even elegant. Thoughtful, too, are the lighting and sound designs (dig the ghetto birds), climaxing in a haunting audiovisual mélange. Too bad the play ends so abruptly (blame Alfaro); the lack of denouement leaves us a little shortchanged.

So okay, it’s flawed. But because director Sara Guerrero and co. take care to communicate the good, Electricidad brings you somewhere. That may sound like backhanded praise, but theatre that really does this is rarer than it ought to be.

Electricidad at California Repertory — Cal State Long Beach
Times: Thur-Sat 7:30 p.m., plus Sat 2 p.m.
The show runs through October 8.
Cost: $23-$25
Details: (562) 985-5526, csulb.edu/theatre-arts
Venue: CSULB Studio Theater, Theatre Arts Building (South Campus), Long Beach

Gov. Newsom Finally Signs Law Expanding Farmworker Union Rights

SACRAMENTO – Alongside advocates and farmworkers outside the State Capitol, Gov. Gavin Newsom Sept. 28 signed legislation expanding union rights for farmworkers. This follows the Governor, United Farm Workers (UFW), and the California Labor Federation having agreed in a letter on clarifying language to be passed during next year’s legislative session to address Governor Newsom’s concerns around implementation and voting integrity.

“California’s farmworkers are the lifeblood of our state, and they have the fundamental right to unionize and advocate for themselves in the workplace,” said Governor Newsom.

AB 2183 by Assemblymember Mark Stone (D-Monterey Bay) creates new ways for farmworkers to vote in a union election, including options for mail-in ballots, and authorization cards submitted to the California Agricultural Labor Relations Board, in addition to the existing in-person voting process.

The supplemental agreement between the Newsom Administration, UFW, and the California Labor Federation includes a cap on the number of card-check petitions over the next five years, and will allow the ALRB to adequately protect worker confidentiality and safety. This additional agreement would be codified into law with a bill next year that would be supported by both the administration and the union. The agreement will be codified with additional legislation next year backed by the union and the administration.

California has taken important actions to support farmworkers during Governor Newsom’s first term, with critical investments in the development and preservation of farmworker housing, creating farmworker resource centers, investing in new protections from extreme heat and protecting farmworkers and their families during the COVID-19 pandemic. California has also made investments to address barriers related to immigration status that also impact many farmworkers, including access to health care, food assistance for immigrants over the age of 55, free immigration services and anti-poverty programs.

“The U.S. and the Holocaust” Looks into the Mirror and the Abyss

0

You know how this story ends. Six million murdered. Nothing will bring them back.

But the exhortation is that we never forget, so the terrible tale is told and retold, partly to honor the victims, partly in the belief that George Santayana is right: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

But only the known can be remembered. As if Trump and COVID haven’t highlighted clearly enough the extent of American ignorance, in 2020 the first-ever 50-state survey on Holocaust knowledge among Millennials and Gen Z” found that “63 percent of […] respondents do not know that six million Jews were murdered and 36 percent thought that ‘two million or fewer Jews’ were killed during the Holocaust,” with “nearly 20 percent of Millennials and Gen Z in New York feel[ing that] the Jews caused the Holocaust.”

Clearly, then, Ken Burns and co.’s The U.S. and the Holocaust could not be written off as a needlessly redundant addition to the copious pool of material on the Holocaust — easily the most widely documented/discussed crime/phenomenon of the 20th century — even if the three-part series didn’t take a deep dive into the U.S.’s role/reaction to Nazi Germany’s efforts toward “the annihilation of Jewry.” But that it does — and even those of us far from ignorant of what transpired in Europe between 1933 and 1945 are likely to learn much about what took place within our borders. Spoiler alert: mostly it ain’t good.

Episode 1: “The Golden Door” (Beginnings–1938) opens with Otto Frank walking down the street in his native Frankfurt. It’s just two months after Adolf Hitler came to power, but already Frank is planning to flee to Amsterdam. He’s the father of Anne, history’s most famous Holocaust victim, so we know how this microplot is going to end, too; but starting us off with a less well-known Frank and weaving this thread throughout all three episodes (we don’t hear directly from Anne until Episode 3) is an effective way to take us into a story we know while priming us to accept and incorporate unfamiliar information.

Much of that comes in the form of American personages both well-intended and wicked. We hear the words of the Emma Lazarus poem emblazoned at the base of the Statue of Liberty (“‘Give me your tired, your poor, / Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, …”), followed by an anti-immigration counterpoint by Thomas Bailey Aldrich, editor of The Atlantic Monthly:

Wide open and unguarded stand our gates,
And through them presses a wild motley throng […]
In street and alley what strange tongues are loud,
Accents of menace alien to our air,
Voices that once the Tower of Babel knew!
O Liberty, white Goddess! Is it well
To leave the gates unguarded? […]

Much of Episode 1 concerns this nativist, racist fear of the other, directly confronting the (to quote one of many historians who serve as talking heads) “national mythology” that the United States has always welcomed immigrants. Beginning with the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, that welcoming trend went into retreat, with the U.S. increasingly defining itself as much by who we excluded as by who we took in. We hear of the pro-eugenics beliefs (e.g., forced sterilization of “undesirables”) of Teddy Roosevelt, Nelson Rockefeller, and Andrew Carnegie; and the virulent anti-Semitism of Henry Ford, whose Dearborn Independent (which in the early 1920s had the second-highest circulation of all American newspapers) ran 91 separate editorials under the general title “The International Jew: The World’s Problem.” In 1924 comes the Johnson-Reed Act, which sets immigration quotas requiring 85% of all immigrants to be from White, Protestant countries and bars all Asians — a category that includes Jews.

Across the Atlantic, Hitler — still in prison for his part in a failed coup — was pleased and inspired by the American example, just as he was by the way Americans expanded our Lebensraum via segregation and slaughter of native peoples. Just a few years later his Nuremberg Laws would be modeled on the Jim Crow laws of the American South.

Despite 3,000 American newspapers articles documenting Nazi violence against Jews during Hitler’s first 100 days in power, the American capitalist machine continued doing business in Germany uninterrupted. And why not, when American public opinion was such that polls found roughly two-thirds of Americans believing Nazi persecution was partly or entirely the Jews’ own fault? Even after Kristallnacht, which was widely reported in newspapers around the world, polls showed that only 10% of Americans favored raising immigrant quotas for refugees, and 50% wanted the U.S. to continue doing business with Nazi Germany.

Throughout The U.S. and the Holocaust we are, if not bludgeoned by, at least punchy from a litany of such statistics, all of which point to a deep-seated anti-immigrant bias in general, nowhere more focused than in the desire to keep Jews out regardless of the Nazi slaughter — though to be fair (as the filmmakers attempt to be), the average American had trouble imagining the scale. Part of the problem — and this is where Burns and co. report details of which the average Holocaust-aware viewer is least knowledgeable — was that government officials generally worked to suppress dissemination of known facts, as well as going to great lengths not only to bar Jews from entering the U.S. (in 1941, for example, new immigration rules denied the issuance of visas to anyone in/from Germany or any country the Nazis had annexed) but even from allowing money expressly earmarked for refugees and partisan organizations overseas from being delivered. When a group of Treasury Department officials became aware of their colleagues’ behavior, they wrote a January 1944 memorandum intended for President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Originally entitled “Report to the Secretary on the Acquiescence of This Government in the Murder of the Jews” and making claims borne out by evidence, just a few lines are sufficient to give a sense of the travesty:

[I]t appears that certain responsible officials of this Government were so fearful that this Government might act to save the Jews of Europe if the gruesome facts relating to Hitler’s plans to exterminate them became known, that they not only attempted to suppress the facts but, in addition, they used the powers of their official position to secretly countermand the instructions of the Acting Secretary of State ordering such facts to be reported. We leave it to your judgment whether this action made such officials the accomplices of Hitler in this program and whether or not these officials are not war criminals in every sense of the term.

This memo led FDR to create the War Refugee Board, one of the relatively rare shining lights in the American response to the Holocaust. But FDR is neither hero nor villain in The U.S. and the Holocaust, but a pragmatist attempting to walk a tightrope between his internationalist leanings and the generally isolationist, largely anti-Semitic Congress and American populace. A chief embodiment of the demons with which FDR had to contend was aviation hero Charles Lindbergh, whose velvety tones we hear extolling the need to preserve “the White race” and sounding the alarm about Jewish control of the press and film industry.

“You and I and the President and the Congress and the State Department are accessories to the crime and share Hitler’s guilt,” Freda Kirchwey, editor of The Nation, wrote in 1943. “If we had behaved like humane and generous people instead of complacent, cowardly ones, the two million Jews lying today in the earth of Poland and Hitler’s other crowded graveyards would be alive and safe…. We had it in our power to rescue this doomed people and we did not lift a hand to do it — or perhaps it would be fairer to say that we lifted just one cautious hand, encased in a tight-fitting glove of quotas and visas and affidavits, and a thick layer of prejudice.” At that time, the dead actually numbered 4 million, and it would be 2 million more before the killing was done.

Needless to say, no serious work touching upon the Holocaust can avoid the grimness of reviewing the industrial-scale, incomprehensible Nazi cruelty. Much documentation comes from the Nazis themselves, who kept meticulous records of their evil deeds, including an untold number of “trophy photos,” clearly proud of the suffering and death they were dealing. Combat-hardened American soldiers regularly “wept like babies” as they came across the mass graves and death camps. Even what they’d seen and suffered on the battlefield could not prepare them for this.

Starting in 1945, finally the full scale of Nazi atrocities was brought home to Americans from coast to coast. Nonetheless, the filmmakers tell us, in the immediate post-war years only 5% of Americans favored raising the quotas to allow more of the “homeless, tempest-tost” survivors and refugees into the U.S., while around 33% thought the number should be reduced. This highlights a key theme in The U.S. and the Holocaust and is undoubtedly primary motivator in the creation of this series: the anti-immigrant sentiment in today’s United States is part of an unbroken tradition. Today’s Americans are the same as those who rejected the “wretched refuse” of the Nazi genocide.

The last five minutes of The U.S. and the Holocaust makes explicit this tie-in between then and now by featuring clips of recent footage that’s all too familiar to anyone with a television and even a passing interest in our current Zeitgeist: torch-bearing White nationalists marching on the University of Virginia, chanting “You will not replace us! Jews will not replace us!” Charlottesville. Donald Trump. January 6. “If we’re going to be a country in the future, then we have to have a view of our own history which allows us to see what we were — and we can become something different,” historian Timothy Snyder tells us here. “And then we have to become something different if we’re going to make it.”

But Snyder misses the mark. Nazi Germany didn’t fall because it was racist, exclusionist, White supremacist, and cruel: it fell because the Axis powers’ ill-conceived aggression against the U.S. and U.S.S.R. brought crushing military might down on their own heads. For all we know the Third Reich might have lasted a thousand year if the Axis had been prudent enough not to pick fights with someone their own size.

The U.S. and the Holocaust doesn’t tell us anything about our fate. It can do no more than remind and educate us about this greatest of atrocities, and in so doing it tells us something about who we’ve been and who we (still) are. This may not be enough to change the hearts and minds of Americans who are keeping the anti-immigrant flame burning yet think they’re somehow different from their counterparts of yesteryear; but it’s worth a try.

Stream The U.S. and the Holocaust anytime or check your local PBS listings.

Governors Briefs: California’s New Legislation, Abortion Protections, Animal Welfare and Voting Made Easier, Safer

New Protections for People Who Need Abortion Care and Birth Control

SACRAMENTO California continues to lead the nation’s fight for reproductive health care access and privacy.

Gov. Gavin Newsom Sept. 27, signed additional bills into law to further protect people from legal retaliation and prohibit law enforcement and corporations from cooperating with out-of-state entities regarding lawful abortions in California, while also expanding access to contraception and abortion providers in California.

The package includes:

PROTECTIONS FROM CRIMINAL & CIVIL LIABILITIES: AB 2223 by Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland) helps to ensure that pregnancy loss is not criminalized, prohibiting a person from being criminally or civilly liable for miscarriage, stillbirth, abortion, or perinatal death due to causes that occurred in utero.

KEEPS MEDICAL RECORDS PRIVATE: AB 2091 by Assemblymember Mia Bonta (D-Oakland) prohibits a health care provider from releasing medical information on an individual seeking abortion care in response to a subpoena or request from out-of-state.

PROHIBITS COOPERATION WITH OUT-OF-STATE ENTITIES: AB 1242 by Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan (D-Orinda) prohibits law enforcement and California corporations from cooperating with out-of-state entities regarding a lawful abortion in California. It also prohibits law enforcement from knowingly arresting a person for aiding in a lawful abortion in California.

EXPANDS BIRTH CONTROL ACCESS: SB 523 by Senator Connie Leyva (D-Chino) expands birth control access – regardless of gender or insurance coverage status – by requiring health plans to cover certain over-the-counter birth control without cost sharing. It also prohibits employment-related discrimination based on reproductive health decisions.

MORE HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS: SB 1375 by Senate President pro Tempore Toni G. Atkins (D-San Diego) expands training options for Nurse Practitioners and Certified Nurse-Midwives for purposes of performing abortion care by aspiration techniques.

 

Voting in California Made Easier

SACRAMENTO California is expanding and protecting voting access. Every active registered voter will receive a ballot in the mail and Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed new legislation to make it even easier and safer to participate in our democracy.

The Signed Bills Will:

  • Increase vote-by-mail ballot drop box locations at UC and CSU campuses.
  • Protect election officials and poll workers from doxing and harassment by giving them the option to keep their home address confidential.
  • Increase multilingual resources and access to polling places.

Details: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov

Governor Newsom Signs Legislation to Protect Animal Welfare

SACRAMENTO Gov. Gavin Newsom Sept. 26 signed several measures to advance animal welfare in California, including SB 879 by Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), which ends unnecessary toxicological testing on dogs and cats.

SB 879, the PET or Prohibiting Extraneous Testing Act prohibits toxicity testing on dogs and cats for pesticides, chemical substances and other products, which often does not advance scientific research on toxicity in humans. The bill includes exemptions for tests related to products intended for use in dogs or cats, including medical treatments. SB 879 does not impact federally required testing.

Gov. Newsom also signed AB 1648 by Assemblymember Brian Maienschein (D-San Diego), which requires kennel owners to create a natural disaster evacuation plan as one of the conditions for obtaining a kennel license or permit. AB 1290 by Assemblymember Alex Lee (D-San Jose) clarifies that stealing or taking someone else’s companion animal is theft.

In addition, the Governor signed SB 774 by Senator Robert Hertzberg (D-Van Nuys) to facilitate the emotional support dog certification process for homeless individuals and AB 2723 by Assemblymember Chris Holden (D-Pasadena) which expands microchip registration requirements for dogs and cats to support the return of lost pets to their owners and deter theft.

Details: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov

 

 

Rep. Barragán Returns from Congressional Oversight Trip to View Puerto Rico Recovery from Fiona

LOS ANGELES Congresswoman Nanette Diaz Barragán (CA-44) returned Sept 25 from Puerto Rico after her visit to the island with members of the House Homeland Security committee to survey the damage and assess the federal government’s response to Hurricane Fiona. The Congressional Delegation or CODEL was led by Representative Val Demings (FL-10), who serves as chairwoman of the House Homeland Security subcommittee on emergency preparedness, response, and recovery – the committee has direct oversight over FEMA, the agency responsible for coordination of federal recovery operations in Puerto Rico.

On Sept. 25, the Congresswoman and her Congressional colleagues were briefed by FEMA, Gov. Pedro Pierluisi, and resident commissioner Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colón on the conditions on the island and the coordinated response. The Congresswoman traveled to various parts of the island to see the damage from the hurricane up-close to better understand the human costs and infrastructure challenges. She heard from residents who had been cut-off from direct access to other parts of the island and who were still without electricity and running water – and helped hand-out toiletries and other necessities to one rural community.

The Congresswoman and her Congressional colleagues heard directly from Puerto Rican officials, residents, non-profit organizations, emergency responders, and federal officials on the impact and damage caused by Hurricane Fiona

Rep. Barragán commended the Biden Administration and FEMA for their rapid response and deployment of resources and staff to the island, but said more must be done.

“Too many Puerto Ricans are still without water, food, and power, and we need to make sure we surge the resources necessary to the island to get these basic necessities to everyone,” said Rep. Barragán. “Our Puerto Rican brothers and sisters are American citizens, and they deserve nothing but the same urgent response and commitment to rebuild and recover as communities on the mainland. We will continue to press FEMA and the Biden Administration to provide the resources Puerto Rico needs – and ensure that the resources and money get to those who need them.”

Death Investigation, Carson

CARSON — Sheriff’s Homicide Investigators are continuing their investigation into the circumstances surrounding the Sept. 20 death of an Asian man in his 50s in Carson.

Carson Station deputies responded to a business in the 1700 block of Del Amo Boulevard regarding a person down, medical rescue call at 6:14 a.m. Sept. 20. Upon arriving, deputies discovered the victim inside the business suffering from apparent blunt force traumatic injuries. He was pronounced dead at the scene.

His cause of death is not immediately apparent and will be determined at autopsy.

There is no suspect or suspect information at this time.

The victim is believed to be an employee at the location and had been working inside the night prior. He was discovered by a coworker.

Anyone with information about this incident is encouraged to contact the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department’s Homicide Bureau at 323-890-5500 or, anonymously at 800-222-8477 or http://lacrimestoppers.org