Clock in at the WC Blog

The nation's most read Spanish language newspaper, La Opinion, endorsed Measure B calling it, "a visionary proposal that merits voter's firm support".

Also supporting Measure B was the LA Sentinel which proclaimed, "On Tuesday, March 3, South LA Voters finally have an opportunity to vote on a measure which will create jobs, develop clean energy and improve the air we breathe. We strongly urge support for Measure B."

County Supervisor Mark Ridley Thomas led a spirited rally in support of Measure B. He was joined by SCOPE which recently released a report highlighting the importance of bringing green jobs to LA's distressed communities.

http://cbs2.com/video/?id=94018@kcbs.dayport.com

Actor and enviromentalist, Ed Begley Jr. blogged about his support for Measure B on the Huffington Post, the link is available below:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ed-begley-jr/measure-b--green-energy-g_b_1...

Former State Controller Steve Westly blogged about his support for Measure B.

From:

California Majority Report - camajorityreport.com/

Steve Westly

Green Energy in LA Now - Vote Yes on Measure B

February 23, 2009 @ 6:35 AM

California has always been a place where innovators come to test bold ideas and blaze new paths. I was part of one such movement, as a Senior Vice President at EBay I saw the power of smart investment in new technology to create jobs. Two years ago I founded the Westly Group to invest in green technologies because I believe that we are at the beginning of another such revolution.

Measure B, the solar energy and job creation program on the March 3rd ballot in Los Angeles, is the kind of bold plan we used to dream about back in 1980 when I worked for the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Solar and Conservation under President Jimmy Carter. A municipal renewable energy plan that will put solar panels on rooftops right in the city, avoiding the construction of expensive transmission lines; a plan that will be able to replace dirty coal and natural gas plants located around the city with clean energy while creating thousands of good paying jobs in Los Angeles in solar manufacturing, installation, and maintenance.

As a former State Controller who spent years fighting for transparency and fiscal responsibility I carefully studied Measure B before endorsing it. I can say with confidence that this is a smart investment. A recent comprehensive analysis which tested over 10,000 cost simulations concluded that once Measure B is fully implemented LADWP ratepayers will continue to enjoy the lowest rates in Southern California.

Measure B also mandates some of the strongest safeguards ever enacted in LA to ensure an unprecedented level of accountability and transparency to protect LADWP ratepayers. It establishes an independent Citizen’s Advisory Committee that is tasked with overseeing the implementation of this plan to ensure it is done in the most efficient and cost effective manner. It also mandates an independent annual audit of the solar program by the City Controller to ensure each dollar is spent wisely and that the program is on track to reach its goals on time.

I spent the past two years working tirelessly to elect a candidate who shared my vision for America. President Obama shares my conviction that we can transform our economy and create millions of jobs by investing in renewable energy. President Obama and I both agree that we as citizens can’t wait on Washington to lead, now is our moment to begin the transition from fossil fuels to clean and renewable sources of energy, and from old manufacturing jobs to new green jobs. That’s why I am joining an unprecedented coalition of environmental leaders, organized labor, health advocates, and energy experts in actively supporting the passage of Measure B. I hope you will join us to make LA green.

Steve Westly was California's State Controller from 2003-2007. He is now a Managing Partner of The Westly Group, a clean technology-oriented venture capital firm located in Menlo Park, California.

Measure B, which will bring 400 MW of solar power to Los Angeles, is the focus of one of the largest labor-environmental alliances of the new Obama era. Key enviromental leaders showed their strong support for Measure B last week, speaking out on the steps of LA's City Hall:

http://www.greenenergygoodjobsla.com/blog/entry/ed-begley-jr.-environmen...

The Los Angeles League of Conservation Voters recently blogged about their support for Measure B on their website. The link is below:

http://www.ecovote.org/blog/?p=508

As election day approaches Measure B continues to attract a broad coalition in favor of green energy and good jobs.

California has always been a land of pioneers– and since the 1970s it has originated innovative energy and environmental policies that have served as models for the rest of the nation. Landmark pieces of legislation and investment have encouraged the creation of everything from cleaner cars to a smarter electric grid. We have spurred the growth of new industries while preserving one of the planet's most beautiful natural landscapes. Measure B is the next big step in this proud tradition and will make Los Angeles the solar capital of the United States.
What Silicon Valley was to the computer chip, Los Angeles can be to the solar panel. If voters pass Measure B, Los Angeles will become the living laboratory for President Obama's promise to create five million green jobs. Below are links that put Measure B in the context of the burgeoning national green jobs movement:

This article from this month's issue of Rolling Stone describes how:

"If the president wants an energy policy that creates jobs while protecting the environment, one state holds the answer: California."

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/25833544/look_west_obama

This advertisement, the first general election TV spot run by the Obama campaign reminds us of the new President's promise to put people back to work by transforming our energy system:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRgWpa_rnWQ

This article from Time magazine discusses the promise of green jobs to improve the lives of working Americans:

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1852183,00.html?iid=spher...

This editorial by S David Freeman- former General Manager of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power- describes how Measure B will make LA the solar hub of America:

http://www.greenenergygoodjobsla.com/news/entry/sun-can-offer-l.a.-a-wor...

On March 3rd we can not only provide green energy and good jobs for Los Angeles but lead the rest of the nation towards a clean renewable energy revolution.

There are many, many questions worth asking PA Consulting about why they are releasing a rehash of a private report compiled in a few days with what they admit was, “limited data”. This thrown-together presentation diverges strongly from the conclusions of the exhaustive independent analysis done over more then two months by Huron Consulting, which included 450 hours of interviews and 10,000 cost simulations. Huron pegged the price of implementing Measure B at around a billion dollars without tax credits and grants factored in which would make the cost significantly lower. This means that rates would increase, (if at all), a little over a dollar per month (at the very most) and that LADWP customers will continue paying the lowest rates in Southern California.

The full Huron report can be found at:
http://www.ladwpnews.com/posted/1475/Measure_B_Analysis.251664.pdf

PA Consulting has apologized to the DWP for the embarrassing and
politically-motivated leak of their hurried and incomplete slide show.
Yet opponents of Measure B continue to tout rehashed versions of it in
an effort to confuse voters as to the costs of Measure B.

Not only as advocates for green energy and good jobs but as members of
the public, we hope the press will ask PA consulting just a few vital
questions:

How many days did PA consulting have to complete the report?

How many hours of interviews did they conduct?

How many solar manufacturing plants did they visit?

How many cost simulations did they run to reach their estimates?

What is the confidence level of their figures?

Did they consult with LA-based solar manufacturing facilities, and if so, who?

Did they interview the management at any solar training facilities? If so who?

Who was the "report" intended for?

Isn't it true that it was based on, "limited and incomplete
information" and included a, "guarantee that it would never be
publicized"?

Do they regret the manner in which their incomplete work was released
to the public?

Did Andrew Rea of PA Consulting write an email apology to the DWP? Why?

Were PA Consulting's estimates ever intended to allow stakeholders to
make decisions with confidence?

Was PA Consulting's report even based on information from this year
and did it even consider the final version of Measure B?

Why did they feel it was necessary to include a long list of
disclaimers at the end of their "report"?

Do they dispute the far more comprehensive analysis of Huron consulting?

The late Senator Daniel Patrick Monihayan once said, "everyone is
entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." An exhaustive
report released by an experienced independent firm confirms what we
have been saying all along- that Measure B will bring green energy to
LA and create thousands of good local jobs while keeping the LADWP's
rates the lowest in Southern California. So, the biggest question of
all is:

Why are the opponents of Measure B still peddling their own distorted
and discredited set of "facts"?

Los Angeles is the largest city on the West Coast and the second largest city in the United States. For decades, Los Angeles has been a large part of the economic engine that drives prosperity in the region, the state and the nation. However, as Los Angeles looks to the future it faces substantial challenges:

• Job growth has slowed, and many of the new jobs being created are low wage jobs that don’t provide good benefits. Close to one third of Los Angeles workers earn less than $25,000 and many do not have health benefits. This is harming local communities inside Los Angeles and putting a strain on city services.

• The current recession has driven the unemployment rate in Los Angeles to 9.9% further dampening the city’s economy and threatening the city’s tax base.
• The infrastructure that made Los Angeles famous and prosperous has reached a dangerous state of decay. Years of neglect have particularly affected the Department of Water and Power, a major support for the city’s economy.
• The effects of global warming combined with development and population growth are exacerbating the strains on the city’s water and power infrastructure and are leading to an increase in the number of failures of the power system and threats to the water supply.
• State law and city ordinances require that Los Angeles shift 20% of its energy supply to renewable energy by 2010. This goal cannot be reached in any meaningful way with programs that are currently on the books.
  

The city badly needs responses to these challenges that provide for continued economic growth, good jobs, and updates to the infrastructure that relieve pressure on the current system while furthering the city’s goal of reducing the growth of its carbon footprint.
To this point, the response to these problems has been piecemeal. An example is the purchase of energy from sources outside the city to meet the renewable energy requirements. While this may help meet the energy requirements, it does nothing to promote economic development, create good jobs, or reduce the strain on the city’s energy infrastructure.
Under Measure B the LADWP will install photovoltaic solar systems on the commercial rooftops of cooperating owners using materials manufactured in the City of Los Angeles and installed by employees of the LADWP. For this to happen, the DWP will have to hire new workers.
These new jobs created by Measure B will be open to Los Angeles residents and a training academy will be established to train them, creating a green work force that will give LA a leg up on the future. Under Measure B, the LADWP would finance and own the systems and use them as part of their renewable energy portfolio.

The Bottom Line

• Photovoltaic solar is the only way to generate renewable energy that is scalable inside the city of Los Angeles and therefore produces jobs and economic development in the city.

• Installation of photovoltaic solar that is owned and operated by the Department of Water and Power will produce good wage jobs at the Department of Water and Power and in the private sector.
• The installation of photovoltaic solar systems on commercial buildings will reduce the load demands on the current power infrastructure during times of peak load.
• A photovoltaic solar system installed on commercial buildings that is owned and operated by the LADWP will replace the current ineffective solar program and save the city money in the long run. That will help the city meet its renewable energy goals and save taxpayer dollars at the same time.
• Creating good, high tech jobs in Los Angeles provides a secure foundation for our economy. Measure B is our chance to make Los Angeles a leader in renewable energy technology and produce good, middle class jobs at the same time.
  

If all you read is the daily fishwrap or a couple of wingnut local LA blogs, you might get the impression that Measure B, the solar measure on the March 3rd ballot in the city of Los Angeles, is the product of some dark and Machiavellian conspiracy to undermine Western Civilization.
Actually, it is much simpler than that. Measure B is an attempt to create a connection between economic development, jobs, and clean, renewable power.
Measure B is the brainchild of a couple of progressive union leaders, Marvin Kropke and Brian D'Arcy of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, and renewable energy visionary David Freeman, former General Manager of the Department of Water and Power. It was sponsored by Working Californians, the same group that operates this website.
What does Measure B do? It requires the Department of Water and Power to install 400 megawatts of clean solar power across Los Angeles over the next 5 years. 400 megawatts is enough clean energy to power 100,000 homes. Furthermore, Measure B has something for everyone.
For business, it provides incentives to conmmerical and industrial building owners that allow the DWP to install solar panels on their roofs and it provides bid preferences for solar manufacturers who are located in Los Angeles.
Measure B will create thousands of good, well paid jobs in Los Angeles--jobs that one can raise a family on.
Because the power installations will be owned and operated by the DWP, the citizens of Los Angeles will own the power. Utility owned power has served the people of Los Angeles well. And utility owned power is considerably cheaper the privately owned power, because no Enron-style manipulation is possible.
Another important aspect of Measure B is that it will generate power inside the city. That means it doesn't need expensive and environmentally unsound transmission lines to get to customers. And it produces power when demand is greatest, reducing the overload on the power grid that causes blackouts.
So who opposes Measure B? Right now, the fronts for the opponents are Ron Kaye, defrocked editor of the Daily News, and Nick Patsaouras, a political insider who is running for City Controller. Both are well-known for their anti-union bias and big egos. But, it is hard not to believe that the real opponents of Measure B are the interests who want to privatize power in Los Angeles so the the"free market" can take advantage of rate payers. If you were paying attention during the Enron rip-off and the mortgage debacle you will get what they have in mind.
The fact is that Measure B is the cheapest way to jump start a "Green Los Angeles" and the best way to protect ratepayers through utility owned power generation and it will provided much needed jobs and economic stimulus for Angelenos. The opponents' game plan is to obscure this point by trying to change the subject and focus on the process of getting Measure B on the ballot rather than the substance of what Measure B is about.
Don't fall for it.
To get the facts go to www.greenenergygoodjobsla.com.

Hey folks. I am sure you have noticed the lack of posting lately. As the title indicates this will be the last post. The Working Californians blog is going dormant for the time being.

You can continue to find my postings over at Calitics and any number of other outlets.

Thank you for being such loyal readers. See you around the blogosphere.

Julia

Today the Senate Health Committee voted 7-1 not to advance AB 1x1 the massive health care reform bill championed by Speaker Fabian Nunez and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. That means health care reform legislation is killed for the year given the timing to make it on the ballot. Chron:

Shortly before the committee hearing, Senate President Don Perata, D-Oakland, said in a letter to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger that he does not support the measure because it lacks adequate funding and could worsen the state's budget problems.

The measure, which passed the state Assembly last month, needs the backing of a majority of legislators in each house before it can be sent to the governor, who supports it.

Schwarzenegger, speaking to the editorial board of the Chronicle, said he will do everything he can to keep the measure alive.

"I'm not taking 'no' for an answer," he said. "We've come a long way to get as far as we have ... this is the last mile."

The $14 billion plan was the product of more than a year of negotiations between the Republican governor and leaders of the Legislature's Democratic majority. The proposal had the backing of a diverse group of corporate, labor and consumer groups but failed to attract the necessary six votes from the 11-member health committee largely because of concerns over the long-term costs of the plan.

The amount of resources mobilized for this fight was enormous. Many groups and organizations poured many man hours and dollars into advancing this cause and then this specific piece of legislation. It is a bitter end to a noble goal: reforming our health care system. Our health care system is a disaster, yet fear of the unknown determined the outcome. We could not ensure that the expenses would not out strip revenues a crucial calculation given our state's current precarious fiscal state. It was not clear how much this bill would impact working middle class Californians. The plan was attacked from the right and the left.

The good thing is that this is not the mid-nighties all over again. When the budget situation improves we will again have a shot at reforming the system. This loss does not mean we have to wait a decade before working hard to enact sweeping change.

This is a victory for the status quo today, but we have a chance in the not too distant future to enact the reforms legislators dared against all odds to advance this past year. There were many more reasons for this to fail than to pass. That will not change the next time we take a shot at it. Hopefully we will learn some lessons from this fight and have a better chance the next time. They sure did a lot better than we did nationally in the mid-90s.

The supporters of AB 1x1 are pulling out all of the stops. A group of health care reform leaders signed a letter to Sen. Shelia Kuehl urging her to support the bill. Sen. Kuehl is a huge proponent of single payer and has stated she will not support the bill sitting before her committee. It cannot pass unless she votes for it or Sen. Perata replaces Sen. Yee from the comittee.

Here is the letter they sent (h/t to Anthony)

>> read more

Stephen Johnson is the EPA chief who rejected his own staff's recommendations to grant California a waiver to regulate our own greenhouse gas emissions. Senator Boxer hauled him in front of the environmental committee she chairs for a grill session to see what the heck prompted him to ignore science and decades of legal precedent. LAT

"I was not directed by anyone," Johnson said at a hearing before the environment and public works committee, denying he had been influenced by political pressure from the White House or anyone else. "This was solely my decision."

Johnson failed to mollify Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), the committee chairwoman and perhaps his fiercest critic, who vowed to press ahead with her investigation into how the EPA chief reached his decision. Within hours of his testimony, she introduced legislation -- co-sponsored by 17 senators, including Democratic presidential front-runners Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois -- to overturn the decision.

Good. They should. There appears to be no reasonable explanation for the rejection other than the car industry doesn't like California regulating its own air.

In his first Capitol appearance since denying California's request late last month, Johnson drew the ire of other Democratic senators whose states also want to enact greenhouse-gas-emission standards for new cars and trucks that are more stringent than the federal government's.

"Your agency's decision to deny California a waiver just defies logic to me," Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) told Johnson. "It's clearly a decision, I believe, that's based on politics and not on fact."

Boxer called Johnson's decision "unconscionable" and accused him of going against the advice of his legal and science advisors and siding instead with the auto industry, which has resisted California's efforts to implement its tailpipe law.

There are fifteen other states that have sided with California and want to enact the same regulations we passed.

The EPA has stonewalled Boxer's attempts to get information on the decision. They even went to far as to cover up some documents with duct tape. Yes duct tape. It would be amusing if the subject were not so important to our quality of life.

In all reality it will likely take a new administration and a Democratic at that to let the states regulate their own greenhouse gas emissions.

The state simply does not have enough money in our bank accounts to pay our bills. That means we will need to borrow a bunch of money. Bloomberg:

Jan. 24 (Bloomberg) -- California may need to borrow as much as $9 billion later this year to pay bills, as the most populous U.S. state faces its biggest cash shortage since 2003, a budget official said.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's finance office estimates the state will need to sell $9 billion of short-term notes in September to cover cash needs for the fiscal year that begins July 1. That compares with $7 billion borrowed in November for this year's operations.

The cash crunch springs from slowing revenue growth over the last 12 months following the worst housing market slump in 16 years. Schwarzenegger last year saw a budget surplus transformed into a $14 billion deficit. Fitch Ratings has warned that California's credit ratings on $49 billion of debt are in danger because of the cash shortage.

The worse our credit ratings, the more expensive it is for us to borrow, just like any other borrower. This is somewhat routine for the state, but it is a jarring number all the same.

Today was the day the AB 1x1 was to be brought up in the Senate Health Committee. It didn't. Senator Don Perata asked to delay the vote until Monday since there were not enough votes to pass the bill. To complicate matters the Legislative Analyst came out with her report that had enough consternation about cost containment for the state that it made Senators nervous about moving forward. AP:

Given the Democrats' resistance, it seemed unlikely Perata could obtain the votes without changing the composition of the 11-member panel, although he has said he does not plan to do so. The committee's four Republican members have been opposed to the bill as an expensive and unnecessary expansion of government into the private health care system.

Democrats also sounded queasy about the potential expense, and they sought assurances that the state would not be saddled with new costs.

"It just seems to me that we go into it with a little more certainty of what the price might be," said Sen. Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento. "Otherwise we don't go forward."

There are many more reasons for legislators to say no to major health care reform than to say yes. That does not mean that the bill shouldn't pass or that it is impossible to pass reform, but rather that this was always an uphill battle. The state of the economy and the budget made the odds even worse. It is providing an easy out for Democratic legislators who might otherwise be supportive.

Legislative Analyst Elizabeth Hill fed their fears with a report that undermined the administration's insistence that California can extend medical coverage to millions of uninsured people without having to spend additional state money.

More likely, she said, the new health care program would become a drain on the state budget. Hill said she estimated conservatively that within five years, the program would cost the state between $300 million and $1.5 billion a year.

"What you have in front of you is by no means the worst-case analysis," Hill said.

There is no way to guarantee that the cost of insurance will not rise at a higher rate than they anticipated. There are outs for the state. It's not as if it would be on the hock for the plan no matter what. Safety measures were built in. Howevier, if the legislators feel like it is more likely than not that we will encounter a situation where the costs exceed the revenue in the near future then it is not worth it for them to support a plan that they believe is headed for failure.

There are hard choices ahead for Senator Perata. Does he want to pull Yee or Kuehl off of the committee, or let this die a quiet death?

The status quo of our health care system is unacceptable, but that does not automatically translate into passage of this plan, no matter how well constructed.

Things are not looking very good for the prospect of health care reform in California at the moment. The bill AB 1x1 is going to come up in the health care committee tomorrow. Sen. Kuehl, the chair of the committee already indicated she would not support it. That meant if only one other Democratic Senator on the committee pulled their support the bill would not be able to advance on a straight vote. CapAlert has the goods.

On the eve of a hearing for landmark health legislation, a spokesman for Sen. Leland Yee said the San Francisco Democrat will oppose the health care measure. The move throws into limbo whether the legislation has the necessary votes to move forward.

“The costs are a big concern for him,” said Adam Keigwin, a spokesman for Yee, regarding the $14 billion health care price tag that coincides with a projected $14.5 billion budget hole.

We have not yet see the report from the Legislative Analyst that Perata requested. This seems to be an early indication that the report was not particularly favorable.

Meanwhile the It's Our Health Care coalition just sent out an email encouraging their members to contact their Senators.

If the Senate doesn't pass AB x1 1 this week -- first out of the Health Committee tomorrow, then, if it passes there, on the Senate floor shortly afterwards, health care reform in California will be dead for the year.

A golden opportunity will be wasted. Health care reform here in California and at the national level will be dealt a body blow. And millions of Californians who could have been helped will be left to suffer the consequences of a deteriorating and dysfunctional health care status quo.

If you want to change the status quo and support reform this year, call your Senator now!

Click here to look up your Senator's phone number and call them today!

Senate process allows for Perata to request that Kuehl pass the bill on without voting. However, it is unclear if he is interested in having her do that. Perata does also have the power to pull Lee from the committee and replace him with someone who will vote for the bill. However, Perata has been throwing considerable cold water on the whole thing and it does not seem like he is inclined to force the issue.

It is a real shame to see so much time and effort come down to this. California had a real shot at passing significant, historic health care reform. The odds have always been stacked against it, just like they are right now. Ever the eternal optimist, I still believe they could get this thing done. It is really up to Perata.

The governor has finally come around to reality. Reforming California's school system will require a huge investment in our children's future and we simply do not have the funds to do that this year. Arnold said this and more in an interview with the LAT editorial board.

But he also talked about investing more in some of the same government programs he once complained were bloated and inefficient.

The message has ceased to be that schools can do more with less.

Now, he said, properly reforming the state's education system could come with a hefty price tag.

Because of the need for funds, Schwarzenegger said, he would put off his plans for an ambitious overhaul of the state educational system until more money is available.

"We have to analyze and bring everyone in the education community together and look at all the reforms and look at if that means we need extra money to do all those things," the governor said.

"To say: 'The funding we leave off the table completely . . . because we don't have any money, but we want to do those reforms,' that is not the way it works."

He is sounding all the right notes at the moment with regards to his plans for his "Year of Education". The same cannot be said of his approach to the budget. He has already lined up the schools as a target for huge cuts.

It has come down to this: will any Democratic Senator on the health care committee vote against the proposal besides Sen. Shelia Kuehl? The Capitol Weekly has all of the wonky details:

The Senate Health Committee is chaired by Sen. Sheila Kuehl, D-Santa Monica, who is openly opposing the bill. Kuehl’s opposition gives the bill’s supporters a single-vote margin on the 11-member health committee.

That means that any Democrat on the committee could single-handedly sink the proposal. And not all of the committee members are sure they’re going to vote for the bill. Kuehl, who has promised an exhaustive examination of the proposal, delayed the first hearing by a week.

“The issue I have is that we have a $14 billion shortfall,” said Sen. Leland Yee, D-San Francisco. “We are cutting services like you cannot believe. So how can we pay for a new health care plan?”

The Senate, in particular this committee is moving slowly on this proposal to examine all of the details. This will not be a repeat of the rapid fire passage of the energy deal during the Enron crisis. AB 1x1 is a major piece of legislation that should impact just about every single Californian. I for one am glad that it is being gone over with a fine tooth comb.

Here is a clear sign that the speculation about Arnold's intentions in proposing a grossly unacceptable budget has some merit. He told the SacBee that he does not expect that they actually close the 48 parks he had called to close in his budget.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Wednesday he proposed closing 48 state parks to "rattle the cage" at the Capitol, but fully expects lawmakers to come forward with alternatives -- including higher fees -- to keep parks open.

"The budget is always a proposal ... There's the reality, and the reality will rattle the cage," Schwarzenegger said during a meeting Wednesday on a wide range of issues with the Bee's editorial board.

Last week the governor released a $101 billion general fund spending plan that was balanced largely through government spending reductions. Closing 48 state parks would eliminate 136 positions and help the parks department save 8.9 percent of its budget -- or $13.3 million.

That is $13.3 million out of a $15 billion budget deficit. This was a very high profile proposal, with little fiscal gain, designed to fire up people. It worked.

Current analysis suggests that increasing fees will drive down attendance exacerbating the problem, not solving it.