THE BUZZ: Maybe next time, folks. Gov. Gavin Newsom yesterday vetoed a divisive and high-profile piece of legislation by Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) that would have allowed three cities to operate safe injection sites for illegal drugs, marking the second time a California governor has nixed the idea, which advocates say would have ultimately reduced overdoses and deaths. Former Gov. Jerry Brown did the same thing four years ago — vetoing a bill (also by Wiener) that would’ve let San Francisco operate safe injection sites after a three-year pilot program. Newsom had previously expressed openness to the idea. But he said in his veto message Monday that he’s concerned that Senate Bill 57 would’ve allowed an “unlimited number” of safe injection sites. Newsom: “It is possible that these sites would help improve the safety and health of our urban areas, but if done without a strong plan, they could work against this purpose. These unintended consequences in cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Oakland cannot be taken lightly. Worsening drug consumption challenges in these areas is not a risk we can take.” Context, as always, is extremely important here. Nothing Newsom does stays solely in the realm of California politics, especially as he wages a crusade to raise his national profile. Crime in cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco is already a favored topic of conservative pundits. Signing a bill authorizing supervised injection sites would almost certainly lead to accusations that he was sanctioning illegal drug use. Maybe not all is lost for supporters of the bill: The governor is asking the secretary of health and human services to convene a group of city and county officials to discuss “minimum standards and best practices” for overdose prevention programs. Newsom said he “remains open” to the discussion when those officials come back with a “truly limited pilot program.” No word on when that will be, however. But advocates weren’t satisfied with Newsom’s promise to eventually reconsider overdose prevention sites, which other cities like New York City and Vancouver have already adopted. It’s been studied enough, Wiener said, and is a proven way to prevent overdose deaths. "We don't need additional studies or working groups to determine whether safe consumption sites are effective. We know from decades of experience and numerous peer-reviewed scientific studies that they work,” he said i n a lengthy statement. “...Each year this legislation is delayed, more people die of drug overdoses — two per day in San Francisco alone." Some officials aren’t interested in waiting on Newsom to give the green light. San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu said in a statement that he’d “fully support a non-profit moving forward now with New York’s model of overdose prevention programs." Wiener agreed, saying it’s “crystal clear the state isn’t going to step up.” BUENOS DÍAS, good Tuesday morning. We’re now officially in the dog days of the 2022 session, and we’ve still got some serious legislative ends to tie up. Chief among them — prolonging the life of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant. And as POLITICO’s Camille von Kaenel reported yesterday, Assembly Democrats are talking about a proposal to nix Newsom’s extension plan. Stay tuned. Got a tip or story idea for California Playbook? Hit us up: jwhite@politico.com and lkorte@politico.com or follow us on Twitter @JeremyBWhite and @Lara_Korte. QUOTE OF THE DAY: "This is a fight not only between the Trades, but between the Assembly and the Senate. The Assembly held up our bills and didn’t do much to try and broker the compromise. It’s always best if people can come together.” State Sen. Anna Caballero (D-Salinas) talking to CalMatters about the onerous task of passing California housing bills. TWEET OF THE DAY: Journalist Zachary Siegel @ZachWritesStuff: “I feel like Dan and Amy from Veep took Gavin Newsom aside and said he could never be president if he signed the CA consumption site bill.” WHERE’S GAVIN? Nothing official announced.
|