CALIFORNIA FOCUS
FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, AUGUST 8, 2017, OR THEREAFTER
BY THOMAS D. ELIAS
FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, AUGUST 8, 2017, OR THEREAFTER
BY THOMAS D. ELIAS
"BROWN'S
EMAIL PROBLEM COULD SULLY HIS LEGACY"
As Gov. Jerry Brown travels the nation
and world posing grandly as the Anti-Trump and the ultimate champion of the
battle against climate change, he’s plainly very conscious of the legacy he
will leave behind when he’s termed out for good after next year.
But an email controversy that’s dogged
him for almost two years remains and it may sully the grand record of
accomplishment Brown wants to take with him into retirement.
More than a year after the state
Supreme Court unanimously ruled that text messages and emails sent by public
officials on their personal devices are public records if they deal with public
business, Brown has still not moved to end his problem.
No one but him and the recipients knows whether that’s because
there’s something untoward in 63 of his or his office's communications with the state Public
Utilities Commission (PUC) at the time of the 2013 agreement that saddled
consumers with 70 percent of the costs for shutting down the ruined San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station, about $3.3 billion.
When she was state attorney general,
current U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris announced investigations both into that
agreement and into whether Brown would have to turn over his emails. Harris is
long gone from her former office, Brown having heartily endorsed her Senate
bid. Her successor, Xavier Becerra, draws headlines for opposing President
Trump at every turn, but refuses to say anything about those two
investigations, which he has apparently allowed to fizzle.
The inaction of both Harris and
Becerra raises the question of conflict of interest for them. Said Becerra’s
press office in an email, “We are the governor’s lawyer… (in this matter).” So
the question of whether Brown should be forced to release his emails is being
decided by his own lawyer, which may be why the announced investigation has
stalled.
But consumer advocates led by former
San Diego City Attorney Mike Aguirre persist in their efforts to learn whether
there’s a smoking gun in those emails. It’s already well documented that
executives of San Onofre operator Southern California Edison Co. met with
former PUC President Michael Peevey (himself a former Edison president) and
hashed out the agreement the PUC eventually passed.
Now Aguirre has been boosted by a
friend of the court brief from the city of San Bruno, site of the 2010
explosion of a Pacific Gas & Electric Co. natural gas pipeline explosion
that killed eight persons and destroyed dozens of homes. Well aware that
documents show a close relationship between PG&E and officials of the PUC
including Peevey, San Bruno officials wonder why no one at PG&E was
punished even though the company was convicted of criminal negligence in the
pipeline blast.
So the city cites the PUC’s long
history of trying to “stonewall the production of documents.” It clearly hopes
that if an appeals court orders production of the Brown emails, it will also
lead to opening of yet more secret communications about PG&E and the San
Bruno detonation.
Meanwhile, current PUC President and
former Brown advisor Michael Picker ignored a request to answer questions about
both cases. Aguirre’s brief in his appeal for release of the Brown emails cites
conflicting Picker testimony about how he decided to vote for the San Onofre
settlement.
“I base my decisions on the
evidentiary record of the proceeding,” Picker told a state Assembly committee
in 2014. Yet, the PUC later said in refusing to divulge the emails that they
reflect “discussions between…Picker and his advisors, the disclosure of which
would reveal (his) thought process
regarding the…matter.” Picker, of course, did not tell the Assembly committee
about those discussions, which may have included communications with Brown.
In short, Picker changed his story,
and the Brown emails may show why.
Says Maria Severson, Aguirre’s law
partner, “The PUC claims the public interest in withholding the records
outweighs the public interest in disclosure,” an argument often made by
government officials during cover-ups.
But Brown must realize that the emails
will eventually emerge, even if it’s years after he leaves office. So if
there’s no evidence of wrongdoing in them, why not quit stonewalling and just
open them up right now?
-30-
Email Thomas Elias at tdelias@aol.com. His book, "The Burzynski Breakthrough, The Most Promising Cancer Treatment and the Government’s Campaign to Squelch It" is now available in a soft cover fourth edition. For more Elias columns, visit www.californiafocus.net
No comments:
Post a Comment