{"id":433362,"date":"2026-08-15T02:06:11","date_gmt":"2026-08-15T02:06:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/433362\/"},"modified":"2026-08-15T02:06:11","modified_gmt":"2026-08-15T02:06:11","slug":"kern-county-supervisors-explore-california-split-proposal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/433362\/","title":{"rendered":"Kern County supervisors explore California split proposal"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (KERO) \u2014 Kern County supervisors are exploring a proposal that would place Kern and dozens of other counties in a new state, separate from coastal California.<\/p>\n<p>Kern County District 3 Supervisor Jeff Flores said the effort is about making sure the region&#8217;s industries and way of life are taken seriously by state leaders.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;So I want to use this exercise to get the attention of the lawmakers, of the governor, that Kern County matters, that our industries matter, that our way of life matters,&#8221; Flores said.<\/p>\n<p>An analysis presented to the board found the proposed inland state would account for only about 15 percent of California&#8217;s current real GDP.<\/p>\n<p>CSU Bakersfield economics professor Richard Gearhart said that number tells a stark story about what separation would actually mean for the region.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;If we were to secede and become our own state, would be about $500 billion with a B,&#8221; Gearhart said. &#8220;Kern County accounts for about $60 to $70 billion of that. So we would be about 1\/10 of the state economy at that point. But the rest of California would be close to $3 trillion worth of GDP and we&#8217;d be cutting ourselves off from a highly educated workforce with lots of industry and those sorts of things.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Gearhart said the proposed inland state would drop California from the fourth-largest economy in the world to roughly the 16th-largest state economy in the country \u2014 comparable to Missouri.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;We would lose a lot of economic opportunities, we would lose a lot of economic growth,&#8221; Gearhart said. &#8220;It would be essentially shooting ourselves in the foot were we to follow this through.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Gearhart also warned the split would dramatically reduce the region&#8217;s workforce. He said inland California&#8217;s employment would fall from roughly 20 million employed people statewide to about 5 million \u2014 a reduction of approximately 13 million jobs.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;We would probably see a wave of businesses closing because they couldn&#8217;t absorb the loss of both workers and tax revenues from the state of California,&#8221; Gearhart said.<\/p>\n<p>Gearhart said the proposed inland state would be left relying heavily on natural resources like agriculture and oil.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;There are no developed countries that are majority natural resource exporters, so we would be more considered to be closer towards a developing country than a developed country at that point,&#8221; Gearhart said.<\/p>\n<p>He also raised the possibility of a Rust Belt-style economic decline taking hold in Central California if the split moved forward.<\/p>\n<p>Gearhart warned that Kern County residents would likely face higher taxes to fund basic services.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;In the short term, we&#8217;d absolutely have to raise taxes to fund everyday amenities like schools, roads, police, firefighters\u2014those sorts of things\u2014and we don&#8217;t have the tax base for it,&#8221; Gearhart said.<\/p>\n<p>He said that could include a new state income tax, sales taxes rising above 10 percent, and higher property taxes \u2014 all of which could accelerate population loss and further erode the tax base.<\/p>\n<p>Dividing California&#8217;s existing assets, including water systems, debt, and statewide programs, would also be a massive undertaking, Gearhart said.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;It would be nearly impossible,&#8221; Gearhart said. &#8220;There would be lots of fights because existing treaties and agreements since the 1800s would be in place. So it would just be a long drawn out legal battle which would increase costs for everyday Californians.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>He said litigation alone could cost the proposed inland state several billion dollars.<\/p>\n<p>Gearhart said he views the proposal as having no basis in economic analysis.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;It is solely for political theater,&#8221; Gearhart said.<\/p>\n<p>Flores acknowledged the chances of an actual split are remote, saying the immediate goal is a stronger voice, not necessarily a new border.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;We want to work with California, not against California, and that goes both ways,&#8221; Flores said.<\/p>\n<p>County staff will now draft a letter outlining the board&#8217;s position and look further into what a split could mean for Kern County. That letter is expected to return to supervisors at their next meeting on August 25.<br \/>Kern County supervisors are exploring a proposal that would place Kern and dozens of other counties in a new state, separate from coastal California.<\/p>\n<p>Kern County District 3 Supervisor Jeff Flores said the effort is about making sure the region&#8217;s industries and way of life are taken seriously by state leaders.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;So I want to use this exercise to get the attention of the lawmakers, of the governor, that Kern County matters, that our industries matter, that our way of life matters,&#8221; Flores said.<\/p>\n<p>An analysis presented to the board found the proposed inland state would account for only about 15 percent of California&#8217;s current real GDP.<\/p>\n<p>CSU Bakersfield economics professor Richard Gearhart said that number tells a stark story about what separation would actually mean for the region.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;If we were to secede and become our own state, would be about $500 billion with a B,&#8221; Gearhart said. &#8220;Kern County accounts for about $60 to $70 billion of that. So we would be about 1\/10 of the state economy at that point. But the rest of California would be close to $3 trillion worth of GDP and we&#8217;d be cutting ourselves off from a highly educated workforce with lots of industry and those sorts of things.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Gearhart said the proposed inland state would drop California from the fourth-largest economy in the world to roughly the 16th-largest state economy in the country \u2014 comparable to Missouri.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;We would lose a lot of economic opportunities, we would lose a lot of economic growth,&#8221; Gearhart said. &#8220;It would be essentially shooting ourselves in the foot were we to follow this through.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Gearhart also warned the split would dramatically reduce the region&#8217;s workforce. He said inland California&#8217;s employment would fall from roughly 20 million employed people statewide to about 5 million \u2014 a reduction of approximately 13 million jobs.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;We would probably see a wave of businesses closing because they couldn&#8217;t absorb the loss of both workers and tax revenues from the state of California,&#8221; Gearhart said.<\/p>\n<p>Gearhart said the proposed inland state would be left relying heavily on natural resources like agriculture and oil.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;There are no developed countries that are majority natural resource exporters, so we would be more considered to be closer towards a developing country than a developed country at that point,&#8221; Gearhart said.<\/p>\n<p>He also raised the possibility of a Rust Belt-style economic decline taking hold in Central California if the split moved forward.<\/p>\n<p>Gearhart warned that Kern County residents would likely face higher taxes to fund basic services.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;In the short term, we&#8217;d absolutely have to raise taxes to fund everyday amenities like schools, roads, police, firefighters\u2014those sorts of things\u2014and we don&#8217;t have the tax base for it,&#8221; Gearhart said.<\/p>\n<p>He said that could include a new state income tax, sales taxes rising above 10 percent, and higher property taxes \u2014 all of which could accelerate population loss and further erode the tax base.<\/p>\n<p>Dividing California&#8217;s existing assets, including water systems, debt, and statewide programs, would also be a massive undertaking, Gearhart said.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;It would be nearly impossible,&#8221; Gearhart said. &#8220;There would be lots of fights because existing treaties and agreements since the 1800s would be in place. So it would just be a long drawn out legal battle which would increase costs for everyday Californians.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>He said litigation alone could cost the proposed inland state several billion dollars.<\/p>\n<p>Gearhart said he views the proposal as having no basis in economic analysis.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;It is solely for political theater,&#8221; Gearhart said.<\/p>\n<p>Flores acknowledged the chances of an actual split are remote, saying the immediate goal is a stronger voice, not necessarily a new border.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;We want to work with California, not against California, and that goes both ways,&#8221; Flores said.<\/p>\n<p>County staff will now draft a letter outlining the board&#8217;s position and look further into what a split could mean for Kern County. That letter is expected to return to supervisors at their next meeting on August 25.<\/p>\n<p>Stay in Touch with Us Anytime, Anywhere:<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (KERO) \u2014 Kern County supervisors are exploring a proposal that would place Kern and dozens of&hellip;\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":433363,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[155,152,7,172119,9,8,172120,26595,162,172121,172122],"class_list":["post-433362","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-california","tag-bakersfield-downtown","tag-bakersfield-news","tag-california","tag-california-gdp","tag-california-headlines","tag-california-news","tag-california-split","tag-csub","tag-kern-county-news","tag-kern-county-supervisors","tag-richard-gearhart"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/433362","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=433362"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/433362\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/433363"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=433362"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=433362"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=433362"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}