9-29-09
9-29-09
Merced Sun-Star
Merced City Council approves Wal-Mart distribution center
The vote was 6-1 in favor of the center...SCOTT JASON
http://www.mercedsunstar.com/167/v-print/story/1084254.html
Capping four years of debate, six hours of public input and dozens of technical studies, the Merced City Council voted Monday to let Wal-Mart build a massive distribution center.
Five council members -- Jim Sanders, Joe Cortez, Michele Gabriault-Acosta, Noah Lor, Bill Spriggs -- and Mayor Ellie Wooten voted in support. Mayor Pro Tem John Carlisle voted in opposition.
"Our largest health issue isn't air quality or asthma," Spriggs said, his voice growing thick with emotion. "Our largest health problem is poverty."
Several audience members in the packed council chambers applauded after the vote.
Carl Pollard shouted, "Yes -- hallelujah!"
The turnout wasn't as large as predicted. The council chambers were barely full and the overflow areas were empty. Supporters outnumbered opponents by a 2-1 margin.
The vote laid to rest the council's role in a project that, depending on who's speaking, will either begin Merced's economic recovery or lead to the environmental ruin of southeast Merced.
Wal-Mart proposed in 2005 building a 1.2 million square foot distribution center that will serve 49 existing stores when it opens and have the capacity to serve dozens more. It pledges to create 900 full-time jobs with an average wage of $17.50.
Supporters see this as a clear reason the project is crucial to improving Merced's economic health.
Opponents charge that Wal-Mart's trucks along with ones from the third-party firms it works with will make Merced's bad air worse and clog up the roads. They question the wage and job figures.
Carlisle said it was clear the project would be approved and hoped his vote would remind Wal-Mart to keep its promises and know not everyone supported its center. He complained there was wiggle room in what Wal-Mart has to do to offset the project's impacts.
"It concerns me considerably," he noted.
Spriggs totaled the number of jobs lost in the past two years: 1,321.
"How in good conscience can any of us sit up here in this economy and tell people they don't have the opportunity to apply for a job?" he asked.
With the project approved, the focus shifts to whether opponents will file a lawsuit to delay the project.
Officials with the three chambers of commerce, the Merced Boosters and the Merced County Jobs Coalition held a news conference before the meeting to ask Wal-Mart opponent Merced Alliance for Responsible Growth to keep the project out of the court system.
"By doing the right thing, you will ensure MARG's legacy and place in our community as an organization that advocates responsible planning and not one that was persuaded by out of town interest groups determined to defy popular public opinion and deny our community hope for a more prosperous future," Merced County Jobs Coalition President Doug Fluetsch said, reading from a letter sent to MARG.
MARG chairman Tom Grave hadn't seen the letter until contacted by the Sun-Star in the afternoon.
"They're doing their job and it's a nice letter," Grave said, "but we're not going to back down."
After the meeting MARG co-chairman Kyle Stockard said the group would meet with its attorneys next week and decide whether to pursue legal challenges.
He remained skeptical about the project's touted benefits.
"This (center) will never be what they promised," he said. "I don't think it will be the salvation."
Wal-Mart spokesman Aaron Rios said he was pleased with the council's decision.
"We're committed to bringing quality jobs to Merced," Rios said.
Without any legal challenges construction could begin as soon as 90 days. Much depends on how quickly city staff processes the paperwork.
Supporters worry a legal challenge could delay the project by as much as two years.
Wal-Mart said 600 construction workers will be needed to build the complex, which will be on 230 acres between Childs and Gerard avenues. Construction is estimated to last about 18 months.
All systems go for UC Merced med school with $1.3M federal grant
University receives grant to establish center for study...DANIELLE GAINES
http://www.mercedsunstar.com/167/v-print/story/1084247.html
UC Merced made a giant leap toward a medical school Monday.
Officials at the school announced a $1.3 million grant from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to establish the Center of Excellence for the Study of Health Disparities in Rural and Ethnic Underserved Populations.
The center will offer minor courses of study in health disparities to undergraduates on campus. It will also foster research of health issues specific to the Valley by undergraduate and graduate students, as well as faculty.
The center's establishment also forms a critical part of the foundation for a medical school at the 3,000-student campus.
In February, the UC Board of Regents endorsed the findings of the Washington Advisory Group, a consulting firm hired by UC Merced to analyze prospects of a med school for the San Joaquin Valley.
The group suggested a phased process for opening a medical school at UC Merced, starting with an undergraduate program focused on health sciences.
"UC Merced is the ideal location for research and education on health disparities," said Chancellor Steve Kang. "Our region offers a natural laboratory for education, training and research in this area."
Valley residents fall victim to chronic diseases at alarming rates and have less access to health care.
San Joaquin Valley residents have the least access to physicians per capita of any region in California. On average, there are 302 physicians per 100,000 people in California. In the Valley, the number of physicians plunges to 173 per 100,000.
The goal of the new program is to increase the number of UC Merced students knowledgeable about disparities in health care and health outcomes. It also seeks to increase the number of students from underrepresented and disadvantaged groups performing research in the area. Finally, it hopes to expand the capacity of the university to conduct research that addresses disparities in the region.
Rep. Dennis Cardoza, D-Merced, said in a press release that the center carries the potential to solve many of the health problems plaguing area residents.
"Merced and the surrounding San Joaquin Valley are grossly underserved when it comes to health services," Cardoza said. "UC Merced's Center for Excellence will focus on understanding and treating diseases and conditions that are prevalent here, such as cancer, cardiovascular disease, HIV, obesity and diabetes. But what sets this center apart from any other is that researchers will also hone in on the socioeconomic and cultural factors that influence health disparities in the Valley."
The grant is funded through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the economic recovery package passed by Congress earlier this year.
Maria Pallavicini, dean of the School of Natural Sciences, and Jan Wallander, professor of psychological sciences and co-director of UC Merced's Health Sciences Research Institute, wrote the grant application and will lead the center.
Pallavicini said Monday it was too soon to declare official research focus areas for the center, but was confident that it would wield a positive impact on daily life in the Valley.
"We're very pleased that they recognize the need to fund something like this in our Valley," Pallavicini said. "It helps us address some of the issues of the Valley, which is why the university was placed here."
According to the consultant's report, titled "Planning for a 21st Century Medical School at UC Merced," the college should establish a medical school in three distinct steps.
Phase I is now under way.
In Phase II, UC Merced would start out as a "branch campus" of the UC Davis School of Medicine. This could happen as soon as 2012. At the outset, 18 to 24 students would be admitted to UC Merced's branch campus.
In the third and final stage, UC Merced would establish a fully independent medical school after functioning as a successful branch campus for a period of time.
At that time, the school would have to establish its main location. The Washington Advisory Group said the two most suitable locations are at the UC Merced campus and at the UCSF Fresno medical education campus.
Ideally, the third phase would be finished before 2020.
Modesto Bee
Stanislaus County to review break for farmland...Garth Stapley
http://www.modbee.com/local/v-print/story/873123.html
The thorny question of whether to continue farmland tax breaks comes before Stanislaus County supervisors today.
People who own about 700,000 rural acres throughout the county eventually could be on the hook for $1.4 million in higher property taxes. That's one option on the table, as supervisors discuss creating a committee to study the loss of state Wil- liamson Act money.
Property owners with less than 10 acres under Williamson Act protection could be the first to pay the higher fees, under a separate item at today's meeting that won't wait for a committee recommendation.
Farming incentives have been a political pawn in Sacramento for years, often pitting urban legislators against counterparts representing agricultural counties. Facing a multibillion-dollar financial crisis, Gov. Schwarzenegger recently eliminated the state payments. That money used to make up any county losses when farmers were charged lower taxes.
The five Stanislaus County supervisors, four of whom own land in Williamson Act contracts, previously decided to absorb the difference this year. But they face unprecedented money problems and eventually could save $1.4 million by starting a 10-year process of canceling the contracts.
That would be incredibly unwise policy for a county whose economic heartbeat pumps in farms, said Tom Orvis, governmental affairs director for the Stanislaus County Farm Bureau.
"A lot of people would have a hard time staying in business without (Williamson Act incentives)," Orvis said, noting cattle ranchers whose rangeland provides slim profit margins per acre. "For some, it gives them enough to keep them afloat."
Other options, according to a county staff report:
Accept no new contracts. For example, the county could refuse four current applications covering 310 acres. But that could run afoul of state law requiring equal treatment, unless county officials redraw "agricultural preserve boundaries."
Audit all parcels, looking for people violating Williamson Act contracts. Such contracts would be canceled and scofflaws could be fined. But the effort "would require extensive staff time," a report says.
Lobby to remove "onerous state oversight," with future contracts between the county and landowners.
Do nothing. This means continuing to absorb the $1.4 million loss of state money, hurting other county programs.
Supervisors for years have shown deference to farming and to the 1965 Williamson Act, considered an important tool for farmland preservation.
Taxing ranchettes an option
Many farmers would not object to ranchettes, many owned by city folk enamored by country living, paying higher property taxes. They don't fit the classic mold of making a living off the land, some say.
So today's recommendation to cancel Williamson Act contracts on 1,403 parcels of less than 10 acres might be attractive and could bring $54,000 more each year to county coffers.
On the other hand, it's common for farmers to work several parcels, including small ones.
For example, Hickman's Frantz Wholesale Nursery relies on 400 acres, but they're split among 18 parcels and three are less than seven acres. County leaders should distinguish between that operation, which supports 100 employees and their families, and hobby farms, Mi- chael Frantz said.
"We're making a living on multiple parcels," he said. "Though some are smaller than 10 acres, we still count on the tax breaks."
Leaders should extend incentives to farmers who prove that at least 90 percent of their income comes from agriculture, including those relying on several small parcels, Frantz said.
"We're a farm family that relies on the Williamson Act. We're happy for it, we've grown used to it and we would be willing to fight to keep it," he said.
Millions of dollars spent on the governor's California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley amounts to "wasted efforts" if Williamson Act incentives die, Orvis said, because they are invaluable to regional planning.
"Call it a growth limitation because it helps keep cities within their boundaries," he said.
Today's meeting of the Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors is scheduled to start at 9 a.m. in the basement chamber of Tenth Street Place, 1010 10th St., Modesto.
Fresno Bee
Census figures show Valley pain...Tim Sheehan
http://www.fresnobee.com/local/v-print/story/1655231.html
New economic estimates released today by the U.S. Census Bureau show what most Valley residents already knew: Things were worse in 2008 than they were in 2007. And experts suggest they're even bleaker now.
People earned less money last year, and more of them lived in poverty, according to the Census Bureau's 2008 American Community Survey.
It's a sobering window on the effects of the economic recession that began in late 2007 and continued to take hold across the country in 2008. But economists warn that the current reality has deteriorated further for Valley families.
"It would be remarkable if things were not significantly worse" given the Valley's history of higher unemployment and reliance on agriculture, said VaNee L. Van Vleck, a professor of economics at California State University, Fresno. "This reflects the period before things went south."
The census estimates are based on nationwide surveys and interviews of 3 million households throughout 2007 and 2008.
In Fresno County, the median family income -- the midpoint at which half of families make more and half make less -- fell by nearly $6,500, to $48,558.
And 22.3% of Fresno County's residents were estimated to be living in poverty -- up from 20% in 2007 and third highest in California behind only Imperial County (22.9%) and Merced County (22.5%), and just ahead of Tulare County (21.6%).
Poverty is defined by the federal government based on annual income, with thresholds ranging from $10,991 or less for an individual to $22,025 for a family of four in 2008.
Among families in Fresno County, 17.3% were estimated to be at or below the federal poverty level, up from 15.6% in 2007.
Families headed by women where there is no husband in the home were even worse off, with more than 35% estimated to be living in poverty.
Similar circumstances were reflected in other counties in the central San Joaquin Valley.
The lowest individual poverty rate in the Valley was reported in Kings County at 16%, while the highest median family income estimate was in Madera County at $50,966.
But those figures are hardly bright spots compared to California and the nation. The individual poverty rate was 13.3% in the state and 13.2% in the U.S. Median family incomes were $70,029 statewide and $63,366 nationally.
As unfortunate as the figures for the Valley are, the American Community Survey estimates "capture just the very, very tip of the iceberg" of the recession's economic havoc, said Heidi Shierholz, an economist with the Economic Policy Institute in Washington, D.C.
That's because the data are outdated, reflecting not only 2008, but a good portion of 2007 before the recession began, Shierholz said.
The nation's average unemployment rate during the period when households were being surveyed was about 5%. Now it's approaching 10% and isn't expected to peak until later this year or early 2010.
"These data capture only about one-tenth of the deterioration we've seen in the labor market," Shierholz said. "It's not capturing anything of what's going on right now."
Because of the lag in collection and reporting of the Census Bureau's information, "the reality now will dwarf what these numbers show," she added. "Eventually, when we get to the 2010 survey data, we'll see a huge jump."
Fresno State's Van Vleck said she doesn't see any indicators of good news on the horizon.
Van Vleck said recent reports indicate that food prices are falling. "That's good news for consumers, but for people who grow and process the food, that means their income is going down," she said.
Rising unemployment in the private sector and payroll reductions in state and local government also are adding to the economic strain in a region where unemployment is typically higher, and income lower, than state and national averages.
"For the most part, [the Valley] is always at the tail end of the boom," Van Vleck said, "and somehow we're usually at the front edge of a decline."
Sacramento Bee
Calif. solar firm hits desert swarm...GEORGE AVALOS, Contra Costa Times
http://www.sacbee.com/702/v-print/story/2216972.html
WALNUT CREEK, Calif. -- BrightSource Energy has encountered some storm clouds in its quest to bring a solar future to large stretches of the western United States. The Oakland, Calif.,-based developer of solar farms has been forced to scuttle its plans to build a solar energy plant in the Broadwell Dry Lake area of California's Mojave Desert.
Plus, BrightSource must deal with environmental fears linked to its plans to build a solar energy field in the Ivanpah section of the Mojave. But the company believes it will ultimately prevail in its efforts to build a three-plant solar electricity complex at Ivanpah that could ultimately generate 440 megawatts of power.
The abandonment by BrightSource of the Broadwell site is a reminder that development of big solar plants can be a tricky endeavor.
Renewable energy projects are in theory designed to reduce use of fossil fuels. Yet these projects require considerable acreage and can also run afoul of competing environmental interests.
At the Broadwell site, BrightSource once was contemplating a trio of 200-megawatt solar plants. Construction was expected to begin in 2014.
But BrightSource's Broadwell project ran afoul of a plan by U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., to create a national monument in the area.
"We have ceased all development activities at the Broadwell site in light of the monument proposed by Senator Feinstein," said Keely Wachs, a spokesman for BrightSource.
The monument was expected to encompass hundreds of thousands of acres stretching from Joshua Tree National Monument to Mojave National Preserve - and include the Broadwell site.
"We are pleased that BrightSource is dropping the project," said Barbara Boyle, western regional representative of the Sierra Club.
The senator and environmentalists were concerned about habitat preservation for an endangered species of desert tortoise. Feinstein saw creation of the monument as a vehicle to protect the tortoise.
BrightSource might have other hurdles to clear at its Ivanpah project, which also could impact tortoise habitats, according to some environmental groups.
"We have concerns about Ivanpah," Boyle said. "Ivanpah has some very important tortoise habitats as well as a number of plant species that are sensitive. We want to explore if there are ways to address the tortoise habitat issues."
Privately held BrightSource hopes to begin construction at Ivanpah in early 2010. First, though, the company needs to obtain permit approvals from the state Energy Commission and the federal Bureau of Land Management.
"The permit process is very deliberate, very robust, and very transparent," Wachs said. "The concerns raised by the Sierra Club have been voiced in that process.
The solar company also is hopeful about Ivanpah because it has struck a deal with Bechtel whereby the engineering giant will build the solar complex as well as take an equity stake in the project.
BrightSource said it is well aware of the environmental concerns.
"We believe we have put forth a thoughtful mitigation strategy for the Ivanpah site," Wachs said.
The Ivanpah site already is affected by development and isn't as pristine as other desert areas such as Broadwell, Wachs claimed.
Wachs said Ivanpah contains two major power transmission lines and a natural gas line, overlooks a major casino area in Nevada, is across the highway from a natural gas plant, is used by off-road vehicle enthusiasts and has been used for cattle grazing.
"These projects will have an environmental impact," Wachs said. "The question is how will we help to minimize that impact. This is the first major solar project in California. We take that responsibility very seriously."
Doolittle, wife named as unindicted co-conspirators in corruption case...Steve Wiegand
http://www.sacbee.com/topstories/v-print/story/2216239.html
Federal prosecutors name former Rep. John Doolittle as an unindicted co-conspirator in a corruption case against one of Doolittle's former aides.
In documents filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., last week, the government also alleged Doolittle's wife, Julia, and nine other people were co-conspirators of Kevin A. Ring.
Neither Doolittle, who last year did not seek a 10th term representing the sprawling 4th Congressional District, nor his wife has been charged with a crime. They could not be reached for comment Monday.
Ring, whose trial began Sept. 11, is charged with 10 counts, including bribery and conspiracy to commit fraud, in connection with his work as a lobbyist for the firm of Jack Abramoff.
Once one of Washington's leading influence peddlers, Abramoff is serving a prison sentence after pleading guilty to corruption charges in 2006.
A former legislative director to Doolittle, Ring was indicted last September for allegedly supplying congressional and executive branch officials with gifts and questionable jobs in return for favorable treatment to clients of Abramoff's firm.
The 46-page indictment referred to Doolittle only as "Representative 5," although other information made it clear to whom it referred.
The indictment charged that Ring and the Abramoff firm provided members of Doolittle's staff with lavish meals and event tickets, and the congressman's wife with $96,000 for a job with a nonprofit group, arranged by Abramoff.
Naming unindicted co-conspirators in an indictment is frowned upon by the Justice Department and courts.
"In the absence of some significant justification," says the U.S. Attorneys' Manual, "federal prosecutors generally should not identify unindicted co-conspirators in conspiracy indictments."
But in a written response to questions from Judge Ellen Huvelle, federal prosecutors said they intend to submit statements from 11 alleged co-conspirators outside the Abramoff firm. They include the Doolittles, four former Doolittle aides and five former aides to other congressmen.
Calls to the Justice Department in Washington were not returned.
San Francisco Chronicle
Water interests argue new state dam proposals...Kelly Zito
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/09/29/MNRO19SUMN.DTL&type=printable
Thirty years ago, a chunk of chain, an eyebolt and Mark Dubois helped end the era of big dam building in California.
Dubois, a bearded, 6-foot-8, 30-year-old river guide from Sacramento, chained himself to a rocky outcropping on the north bank of the Stanislaus River and stayed there for a week, determined to prevent the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers from filling the canyons behind New Melones Dam and submerging the limestone caves, verdant meadows and petroglyphs of the river valley.
Dubois lost that fight: New Melones had been approved in the 1940s and was well under way when he and the nascent Friends of the River got involved. But he and hundreds of others who celebrate the 30th anniversary of the Stanislaus Campaign next month believe their work is echoing through a new generation as another dam debate emerges in California.
"We didn't win 30 years ago, but the world has changed," Dubois said in a telephone interview from his home on Bainbridge Island in Washington state. "Even though (Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger) is pushing these dams, people know they don't make sense."
As California grapples with an aging water-delivery network, growing population, worsening water quality, a drought and the potentially far-reaching effects of global climate change, dams are again on the table.
Last month Schwarzenegger insisted he would not sign off on any major overhaul of the water system without money for new dams and reservoirs.
The governor has the support of conservatives and the vast Central Valley, where many farmers are convinced that new, man-made lakes will help offset dry spells and ease the federal rulings that have cut water pumped through the ailing Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.
A costly option
But environmentalists and their liberal backers contend dams are a costly, ecologically dicey option set against the backdrop of California's unprecedented budget cuts and alarms over the decline of fisheries, waterways and water quality.
By most accounts, New Melones was not the boon promised. When federal engineers studied the project, they far overestimated the water supply and underestimated demand. As a result, for years much of the water has gone to flush out the delta and to fulfill contracts in Stockton and elsewhere; little went to local water suppliers.
"It wasn't surprising to us at all," said Steve Evans, conservation director at Friends of the River. "New Melones was a project looking for a purpose."
Memories die hard
The several dams under consideration do not have quite the same scenic or recreational pull as the Stanislaus River. But memories of landscapes lost behind dams die hard. River advocates point to the flooding of picturesque Hetch Hetchy Valley for San Francisco's water interests and Friant Dam's catastrophic effect on salmon in the San Joaquin River.
Dams "make sense if you don't care about taking care of the natural world," according to Ronald Stork, senior policy advocate for Friends of the River.
These days, however, the debate has shifted to the economics of dam building.
California already has upward of 1,000 dams that provide water supply, flood control and hydropower - built on the most productive and accessible sites, experts say. Each time another dam is added to a river, billions are spent and the water supplied is minimal.
"We have to look further than this reflexive, historical impulse that says building dams will solve all our problems," said Assemblyman Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael. "It's not true. Water recycling, conservation, efficiency... dwarf the amount of water we could get through any (reservoirs) we build."
Reasonable compromise
Conservatives and their supporters however, think they've forged a reasonable compromise that, though expensive, will add an important tool for managing the state's water system.
"The magnitude of the problem is so enormous that we can't afford to say no to one solution," said Chris Scheuring, environmental attorney for the California Farm Bureau.
Scheuring's group and others stand behind three big projects they argue would not inflict the environmental harm of past dams: The expansion of Los Vaqueros Reservoir in Contra Costa County, the Temperance Flat dam on the San Joaquin River above Friant Dam, and Sites Reservoir, which would flood the Antelope Valley in Colusa County.
The $3.8 billion Sites proposal, in particular, marks a departure from the norm because it is an off-stream reservoir that does not obstruct a river. Through canals connected to the Sacramento River, the Department of Water Resources says, water would be pumped into the lake where it would be used to supplement flows into the delta or allow deeper, colder reservoirs to hold back water for critical salmon runs.
Reservoir supporters say Sites presents the best of all worlds. And they seem determined to ensure that Sites and similar projects make it into any water legislation package.
"We're not going to approve another water bond package for billions that haven't improved water reliability," said state Sen. Dave Cogdill, R-Modesto. "These are not high dams on wild and scenic rivers. We're talking about a very responsible approach."
Not worth it?
Peter Gleick, president of Oakland's Pacific Institute, a nonpartisan water think tank, acknowledges that Sites or Temperance Flat could add a certain amount of flexibility to the system. But, he says, that slight improvement simply isn't worth the economic, environmental and political cost.
"Many of dams we built in the last century brought us great benefit," Gleick said. "But I think the era of new dams is over in California."
Inside Bay Area
Editorial: We don't need Congress to produce any more sneak-attack water bills in California
http://www.insidebayarea.com/search/ci_13438587?IADID=Search-www.insidebayarea.com-www.insidebayarea.com
COOPERATION AMONG competing interests on California water policy is notoriously difficult to achieve. Resorting to ambush amendments in Congress can only make that progress harder.
Evidently, that's not a concept taken to heart by Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Visalia. He helped to orchestrate an amendment to a $32 billion Interior Department funding bill in an effort to overturn two federal agency decisions that would reduce water deliveries to Central Valley farms.
The two biological opinions by the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service are being used to guide protections for the Delta and threatened species, including salmon and smelt.
After failing in the House in multiple efforts to block funding for the biological opinions, Nunes maneuvered to get Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., to offer the amendment.
It is no surprise that the Senate rejected it by a 61-36 margin. Why Nunes or anyone else thought a measure by a South Carolina senator who had no involvement with California water policy had any chance of passage is puzzling.
Nunes' spokesman Andrew House said the amendment "was something of a Hail Mary." That should have been the end of it. Instead, Nunes claimed that California farmers were again denied water, this time by Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer.
Such partisan rhetoric puts a wedge between Feinstein and some California farmers, which is hardlyhelpful. Feinstein has played a major role in trying to establish an evenhanded water policy that meets agricultural and environmental needs.
Some of the same farmers who praised Feinstein a month ago favored the last-minute amendment, which Feinstein said was kind of a Pearl Harbor attack on everything she and others were trying to do with California water.
Let's hope Nunes tactic and the support it received from a number of agricultural interests will not undermine future efforts to develop sensible California water policy.
Greater cooperation and openness, not failed partisan legislative stunts, are what the state needs to make progress on what has always been a difficult and contentious issue.
Mercury News
Colo. Gov. says western water policies must change...STEVEN K. PAULSON Associated Press Writer
http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_13444606?nclick_check=1
DENVER—Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter says western states must work together on water issues if the region is to continue to grow.
Ritter told the Western States Water Council, the Colorado Department of Natural Resources and the Western Governor's Association that western states need to work with local communities to ensure water is available before new development projects are approved.
Ritter said 19 states and 30 million people rely on water from Colorado, and states need to work together or face serious water shortages over the next few decades.
"You have to engage towns, cities and communities to consider how they grow. Water use planning and land use planning have got to go together," Ritter told the conference Tuesday.
The council is an organization of representatives appointed by the governors of 18 Western states. The purposes are to promote cooperation, development and management of water resources.
The theme of the meeting is "Water and Land Use Planning for a Sustainable Future."
Roderick Walston, a water attorney from California, said previous water planning focused on quantity and quality, but California has now integrated those plans with land use planning and development. He said the issue is how to enforce it and how much power gets left to local government.
"This will be the future of the West," he told the conference. "Should the courts make the ultimate call, or is it better to do it at the administrative level?"
He also said lawmakers have to decide whether to allow the government to reject projects that don't comply with water plans.
Sandy Fabritz-Whitney, assistant director of water management for the Arizona Department of Water Resources, said the question is whether to regulate water policies from the top down or leave it to local governments.
She said western states need to track their water use and determine how much they really need.
"We don't know how much water we're using," she said.
Brian Walsh of the Washington state Department of Ecology said his state has a long history of water planning and regulation, but some areas of the state still balk at water planning.
He said 36 watersheds in Washington have approved water plans, but there is still no statewide plan.
New York Times
In a Parched Los Angeles, the Streets Suddenly Run Wet...RANDAL C. ARCHIBOLD
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/29/us/29water.html?pagewanted=print
LOS ANGELES — This arid city is always looking for water. Lately, a lot of it can be found cascading down the streets.
To the threat of quakes, wildfire and mudslides that give Los Angeles an air of impending collapse, add a multitude of recent damaging water main breaks that have buckled streets, flooded businesses, exasperated residents, blocked traffic and perplexed engineers.
One break caused a street cave-in whose resulting hole partly swallowed a fire truck sent in response. Some have occurred on major thoroughfares, the latest Monday morning at one of the city’s busiest intersections, in the Miracle Mile area, that caused delays that might have been worse had it not been for Yom Kippur, which kept traffic down.
Since Sept. 1, there have been 43 breaks that have flooded or damaged streets, compared with 21 in September 2008, 17 in September 2007 and 13 in September 2006.
The rash of blowouts began in June, when a new drought-induced water policy went into effect, a circumstance leading outside engineers and analysts to question whether water restrictions are contributing to the problem.
Under the policy, residents are permitted to water their lawns only on Monday and Thursday, causing a surge in water flow those days that may be taxing the system, said Richard G. Little, a policy analyst at the University of Southern California who studies public infrastructure.
“I am one person who thinks there is something odd going on here,” Mr. Little said.
At a City Council hearing last week, Jim McDaniel, a top manager with the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, expressed skepticism that the water rationing could be a cause but nevertheless said no theory had been ruled out.
The department, which has opened an investigation, said in a statement issued Monday: “We will not speculate about causes to the recent increase in the severity of pipe breaks. We will wait for the facts and evidence discovered through our investigation to lead us to conclusions — not form them before we have evaluated the facts and completed our investigations.”
Officials of the department, who have brought in outside engineers to help them find an answer, say that over all, the number of reported leaks, large and small, has been about average in the last few months. It is the rash of significant, very visible ones that has everyone puzzled. Is it a statistical anomaly? Or, as Mr. Little suspects, is something going on down there?
As in most big cities, Los Angeles’s plumbing is getting old — one burst pipe dated from 1917 — and breaks now and then are a given.
Civil engineering experts across the nation have been sounding the alarm for years that not enough is being spent on cities’ crumbling infrastructure; the American Society of Civil Engineers this year gave the nation a D– when it comes to taking care of drinking water facilities.
Whatever the cause, few breaks are escaping the attention of the local news media, and they have people wondering and worrying. Interspersed with word of one break or another on Twitter are disaster-portending comments like “With all the water main breaks in Los Angeles, we shall soon be floating out to sea.”
Over the weekend, there were three breaks, two in the San Fernando Valley, which has been hit hard by the trend, and the other in the Hollywood Hills.
The city says the amount of water lost to the breaks has not been significant, but some residents are not so sure.
“It’s wasting a lot of water while we are rationing,” said Marilyn Peters, a retired nurse, as she stood at the corner of Fairfax Avenue and San Vicente Boulevard watching city crews mop up Monday after the latest break. Conservation-promoting signs affixed to their trucks read, “Use Water Wisely.”
CNN Money
FDIC asks banks for help
The agency raised its estimated bank failure tab and wants banks to kick in $45 billion to shore up the deposit insurance fund...Colin Barr
http://money.cnn.com/2009/09/29/news/fdic.restoration.fortune/
index.htm?postversion=2009092912
NEW YORK (Fortune) -- The banking bust is getting mighty costly.
Bank regulators on Tuesday sharply raised their estimate of the cost of cleaning up after bank failures -- and proposed sending the industry a $45 billion tab to shore up the dwindling deposit insurance fund.
The staff of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. said it expects expenses tied to failed banks to surge to $100 billion over five years -- up 43% from the agency's last estimate in May.
As a result of the rising costs and the pressures on the agency's cash position, the FDIC proposed that banks prepay their deposit insurance premiums for the next three years at the end of December.
The move would head off a cash crunch at the fund that stands behind consumers' bank deposits. Under FDIC guidelines, bankers and others will have a month to comment on the proposal before it becomes a rule.
The FDIC said the fund, under strain from 95 bank failures this year, will have a negative balance when the third quarter ends Wednesday and could run out of cash by the end of the first quarter next year. Over the past year, the deposit insurance fund balance has dropped to $10 billion from $45 billion.
As a result, there is a need for banks to pony up cash on hand now to support the fund, which supports more than $4 trillion in insured deposits.
The FDIC said the banks mostly will be able to make the payments out of reserves, so it won't unduly strain their finances or reduce lending.
"Our analysis suggests the industry can step up, so that's what we are asking them to do," said FDIC chief Sheila Bair.
The agency said the banking industry has "substantial liquidity," with some $1.3 trillion in liquid balances -- up 22% from a year ago.
Because the banks won't have to account for their payments to the FDIC all at once, the plan proposed Tuesday "will put the industry's liquid balances to good use in conserving capital and helping to maintain the capacity of banks to lend while they rebuild" the fund, the FDIC said.
The industry, which had been lobbying against another option open to the FDIC -- levying a so-called special assessment on banks, as it did earlier this year -- generally praised the prepayment decision.
"At this critical time, when the economy is just beginning its recovery, looking to options that are less pro-cyclical and that spread the cost over time is the right policy," the American Bankers Association said in a statement.
The FDIC said it wouldn't make any further special assessments on banks for the rest of the year, and ruled out raising the premiums it levies on banks till 2011.
Tuesday's proposal highlights how much money the banks have made over the past decade, while until recently contributing little to the insurance fund.
In the seven years leading up to the bloodbath of 2008, when banking industry profits tumbled 78% as the credit bubble collapsed, FDIC-insured commercial banks made an average pretax operating profit of $142 billion, according to agency data.
Over the same period, the industry paid out just $170 million a year, on average, in deposit insurance premiums, thanks largely to a 1996 law backed by the bankers' friends in Congress. In 2006, President Bush signed into law a measure that restored the FDIC's right to assess premiums on well-capitalized banks.
Since the markets melted down two summers ago, the FDIC has been playing catch-up. It booked $643 million in net assessments in 2007 and $3 billion last year -- and is on track to bring in some $17 billion over the course of 2009.
The FDIC does have some other options to shore up the fund. For instance, it could borrow cash from the Treasury Department.
The agency has a $100 billion standing credit line with Treasury -- and, thanks to a law passed this year, the authority to borrow as much as $500 billion through
2010 in an emergency.
But Bair has been reluctant to tap into this line of credit. She and other officials said Tuesday they prefer to leave the Treasury credit line untapped unless there is what they call an emergency situation -- such as the failure of a massive institution.
"I think that the American people would prefer to see an end to policies that look to the federal balance sheet as a remedy to every problem," Bair said. "That is especially the case with an industry that has the resources to deal with the problem."