10-9-09

 
10-9-09
Merced Sun-Star
Merced County residents get a peek at high-speed rail route options...SCOTT JASON
http://www.mercedsunstar.com/167/v-print/story/1104032.html
Merced leaders and local residents Thursday night blasted alternative high-speed rail routes from San Jose to Merced because they would interfere with farms or neighborhoods.
"This looks like a tremendous amount of prime ag land that will be disrupted," Merced College President Ben Duran said after hearing about the options.
Officials with the California High-Speed Rail Authority presented potential alternative routes for the 120-mile San Jose-to-Merced segment during a meeting at the Merced Senior Community Center on 15th Street. Roughly 70 people, including officials from UC Merced and city and county government, attended the two-hour meeting.
As part of the planning process, the rail planners must consider all options before deciding where the train will travel. The input heard during the meeting will be used in the next phase when planners do more environmental studies and suggest a final route.
For the San Jose-to-Gilroy-Merced section, a plan should be picked by 2012. "It seems like a long time but it will move real quick," regional manager Gary Kennerley said.
The route suggested by the rail authority -- and favored by people at the meeting -- would have the bullet train shooting in a straight east-to-west line north of Los Banos, alongside Henry Miller Road. It would then follow Highway 152 before heading north along Highway 99 at Chowchilla into Merced.
Two optional routes have the track dipping slightly to the south sooner. Two others are dramatically different.
One alternative has the tracks arcing north near Gustine, cresting at Highway 165 and falling down to align with Highway 140.
The second alternative has the tracks following I-5 south before curving east toward Firebaugh and going into Fresno. The route would leave Merced out.
Duran challenged the lower route because it would disrupt many more farming operations. He questioned whether using it would violate the intent of Prop. 1A, a $9.9 billion bond measure which voters passed knowing certain routes were likely.
Other residents were frustrated that the planners came back with more route options for the rail system. "When will we commit that we'll only use a certain route?" council candidate Rick Osorio asked. "You'll spend more time studying and spend all the money."
Regional project manager Dave Mansen said considering alternatives is part of the federal study that needs to be done.
Merced County Assistant Development Services Director Bill Nicholson gave planners a two-page written letter. He went on to tell them that the I-5 route could impact the kit foxes and cause planning headaches as a result.
The northern route would go through the McSwain neighborhood and also present problems, he said.
UC Merced Associate Chancellor Janet Young said the university would submit written comments, but encouraged planners to stick with the route suggested by the the rail authority.
"The (northern) one looks inefficient," she said.
Other residents worried about noise, impacts to farm operations and cost overruns. Planners said they'd try their best to keep the trains quiet, find solutions to impacts and budget as accurately as possible.
California is waiting to hear on its application for federal economic stimulus funding submitted last week. The federal government has $8 billion to distribute. The state asked for $4.5 billion. Officials with the White House said 24 states asked for a combined $50 billion. An announcement should be made this winter.
Black bear spotted in North Merced, near UC campus...CAROL REITER
http://www.mercedsunstar.com/167/v-print/story/1104013.html
Black bears are a common sight in nearby Mariposa County, but near the Merced Golf and Country Club?
Not usually, but a black bear apparently made his way down out of the foothills and into an area of North Merced more well-known for luxury homes than wildlife.
Mike Enos, a wildlife trapper for the U.S. Department of Agriculture, said that sightings of the bear started coming in from the Hatch Road area of North Merced on Tuesday. Then the bear got more ambitious.
"We started hearing about the bear in the Farmland and Golf roads area," Enos said.
Enos was called out by the California Department of Fish and Game to try and trap the bear, Enos said. Glenn Rodriguez, a game warden with the state, said the bear is probably about 200 pounds, and tracks and fecal droppings confirmed that the bear was in the area.
"The bear has not been aggressive, but we have got the traps up," Rodriguez said.
Black bears are the only species of bears found in California, and there are an estimated 25,000 to 35,000 animals in the state. Males are usually bigger than females, and can weigh up to 500 pounds, although the average weight of a black bear is about 300 pounds.
Enos said that after the first reports of the bear came in, it seemed to gravitate north, closer to the country club.
"We got calls from the subdivision by the lake," Enos said.
Enos said bears have ended up in Merced County from time to time, although it isn't the bear's usual range. Black bears live in the mountains and wooded areas of the state, but Enos said this was probably a young bear that got sidetracked.
"It probably followed a creek drainage down out of the hills and then found himself in civilization," Enos said.
Black bears eat almost anything, Enos said, from fruits and berries to small mammals. Some black bears have turned into nuisances in Yosemite National Park, when they figure out that people mean food, and start breaking into cars and hassling people.
But most black bears just want to be left alone, and this one seems to be following that scenario.
The traps have been set where the bear was seen, but Enos said that no sightings had been made on Thursday, and he believes the bear may have moved away from where people live.
But if the bear is still around, people should stay away from it, although most black bears aren't aggressive. If the bear feels trapped, though, it could get aggressive.
"If we trap it, we will relocate it," Enos said. "But I kind of feel that he's moved on."
Foundation gives $500K grant to UC Merced scientists...Danielle E. Gaines
http://www.mercedsunstar.com/167/v-print/story/1104047.html
Scientists at UC Merced received a $500,000 grant from the National Science Foundation Thursday to develop new techniques for duplicating human actions in the virtual world.
Their studies could lead to better animation for computer games, movies, and even online tutorial programs.
Computer scientist Marcelo Kallmann and cognitive scientist Teenie Matlock will work with graduate students to analyze how humans gesture and then create computer models that generalize the gestures to new situations in the virtual world.
At the end of their three-year grant, Kallmann and Matlock hope to create a database of the gestures that can be used by graphic programmers and animators.
Together with colleagues from the School of Engineering, Kallmann and Matlock have previously received grants from the National Science Foundation in 2007 and 2008.
One award funded the visualization and motion-capture facility at UC Merced, and the other was used to buy humanoid robots.
In total, they have been awarded nearly $1.25 million, contributing to the establishment of a Center on Autonomous and Interactive Systems at the campus.
Our View: Wanted -- a lifeline for higher ed
UC president says universities not only state's responsibility but entire nation's.
http://www.mercedsunstar.com/181/v-print/story/1104015.html
Public colleges and universities educate 80 percent of students in the United States. They remain an engine of opportunity for students from all backgrounds.
But they are slipping.
In California, for example, per capita state funding for higher education in 1988-89 was $348; last year, it was $263. One big result of this dwindling investment: rising inequality in access to a higher education.
Where California used to be a leader, today it ranks in the bottom 10 states in the share of students getting a four-year college degree.
California has long debated whether to move toward a model of higher fees and financial aid in a time of diminished public funding. We have supported that idea, so long as the state provides financial aid for students who cannot afford higher fees.
Raising tuition while slashing aid for low- and moderate-income students, as the governor has proposed, would make access and affordability issues worse.
So what should public colleges and universities do in this era of declining state support?
University of California President Mark Yudof has produced a 10-page conversation starter that is worth pursuing.
In it, Yudof notes the national interest in producing engineers, doctors, teachers and ideas that become the new products of the future.
Then he points to historic federal support for higher education, beginning with the Morrill Act signed by President Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War.
Essentially, Yudof is calling for a Morrill Act for the 21st century -- building on the century-and-a-half-old national system of state-run colleges and universities.
Yudof is pressing for an expanded federal role in higher education:
Build on the existing Pell Grant approach. Give universities an incentive to enroll lower-income students with add-on funding based on the percentage of enrolled Pell-eligible students.
Build on federal research awards. Give universities an incentive to train the researchers and teachers of the future with add-on funding for graduate programs.
Create a competitive grant program for higher education centered on specific goals (like the K-12 Race to the Top grants), for example, to improve college completion rates for lower-income students.
These ideas are no federal blank check -- and should launch a discussion of others.
Speaking at UC Berkeley in 1962, President John F. Kennedy called the Morrill Act "the most extraordinary piece of legislation this country has ever adopted."
The Morrill Act, he said, created "through our national government, an entirely American kind of university" centered on the idea that "opportunity should be available to everyone and that education was the vehicle for that opportunity."
The challenge, once again, is how to keep public colleges and universities excellent and accessible to all Americans.
Yudof, as head of the largest public research university system, is well-placed to press both the state and federal government to rekindle their role in public higher education.
Public support isn't just a job for the federal government. It is states that really have fallen off in funding higher education.
But, as Yudof convincingly argues, higher education is not only a state responsibility. The nation has a stake in an educated citizenry, too.
Modesto Bee
Calif. judge lets high-speed rail planning proceed...DON THOMPSON, Associated Press Writer
http://www.modbee.com/state/v-print/story/886355.html
SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- A Sacramento County judge decided Thursday to let planning continue for a high-speed rail route between the Bay Area and the Central Valley through the Pacheco Pass.
The cities of Atherton and Menlo Park sought to stop planning while they challenge the California's high-speed rail authority's decision. They prefer a northern route through the Altamont Pass in part because it would have less effect on cities south of San Francisco.
Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Michael Kenny issued a tentative ruling Thursday denying the stay. He said there is no reason to stop planning because the authority's studies won't harm the environment. The order will become final unless Kenny is persuaded otherwise during a hearing Friday.
"The actions for which a stay is being requested are studies with no potential for adverse change or alteration to the physical environment," Kenny wrote.
The underlying lawsuit challenging the route will continue.
California voters approved a $9.9 billion bond measure in November to help pay for a high-speed rail line between San Francisco and the Los Angeles area. Last Friday, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger requested $4.7 billion in federal stimulus money to help build the 800-mile bullet train system.
High-speed rail authority spokesman Jeffrey Barker said there was no reason to stop planning.
"We don't believe that anyone is interested in jeopardizing billions of dollars in economic stimulus for California, delaying the creation of tens of thousands of jobs, and forcing taxpayers to shoulder higher costs to build the system," Barker said in a statement.
The proposed route would one day link the San Francisco Bay area, Sacramento, Fresno, Los Angeles, Anaheim and San Diego with trains running at speeds of up to 220 mph.
The bond measure required the San Francisco to Los Angeles and Anaheim segment be built first, with a target completion by 2020.
Only then would the state start links to San Diego and Sacramento, depending on funding. But some communities between San Francisco and San Jose are upset that elevated trains could split their communities and require the destruction of homes and businesses.
Menlo Park public works director Kent Steffens said he hadn't seen the ruling and couldn't comment.
Palo Alto filed documents supporting the other cities' challenge, but expects rail authority officials will follow environmental planning laws, said deputy city manager Steve Emslie.
Reverse loans raising concern...Tony Pugh, McClatchy Newspapers
http://www.modbee.com/business/v-print/story/886637.html
Consumer advocates say a growing number of older homeowners and a new crop of eager lenders could steer the reverse mortgage industry down the same financial course that toppled the subprime mortgage market and left taxpayers footing the bill.
To avoid a repeat, a report by the National Consumer Law Center urges Congress to enact new consumer protections to curb shady marketing tactics, deceptive advertising and potential abuses of the reverse mortgage program.
Some of the problems are television advertisements that market the loans as a "government benefit," and financial incentives for loan processors known as "yield spread premiums."
"These are financial kickbacks that make loans more profitable for lenders and loan brokers, but more expensive for borrowers," Tara Twomey, the NCLC attorney who authored the report, said Tuesday.
In addition to banning these practices and requiring better data collection by lenders, the report also calls for a new standard that requires reverse mortgage professionals not to harm the financial interests of elderly borrowers.
"If these systemic problems in the reverse mortgage market are not addressed, this market could be another financial fiasco," Twomey said.
Homeowners who are 62 and older can use reverse mortgages to borrow against their home equity. The mortgages have become popular because the money doesn't have to be repaid until the home is sold or the borrower dies or permanently moves out. The extra cash can help seniors pay for medical expenses, for home improvements or simply to live more comfortably.
Ninety percent of reverse mortgage loans are issued through the federally insured Home Equity Conversion Mortgage program, which issued only 157 loans in 1990 and more than 112,000 in fiscal 2008.
Future growth is imminent, said Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., because 10,000 people reach age 62 each day. More than 12 million people 65 and older own their homes with no mortgage debt, representing nearly $4 trillion in home equity.
With nearly 78 million baby boomers born before 1964 fueling growth in the coming decades, the reverse mortgage industry has been attracting many lenders. These include some of the nation's largest banks, whose profits have been drying up in the recession.
Many lenders made first loans in 2008
But of the 2,700 reverse mortgage lenders nationwide, 1,500 made their first loans in 2008, McCaskill said. That rapid growth, experts say, also has attracted shady loan professionals who once worked in the subprime mortgage industry.
Earlier this year at a field hearing held by McCaskill, a special agent with the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Office of Inspector General testified that fraud had found its way into the reverse mortgage program. He said inflated home appraisals, which increase lender profits, have been found. And in some cases, friends, family and neighbors have cashed loan payment checks after borrowers have died.
Fraud and declining home values could end up costing taxpayers because reverse mortgages are insured by the federal government. When a borrower terminates the loan because of death or some other reason, the Federal Housing Authority insurance fund is on the hook if the loan balance exceeds the value of the properties.
HUD insures more than $105 billion in Home Equity Conversion Mortgage loans. In addition, the Government National Mortgage Association, or Ginnie Mae, issued $700 million in Home Equity Conversion Mortgage mortgage-backed securities this year, but it's unclear what the securities are worth because of falling home values.
Peter Bell, president of the National Reverse Mortgage Lenders Association, said he recently surveyed all state attorneys general nationwide and found only six were investigating criminal cases involving reverse mortgages. And in those cases, "the reverse mortgage lender is not generally involved in whatever scam is going on," he said.
The association's code of ethics and professional standards allows the group to report nonmember violations to law enforcement agencies and publicly name any of the 600 member firms that violate the code. The first two member firms violating the code are to be named soon, he said.
McCaskill is working with Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., on companion legislation in the House. She said she hopes to introduce the Senate legislation by year's end and expects Senate approval in early 2010.
On the Net: More on reverse mortgages, www.nrmla.org; new report on abuses, www.nclc.org/reports/content/ReverseMortgages1009.pdf.
Fresno Bee
State court OKs pollution fee on developers
Disputed levy targets pollution caused by new homes, businesses...John Ellis
http://www.fresnobee.com/local/v-print/story/1667828.html
A state appellate court this week upheld a controversial and unusual fee that makes developers pay for pollution caused by traffic coming from new homes and businesses on the edges of cities.
The California Building Industry Association and others sued the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District in June 2006, shortly after the fee began. The association and its allies called the fees illegal taxes that had no direct relation to air pollution emissions.
Last year, however, Fresno County Superior Court Judge Donald Black sided with the air pollution control district when he upheld the fees. The building industry in turn appealed, resulting in Tuesday's 19-page ruling.
Seyed Sadredin, the district's executive director, said in a statement that he hoped the Building Industry Association would now "join the many Valley developers who have taken this rule to heart and designed their projects to reduce air-quality impacts."
Whether that will happen, however, is unclear.
State building industry officials -- including CEO and president Elizabeth Snow -- did not return phone calls or e-mails asking whether an appeal to the state Supreme Court would be made.
But Mike Prandini, president and chief executive officer for the Building Industry Association of Fresno/Madera Counties, said Thursday that he would support an appeal.
The local building association was not a party to the lawsuit, but supported it and pays dues to the state building association, which filed the suit. "We support a continued appeal, but that's their decision," Prandini said of the state association.
Prandini said appealing Black's ruling "was not a knee-jerk" decision, and he thinks there will be "due diligence to determine what the issues" are before deciding on whether to appeal to the state Supreme Court.
When the fee was approved, air district officials said it was structured in accordance with a 2003 state law that required the Valley district to levy the fees. Several state laws that year targeted the Valley because the region has some of the nation's worst air quality.
But officials also included provisions to reduce fees for builders who installed clean-air features, such as outdoor outlets for electric lawn mowers, bike lanes and energy-efficient water heaters.
A federal judge in Fresno last year also threw out a lawsuit that challenged the fees, but based on a different legal issue. That lawsuit was filed by the National Association of Home Builders.
Sacramento Bee
Schwarzenegger goes public with blanket veto threat...Jim Sanders
http://www.sacbee.com/topstories/v-print/story/2241584.html
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger threatened publicly Thursday what he has hinted privately for days: He will veto many of the 700-plus bills on his desk unless a water deal is struck this week.
"I made it very clear to the legislators and to the leaders that if this does not get done, then I will veto a lot of their legislation, a lot of their bills, so that should inspire them to go and get the job done," he said.
Schwarzenegger's threat came at the end of remarks to the Association of Community College Trustees' Leadership Congress in San Francisco.
Hours later, Schwarzenegger met behind closed doors at the Capitol with legislative leaders of both parties in hopes of reaching agreement to ease water supply and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta problems that have been brewing for decades.
More talks are anticipated before Schwarzenegger must take action by midnight Sunday on bills passed recently by the Legislature.Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg dismissed the governor's veto comments as a "sideshow."
"I have every confidence that when it's all said and done, and all the noise has gone away, the governor will consider the bills on their merits," Steinberg said.
But the Sacramento Democrat also expressed frustration with the threat.
"It assumes that it takes the governor to encourage us to work harder on water. I couldn't be working any harder, actually, to try to get this done," Steinberg said.
Assemblyman Alberto Torrico, D-Newark, blasted the threat as misconduct.
"We can all agree that political extortion is not an acceptable practice in this state," he said. "But the governor's renewed threats are coming perilously close to extortion."
Other Assembly members privately have floated the idea of filing articles of impeachment if the governor vetoes bills en masse as punishment.
Senate GOP leader Dennis Hollingsworth said he is not concerned.
"There is nothing more important than a water deal right now," the Murrieta Republican said.
Delta bill could drive up Sacramento sewage rates...Matt Weiser
http://www.sacbee.com/topstories/v-print/story/2241614.html
Sacramento officials worry that state legislation to reform management of Delta water could subject city ratepayers to steep new sewage-treatment fees.
The concern highlights the numbing complexity in water laws now being negotiated by California lawmakers.
At issue is whether the budding water bill, Senate Bill 68, will require the Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District to pay for more rigorous treatment.
The last draft of the bill says nothing about Sacramento's treated sewage or even sewage effluent in general. But Sacramento officials worry it could nevertheless trigger a chain of events harmful to ratepayers.
"It would be a domino effect," said Stan Dean, chief of policy and planning for the sewer district.
The district collects sewage from the capital metro area's 1.4 million people, and discharges treated effluent into the Sacramento River at Freeport.
That happens to be near the planned location of several new intakes for a proposed water diversion canal. Once known as the peripheral canal, it would divert a portion of the Sacramento River's flow across the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta directly to state and federal water export pumps near Tracy.
Some 23 million Californians and nearly 2 million acres of farmland across the state depend on that water, which today is pumped from Delta channels. That supply has become increasingly unreliable due to vulnerable levees in the Delta and the estuary's environmental decline.
The canal would protect water diversions from natural disasters and isolate wildlife from the pumping systems.
But new canal intakes on the Sacramento River would alter its flow, effectively providing less dilution for treated sewage discharged into the river. This could cause the sanitation district to violate its effluent discharge standards, Dean said. That could then lead to a need for costly additional treatment.
"It would only be because of the location of a peripheral canal that we would have to do something different than we do today," Dean said.
The district has come under scrutiny over the past year concerning ammonia in its treated wastewater. Sacramento's effluent is the single largest source of ammonia in the estuary.
The chemical, a byproduct of human waste, is being studied as a possible contributor to disruptions in the Delta food chain. No clear connection has been proved.
The water bill neither authorizes nor prevents construction of a canal. It appears to leave that decision in the hands of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, a separate program designed to gain approval for the canal under the Endangered Species Act. But other programs in the bill might be triggered or influenced by the outcome of the conservation plan.
In a letter Oct. 2 to legislative leaders, the sewer district and other local water agencies said they want language added that guarantees all impacts to Delta-area communities are "fully mitigated." Dean said this is meant to include any ratepayer costs resulting from programs in the bill.
The letter also asserts that any costs to Sacramento's sewage system resulting from a new Delta canal should be paid for by those who divert water from the canal.
The letter was addressed to Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, who is leading negotiations over the water bills. Steinberg represents Sacramento, but so far it does not appear his local constituents are getting any special attention in the water debate.
Phil Isenberg, a former assemblyman representing Sacramento, wasn't surprised.
"He's the leader of the state Senate. He is obviously not just an elected representative of the Sacramento region," said Isenberg, who chaired a task force appointed by the governor to study Delta problems. "So much of water is about regional interests, regional antagonism. It's hard to get through all of that to the major public policy concerns."
Negotiators met again Thursday in an effort to reach legislative agreement on the water bills. It was unknown if Sacramento's concerns came up.
The water bill was largely negotiated in secret without participation from Northern California water interests, which also have no vote in the Bay Delta Conservation Plan.
Southern California agencies that rely on Delta water have a central role in both processes. These include the Westlands Water District and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California.
Metropolitan General Manager Jeffrey Kightlinger said his agency has no intention of paying to clean up Sacramento's effluent. He said Sacramento's concerns should not delay a water deal.
"They shouldn't have to pay to treat the water for our drinking water needs," he said. "If they're having an impact on the ecosystem, they should pay to treat that. If it's established they're having no impact, that's another story."
My View: The Delta's future: It's time for leadership...Patrick Johnston. Patrick Johnston, a member of the Delta Protection Commission, is a former state legislator from San Joaquin County.
http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/v-print/story/2241459.html
The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta is deteriorating. Fisheries are failing and Delta lands are sinking. Water quality is lower than before. The state's water supply is threatened by drought, climate change and the specter of earthquakes. At the same time, cities, farms and protectors of the ecosystem are all demanding more water.
Something has to give.
Unfortunately, decisions about water use and allocation are divided among the federal and state governments, water districts, water-rights holders and judges who render decisions repeatedly when warring parties can't reach agreement. No one is happy with the status quo, but seemingly no one can make decisions that solve problems.
Leadership is required.
Under the Capitol dome, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg have provided that necessary leadership. They have been guided by a rational analysis and a set of recommendations formulated by the Governor's Blue Ribbon Panel headed by former Delta legislator Phil Isenberg.
This analysis calls for two fundamental changes:
� Commit in law to the twin public policy goals of protection of the Delta environment and a reliable water supply.
� Streamline the governance structure for managing the Delta and the water system.
When I was elected to the Assembly in 1980, one looming issue was absolutely black and white to me: the peripheral canal.
I knew that I was against it, and that was that.
In 1982, I voted "no" in the Legislature on the bill to authorize the conveyance facility around the Delta. After Gov. Jerry Brown signed the legislation, I was active in the referendum campaign to reject the new law. Northern counties overwhelmingly voted against the canal proposal, swamping the tepid support in the south state.
The tension between the north and the south, between the Delta and everywhere else, has not gone away. But the state can commit to balancing the needs of all. To do so, it makes sense to have a new Delta Stewardship Council composed of seven members who must, as a matter of law, be guided by the twin goals of environmental protection and water delivery.
Only one member of this council will be designated based on a specific qualification: The chairman of the Delta Protection Commission will serve on it automatically.
The water policy package now pending in the Legislature, shepherded by Steinberg, would create this council. The legislation is the first comprehensive water package in years, and along with bringing some coherance to Delta decisions, it would improve upon governance structures already in place.
The Delta Protection Commission, created in 1992 by legislation I authored, would continue to plan and regulate land uses on the Delta islands for the benefit of farming, wildlife habitat and recreation.
Under the proposed legislation, the composition of the commission would be changed to increase local government representation. Delta residents would have a clear majority.
In addition, there would be a Delta Conservancy to channel funding to projects that directly benefit the islands and their residents.
The proposal acknowledges that water debates are more geographically determined than they are partisan. Regional differences will produce competing proposals. It is essential that a new decision-making framework be passed into law as soon as possible.
Will there ever be a peripheral canal?
I don't know. But I do know that if legislators fail to act because they think it is politically tough to support a new Delta Council, they will be making a big mistake.
Inaction today means in future years, they will have to vote directly on levels of water delivery, vote to allow endangered fish species to die, and choose between competing regional interests, each of which demands "me first."
A new governance system is a better way to make judgments than what exists now.
Stockton Record
Bankruptcy for Trinitas
Owners seek Chapter 11 protection in bid to block foreclosure auction...Dana M. Nichols
http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091009/A_NEWS/910090313/-1/A_NEWS#STS=g0l8yd9a.k2h
WALLACE - The owners of the Trinitas golf course south of Wallace this week filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, a move that the course's owner said blocks a foreclosure auction of the 280-acre property that had been scheduled for this morning.
"We are very disappointed we have to take such drastic measures to save our family farm and this opportunity for our community," said Mike Nemee, who with his wife, Michelle Nemee, owns the course and an olive orchard on the site.
Documents filed Wednesday afternoon in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of California indicate that in addition to the $2.4 million in loans extended by Community Bank of San Joaquin and secured on their land, the Nemees also have $667,132 in unsecured debt owed to law firms, architects, builders, consultants, credit card companies, other businesses and Calaveras County government agencies.
A document at the bankruptcy court also indicated that the filing that attorney Kennety Foley performed on behalf of the Nemees was incomplete, and the court gave the couple until Oct. 22 to file additional information, including details on the real property they own, their secured debts, current income and personal property.
A bank foreclosure auction of the Trinitas property had been scheduled to be held this morning in front of the Calaveras County Courthouse. As recently as Tuesday, a representative of Community Bank of San Joaquin and the Nemees had said that the auction could be averted if Calaveras County Supervisors voted to recognize golfing as a legal use for agricultural land.
Instead, the board of supervisors Tuesday voted 3-2 to uphold a decision by the Calaveras County Planning Commission that golf is not a form of agritourism and thus is not legal on farmland.
The Nemees had argued that the county's own agricultural preservation ordinance allows farmers such as the Nemees to open businesses including golf courses in order to raise the cash to preserve their farming operation.
A letter that county code enforcers sent in May to the Nemees told the couple that golf is not legal and that they could be subject to enforcement action if they continued to operate the business. The Nemees appealed that letter and the votes by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors both rejected that appeal.
Mike Nemee said Thursday that the bankruptcy filing clears the way for his golf business to continue operating for the foreseeable future.
"We are open for business, and our phone's been ringing off the hook," Nemee said.
Although the May letter indicated that continued golfing would trigger an enforcement action, county officials in recent months have declined to say what enforcement steps they are taking, citing several lawsuits the Nemees have filed against the county as the reason for keeping mum on their strategy.
The idea that bankruptcy protection could clear the way for golfing to continue indefinitely is galling to some neighbors of the course who have spent years seeking to preserve what they see as the area's rural character.
"I don't see how a court can protect from enforcement of county laws," said Kathy Mayhew, who with her husband, Lew, organized Keep It Rural Calaveras, the neighbor group that has opposed Trinitas.
"It seems to us the Nemees have hijacked the county," Mayhew said.
"It is just very frustrating that the rules that appear to apply to everybody else are not being applied to this golf course."
Neighbors have complained about the course since construction began in 2001. The Nemees insist they had approval from county officials for what they did, but county planners now say the course was built without the necessary permits, zoning and environmental review.
The creditor list with the Nemees' bankruptcy filing paints a history of the struggle they waged in recent years to make the course succeed and get it over legal hurdles. Three different law firms are on the list, including the top unsecured creditor, Sacramento-based attorney Bill Abbott, who is owed $102,000, according to the document.
LS Mason & Associates, an engineering firm based in Lafayette, is second at $69,837 and RDR Production Builders, a construction firm based in Lodi, is third at $61,000.
The list also includes consultants, an architect, four different credit cards and a $50,000 promissory note from NEx Systems, a carpet cleaning company in which Mike Nemee was formerly a partner. According to the filing, the Nemees also owe Calaveras County $28,785 in property taxes and $22,000 in other fees.
Canal drilling underway...Alex Breitler's blog
http://blogs.recordnet.com/sr-abreitler
State officials today will begin drilling in the Delta to study potential intake sites for a peripheral canal, as well as other aspects of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan.
Read all about it. And here's a story I wrote about the drilling earlier this summer.
Delta drilling planned for canal
State officials to search for possible intake sites...Alex Breitler...7-16-09
http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090716/A_NEWS14/307169957#STS=g0l95yjn.1ssc
SACRAMENTO - State water officials plan to drill into Delta river bottoms starting next month as they explore possible intake sites for a peripheral canal.
The drilling is further evidence that the canal is no longer just a concept on paper as officials move toward on-the-ground analyses and surveys.
The California Department of Water Resources said it needs data about channel soils to help plan where a canal should begin, as well as identify locations for tunnels, siphons and barriers.
The drilling also explores infrastructure for "through-Delta conveyance," that is, the concept that some water will continue to flow through the estuary toward the export pumps near Tracy.
The plan is to use anchored barges or ships to drill at 16 locations throughout the Delta, including three major rivers: the Sacramento, San Joaquin and Mokelumne. Much of the drilling will take place on the Sacramento River between Walnut Grove and Freeport, roughly the area in which a proposed canal would begin.
"We're trying to hit so many different options," said Mark Pagenkopp, a senior engineering geologist with Water Resources.
The state has been surveying private lands for some time, a Water Resources spokesman said Wednesday, but this stage of the project requires a public comment period, which ends July 26.
The work is part of a massive environmental review for the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, an effort to improve the state's water supply while also restoring Delta habitat. The canal is a key part of that plan, though foes say it will destroy, not restore, the estuary by robbing it of fresh Sacramento River water to boost water exports to other parts of California.
Dante Nomellini, a Stockton attorney representing farmers who have sued over the conservation plan process, said private landowners continue to resist state efforts to access their land.
He was not surprised that the state intends to drill.
"The fact that they've gone out into the field and contacted owners for entry, I don't know how much more of an awakening we need," he said.
State officials also said this week that they expect to release details soon about how a canal could be operated while still allowing some fresh water to flow into and through the Delta. Canal opponents have long insisted that the state should not be pushing forward with a canal when questions about how it would operate have not been answered.
Bay Delta Conservation Plan
Field Studies/Land Access
http://www.baydeltaconservationplan.com/BDCPPages/
EIREISInfoFieldStudies.aspx
Field Studies/Land Access
Requests for Temporary Entry Permits (TEPs) have been sent to a number of Delta landowners whose property falls within the study area for potential water conveyance and habitat restoration areas. Signed TEPs permit field crews temporary access to private property in order to conduct studies to support the EIR/EIS documents. 
Review information from the 2008 Landowner Meetings
In-water Geotechnical Drilling Scheduled for October 8-31, 2009
In-water geotechnical drilling activities in support of the environmental review process for the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) are scheduled to begin on October 8 and will continue through October 31, 2009. Information gathered will be used to support the BDCP Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS).
DWR has prepared a Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration and has filed the Notice of Determination with the State Clearinghouse and completed its review under CEQA for this work. In addition, the required federal and state permitting and consultation requirements have been met.
Permits Obtained
Department of Fish & Game 1600 permit
National Marine Fisheries Service Compliance                     
United States Fish & Wildlife Service Compliance
Nationwide Permit 6                                   
California Regional Water Quality Board 401 Certification
For more information contact Rebecca Nicholas at (916) 651-2966.
In-water Geotechnical Drilling Public Comment Period Closed - Response to Comments Posted
DWR has filed the Notice of Determination with the State Clearinghouse and completed its review under the California Environmental Quality Act for the BDCP In-Water Geotechnical Drilling work. Drilling is anticipated to begin following completion of all federal and state permitting and consultation requirements have been met.DWR is the Lead State Agency for the Bay Delta Conservation Plan In-water Geotechnical Drilling Project under CEQA and has prepared a Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration. DWR is planning in-water geotechnical borings in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to obtain information for proposed water conveyance facilities associated with the Bay Delta Conservation Plan. The public comment period has ended and responses to comments are posted below. For more information, email Michelle Beachley at: mbeachle@water.ca.gov.
View the Notice of Intent
View the Notice of Determination
View the Mitigated Negative Declaration/Final Initial Study
Attachment A: Response to Comments
Attachment B: Agency Comments
Attachment B (continued): Individual Comments
San Francisco Chronicle
Schwarzenegger pushes lawmakers for water deal...SAMANTHA YOUNG, Associated Press Writer
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/10/09/financial/f060027D67.DTL&type=printable
Sacramento, Calif. (AP) -- California's legislative leaders were racing to meet a Friday deadline to strike a deal on remaking the state's aging water system and appease Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has threatened to veto hundreds of bills unless they agree to a water plan.
Republican and Democratic leaders planned to spend a fourth consecutive day negotiating on how to overhaul a water storage and delivery system that is nearly half a century old.
"There's nothing more important than a water deal right now," said Senate Minority Leader Dennis Hollingsworth, R-Murrieta.
The Republican governor has warned lawmakers he would "veto a lot of their legislation" if they fail to craft a comprehensive fix to the state's water troubles.
Schwarzenegger has until midnight Sunday to sign or veto bills and has told lawmakers he wants a water deal completed by the weekend. About 700 bills are awaiting action.
Upgrading California's decades-old water system is a top priority for Schwarzenegger, who is heading into his last year in office and wants to count a water deal as part of his legacy.
Democrats and Republicans have tangled over water issues for years, pushing off decisions while conditions have worsened for farmers, water districts and wildlife. The trouble is especially acute in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, the water conduit for two-thirds of the state's residents.
Federal courts and agencies have ordered severe reductions in pumping to protect the delta's collapsing ecosystem.
Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, a Sacramento Democrat, described the talks this week as productive. He expressed hope legislative leaders could agree to a framework on Friday and that the Senate could vote on legislation next week.
"We fixed a $62 billion deficit and managed to get the votes for that, and if the leaders are in agreement and the governor is in agreement, we'll go out there and do our best to gather the requisite number of votes," Steinberg said.
Lawmakers remain apart on several issues that could jeopardize the entire package.
Disagreements remain over protection of water rights, mandatory conservation standards for cities, groundwater monitoring of private water supplies, who should make water decisions in the delta and how to pay for the infrastructure and restoration efforts requested by lawmakers.
If the leaders do compromise, their plan must win approval in the Legislature. That could be a tough sell because individual lawmakers will be pressured by water districts, environmentalists, farmers and others to protect their interests.
Assemblyman Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael, who has been involved in the water negotiations, said his colleagues will want time to go over whatever deal the governor might forge with Democratic and Republican leaders of the Assembly and Senate.
"This is too big an issue. The stakes are too high for folks to take it on faith that this is good," Huffman said after meeting with the governor. "They are going to want to understand it; they are going to want to take it back to their water districts and vet it a little bit."
A water deal that includes a bond requires a two-thirds vote in the Legislature, and thus needs at least some support from Republicans, the minority party. Bills dealing only with policy issues can pass with a simple majority vote.
Last month, Democrats presented a $12 billion package that sought to improve how water is used, delivered and stored in California. It died after Republicans complained that it failed to provide assurances that dams would be built, a key demand of the governor and GOP lawmakers.
Lawmakers in both parties also question whether the state can afford to issue billions of dollars in bonds. California already has $67 billion in outstanding bond debt. That's expected to grow by another $44 billion over the next four years, according to an Oct. 1 report released by the state treasurer's office.
Hollingsworth said lawmakers were discussing a smaller general obligation bond, perhaps between $8 billion and $10 billion.
Much of California's network of reservoirs and canals dates to the term of Gov. Pat Brown in the 1960s, leading Schwarzenegger and many others to say the system is inadequate for today's population and the millions of people to be added in the years ahead.
Three years of below-average rainfall and lighter-than-average snowfall in the Sierra Nevada, combined with the federal pumping restrictions intended to protect delta fish, have created a severe water shortage for much of the state.
Farmers have fallowed thousands of acres, while cities have imposed mandatory water rationing, raised rates or imposed surcharges on their customers.
Indybay
Delta Groups to Unveil Alternative Water Policy Proposals Friday...Dan Bacher...10-8-09
As Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is pressuring the legislature to come up a the water bond proposal that includes a peripheral canal, Restore the Delta and representatives of other organizations will unveil alternative water policy recommendations on Friday.
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/10/08/18624916.php
Delta Groups to Unveil Alternative Water Policy Proposals Friday...Dan Bacher
Sacramento – Restore the Delta, representatives of the Delta community, fishing organizations, and environmental groups will unveil alternative water policy recommendations they are submitting to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, Senate Pro Tem Steinberg, and Assembly Speaker Bass Friday as they consider solutions to the state’s eminent water problems.
"These policies will put California on the right track toward a resilient water system founded on a sense of stewardship and responsibility for the precious water resources we are privileged to have," according to a statement from the groups.
The coalition of diverse organizations is releasing its proposals at a time that Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is refusing to sign 700 bills now awaiting his signature unless he receives a water bill package to his liking on his desk by Friday night. Schwarzenegger is in effect holding the state hostage to his plan to build a peripheral canal.
The recommendations will be discussed during a media teleconference call on Friday, October 9, at 11:00 am. The speakers will include Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla - Restore the Delta; Charlotte Hodde – Planning and Conservation League: Debbie Davis – Environmental Justice Coalition for Water; Jennifer Clary – Clean Water Action; Jim Metropulos – Sierra Club California; Michael Jackson – California Water Impact Network and California Sportfishing Protection Alliance; Conner Everett – Southern California Watershed Alliance; and Steve Evans – Friends of the River
Key provisions to be discussed include regional self-sufficiency; energy efficiency; water quality; conservation; impacts on the Delta community, farmers and fishermen; reform of existing agencies; and balanced financing.
Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, campaign director for Restore the Delta, today slammed the continued, back room negotiations on water policy legislation between the Governor and the Legislature.
“It continues to boggle the mind that Governor Schwarzenegger and the Legislative leadership continue to debate the future of the Delta region behind closed doors and without any representation from anyone from the heart of the Delta or who is committed to protecting it," she stated. "Instead of bringing groups together to find common ground we see more of the same – backroom deals, political strong-arm tactics (such as the Governor threatening vetoes unless his water scheme is passed) and special interests driving the agenda."
“This is not the way to conduct the people’s business and is no way to address the real water policy issues that impact all Californians," she emphasized.
Many others from throughout the state have also voiced their concerns about the process with which water policy is being “debated” in Sacramento. In a letter sent to Senate Pro Tempore Steinberg and Speaker Bass on October 2, a broad coalition of Delta government, business, labor and community leaders strongly insisted that plans to supply other parts of the state with water not be done at the expense of the California Delta, the largest estuary on the West Coast of the Americas.
“As government, business, labor and community leaders of the greater Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta region, we support efforts to find a solution to the issues facing the Delta and the state’s water supply system, but insist that Delta policies designed to secure water for other parts of the state must not adversely impact or occur at the expense of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta region," they stated. "Further, we demand the opportunity to be represented in discussions as the legislation package is further developed. Simply put, a fair and balanced Delta solution should not be crafted without the involvement of – or at the expense of – the greater Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta region.”
The conference call is for credentialed media only. For more information, contact Roger Salazar for Restore the Delta, (916) 444-8897, or go to http://www.restorethedelta.org.
Delta, Environmental, Fishing, and Tribal Groups Unveil Alternative Water Policy...Dan Bacher
A diverse group of Delta, community, environmental, fishing and tribal groups today sent alternative water policy recommendations to the Governor and Legislative Leadership.
**To view the recommendations and a copy of the letter, please visit http://www.ejcw.org/10-8-09%20Coalition%20Letter-1.pdf
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/10/09/18624985.php
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEOctober 9, 2009
Contact: Lindsay Martin (for Restore the Delta) (916) 444-8897
Delta, Community, Environmental, Fishing, and Tribal Groups Unveil Alternative Water Policy Solutions
Sacramento – Today Restore the Delta, along with groups representing Delta, local community, environmental, fishing and tribal organizations that care about the California Delta, sent a letter to Governor Schwarzenegger, Senate Pro Tem Steinberg and Assembly Speaker Bass recommending sensible water policy solutions to the state’s eminent water problems.
The letter, initially signed by twenty-three organizations says, in part: “Water is a fundamental resource essential for a healthy population, environment, and economy. Without equitable and sustainable management of California’s water resources we face an uncertain future particularly in the face of climate change. At stake in all of this is the fate of the Bay-Delta ecosystem – the most important estuary on the west coast of both Americas…The biological significance of the Bay-Delta is unparalleled. Future generations will judge us harshly if we do not act wisely now to save it and the fish and wildlife, the farms and the communities it supports.”
Attached to the letter was a set of policy recommendations endorsed by the signatories.
The letter continues, “We believe that implementation of these policies will put California on the right track toward a resilient water system founded on a sense of stewardship and responsibility for the precious water resources we are privileged to have.”
The proposed policy recommendations fall into three categories: values-driven management; reform of existing agencies; and sustainable financing. Reforms in these areas will generate more savings in the short-term – both in implementation and outcomes – as well as produce a reliable water supply for the state in the long-term.
Key provisions of the water policy recommendations include:
· Regional self-sufficiency
· Energy Efficiency
· Water Quality
· Conservation
· Impacts on the Delta Community, Farmers and Fisherman
· Reform of existing agencies
· Balanced financing
The letter and recommendations were signed by:
California Sportfishing Protection Alliance
California Coastkeeper Alliance
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
California Water Impact Network
Clean Water Action California
Community Water Center
Southern California Watershed Alliance
Desal Response Group
Sierra Club California
California Striped Bass Association
Environmental Justice Coalition for Water
The Fish Sniffer
Food and Water Watch
Friends of the River
Heal the Bay
Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations
Planning and Conservation League
Restore the Delta
The Sierra Fund
Urban Semillas
Winnemem Wintu Tribe
Green LA
Butte Environmental Council
Foothill Conservancy
Contra Costa Times
East Bay water districts see reform bill differently...Mike Taugher
http://www.contracostatimes.com/environment/ci_13516844
The East Bay's largest water district says the most ambitious attempt to reform state water policy in at least a decade is a bare-knuckled water grab by Southern California that will cost its 1.3 million customers money and deeper rationing in droughts.
A neighboring district, meanwhile, views the package as a step in the right direction. The Concord-based Contra Costa Water District says it would support the package with a few modest tweaks because it would place a higher standard on changes already in the works.
As key lawmakers face a deadline today for a water deal, why do neighboring districts that together serve most of the East Bay have such different views?
The answer lies in the plumbing.
The East Bay Municipal Utility District — like the San Francisco Public Utilities District, which has a similar water system — has mostly stayed out of fights over the Delta.
That's because the older and smaller EBMUD and SFPUC take their water upstream from the Mokelumne and Tuolumne rivers and carry it around the Delta, much like the controversial peripheral canal they oppose for Southern California.
The problems in the Delta started when Southern California and San Joaquin Valley farms tapped into the estuary with massive pumping plants. To guarantee a more stable supply of water and avoid conflicts with endangered species damaged by the pumps, Southern California interests have backed the idea of a canal to draw water from upstream and divert it around the Delta.
EBMUD officials worry they would have to give up some of their water allocations to maintain Delta flows once a canal is built.
"The pumps caused the problem," EBMUD lobbyist Randy Kanouse said. "We're not going to repair systems and mitigate harm that has been caused by others."
EBMUD officials see the Delta package as a water grab that was first negotiated by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, the Westlands Water District and the Natural Resources Defense Council, and now is being negotiated by a handful of lawmakers and the governor, almost all from Southern California.
"Why are we surprised that Northern California's water was not protected?" Kanouse said. "There was nobody in the room to protect our interests."
Long history
In contrast to EBMUD's relative isolation, the Contra Costa Water District has long fought in the trenches of the Delta's water wars.
The Concord-based district, formed in 1936 as part of the federal Central Valley Project, gets its water from the Delta just downstream of massive state and federal pumps that heavily influence the purity of the water at its intakes.
It sees the package as largely good. The reason: With or without new legislation, the state's biggest water interests, backed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, are moving at breakneck speed to build a peripheral canal and rework the Delta water system through an effort called the Bay Delta Conservation Plan.
The package of bills would force the plan to meet higher standards, has sweeping new water conservation requirements and other mandates.
For example, the bills would require the State Water Resources Control Board to determine how much water should remain in the Delta to protect the environment and other "public trust" values before a peripheral canal could be built.
That is not a requirement now.
"Knowing that first is key before you spend the money," said Greg Gartrell, Contra Costa Water District assistant general manager. "The bills put big hurdles on everything they want to do, and that's good. They don't have those hurdles now."
Changes sought
The district is still looking for changes to the bill, primarily one to protect Delta water quality and another to address what it sees as an inequity that subjects regional governments to state oversight but exempts state and federal pumps from the same scrutiny.
The combination of secrecy in the negotiations, the complexity of the package and the speed with which political leaders want to move has raised alarms.
"The way this governor is trying to ramrod it down the backs of people is just wrong," EBMUD Director John Coleman said. "When we're not at the table, how can you perceive this as anything but a water grab?"
Bay Area lawmakers and those from the five Delta counties have been mostly or entirely opposed to the package, which could make passage of any deal difficult unless strong Republican support emerges.
In the end, though, the fate of the package will also rest on how to pay for it.
Lawmakers are increasingly skittish about taking on more debt because higher debt service payments will cut deeper into social services and other programs that were hit hard this year.
But many of the plan's backers insist much of it be financed with general obligation bonds, with the amounts under discussion varying from $8 billion to $12 billion.
Treasurer Bill Lockyer has warned against relying on taxpayers for investments that should be paid by others — for example, the water districts and their ratepayers who benefit from the plan.
Lockyer's spokesman said the treasurer would closely watch how bond language develops.
"If he feels it's unwarranted, he will make his views known in no uncertain terms," spokesman Tom Dresslar said. "The GO (general obligation) well is not bottomless."
Editorial: Fix Delta levees now, get local buy-in on other water projects...MediaNews editorial
http://www.contracostatimes.com/opinion/ci_13515572
AFTER FAILING TO accomplish much of anything significant in its regular session, the California Legislature once again is preparing to act on comprehensive water legislation. But it is far from ready to move ahead on its inadequate Bay Delta Conservation Plan and should not succumb to the governor's threat to veto scores of bills unless the water measure passes..
The underlying problem is the manner in which the Legislature has proceeded. The 14-member conference committee that pieced together the water legislation did not have a single legislator from the Delta region.
Of particular concern, one of the Legislature's strongest and best-informed voices on Delta protection was left off that committee.
Another reason why the 4 million people living in Delta counties should be concerned about commitments to protecting the Delta is the makeup of the Delta Stewardship Council.
This is the group that would be in charge of planning, financing, building and operating new facilities. Yet the seven-member panel would have only one member from the Delta.
That is why the five Delta counties have formed a coalition to oppose any legislation that does not meet their criteria. They have cause to worry.
The legislation does not have assurances that there will be adequate flows of water into the Delta. Nor does it properly safeguard local farming interests. It also lacks sufficient assurances of mitigation for potential financial losses and ecological damage.
These are all legitimate concerns of local interests in Contra Costa, Solano, San Joaquin, Yolo and Sacramento counties. Yet there has been scant attention to local voices who have the most at stake in Delta water policy changes.
It would be a major mistake for the Legislature, actually the "Big Five" (governor and party leaders in each legislative branch), to go any further without greater input from local leaders in the Delta area.
In the meantime, the Legislature should quickly authorize most if not all of the major levee repairs. There is no good reason to include levee projects with water conveyance or other aspects of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan.
The money for the repair work has been available for two years and much of it should have been completed by now.
It appears that proponents of the Delta water legislation are using much-needed levee repairs as leverage to gain support for quick passage of a flawed bill and placing a bond measure on the ballot to finance a conveyance and dams.
Many of the projects that are included in the comprehensive water measure make sense, such as additional storage and some kind of conveyance around the Delta.
But there is no real urgency to move ahead without far more consultation with Delta counties. At least there should be three Delta area members on the Delta Stewardship Council to assure there will be sufficient oversight on whatever projects are built and their operations.
Failure to adequately address all interested parties in any comprehensive water policy is all but certain to result in protracted litigation.
Because of lawsuits, it took the East Bay Municipal Water District more than three decades just to access its American River water rights.
The San Joaquin River restoration project took 18 years to reach a settlement that allows a diversion of 15 percent of the water out of the Friant Dam.
The best course of action for the Legislature is to quickly advance levee repairs and postpone action on the Bay Delta Conservation Plan until there is an accommodation with those most affected — the five Delta counties.
Los Angeles Times
Few Bush-era energy leases are valid, report finds
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar says his agency will prevent further development on the problematic parcels on Utah's public land...Nicholas Riccardi
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-utah-leases9-2009oct09,0,6479072,print.story
Reporting from Denver
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said Thursday that only 17 of 77 oil and gas leases on Utah public lands that the Bush administration auctioned off in December were valid and that his agency would prevent development on the remaining parcels, at least in the near future.
Salazar spoke at a Washington news conference to announce the findings of a report he commissioned this year on the parcels, which became the subject of a fierce controversy during the waning days of George W. Bush's presidency.
Environmentalists contended that the auction of drilling rights on 100,000 acres of federal land in southeastern Utah were a last-minute giveaway to the energy industry. The environmentalists won a restraining order from a federal judge halting the sales.
Salazar revoked most of the leases upon entering office and said his staff would study which were appropriate. On Thursday, he said the review found that few were.
"There was a headlong rush to leasing in the prior administration," Salazar said. "There were areas that should not have been leased."
He said eight of the parcels should never be leased and the remainder could be leased someday after additional review and regulations. The problematic parcels included lands within view of Arches and Canyonlands national parks. One lease was directly on the Colorado River, in a cliff face above a popular campground.
The report, based on nine days of on-site investigation, found that people in the Bureau of Land Management's Utah office, which oversaw the sales, believed that energy concerns should override environmental or recreational ones.
"There is no such preference for the use of the land," Salazar said.
Energy groups said the findings continued a troubling trend -- a hesitancy in the Obama administration to foster American energy sources. Salazar has also reversed a Bush administration effort to open swathes of Western land to oil shale development.
"We wonder why the administration continues to undertake actions that limit economic development in the West, decrease energy security and make addressing climate change even more difficult," Kathleen Sgamma of the Independent Petroleum Assn. of Mountain States said in a statement.
Environmental groups hailed the report's findings but cautioned that even if the Obama administration wanted to rebid the 17 leases it found appropriate, it would need to follow procedures laid down by the federal judge.
"The report is a resounding rejection of the 'drill here, drill now' approach of the Bush administration," said Steve Bloch of the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance
California municipal bond sale falls short of fundraising goal
After $4.5 billion in general obligation bonds fails to attract enough orders to raise the full amount, the state cut the total size of the deal by 8% to $4.14 billion, Treasurer Bill Lockyer says...Tom Petruno
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-california-bonds9-2009oct09,0,822335,print.story
California suffered a painful snub by investors Thursday as the state's attempt to sell $4.5 billion in general obligation bonds failed to attract enough demand to raise the full amount.
After boosting interest rates on a chunk of the debt, the state cut the total size of the deal by 8% to $4.14 billion, Treasurer Bill Lockyer said.
The debt, split among taxable and tax-free bonds, will finance infrastructure projects.
Municipal bond analysts said California was, in part, a victim of circumstance: The bond market overall -- including muni, corporate and U.S. government issues -- hit a wall last week after months of ravenous investor and trader demand that had pushed yields sharply lower.
Depressed yields finally led to a buyer's strike, which drove "momentum" traders out of the muni market, analysts said.
Suddenly, "people are punting bonds," said Matt Fabian, senior analyst Municipal Market Advisors in Westport, Conn.
With investors insisting on higher yields on bonds in general before they'd buy, California was bound to be squeezed, analysts said. That also gave some investors an excuse to focus on the state's still-troubled fiscal situation.
Tom Dresslar, a spokesman for Lockyer, acknowledged that the state's weak credit rating -- the lowest of any state -- "didn't help" the bond sale.
What's more, institutional investors knew they could push the state for higher yields after bond orders from individual investors came in well below expectations: Of the $1.3 billion in tax-free bonds offered for sale, individuals ordered just 33%, or $428 million.
By contrast, when California offered $4 billion in tax-free bonds for sale in March, individuals grabbed 75% of them.
The lure in March was that interest rates were much higher. The state paid an annualized 5.85% yield on the 20-year tax-free bond sold in March, for example. In this week's offering, individual investors were offered a preliminary yield of 4.63% on the 20-year tax-free issue.
But the relative dearth of demand this time around forced the state to raise final yields across the board. The 20-year tax-free bond will pay 5%. The seven-year issue in the deal will pay 3.37%, up from the 3.1% initially offered.
The state was able to sell all $1.3 billion of tax-free debt it offered. It also sold $1.75 billion in 30-year federally subsidized Build America Bonds at a taxable yield of 7.23%.
The state cut back on two other taxable issues it had hoped to sell, abandoning a 15-year issue entirely.
Although California had to shell out higher interest rates than it had hoped, Dresslar noted that rates still were well below what the state paid in the spring bond sale.