10-22-08

 10-22-08Merced Sun-StarLivingston City Council approves master plan for aggressive growth...JONAH OWEN LAMBhttp://www.mercedsunstar.com/167/story/509705.htmlLivingston's City Council unanimously voted to approve a controversial draft master plan and environmental impact report that projects exponential growth for the North Merced County area, despite public outcry against the plan.On Tuesday night, the five-member council voted on a resolution that in effect approved the 2025 EIR and general plan update. Before the vote, Mayor Gurpal Samra said that the process had been been inclusive and that the community's concerns had been listened to. But, he said, after almost four years, a decision had to be made. "To get a 100 percent consensus -- it's not going to happen," said Samra. "We must speak to the future. Like anything else, things change."The council faced a chamber filled with many opponents of the plan. Farmers, farmers' lawyers, residents and county officials were among the plan's opponents in the room. Thirteen members of the public spoke to the council on the matter and all but one opposed the plan.Their concerns ranged from the disappearance of farmland and high growth projections to a flawed process and lack of concern for the public's input...Also at the podium in opposition to the plan was the executive director of the Merced County Farm Bureau, Diana Westmoreland Pedrozo. She read part of a letter addressed to the council. "Our comments outline multiple violations of existing laws and regulations, which render the 2025 Plan, DEIR, and the entire process fatally flawed," read the beginning of the letter. The county had also sent a representative."The county is not going to be able to support this document," said Bob Smith of the department of public works administration, in repetition of his statements at the city's last council meeting. The county's master plan did not jive with the city's, said Smith, on several important levels like traffic, roads and farmland designation. Richard Harriman, representing the Arakelian family, not only voiced his client's concerns about the disappearance of farmland, but also pointed out that the city council members could be legally liable for attorney fees if there is any litigation on the matter.After the public had spoken, the council members discussed their reasoning for what would be a unanimous vote.Councilman Frank Vierra said more than a million dollars had already been spent on the plan. Where, he asked, was the city going to get more money to pay for the extensions requested? He also pointed out that lots of development was going on across the county, but no one seemed concerned over that. Councilman Roy Soria said that while the council had listened to those concerned about the plan, there were others who wanted more jobs, services and commerce.Councilman William Ingram, in a nod to the farmers in the room, pointed out that no matter what the plan says, if farmers don't sell their land then farmland can't become houses.The fallout from this vote may come sooner than the plan's opponents fear. With almost every council member up for reelection in November, they may pay for their decision with their seats.Castle development firm owes Merced County $1.6 millionSince 2007, real estate firm has had a spotty record of making payments...SCOTT JASONhttp://www.mercedsunstar.com/167/story/509709.htmlHang on to hope or cut your losses?That's the dilemma lenders and real estate agents have faced throughout the foreclosure crisis. And now the county faces the same question about its prime private-sector investment.Federal Development, the real estate firm charged with revitalizing Castle Commerce Center, owes Merced County $1.6 million in payments dating back to the summer of 2007.The Board of Supervisors hired the Washington, D.C., firm in December 2006 to manage Castle. Under the agreement, Federal is supposed to pay the county $500,000 quarterly, or $2 million yearly, and gets to keep all the rent from the center's tenants. Federal Development is also charged with finding more tenants and polishing the 517-acre former Air Force Base.For the past year and eight months, records show, it's posted a spotty record of making payments then winding up delinquent. It's paid $1.4 million and owes $1.6 million.The Board of Supervisors remains divided about Federal's future role with Castle and hasn't reached a clear decision on what will happen at the sprawling venue near Atwater.The money from Federal goes into Castle's operation fund, which covers salaries, benefits, utilities and other costs tied to maintaining the base and airport. Castle has a 2008-2009 budget of $2.6 million, which includes $2 million in expected revenue from Federal Development. Castle director John Fowler said he's used reserve money to bridge the center's budget shortfalls. The rainy-day fund once held more than $1 million. Now it's at $400,000.So far, the county's general fund hasn't been tapped to cover Castle's costs.Calls to Federal Development were directed to its Florida public relations firm, which didn't return phone calls.County spokesman Mark Hendrickson said government leaders are in "sensitive discussions" with Federal Development...County records released to the Sun-Star on Tuesday show that Federal began missing payments shortly after it signed a deal with the county.Federal paid the county $800,000 in 2007, less than half of what was owed. This year, Federal paid the county $600,000.Supervisor Deidre Kelsey said Federal began to go sideways last spring, adding that she's been holding out hope that it would pay off its debt."I don't think the board's without empathy, given the economic times," she said. "They're not fly-by-night, and we don't want them to fail anymore than they do."The company, which has plans to turn Castle into a top-tier business park, made some gains in July and August when it made two $200,000 payments, she explained.Still, the company needs to square itself with the county soon. The the only way to keep the relationship going is by handing over cash, she said. "It's a decision of when you pull the trigger," Kelsey explained. "We can't go on like this forever."Board of Supervisors Chairwoman Kathleen Crookham said she felt concerns early on about the arrangement and regularly asked questions about what was happening. "I just had grave concerns from the beginning," she said.When the board voted to approve the deal, Crookham said she went along because there weren't other firms interested in Castle. "People weren't knocking down the door to come in," Crookham noted...Modesto BeeLower prices woo home buyers in Modesto areaSeptember sees big leap in sales around region...John Hollandhttp://www.modbee.com/local/story/471108.htmlThe clearance sale in real estate continued last month, with another jump in the number of homes sold and a continuing drop in prices.Stanislaus County's median sale price was $179,000 in September, down 40 percent from a year earlier, MDA DataQuick reported Tuesday.The lower prices drew plenty of buyers into the market, according to the La Jolla-based research firm. They snapped up 1,016 homes in Stanislaus County last month, almost triple the number in September 2007, the report said."They're taking advantage of the lower prices and low interest rates," said Jim Theis, a real estate agent for Coldwell Banker Endsley & Associates in Turlock.He cautioned that most of the homes were sold by banks after foreclosure, and they were priced low to move fast.In Merced and San Joaquin counties, the number of sales also soared last month compared with a year earlier. Each had a 47 percent drop in the median price, to $140,000 in Merced and $191,500 in San Joaquin.Tuolumne County saw a tiny gain in its median price over the 12 months, up 0.8 percent to $330,000.Statewide, home sales rose 65 percent year over year, while the median price declined 34 percent to $283,000.The housing market is now three years into its downturn, which has brought foreclosures for many homeowners and upheaval for Wall Street investors holding the mortgages.The median price in Stani-slaus County had reached nearly $400,000 when the market reversed.Craig Lewis, president and chief executive officer at Prudential California Realty in Modesto, said the foreclosure wave appears to be waning. He said prices could bottom out in three or four months...Judge: Delta salmon 'unquestionably in jeopardy'...TRACIE CONE , Associated Press Writerhttp://www.modbee.com/state_wire/story/470774.htmlA federal judge ruled Tuesday that California's canal water systems are placing wild salmon "unquestionably in jeopardy," but stopped short of issuing court-order limits on pumping in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.Environmental groups had sought the temporary pumping limits to guard three species of migrating salmon in the delta until a new fish protection plan is due in March.But U.S. District Judge Oliver Wanger declined to do so, after the state Department of Water Resources said last month it would voluntarily reduce pumping to protect the juvenile fish."Upon initial glance, the department believes that the judge handed down a responsible ruling," said spokesman Ted Thomas.If environmental groups want to make new arguments for court-ordered pumping limits, Wanger wrote, any motion filed would be "heard on an expedited basis," an offer attorneys are considering."We need to decide whether it's worth doing for this short amount of time or not," said Michael Sherwood, an attorney for Earthjustice.Chinook salmon and steelhead freely migrated on the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers until the federal and state system of dams built to deliver water via canals to the state's arid areas blocked their paths. Now up to 42 percent of the endangered juvenile fish die as they are sucked into Delta pumps that send water into canals.Wanger's opinion eased the fears of farmers worried about impacts of mandatory water cutbacks on an agricultural industry already suffering from drought, while validating concerns by environmentalists as well as fishing groups affecting by the collapse of the state's salmon population."In the meantime, we've got boats tied up this year and probably next," said a frustrated Zeke Grader of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Association, referring to the resulting ban on commercial and recreational fishing.The ruling stems from Wanger's earlier decision that pitted the endangered fish against Central Valley farmers. In that ruling, he said the National Marine Fisheries Service's biological opinion on water projects tied to the delta does not adequately protect salmon and must be rewritten.In the meantime, environmentalists, fishing groups and water users filed briefs over how the delta and its water should be managed until then. Earthjustice had wanted the judge to order a cutback in pumping that would be legally enforceable.Last month, the Department of Water Resources, intervening on behalf of the water districts who depend on canal water for their constituents, said they would operate the water systems to minimize impacts on salmon, especially during the December-January migration of juvenile fish to the ocean, until the new report comes out. Wanger said that testimony under oath made a court order unnecessary.Fresno BeeJudge declines to reduce pumping of delta water for salmon...John Ellishttp://www.fresnobee.com/local/story/953695.htmlA federal judge on Tuesday denied a request by environmental groups to reduce delta pumping and take other measures at two major California reservoirs to help the state's endangered salmon population. In an 11-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Oliver W. Wanger didn't outright reject the requests, but said a hearing would be necessary if environmental groups wanted to pursue the proposals. Environmentalists aren't sure whether they will seek a hearing because an updated opinion on how to manage the salmon is due in March, said Michael Sherwood, an attorney for the environmental group Earthjustice. They will discuss the matter today. Environmentalists had requested that: Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta pumping in December and January be limited to 7,600 cubic feet per second, or to a ratio based on how much water enters the estuary, based on whichever is more protective of the salmon.At least 1.9 million acre feet of water be held in Lake Shasta at the end of January, and 2.5 million acre feet at the end of February. Releases from Folsom Lake be limited beginning Dec. 31 until the new salmon opinion is completed. The federal government and its water agency allies had opposed the request and had presented new evidence that questioned the science used to justify the requests. Changes requested by environmentalists would have been only for the short term until the new opinion is issued. The litigation over winter-run Chinook salmon, spring-run Chinook salmon and Central Valley steelhead is part of a long-running battle between the government and environmentalists dealing with the massive Central Valley Project's effect on the fish, which are listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. Wanger already has issued a written opinion that the three fish species are at risk of extinction, and the state and federal water project operations are further jeopardizing them.But in Tuesday's ruling, the judge was reluctant to issue a further ruling without hearing more evidence. "In light of the potential consequences of further reducing the available CVP project water [yield] to implement such remedies, and in the face of substantial scientific disagreements about the effectiveness and need for such remedies, it is improvident to issue any such relief without further hearings," Wanger wrote. In addition to the steelhead and two salmon species, the government and environmental groups are sparring over the CVP's effects on the tiny delta smelt. An updated opinion on the smelt is due later this year. Environmentalists filed suit involving the salmon and smelt because they said the government based project operation effects on the species on flawed data. Wanger agreed, which is why the opinions are currently being rewritten. Fresno County home sales surge 76%32% drop in median price of existing homes fuels a September buying spree...Sanford Naxhttp://www.fresnobee.com/business/story/953666.htmlA 76% surge in existing home sales in Fresno County last month -- and similar gains in the rest of the San Joaquin Valley -- is further evidence that the housing market is recovering, a leading market analyst said Tuesday. But the recovery could fall apart if economic conditions worsen, said John Walsh, president of MDA DataQuick, which tracks real estate transactions. A sign of that fragility is house prices, which continue to fall. The median price of a resale house in Fresno County was $179,000 in September, a 32.4% decline from a year ago. "For the inland markets," Walsh said, "September's relatively strong sales provide more evidence that a recovery got well under way this summer. Now it's just a question of whether it will stay on track and provide stable prices and fading foreclosures in 2009, or will it get derailed by an economic crisis."In Fresno County, 679 existing houses changed hands compared with 385 in September 2007 and 642 in August, DataQuick reported. The story was the same in other parts of the Valley, from a 22% increase in Kings County to a whopping 355.1% boost in Merced County -- one of the regions hardest hit by foreclosures.Walsh said sales took off after prices, facing pressure from thousands of foreclosures, fell substantially. "Inland markets have spoken," he said in a statement. "Sales take off when prices drop 30% or more from the peak. "In Merced County, for example, the decline in house prices was 46%."...Homebuilders are not enjoying the same resurgence. Sales of new houses in Fresno County fell 5.2% from a year earlier, and the number of building permits issued fell 11%, according to the California Home Building Industry Association, which also released figures Tuesday. Factor in new-home tallies and the percentage increase of all sales was only 37.1%. That compares with the 76.4% gain in existing home sales alone. Developers say they can't compete with the abundance of bank-owned properties, which are selling at discounted prices. About 55% of all the existing homes sold in Fresno and Clovis last month were foreclosures, said Don Scordino, president of the Fresno Association of Realtors...Scordino said first-time homebuyers are out in force, and that the number of houses for sale fell 31.4% in the last year. Still, prices are not increasing -- and won't until foreclosures wane. "Supply and demand says prices should be going up, but there are so many foreclosures and banks are desperate to unload them. That is keeping prices soft," he said. McClatchy NewspapersState, Tuolomne Utilities District battle over Pinecrest Lake...Michael Doylehttp://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/54544.htmlWASHINGTON -- The Sierra Nevada's popular Pinecrest Lake is roiled in a dispute over water and power. State officials have one idea about managing the lake; the Tuolumne Utilities District has another. Now, with potential lawsuits looming and federal regulators waiting, lawmakers are starting to weigh in."It's very important to have a utility district that can operate and provide services to its customers," Rep. George Radanovich, R-Mariposa, said Tuesday Pinecrest Lake is the most public part of the Spring Gap-Stanislaus Project, a Pacific Gas and Electric Co. hydropower complex located within the Stanislaus National Forest. The project license is currently up for renewal by federal regulators, a painfully complicated process in the best of times.But the Tuolumne Utilities District, now joined by Radanovich, complains conditions imposed by the State Water Resources Control Board could threaten future water supplies. The water board wants to even out the flow of water from Pinecrest, while maintaining levels high enough for recreation use. Potentially, these goals conflict with the utility district's supply needs."The (plan will) impose an unjustified and arbitrary reservoir elevation that disrupts and curtails the longstanding domestic water supply that has been the principal source of (the Tuolomne Utilities District's) water," utility district attorney Jesse Barton declared in writing.The state water board, though, insists more control is needed over Pinecrest releases. For the first time, the water board would set a target elevation of 5,610 feet for the Pinecrest Lake level."The current license ... has few restrictions on the timing and shaping of water supply," federal regulators noted in a key environmental study, whereas consistently "maintaining lake levels ... would extend the recreational season and therefore increase recreational opportunities."So now, Radanovich and the utility district are flexing their muscles on both coasts.In a phone call Monday, and subsequent letter, Radanovich urged the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to delay relicensing until the Tuolumne Utility District's concerns are mollified. In Sacramento, tellingly citing a desire to "avoid the burden and expense of duplicative litigation," the utility district and state water board have agreed to stay out of court at least until the water board reconsiders its earlier plan.A FERC official told Radanovich on Monday that the agency would take seriously the request to postpone licensing while the dispute is resolved. In theory, the agency might have issued another license at any time.PG&E filed its Spring Gap-Stanislaus renewal application in December 2002. Federal licensing for hydropower projects take a long time, cost a lot of money and involve many tradeoffs. For instance, the state is requiring PG&E to construct a fish screen at the entrance to the Stanislaus Power Tunnel. The utility also will have to pay $20,000 for state officials to stock Pinecrest Lake with fish.The five-member water board signed off on the proposal last month, including a plan for regulating water flows and lake levels. The highly detailed, 23-page plan specifying how much water flows, and when, was then sent to Washington.The Spring Gap-Stanislaus Project is on the middle and south forks of the Stanislaus River, near the mountain town of Strawberry. All told, the hydroelectric project generates an average of 415,000 megawatt hours annually.Sacramento BeeSacramento home sales rise for sixth month...Jim Wassermanhttp://www.sacbee.com/103/story/1332806.htmlIt was a big-bang ending for a turnaround summer.September saw the highest number of home sales this year in the capital region as still more buyers bid against one another for heavily discounted bank repos, property researcher MDA DataQuick reported Tuesday.The month that traditionally starts a fall slowdown showed the most activity since June 2006, as 4,369 buyers closed escrow during September in Amador, El Dorado, Nevada, Placer, Sacramento, Sutter, Yolo and Yuba counties, the La Jolla researcher said. Analysts warned, however, that the sales began in weeks before a theme of potential economic collapse anchored daily newscasts and headlines."This tells us about people who were in the mood to buy well before the grim financial news hit the last few weeks," said MDA DataQuick analyst Andrew LePage. He said October sales will give a better reading of possible caution.Still, LePage said, "September was a strong month." He called it a sixth straight month with sales higher than the same time last year."Sacramento is well into the first phase of the housing stabilization process, which starts with sales recovering on a year-over-year basis," he said.September showed nearly 2,000 more escrow closings than September 2007. It was also 371 more sales than in August.The burst of late-summer sales trimmed further the number of for-sale signs across the region, a sign that bank-owned homes – for now – are selling faster than they're being added to the market...September's sales gain over August is a reversal of the usual trend that sees the year's escrow closings begin to decline in September. The same trend played out statewide as first-time buyers and investors scooped up some of the most affordable bargains in years.California's home builders, meanwhile, pulled back hard on home starts.Statewide, builders started 35 percent less single-family homes in September than the same month last year...Sacramento County's median sales price – where half cost more and half cost less – was just barely above $200,000. The median was last below that symbolic level in April 2002, at $195,000, according to MDA DataQuick...Discounted foreclosures were 65.8 percent of September sales in Sacramento County, according to MDA DataQuick. Foreclosures were half of sales in the Los Angeles region and 42 percent of those in the Bay Area during September, the firm said...Daniel Weintraub: Former pol finds new business just like the old...Daniel Weintraub http://www.sacbee.com/weintraub/story/1332636.htmlSTOCKTON – Bill Jones has left government. But as a businessman pushing the most popular – and perhaps the most controversial – alternative to petroleum, he seems more enmeshed in politics than ever.Jones, a former California secretary of state and a candidate for governor just six years ago, is chairman of Pacific Ethanol, a fast-rising company that opened the state's largest ethanol plant here earlier this month.It is a gleaming facility that stands out in the otherwise grimy Port of Stockton, sitting at the end of a long, curving ribbon of jet-black asphalt paralleled by a shiny new railroad spur. Both are getting plenty of use as 100-car freight trains deliver Midwestern corn and trucks rumble from nearby fields or head out filled with fuel. The plant itself is state of the art, controlled by two employees at a time sitting at computer terminals. A few dozen other employees putter around in shifts doing maintenance and other minor tasks that can't be automated.Whether the corn arrives by road or rail, the kernels are quickly dumped through metal grates onto an underground conveyor belt, then combined with enzymes and yeast, heated to 90 degrees and fermented.The fermented product is piped to a massive still and boiled so that the ethanol steam can be separated from the liquid, then cooled and trucked to Northern California oil refineries, which blend it with their gasoline to create a cleaner-burning fuel. Most of the water that remains behind is recaptured and reused. The corn mush, once it gives up its sugars to make the ethanol, is dropped from another belt into two huge piles inside a cavernous building.That mush – known as wet distiller's grain – will be one of the secrets to the plant's success if all goes according to plan. The grain is packed with protein and some fat, a power meal for the cows at nearby dairies. Because of that proximity, Pacific Ethanol can sell the stuff as feed and deliver it fresh, instead of having to dry it for long-distance shipping. That means the plant can forgo a drying process that, in a typical Midwestern ethanol refinery, accounts for 30 percent of the energy use.Jones and his business partners are hoping that their design and strategy will allow them to sell all the fuel they can produce into a California market that currently imports 80 percent of its ethanol from the Midwest. But questions remain about just how large that market will become.Corn-based ethanol burns cleaner than gasoline, but it has always been dogged by questions, never more than now. The industry emerged thanks to massive federal subsidies, and even today, the government gives the oil companies 45 cents for every gallon of ethanol they blend with gasoline.At the same time, the government mandates that every gallon of gasoline include at least 6 percent ethanol, a standard that, in California, will soon rise to 10 percent.Critics point out that ethanol, because it is not as dense a fuel, does not produce the same fuel efficiency as gasoline unless cars are modified to run on either product. And because corn must be heated to ferment and distill it, some say ethanol actually provides no advantage over the fossil fuel it replaces.But the real debate that will shape the industry's future is just beginning, as California and the nation grapple with global warming by looking for ways to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide. Reliable studies, including one by the Argonne National Laboratory, have concluded that ethanol produces 30 percent to 40 percent fewer emissions than gasoline, even when the entire process, from the farm to the tailpipe, is included.The one factor that comparison does not include, however, is the indirect effect of moving land from pasture, forest or other types of farming into growing corn for ethanol. If corn yields remain constant and demand for other corn-based products doesn't decline, this theory goes, then every acre of corn used for ethanol will have to be replaced with an acre of corn to take its place in the food supply. If the land used for ethanol is taken out of other crops, then that food will have to be replaced as well, increasing carbon emissions as forests or grasslands are turned into farmland.The California Air Resources Board is currently studying whether to count the effects of those indirect land shifts against ethanol as it tallies up the carbon content of alternative fuels. Depending on which numbers the regulators use, ethanol's value as a greenhouse-gas fighter might be considered nil, bringing the growth of the industry to a screeching halt just as it is gaining a foothold as viable alternative to petroleum."That doesn't make any sense from a public policy standpoint," Jones said. "This idea of indirect land-use impacts is not based on science. It's based on economic modeling that is hypothetical and unproven." Jones, his company and his entire industry will soon be mounting a full-court press to persuade regulators not to count those hypotheticals.For this former state official, it seems, his new business is every bit as political as his old one. Tracy PressSend McNerney back to WashingtonJerry McNerney has only been in office for two years representing the 11th congressional district. Because he listens to his constituents, we think he should go back to Washington...Press Editorial Boardhttp://tracypress.com/content/view/16187/2244/In 2006, seven-term Republican lawmaker Richard Pombo of Tracy plunged to stunning defeat, and a little-known mathematician named Jerry McNerney went to Washington as our district’s congressman.Some people, including Pombo, said the Pleasanton Democrat wouldn’t last longer than two years in Congress. We think this election will prove them wrong.Why do we endorse the freshman congressman this time around, when two years ago we backed Pombo?He’s a moderate, especially compared to his challenger, Dean Andal of Stockton, and he’s independent enough to stick his neck out to support bipartisan efforts, such as the $700 billion Wall Street bailout — something that would have been easy to vote against given his tight congressional race.He posts his entire list of earmarks on his Web site and doesn’t apologize for trying to bring as much money back to our district as possible. After all, Californians send plenty more to Washington in federal taxes than the state receives in federal expenditures. He listens to his constituents and has been highly visible in the district, returning home all but three weekends since he took office and hosting 45 Congress at Your Corner events. He refused to vote for President Bush’s open-ended Iraq war policy. During the Tracy Press’ Oct. 11 candidates forum, Andal had the audacity to call him “immoral” for voting not to fund the troops in Iraq. There’s nothing immoral about supporting a timed withdrawal from Iraq, disagreeing with the president and advocating for veterans benefits, as McNerney has.   Andal, a consultant for Mountain House developer Gerry Kamilos, was a California assemblyman from 1991-95 whose extreme conservatism makes us wonder if he can effectively work with 434 colleagues spanning the political spectrum. In his zeal to lower taxes and fight spending — a desire we applaud if applied with a dose of common sense — Andal voted against raising fuel-efficiency standards and cast votes against the protection of clean water. The League of Conservation Voters named him one of its Dirty Dozen for his “abysmal record on energy and the environment.” He also developed a reputation for voting against women’s rights, and recently, state Sen. Ellen Corbett, D-San Leandro, and Assemblywoman Mary Hayashi, D-Hayward, signed a letter that charged, “Someone with a record like Andal’s can be counted on to turn back the clock on all we have achieved.”McNerney has learned a lot about the valley during the past two years and has worked on issues involving energy, heath care, veterans affairs and education. He serves on the House Committee on Science and Technology and a select committee on energy independence and global warming. And he has pledged his support for a solar farm in Tracy.Voters in the 11th congressional district — from Lodi to Tracy to Morgan Hill — should send him back for a second term. Wal-Mart expansion gets council OK After hearing impassioned pleas both for and against an expansion of the Tracy Wal-Mart, the City Council voted 3-1 to allow the big-box retailer to add a grocery store and 70,000 square feet of space...Eric Firpo http://tracypress.com/content/view/16188/2268/Wal-Mart is going to get bigger. The City Council voted 3-1 to allow Wal-Mart to add roughly 82,000 square feet of space and include a grocery store. Councilwoman Irene Sundberg recused herself from the vote, saying only that she had a conflict of interest for "possible financial reasons." She told the Tracy Press earlier in the day that she owns Wal-Mart stock. A big crowd packed the council chambers at City Hall, and for 2½ hours supporters and opponents argued the pros and cons of allowing a store that’s about 130,000 square feet to grow to 206,000 square feet. Most people spoke in favor of Wal-Mart. Shoppers, employees and store executives sang the praises of the nation’s biggest retailer and argued the estimated 200 extra jobs it would create would be an economic boost to the city. There was also an overwhelming sentiment that a Wal-Mart grocery store would heighten competition among grocery retailers in a town dominated by Save Mart and save shoppers money."Momma saves, momma happy," said homemaker Pauline Silva. But the vote no doubt left a handful of already-hurting shopping center owners unhappy. Several property owners in town, a consultant, an attorney and several Tracy residents warned that a bigger Wal-Mart will mean a smaller tax base for neighborhood shopping centers anchored by grocery stores. Stuart Sobek owns the North Tracy Boulevard shopping center where Food Maxx sits, and where the vacancy rate would be 68 percent if Food Maxx went under. He was one of a few property owners who forecast blight if Wal-Mart is allowed to expand. "It’s the worst economy since the Great Depression, and you cannot ignore that," he told the council. Others said it would do the city little good to add 200 jobs at Wal-Mart if it subtracted higher-paying jobs at stores driven out of business by the big-box store. And people complained about the extra traffic that a bigger Wal-Mart would lure at already overcrowded intersections in the Grant Line Road corridor. Councilwoman Evelyn Tolbert said a lot of nice things about Wal-Mart, but voted no because she thought the store should be allowed to grow to 163,000 square feet, the size that was OK’d by the city when it was approved in 1992. But in the end, 76-year-old Wal-Mart supporter Pat Bergeron seemed prescient when he said early in the night, "A ‘yes’ vote on this might get you extra votes in the voting booth" on Nov. 4. When Councilwoman Suzanne Tucker and Councilman Steve Abercrombie said they favored Wal-Mart, it was left to Mayor Brent Ives to cast the deciding vote. "At this point in time, you realize who put you in office," Ives said. "What I heard is that a Super Wal-Mart is what Tracy wants." San Francisco ChronicleRush to read 200,000 comments on Species Act...Dina Cappiello, Associated Presshttp://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/10/22/MN8C13LRU4.DTL&type=printableRushing to ease endangered species rules before President Bush leaves office, Interior Department officials are attempting to review 200,000 comments from the public in just 32 hours, according to an e-mail obtained by the Associated Press.The Fish and Wildlife Service has called a team of 15 people to Washington this week to go through letters and online comments about a proposal to exclude greenhouse gases and the advice of federal biologists from decisions about whether dams, power plants and other federal projects could harm species. That would be the biggest change in endangered species rules since 1986.In an e-mail last week to Fish and Wildlife managers across the country, Bryan Arroyo, the head of the agency's endangered species program, said the team would work eight hours a day starting Tuesday to the close of business on Friday to sort through the comments.Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne's office, according to the e-mail, will be responsible for analyzing and responding to them.The public comment period ended last week, which initiated the review.House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Nick Rahall, D-W.Va., whose own letter opposing the changes is among the thousands that will be processed, called the 32-hour deadline a "last-ditch attempt to undermine the long-standing integrity of the Endangered Species program."At that rate, according to a committee aide's calculation, 6,250 comments would have to be reviewed every hour. That means that each member of the team would be reviewing at least seven comments each minute.It usually takes months to review public comments on a proposed rule, and by law the government must respond before a rule becomes final."It would seem very difficult for them in four days to respond to so many thoughtful comments in an effective way," said Eric Biber, an assistant professor at the UC Berkeley's Boalt Hall School of Law. Along with other law professors across the country, Biber sent in 70 pages of comment.Fish and Wildlife Service Director Dale Hall told the AP on Tuesday that the short time frame for processing the comments was requested by Kempthorne and would set a record."There is an effort here to see if this can be completed" before the administration is out, Hall said. He said the goal was to have the rule to the White House by early November. In May, the administration set a Nov. 1 deadline for all final regulations.How fast the rule is finished could determine how hard it is to undo.A new administration could freeze any pending rules. But if the regulation is final before the next president takes office, reversing it would require going through the entire review and public comment period again - a process that could take months and that sometimes has taken years.Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama already has said he would reverse the proposal. Congress also could overturn the rules through legislation, but that could take even longer.Sen. John McCain's campaign has not taken a position on the Bush administration's proposed change in endangered species regulations.Environmentalists said the move is the latest attempt by the Bush administration to overrule Congress, which for years has resisted efforts by conservative Republicans to make similar changes by amending the law.Criticism from environmental groups and Democratic leaders prompted the Interior Department to extend the public comment period from 30 days to 60 days."Somebody has lit a fire under these guys to get this done in due haste," said Jamie Rappaport Clark, executive director of Defenders of Wildlife and the head of the Fish and Wildlife Service under President Bill Clinton.The Interior Department received approximately 300,000 comments over the 60-day comment period, many critical of the changes.About 100,000 of them were form letters, Hall said.Finance group predicts housing weakness...Carolyn Saidhttp://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/10/22/BUS613LRF6.DTL&type=printableThe U.S. housing market will continue to struggle until at least next summer, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association, which is meeting this week in San Francisco.Jay Brinkmann, the trade group's chief economist, said he expects $1.67 trillion in home loan originations next year, down from the $1.86 trillion estimated for this year, and a 27 percent drop from the $2.3 trillion in 2007. He projects new-home sales will fall about 12 percent in 2009 before rising by about 25 percent in 2010. Existing home sales this year will fall about 13 percent and then rebound slightly next year, rising about 3 percent, followed by a 6 percent increase in 2010. "A recession appears to be under way," he said. The association also predicts that unemployment, currently at 6.1 percent, will reach 7.8 percent by early 2010 before declining that year. New homes sales this year will be down 36 percent compared with last year.Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the mortgage giants taken over by the government last month, came under fire in the day's opening session, a spirited discussion of politics by an insider from each end of the spectrum: Karl Rove and former Sen. George Mitchell. Rove, former deputy chief of staff and senior adviser to President Bush, blamed Senate Democrats for not reining in the government-sponsored enterprises. Mitchell responded that turning problems into partisan debate is not helpful. "The last thing this country needs is to engage in an orgy of finger-pointing and blame identifying when we have a serious national crisis," he said. Rove's and Mitchell's discussion was briefly interrupted by protesters from the activist group Code Pink, including a woman who tried to make a citizen's arrest of Rove. That prompted an audience member to call out, "We love you, Karl; you're great," eliciting vigorous applause from the audience. Economic predictions from a panel of industry experts later in the day were as downbeat as those of the association. "Our best guess is we'll have a deep recession like in the 1980s, not a moderate one like in 2000," said Ken Rosen, chair of the Center for Real Estate and Urban Economics at UC Berkeley. His definition of a deep recession? "We lose 4 or 5 million jobs, the unemployment rate goes to 8.5 percent; interest rates go lower, not higher." Still, he added, "A moderate recession is what we all hope maybe we'll be able to achieve" if the recent government interventions in the financial markets prove successful. Rosen expects U.S. home prices to drop 20 percent "when all is said and done; we're probably three-quarters of the way there." While many reports this year show much steeper median price declines for homes sold, he said those are skewed by the huge volume of foreclosures on the market.Alex Pollock, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, said it's instructive to look back at the deep recession of the 1980s, when agriculture, oil and commercial real estate experienced busts; up to 200 commercial banks failed annually for five or six years; emerging countries defaulted on debts; and the savings and loan crisis hit - all simultaneously."We recovered and went into the boom of the 1990s," he said. "We'll recover from this terrific bust. The growth will resume. When it does, we need to try hard to remember all the lessons we're relearning right now."Ellen Schloemer, executive vice president of the Center for Responsible Lending Self-Help Credit Union in North Carolina, disputed two reasons many people are blaming for the subprime mortgage mess. One is the Community Reinvestment Act, a 1977 law that encourages borrower activity in low- and moderate-income neighborhoods. "How people can think that a law that's been on the books for 30 years somehow precipitated or caused the subprime crisis is frankly just beyond me," she said. "I think it is a smokescreen. CRA did not apply to most subprime lenders."Also being scapegoated, she said, are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Although the two institutions did buy too many risky home loans, their volume was dwarfed by those in the private market, she said. "I think it's political nonsense to blame things not at fault."UC, facing budget cut, defers faculty raises...Tanya Schevitzhttp://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/10/22/BA3J13LJBF.DTL&type=printableThe UC Board of Regents approved a revised budget Tuesday that defers most faculty and staff raises and improvements in the student-faculty ratio after the state imposed a $33 million midyear budget cut.UC is getting $3 billion in state general funds, $48.7 million less than last year's state funding, Katie Lapp, UC executive vice president for business operations, told the regents. Even without the midyear cut, the system had come up short as it absorbed growing enrollment and higher costs in areas such as health care and utilities, she said.With expected increases in costs, UC is projecting that it has to use $149 million from existing resources to fund its minimum needs. According to Lapp, that is equivalent to about a 5 percent reduction in state funding."It is pretty bare-bones," UC President Mark Yudof said of the budget during Tuesday's meeting of regents by teleconference.He said that in talking to the campus chancellors about their plans for absorbing the cuts, he emphasized that teaching is paramount. But he said nothing is sacred given the fiscal woes."I said, if at all possible, leave the instructional budgets alone. But I don't think that any of us should feel confident that we will avoid any negative impacts on the instructional side."The new budget does not include money for across-the-board salary increases for faculty and staff or for a four-year plan to raise the faculty salary scale. Some faculty members will get merit increases.William Casey, a chemistry professor at UC Davis, is frustrated by the deferral of faculty raises."UCD is seeing the third cycle of budget crises since 1991 and nothing was ever done in the good years to prepare," he said. "They gave themselves perks and mismanaged the budgets and didn't streamline the institution at all." Steve Boilard, director of higher education for the state Legislative Analyst's Office, said UC was initially given about the same amount of state funding as last year and fared better than other state agencies also facing midyear cuts.Inside Bay AreaPAC money stirring Tracy mayoral election...Mike Martinez, Tri-Valley Heraldhttp://www.insidebayarea.com/trivalleyherald/localnews/ci_10779933A Tracy businessman is throwing some gasoline on this year's political fire season by creating a political action committee.Tony Souza, who owns Souza Realty and Development in Tracy, is supporting Tracy Mayor Brent Ives and opposing Councilwoman Irene Sundberg through a group called "For a Better Tracy."Souza, in partnership with Sacramento developers, wants to see the city's largest proposed residential community — Tracy Hills — spring up south of the city along Interstate 580."It's all related to a better business climate for Tracy,'' Souza said. "I feel Brent is someone that businesspeople can deal with, can talk to, and I think he is the candidate who will foster not only a better business climate, but increase jobs in Tracy. And that's what we're working for.''Sundberg "absolutely (does) not'' hold the same qualities, he said.Sundberg is running for re-election to the council. She and fellow incumbent Steve Abercrombie, as well as challengers Mike Maciel, Larry Gamino and Larry Hite, are vying for two seats.Last Thursday, in the closing moments of a mayoral candidates forum, Celeste Garamendi, in her second bid to become mayor, read an e-mail that Souza had sent to dozens of people requesting contributions. Recipients included 11th Congressional District candidate Dean Andal; two people working for Tracy Hills (former Sacramento City Manager Robert Thomas and former 17th District Assemblywoman Barbara Matthews) and Ives, who says he has no control over political action committees. Souza said he's received some positive responses from the e-mail and is currently collecting donations.When asked about his plans for the final two weeks of his campaign, Souza replied only with cryptic, "You'll see.''Ives was unavailable for comment on Tuesday. The third candidate in the mayor's race, Evelyn Tolbert, was also unavailable for comment.This won't be the first time that political action committee money has come into play in Tracy.In the 2006 mayoral race, which featured Garamendi against Ives, a Sacramento-based political action committee poured in more money than both candidates spent running for the city office. "In 2006, Brent Ives and Tracy Hills brought gutter politics to Tracy and it's continuing today with what they're doing,'' Garamendi said. "We know they coordinated in 2006, and the e-mail demonstrates they're doing it again. It's not truthful for the mayor to state he doesn't know what's going on. If the mayor says he doesn't have the power over his good friends to stop these dirty politics, then it raises the question of who is really in control. Clearly he is not.''HAT PAC, which has ties to local developers and former U.S. Rep. Richard Pombo, spent more than $200,000 in October to help Ives defeat Garamendi. Ives, whose campaign spent about $40,000 on the election, defeated Garamendi by 1,600 votes, slightly more than 10 percent of the ballots cast in a race that brought the city's polarized viewpoints on growth to the surface. Garamendi, who spent a little less than $18,000 on her campaign, said, "They have pandered to the residential developers that have lined their campaign coffers and ignored all other businesses and corporations that are going to bring good paying jobs to Tracy,'' Garamendi said. "That's the entire problem. Bad money is blocking out good money because of the corruptive influence of the residential developer lobby.''Santa Cruz SentinelCemex shuts down cement shipping until new air tests are in...Shanna McCordhttp://www.santacruzsentinel.com/localnews/ci_10782980DAVENPORT -- Cemex will stop shipping cement to customers until results from recent air samples are analyzed and it's determined how much, if any, chromium 6 lingers in Davenport."It's the right thing to do," Cemex Vice President Satish Sheth said Tuesday. "I could tell that's what the community really wants."Sheth made the call to cease the daily loading of 20 to 50 cement trucks after a county Board of Supervisors meeting on Tuesday, at which several North Coast residents and county leaders expressed frustration and anxiety about overdue air testing results and the continual loading of trucks at the plant that could possibly emit more chromium 6 in the air.The factory already had shut down its kiln for the past couple of months due to slowing demand, but had continued to ship cement to customers in the San Francisco Bay Area."Cemex is disappointed that the air sampling results have not been produced," Sheth said. "We have done everything we can to address the community's concerns, from implementing operational changes to taking aggressive measures to minimize fugitive dust from the operation. "Today, we take one more step out of great respect for this community."Sheth said he did not know how much the halt in shipping would cost the international cement company. The company has no plans to lay off any of its employees, he said.High levels of the cancer-causing chromium 6 were detected in the Davenport air this summer by the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, which traced the toxin to cement dust blown from the 100-year-old Cemex. The levels were up to 10 times more than what the state Environmental Protection Agency allows for the carcinogen. More recent air samples in Davenport, those taken the week of Oct. 6, have been sent to a busy, backlogged laboratory in Los Angeles, which has been unable to produce an analysis for the air district.Ed Kendig of the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District said he hopes to have results from the laboratory by the end of this week. New air samples will compare chromium 6 measurements between the time when the cement plant was operating and since it's been closed. "It's not a good situation," Kendig said. "We need this data, the community needs this data."Sheth said the decision to stop shipping was in response to comments he heard during the supervisors' meeting from residents like Kate Alm. "I'm asking you to ask them to shut down until we get the results back," the Davenport resident said to the supervisors. "Why not make good on Cemex's integrity until we get the results promised to us. That's one way to assuage our fears."Supervisors stopped short of asking Cemex to halt cement shipments, and instead insisted the new test results immediately be brought to their attention and the public's when available. The supervisors will receive an update on the chromium 6 situation from the county Environmental Health Department at their Nov. 18 meeting."The lack of data is the real problem here," said Supervisor Neal Coonerty, whose district includes the North Coast.In the meantime, county health officials have collaborated with the California Cancer Center to compile data related to cases of lung and bronchus cancer near the Davenport cement plant compared with cases in other parts of the region -- Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Monterey and San Benito counties.Chromium 6 is known to cause lung cancer among people continually exposed to high levels of the toxic metal for several decades. The county expected to see nine cancer cases in Davenport between 1998 and 2002, based on the population, but there was only one. Supervisor Ellen Pirie asked county Health Officer Poki Namkung to explain the significance of the cancer statistics."I think it's actually reassuring," Namkung said. "To me it means there's been no significant exposure to the toxin over a long period of time. For the general population, it takes a long chronic exposure to a toxin, usually tobacco smoke, to contract lung cancer."County health officials have hired environmental toxicologist Teri Copeland to conduct an extensive health risk assessment of Pacific Elementary School in Davenport, one of the spots where excessive amounts of chromium 6 were found in the air.Copeland and a team of a dozen or so scientists will wipe down the playground equipment and areas inside the school to determine if the contaminant still exists."Her work will give us the piece to the bigger picture of what's happening there," Steve Schneider of the county Environmental Health Agency said. "She's going to get to the bottom of what's there and that will be representative of what we're going to find in the rest of the communitySanta Cruz's Measure E widely eyed as possible water-pollution funding strategy...Kurtis Alexanderhttp://www.santacruzsentinel.com/ci_10774285?IADID=Search-www.santacruzsentinel.com-www.santacruzsentinel.comSanta Cruz's stormwater tax on the Nov. 4 ballot is drawing interest well beyond city limits.Policymakers across the county, and likely elsewhere, are watching to see if the proposed parcel tax, known as Measure E, proves to be a successful way of raising the cash needed to keep pollution from washing from streets and subdivisions into the bay.Like Santa Cruz, cities and counties up and down the coast face a quickly approaching deadline to finalize their strategies for controlling stormwater runoff. In all of these areas, though, money remains an obstacle to creating a workable plan, or at least one the state will approve."Our financing of this is not clear at this point," said county Supervisor Neal Coonerty, who is working this week to submit a joint stormwater plan for Santa Cruz County and the city of Capitola. "We're going to take a closer look at how Measure E does in the city of Santa Cruz. That's one of several possibilities for us."Stormwater runoff, which carries oil, pesticides and other wastes from developed areas into local waterways, can be limited by any number of measures, from upgrading storm drains to public education. But some can be quite expensive.The county, as well as Santa Cruz, Scotts Valley and Watsonville, have until Friday to report their stormwater plans to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. Although financial details are not part of the report, county leaders are wary of overcommitting to costly pollution controls."Considering that we're looking at a number of years of reduced funding, we're sitting here and looking at what other programs we can cut to make this happen," Coonerty said. "Honestly, I don't think this should be put off, but the state should pay for it. It's a huge financial burden for the local jurisdictions."For several months, county leaders have gone back and forth with state officials over what is required of them. A letter sent last month from the water board identified 81 deficiencies with plans the county had submitted earlier this year.While most of the problems can be easily corrected, like providing more information, some require time and effort, like committing to increased street cleaning and greater pollution monitoring.John Ricker, the county's water resources director,said the revised plan the county will submit this week likely will address most of the state's concerns. But he says there are some things the county can't do, for example, monitor runoff from new development to the degree the water board is requiring."My sense is they will want us to do much more than we can," he said.The water board's pressure comes as environmental regulators, with the mandate of the federal Clean Water Act, shift their attention from individual industrial sites to larger urban areas. With factories and sewage plants already controlled for pollution, regulators are now scrutinizing the more general runoff problem.As much as a quarter of all water pollution is thought to come from stormwater.State officials concede that controlling runoff will not be cheap but say it can prevent more expensive cleanup in the long run."There's a significant cost associated with not having a solid stormwater water runoff program," said Phil Hammer, an environmental scientist with the water board's Central Coast division.The county is uncertain exactly how much its final stormwater plan will cost to implement, but some cities are already speculating on a price tag.The city of Santa Cruz hopes to bring in $700,000 annually for pollution controls with Measure E, which would levy a tax of $28 per residential parcel and $94 per commercial parcel.Scotts Valley would likely need, on top of additional costs for water testing, a full-time employee to execute its stormwater plan, according to Public Works Director Ken Anderson,"But we don't have many extra employees to spare. None actually," Anderson said.Hammer, with the water board, says the state has been providing local governments extra time to develop cost-effective strategies for addressing stormwater, but can only give so much."We'd like to see it a happen sooner rather than later," he said.The water board hopes to have the local plans available for public review and completed by March of next year.Pleasure Point attorney and avid body surfer Mike Guth, who said he has seen his share of dirty runoff and subsequent beach closures, agrees that something needs to be done."It hasn't been the most aggressively managed issue in the past four years," he said. "Let's hope that changes."The county Board of Supervisors will consider its stormwater management plan at its regularly scheduled meeting at 9 a.m. today at 701 Ocean St.Los Angeles TimesConstruction of Imperial Valley water reservoir beginsThe project will store Colorado River water that had been flowing to Mexico. Southern California will be among the beneficiaries...Tony Perryhttp://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-water22-2008oct22,0,2765292,print.storyReported from The Imperial Valley — On a rocky patch of desert, federal and state officials Tuesday began construction on a $172.2-million reservoir that will store water from the Colorado River that otherwise would be "lost" to Mexico.The reservoir will mean more water for coastal Southern California, southern Nevada and central Arizona -- where water agencies have agreed to split the cost.But it will mean less water for Mexico, where farmers and cities are suffering from drought and a leaky infrastructure that has trouble delivering water to its customers.For decades, the United States has allowed Mexico to receive more water from the Colorado River than it was assured under a 1944 treaty. The excess water came from those occasions when more water was surging down the river than Imperial Valley farmers could use.But with the region suffering a historic drought, the U.S. Interior Department took the lead in devising a project to capture excess water from the All-American Canal rather than allowing it to flow south of the border."It's not Mexico's water," said Stella Mendoza, a member of the Imperial Irrigation District board. "It's California's water. Mexico has been using it for free all these years. They should have realized that someday it would stop."The reservoir, scheduled to be completed in August 2010, is the second Imperial Valley project that will mean more water for the United States but less for Mexico. At a cost of nearly $250 million, a 23-mile stretch of the All-American Canal is being lined with concrete to prevent seepage.Seepage from the canal, and excess flows from the Colorado River, have helped replenish the Mexicali Valley aquifer. Studies by San Diego State and the Mexican government have predicted dire consequences for thousands of Mexican farmers because of the lining and reservoir projects.When the canal-lining project was in the planning stage, U.S. and Mexican officials began negotiations to find ways to diminish the effect on Mexico. The talks broke down when the Mexican government sued -- unsuccessfully -- to block the project.Last year, Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne and his Mexican counterpart agreed on a binational study group to find ways to stretch the Colorado River supplies for both countries.Kempthorne, the key speaker at Tuesday's groundbreaking, said he remained hopeful that the two countries would find solutions to their common problem: drought.He called the reservoir "a triumph for common sense water-management policy" and noted that it brought together three agencies that have feuded for years over allocations from the Colorado River.The cost is to be split among the Southern Nevada Water Authority ($115 million), the Central Arizona Project ($28.6 million) and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California ($28.6 million).Each will receive a share of water in proportion to how much it has paid.The water will be sent from the All-American Canal into the 500-acre reservoir in times of surplus. When farmers in the Imperial Valley need water, they can draw it from the reservoir. In turn, the three agencies paying the cost will be allowed to boost their share from the Colorado River.Despite the canal lining and reservoir, Mexico will still receive its allocation under the 1944 treaty, officials said. The reservoir is next to the All-American Canal, 35 miles east of El Centro.For Metropolitan, the additional water comes as the agency's board of directors is set to begin discussions about possible mandatory cutbacks to its customers in six counties."This project could not have come at a better time for Metropolitan," said Roger Patterson, the agency's assistant general manager. "Our water supplies are under a great deal of pressure."MSNBCFeds rush to ease endangered species rules 15 reviewers, 200,000 comments, 32 hours to go through all of them...The Associated Presshttp://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27312289/print/1/displaymode/1098/WASHINGTON - Rushing to ease endangered species rules before President Bush leaves office, U.S. Interior Department officials are trying to review 200,000 comments from the public in just 32 hours, according to an e-mail obtained by The Associated Press.The Fish and Wildlife Service has called a team of 15 people to Washington this week to pore through letters and online comments about a proposal to exclude greenhouse gases and the advice of federal biologists from decisions about whether dams, power plants and other federal projects could harm species. That would be the biggest change in endangered species rules since 1986.In an e-mail last week to Fish and Wildlife managers across the country, Bryan Arroyo, head of the agency's endangered species program, said the team would work eight hours a day starting Tuesday to the close of business on Friday to sort through the comments. Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne's office, according to the e-mail, will be responsible for analyzing and responding to them.Last week's end to the public comment period initiated the review.'Last-ditch attempt'Democratic Rep. Nick Rahall, chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, whose own letter opposing the changes is among the thousands that will be processed, called the 32-hour deadline a "last-ditch attempt to undermine the long-standing integrity of the Endangered Species program."At that rate, according to a committee aide's calculation, 6,250 comments would have to be reviewed every hour. That means that each member of the team would be reviewing at least seven comments each minute.It usually takes months to review public comments on a proposed rule, and by law the government must respond before a rule becomes final."It would seem very difficult for them in four days to respond to so many thoughtful comments in an effective way," said Eric Biber, an assistant professor at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law. Along with other law professors across the country, Biber sent in 70 pages of comment.Fish and Wildlife Service Director Dale Hall told the AP on Tuesday that the short time for processing the comments was requested by Kempthorne and would set a record."There is an effort here to see if this can be completed" before the administration is out, Hall said. He said the goal was to have the rule to the White House by early November. In May, the administration set a Nov. 1 deadline for all final regulations.Overruling Congress?How fast the rule is finished could determine how hard it is to undo.A new administration could freeze any pending rules. But if the regulation is final before the next president takes office, reversing it would require going through the review and public comment period again, which could take months and sometimes requires years.Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama already has said he would reverse the proposal. Congress also could overturn the rules through legislation, but that could take even longer. Sen. John McCain's campaign has not taken a position on the Bush administration's proposed change in endangered species regulations.Environmentalists said the move was the latest attempt by the Bush administration to overrule Congress, which for years has resisted efforts by conservative Republicans to make similar changes by amending the law.Criticism from environmental groups and Democratic leaders prompted the Interior Department to extend the public comment period from 30 days to 60 days."Somebody has lit a fire under these guys to get this done in due haste," said Jamie Rappaport Clark, executive director of Defenders of Wildlife and the head of the Fish and Wildlife Service under former President Clinton.The Interior Department received approximately 300,000 comments over the 60-day comment period, many critical of the changes. About 100,000 of them were form letters, Hall said.