11-17-08

 11-17-08Merced Sun-StarGustine's Mel Markville Sure Does Whine...Submitted by ElZorrohttp://sunspot.mercedsunstar.com/?q=node/5580Gustine candidates denounce election mailer...Written by News Staff...Saturday, November 15, 2008GUSTINE – An eleventh-hour election mailer targeting mayoral candidate Mark Melville was denounced by he and incumbent Mayor Rich Ford.The single-sheet, double-sided flyer called into question Melville’s consulting work for Pacific Holt Corporation and his relationship with Greg Hostetler, owner of Ranchwood Homes - raising allegations of conflicts of interest and imcomplete campaign disclosures which Melville categorically denied.The mailer stated that it was financed by “Concerned Citizens of Merced County.” The group is not a registered Political Action Committee, and listed a Planada post office box as its address.The flyer hit an unknown number of mailboxes the Saturday before the election, leaving Melville little opportunity to respond.“This is the lowest form of politics,” Melville said last week. “I talked to people who were visibly upset that somebody would do that to me.”Melville said he confronted Ford after learning of the flyer, and came away convinced that the incumbent mayor had nothing to do with the mailer.“That is not Rich’s style. I don’t believe Rich would stoop to anything like that,” Melville stated.Ford said he, too, was upset by the flyer.“I don’t know why somebody (in Planada) even felt it necessary to get involved in the election over here in Gustine. I don’t think it did any good, and think it may even have backfired. Something like that doesn’t go over very well in a community like this,” said Ford, who leads the election as the vote count continues. “I don’t think thereis any place for something like that.”Melville said the allegations, which largely mimic those previously posted on Mattos Newspapers’ online Soapbox forum by a vocal critic of the candidate, are entirely without merit.“There has never been any impropriety,” he declared. “They are trying to link me back to Hostetler. He is a friend of mine who has gone out of his way to make sure there was never any conflict while I was in any sort of official position. I have never voted in conflict. I keep asking for somebody to show me what I voted on that was a conflict of interest, and nobody has ever done it. They throw out insinuations, unsupported by factual information.“When you want to ruin somebody’s reputation, that’s the crime,” Melville added.He said he was incensed by the mailer.“It is disheartening. You go out and work hard; I spent $1,800 on this campaign and took no contributions,” Melville said. “I spent my own money, and then you have this happen when you have no way to go back and defend yourself.”Melville believes the flyer may have sparked enough voter interest to be at least partially responsible for the large number of provisional ballots at local polling places last Tuesday.“If all the provisionals were from people who were upset at the mailer, the count could go my way,” he theorized. “If people believed the flier, it could go Rich’s way.”Ford questioned whether the mailer had a significant impact on the outcome.“I don’t think a lot of people even read it,” he said. “They had already made up their minds by that point.”Sacramento BeeEditorial: Two big water deals now gain tractionhttp://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1402960.htmlWill Barack Obama bring peace to Western rivers?No, we are not that audacious. Nor do we presume the president-elect is spending much time getting briefed on Western water politics.But it's hard not to notice that, just two weeks after the election, negotiators have announced breakthroughs on once-stalled talks to restore two California rivers. On Thursday, federal officials, environmentalists, Indian tribes and others announced agreement with a utility, PacifiCorp, to remove four dams that block the Klamath River. This pact could potentially end years of litigation and fighting over the Klamath, while restoring salmon to a river that once was a major fish factory.Two days earlier, U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein announced a final deal among parties that have been trying to implement a restoration settlement for the San Joaquin River.Feinstein hopes to get the pact approved by Congress in the lame duck session, capping 18 years of litigation that has pitted environmentalists against irrigators that get their water from Friant Reservoir.The two deals have their differences. The San Joaquin pact is further along and would produce results more quickly. If approved by Congress, it would restore water to the river in 2009 and possibly return some salmon by 2012.The Klamath deal, by contrast, is more of a framework than a binding agreement. It has a goal of starting to remove the dams by 2020. Although some have criticized this 12-year lag, negotiators say it will give PacifiCorp time to replace power lost by the dismantling of hydroelectric dams.The common thread between these deals? The Bush administration supported both. And both included parties that, after years of hard bargaining, saw more advantage in cutting a deal than awaiting the uncertainties of a new president and Congress.So, for better or worse, Obama's election is already shaking up the inertia of Western water. More changes are sure to flow in the years ahead. Los Angeles TimesThe issues behind O.C.'s toll road plan...Los Angeles Timeshttp://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-tollroadgrafic17-2008nov17,0,3820889,print.storyThe contentious proposal to extend a toll road 16 miles, part of that through San Onofre State Beach in northern San Diego County, has been moving slowly through the bureaucratic process for decades. The $1.3-billion road is intended to connect Rancho Santa Margarita in southern Orange County with Interstate 5 at Basilone Road just south of San Clemente. The U.S. Department of Commerce is now considering whether to override the state Coastal Commission's rejection of the project this year. Summarized below are key aspects of the dispute.-- Susannah Rosenblatt EnvironmentThe U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued a biological opinion in April, which concluded that although alternative routes would have a lesser effect, the road would be "not likely to jeopardize the continued existence" of at-risk species in the 2,107-acre state park. A coalition of environmental groups filed a federal lawsuit in August alleging that the agency's opinion was flawed.* Pro-road: Supporters say mitigation measures such as preserved and re-created habitat, wildlife crossings and scientific monitoring would help protect nine federally endangered or threatened species in the area. They point out that trestles and Interstate 5 already cross the San Mateo Creek watershed. * Anti-road: Many conservationists consider San Onofre State Beach part of one of the last pristine watersheds in Southern California and say an extension of California 241 would encroach on critical habitat and put other state parks at risk. SurfingCobbles on the seafloor help create the unique waves that make the Trestles surf break famous. Both sides have commissioned hydrology studies to bolster their arguments.* Pro-road: Supporters, who say their studies are more extensive, point out that the Foothill South would be half a mile from the beach and would not alter surfing conditions. * Anti-road: Opponents say sediment caused by runoff and construction grading would flow into San Mateo Creek, potentially altering the natural movement of cobbles to the ocean and ruining the waves. CampingWith 2.8 million visitors last year, San Onofre State Beach was the fourth-most visited in California. The inland San Mateo campground was created as mitigation for the nearby San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. The toll road and right of way would take up 320 acres, or 27% of the inland portion of the park. Supporters say no campsites would be destroyed, but in a 2004 letter, parks Director Ruth Coleman said the road would render the campground and nature trails "unusable." The department's current position on the matter is neutral." The California State Parks Foundation, a nonprofit advocacy group, and the state parks commission oppose the road.* Pro-road: Supporters say only 5% of the park's visitors use the inland campground, which is adjacent to power lines. The toll road would be 385 feet from the nearest campsite, farther than campsites in a different part of the park are from Interstate 5.* Anti-road: Opponents say the planned six-lane turnpike is much larger than an existing two-lane access road, and a 16-foot sound wall intended to block traffic noise would impair the rustic atmosphere. The toll road, opponents say, would ruin the campground.Native AmericansFormer Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer filed a lawsuit in 2006 with the support of the state Native American Heritage Commission to block the road, which would cut through Panhe, a sacred ceremonial site. One of four tribal factions agreed to settle with the Transportation Corridor Agencies.* Pro-road: The toll road agency says it has been working with Orange County tribes for more than a decade to try to avoid sacred areas. The agency says federal law offers better protection for cultural resources than state law.* Anti-road: Native American groups and their supporters lament the potential loss of Panhe. TrafficThe Federal Highway Administration endorsed the proposed route, which was selected by Caltrans, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Environmental Protection Agency and other state and federal agencies. The turnpike would be an alternative to Interstate 5 in southern Orange County. Daily car trips are expected to grow 60% within two decades. The California Department of Transportation signed a non-compete agreement with the toll road agency in 1993 that bars Caltrans from making major road improvements within five miles of either side of the toll road, with some exemptions for safety and other requirements. The agreement expires in 2020. * Pro-road: Supporters estimate that without the toll road extension, travel times on Interstate 5 between Mission Viejo and San Diego County will worsen. The road, they say, is a vital link in a regional transportation plan and has been on the books since 1981. Widening Interstate 5, they say, would mean razing 1,200 homes and businesses. * Anti-road: Opponents say Interstate 5 can by widened without widespread destruction of homes and businesses, and that the toll road agency's widening plan relies on the most intrusive design. Opponents proposed an alternative plan, which was recently rejected by the Federal Highway Administration as "not reasonable and feasible."SecurityAbout a quarter of the road cuts through Camp Pendleton. Marine Col. J.B. Seaton, a commanding officer, said the road would bring "security and training enhancements" to the base but is not essential to adequate security at the facility. * Pro-road: Supporters say an additional thoroughfare would help first responders travel through the county in the event of a disaster. Construction of the road would include improvements to fences, gates and other infrastructure on the base. * Anti-road: Opponents say the road would be "detrimental" to national security.PoliticsThe toll road agency was formed in the 1980s by local Orange County officials seeking alternative ways to fund construction of new roads.* Pro-road: Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger backs the toll road project, as do eight members of Congress and 14 state legislators.* Anti-road: Twenty-five members of Congress and 38 state legislators have signed letters opposing the plan. Santa Monica Councilman Bobby Shriver, the governor's brother-in-law, and film director Clint Eastwood say they were booted off the state parks commission over their opposition to the Foothill South -- a claim the governor's office disputes. CNN MoneyCitigroup to cut more than 50,000 jobsNew York City-based bank unveils massive layoff plan -- the latest step by the embattled firm to slim down in response to the economic slowdown...David Ellishttp://money.cnn.com/2008/11/17/news/companies/citigroup/index.htm?postversion=2008111712NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Citigroup said Monday it planned to cut more than 50,000 jobs, the latest move by the struggling bank to cut costs in order to weather the credit crisis plaguing Wall Street.In an investor presentation on its Web site, the company said it would reduce its workforce to approximately 300,000 employees. As of the end of September, the New York City-based bank had about 352,000 employees.This would be a 20% reduction in Citigroup's staff from their peak levels late last year.Roughly half of those jobs would come as a result of recent division sales, including the sale of the company's German retail banking division. A Citigroup spokesperson said the remainder would touch all divisions of the company, both domestically and internationally.Last week, there was speculation that the company's investment banking and wealth management divisions would feel the brunt of the cuts.Citigroup CEO Vikram Pandit, who was appointed last December, addressed the job cuts at an employee town hall meeting held Monday morning.In a memo to company employees Monday, Pandit asked workers to remain committed to their clients and customers ahead of what is expected to be a difficult 2009. "Citi needs you to maintain your focus on helping them succeed because now is the time when lasting loyalty is earned," he wrote. Most of the cuts are expected to take place by year end before trailing off sometime in 2009. What remains unclear is whether more layoffs could follow. The company described the cuts as a "near-term" target.Citigroup's announcement is the latest blow to an already reeling labor market. Nearly 1.2 million jobs have been lost this year and the unemployment rate hit a more than 14-year high of 6.5% in October. And according to figures from outplacement firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas, Citigroup's job cuts rank among the largest since Challenger began tracking layoffs in 1993. IBM announced job cuts of 60,000 workers in July 1993 while retailer Sears announced 50,000 job cuts in January 1993. A company in crisisMonday's news from Citigroup is yet another example of how the bank is desperately trying to cut costs in the wake of the financial crisis. Citigroup, the nation's second largest bank by assets behind JPMorgan Chase (JPM, Fortune 500), has been one of the hardest hit financial institutions since the credit markets first began to seize up last year.Over the past four quarters, the New York City-based firm has trimmed its payroll by 23,000 workers and announced plans this past spring to sell off various divisions.During that same time frame, the company has lost more than $20 billion, due in large part to its ill-timed bets on the U.S. housing market. But Citigroup tried to impress upon Wall Street Monday that it was in a position of strength. The bank said its revenues have remained stable and that the company had plenty of capital following a move by the U.S. Treasury into inject $25 billion into the bank as part of the government rescue plan.Investors seemed largely unconvinced and unwilling to believe that the latest job cuts would do much to prop up the ailing firm."The patient was diagnosed with cancer a year ago and now they want to start giving them chemo," said William Smith, president of SAM Advisors LLC, whose firm owns shares of Citigroup. "I think it is too little too late."Citigroup (C, Fortune 500) stock tumbled more than 6% in late morning trading on the New York Stock Exchange. In the last two weeks alone, shares have lost about a third of their value and so far this year, they are down about 68%.Last month, the company lost a high-profile battle for struggling regional bank Wachovia (WB, Fortune 500). Citigroup had a government-brokered deal to buy Wachovia's retail banking assets but Wachovia later agreed to a takeover offer for the entire company from the West Coast banking giant Wells Fargo (WFC, Fortune 500).Some analysts have speculated that Citigroup may be looking to acquire another bank. But as the U.S. economy continues to slow down and more consumers lose their jobs, the bank will probably have to focus more on rising loan losses. Citigroup has set aside more than twice the amount of money it did a year ago to cover bad loans.There has also been talk of a potential shakeup in the senior management ranks. Last week, The Wall Street Journal reported that the company is considering replacing chairman Sir Win Bischoff. Citigroup's board sent a memo to all employees calling the report "irresponsible and completely inaccurate" however