1-4-09

 1-4-09Modesto BeeIf you want to make decent pay, don't work in northern valley...J.N. Sbrantihttp://www.modbee.com/local/v-print/story/552461.htmlThe wage gap is growing between what Northern San Joaquin Valley employers pay and what's paid by employers statewide and nationally.Stanislaus County employers, for instance, paid workers 35.5 percent less than the California average and 18.5 percent less than the national average in 2007.New Bureau of Economic Analysis wage statistics show how valley businesses for decades have paid employees less, but the disparity has worsened during this recession.Before the valley's economy began tanking in 2006, Stanislaus, San Joaquin and Merced county wages were slowly narrowing the wage gap. During the so-called "dot-com bust" in 2001 and 2002, for instance, valley wage increases soared compared with those offered by employers elsewhere in the state and nation. Valley wages also outpaced state and national averages during this region's 2003-2005 building boom.But those good years were too few and the gains were too little to eliminate long-term pay inequalities. Now that the valley's economy has crumbled, BEA statistics show that valley employers are providing relatively meager pay increases.Example: Stanislaus employers paid workers an average of $37,034 last year, compared with California's average of $50,182. Wages were even worse in Merced County, $32,712, and not much better in San Joaquin, $38,407.Bay Area pay far higherIt's obvious why so many valley folks commute over the Coast Range for work when valley wages are compared with what Bay Area employers paid on average in 2007: Alameda County, $58,014; Contra Costa County, $55,293; San Mateo County, $71,517; San Francisco County, $75,102; and Santa Clara County, $82,003.And it seems the rich just keep getting richer. In Santa Clara, for example, wages rose more than 7 percent last year, which was more than double Stanislaus' 3.4 percent wage gain.But not all valley workers suffered equally: Those employed by local government agencies did much better than those working for private companies.When all types of compensation are considered, including retirement plan contributions and fringe benefits, Stanislaus' local governments boosted pay packages nearly 5.9 percent last year. Stanislaus' private employers raised compensation less than 3.2 percent.The contrast was more drastic in Merced, where local government agencies hiked compensation 8 percent, compared with private company increases of less than 2.5 percent.Thousands of employee compensation statistics are posted on the BEA's Web site, www.bea.gov. Besides average wage statistics, the bureau tracks compensation and job numbers for 114 industries and 3,111 counties.Stanislaus employers, for example, had 183,552 full-time and part-time workers in 2007 who were paid nearly $6.8 billion in wages and $1.65 billion worth of fringe benefits. Health care is Stanislaus' fastest growing sector. Health care employer payrolls swelled nearly 13 percent in 2007.Meanwhile, payrolls for retail trade, construction and real estate companies declined, reflecting the collapse of the housing market.Sacramento BeeAnother View: Sanitation agency ready to help Delta...Mary K. SnyderMary K. Snyder, district engineer for the Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District, is responding to the Dec. 31 editorial "A half-million on spin, not science / Public relations is no substitute for research on ammonia in Delta." http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/v-print/story/1513222.htmlMembers of the Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District are glad to read that The Bee acknowledges that science should drive policy concerning the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. We have been advocating the same point for years with little traction.For too long, the district's efforts to define its role in the debate and respond to inflammatory and unsubstantiated claims were met with a serious lack of interest or, even worse, skepticism. Now, we're encouraged that the facts about the Delta debate are reaching a larger audience.Unfortunately, The Bee's editorial took us to task for hiring a public relations firm to counter the well-funded, aggressive misinformation campaign being waged by state water contractors. As an organization of mostly engineers, technical and operational experts, we're in unfamiliar political territory and inexperienced at telling our story in that arena. But too much is at stake for Sacramento for us to just sit back and allow others to create a political environment that forces Sacramento ratepayers to subsidize water infrastructure and treatment for other parts of the state. The Bee's editorial challenges all parties to be more proactive. In fact, over the years, the district has invested millions of dollars in water quality research for the Sacramento River watershed. We were instrumental in creating the Sacramento River Watershed Program and secured several grants to fund the Sacramento River Toxic Pollutant Control Program.We have long promoted the need for more research to determine the actual impact of our discharge on Delta species and are supporting the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board's current efforts to conduct the only definitive, relevant research on ammonia. We stand ready to participate in efforts to understand and sustain the Delta ecosystem. Los Angeles TimesUC officials debate accepting more non-Californians to boost revenueOut-of-state and international students could help the public university system cushion cuts in funding, but could also keep out qualified local applicants...Larry Gordonhttp://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-outofstate4-2009jan04,0,925839,print.storyUCLA sophomore Ying Chen could have stayed at home in New Jersey for college, but instead she traveled cross-country, where she willingly pays about $20,000 a year more for her education than most of her classmates.Some UC officials think that increasing the number of students like Chen would be a smart way for the university system to bring in more revenue at a time when the state budget is tight. They point to other state university systems that enroll much higher percentages of out-of-state students.Opponents of the idea warn that it could squeeze out qualified California students."When we start chasing that money as a substitute for state money, that's bad public policy," said Lt. Gov. John Garamendi, a regent by virtue of his office who is also exploring a run for governor.Chen, an anthropology major, said she could have attended Rutgers University, a New Jersey state university, for much less money but was drawn west by UCLA's beautiful campus and the chance to explore a faraway state even if she can't afford Thanksgiving trips home. "Of course, it would be lovely" if she didn't have to pay the price differential UC charges out-of-state students. Still, choosing UCLA, she said, "was a good decision."At UC campuses, in-state freshmen pay about $8,100 in fees, not including room, board or books. Because California does not provide funding for out-of-state students, about half of the extra $20,000 they pay each year covers UC's costs and the other half is profit for the system, officials said. David Shulenburger, vice president for academic affairs at the National Assn. of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges in Washington, D.C., said he expects more public universities across the country "as a matter of survivability" to at least consider additional recruiting outside their states. The premium tuition for out-of-state students helps schools afford basic functions and subsidize in-state students' fees, he said.About 10% of UC's 220,000 students, including those in undergraduate and graduate programs, are from outside California. But only about 6% of the undergraduates are non-Californians.By contrast, about 16% of first-time undergraduates at public four-year colleges and universities nationwide are from other states or other countries, according to the U.S. Department of Education. Prestigious state universities in Colorado, Michigan, Virginia and elsewhere regularly enroll more than 30% of their freshmen classes from outside their state borders. UC regent Judith Hopkinson recently urged the university's governing board to consider increasing the numbers of out-of-state students for the financial and social benefits that she said are provided by a more geographically diverse student body. Hopkinson, in an interview, suggested that having more than 15% to 20% of undergraduates from outside California might be a long-range goal to cushion some of the projected cuts in state funding. "We ought to look at it," she said. "Because I believe it is in the financial benefit of the university in the long run, I like to keep an open eye to all options."Out-of-state students generally are held to higher admissions standards, which can boost a campus' average GPA and SAT scores and national rankings. Non-Californians from the U.S. are eligible for many financial aid programs at UC although they face higher thresholds.Proposed steep cuts in state funds this school year and next have prompted UC to consider limiting overall enrollment next fall. If that happens, said Patrick Callan, president of the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education in San Jose, any move to boost the number of out-of-state students at UC "would be politically suicidal. Can you imagine the Legislature standing for that?" Some Midwestern and Northeastern states are experiencing significant declines in their college-age population and may be able to accommodate more students from out of state, but that is not so in California, he said. Callan added that describing the issue as a diversity effort falls flat in immigrant-rich California "since we already have people from all over the world here." According to UC system spokesman Ricardo Vazquez, UC has no set quotas and no regulation regarding the percentages of in-state and out-of-state enrollees. But in recent years, the university had fallen about 1,000 short of its tradition of enrolling out-of-state and international students at all levels, partly as a result of troubles that some foreign students had in obtaining visas in the wake of the 2001 terrorist attacks. The UC central administration recently pushed campuses to reach targets or potentially lose some revenue. Preliminary numbers for this fall are up to the traditional 10%, combining undergraduates and graduates. California's other public university system, the 23-campus Cal State chain, enrolls a much smaller proportion. Only about 4% of its 440,000 students, undergraduate and graduate, are not from California, officials reported.In past years Cal State had no limits on out-of-state students, but new applicants from outside California for next fall might have a tough time gaining entrance because Cal State is considering cutting overall enrollment by 10,000, according to system spokeswoman Clara Potes-Fellow. Non-Californians will have low admission priority, she said.At UCLA, freshman Derick Tsaoi said he passed up a large scholarship offered by the University of Maryland in his home state. Instead, after much deliberation, he took out substantial loans to attend UCLA and study biochemistry in what he described as a more adventurous and academically prestigious setting.At first he was a bit lonely and struck by how few non-Californians are at UCLA. "But after a while, I realized that's why I went there," he said, "to meet new people."Washington PostU.S. Forest Policy Is Set to Change, Aiding DeveloperShift Would Let Firm Pave Logging Roads...Karl Vickhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/03/AR2009010301715_pf.htmlLOS ANGELES -- The Bush administration appears poised to push through a change in U.S. Forest Service agreements that would make it far easier for mountain forests to be converted to housing subdivisions.Mark E. Rey, the former timber lobbyist who heads the Forest Service, last week signaled his intent to formalize the controversial change before the Jan. 20 inauguration of President-elect Barack Obama. As a candidate, Obama campaigned against the measure in Montana, where local governments have complained of being blindsided by Rey's negotiating the policy shift behind closed doors with the nation's largest private landowner.The shift is technical but has large implications. It would allow Plum Creek Timber to pave roads through Forest Service land. For decades, such roads were little more than trails used by logging trucks to reach timber stands.But as Plum Creek has moved into the real estate business, paving those roads became a necessary prelude to opening vast tracts of the company's 8 million acres to the vacation homes that are transforming landscapes across the West.Scenic western Montana, where Plum Creek owns 1.2 million acres, would be most affected, placing fresh burdens on county governments to provide services and undoing efforts to cluster housing near towns."Just within the last couple weeks, they finalized a big subdivision west of Kalispell," said D. James McCubbin, deputy county attorney of Missoula County, which complained that the closed-door negotiations violated federal laws requiring public comment because the changes would affect endangered species and sensitive ecosystems. Kalispell is in Flathead County, where officials also protested.The uproar last summer forced Rey to postpone finalizing the change, which came after "considerable internal disagreement" within the Forest Service, according to a U.S. Government Accountability Office report requested by Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.). The report said that 900 miles of logging roads could be paved in Montana and that amending the long-held easements "could have a nationwide impact."Tester and Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), who chairs the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, then asked for an inquiry by the inspector general of the Agriculture Department, which includes the Forest Service."I think we need another set of eyes on it," Tester said Friday. "I don't think that's running out the clock. If this is a good agreement, then what's the rush? Why do it in the eleventh hour of this administration?"Probably because the proposal would die after Jan. 20. Obama sharply criticized Rey's efforts during the presidential campaign, seizing on concerns that a landscape dotted with luxury homes would be less hospitable to Montanans accustomed to easy access to timberlands."At a time when Montana's sportsmen are finding it increasingly hard to access lands, it is outrageous that the Bush administration would exacerbate the problem by encouraging prime hunting and fishing lands to be carved up and closed off," Obama said.Rey vows to act soon. In a Dec. 12 letter to Tester and Bingaman, he repeated his logic for granting Plum Creek the changes it requested, then closed with a promise to schedule briefings "to describe how we plan to proceed."In a phone interview Wednesday, Rey said he will act immediately after the courtesy meetings with the lawmakers. "That will probably be in the next week or so, before this goes forward," he said. Tester said he has not yet heard from Rey's office to arrange a meeting.On environmental questions, the Bush administration has a checkered record of following through on promised eleventh-hour changes, said Robert Dreher, a lawyer with Defenders of Wildlife."I suppose it's a legacy issue," Dreher said. "They've already backed off on a couple of things they said they were going to do," including proposed changes on marine fisheries and industrial emissions.On the other hand, the Bush White House went ahead with controversial changes to the Endangered Species Act, despite opposition from environmentalists.The Plum Creek deal could be accomplished with the stroke of a pen. Because it amends existing easements, the change involves no 30-day waiting period. But the step carries a political cost that the administration evidently has been assessing since June, when Rey said he expected to formalize within a month the change, which half a year later is still hanging fire."It's conceivable they don't want to leave office looking like bad guys," Dreher said. "There's been a lot of concern about the nature of the process and the lack of inclusiveness. You've got the county government in Montana angry over it. If they do this walking out the door, they're kind of ramming it down their throats."