6-11-09

 
6-11-09
Badlands Journal
A first look at the dairy crisis...Badlands Journal editorial board
http://www.badlandsjournal.com/2009-06-10/007262
Although “oligarchy” may not be a word that springs to the lips of every dairymen, we bet that the top commentary in the collection below, “The Diary Oligarchy,” will ring a lot truer to them than the three versions of the same McClatchy editorial calling for a “free market” for the dairy industry, presumably to solve the “over-production” problem.
 The paradox is that dairy prices are determined by government, federal in the case of most states, in California by the state. The idea is that there should be some public benefit, some “government oversight” in the process because in an actual unregulated “free market,” the job of getting supply to correlate with demand had been found to be impossible. That’s why government regulation of prices began in the 1930s. The witless master McClatchy editorialist writes as if the dairy industry was like the oil industry. This is quite an act of institutional amnesia for a newspaper chain whose entire history of growth and expansion has been entwined with the production of perishable agricultural commodities. A media oligarch like the McClatchy Co., who drank so much of the corporate kool-air that its stock has been trading below a dollar for six months, should have the keenest awareness of perishability.
Badlands Journal editorial board
6-8-09
CounterPunch.com
Drinking the Kool-Aid of Corporate America
The Dairy Oligarchy
By JIM GOODMAN
http://www.counterpunch.com/goodman06082009.html
Dairy farmers are in deep trouble. Milk prices have fallen by half since last year, dropping to a 30-year low. Consumption has fallen in light of the slowing world economy and now there is a huge milk surplus, or so the “experts” tell us.
It's a nice theory, surplus equals low prices, easy to explain and easily accepted by farmers. Farmers want an explanation, they listen to the dairy ”experts”, they drink the kool-aid.
Farm prices, like the rest of the world economy, crashed because of a globalized, unregulated free market system, not because of surplus product. According to New York dairy farmer/market analyst John Bunting “dairy markets are run by an oligarchy-- a few elite players-- with little or no government oversight”. The parallels between the current dairy price crash and the Wall Street financial crash are pointedly exact.
Both crashes were engineered by the same sort of folks, those who promised us they had the Midas Touch but were instead, Bulls in the China Shop.
Just as Wall Street investment bankers took advantage of the removal of regulatory safeguards put in place by the government after the 1930's depression, so did the “elite players” of the dairy industry take advantage when the US Congress scraped parity dairy pricing in 1981.
Until 1981 as Bunting shows, farm and consumer milk prices were perfectly correlated. Since 1981 (according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics) inflation adjusted farm prices have steadily fallen while consumer prices have steadily risen.
Increased 2009 first quarter earnings of Kraft Foods (up 29%) and Dean Foods (up 39%) came, according to The Milkweed, “from dairy farmers' grief”.
If US dairy farmers are overproducing, why are imports of dairy product constantly rising? The National Milk Producers Federation notes “In the past 10 years alone, the value of dairy imports sold in the U.S. has expanded from $800 million, to nearly $3 billion”.
Why have cheese imports increased in the first quarter of 2009 over 2008? Or as Bunting notes, how can free falling milk prices be justified by the following data?
Nearly as much nonfat dry milk was exported in December 2008 as was exported in December 2007.
December 2008 imports of milk protein concentrates were massive.
Imports of casein, another dairy derived protein, also increased in December 2008.
“Butter and other milkfats” imports increased nearly 60% in December 2008 compared with December 2007.
Cheese imports for December 2008 increased 15% over December 2007.
Commercial disappearance of dairy products increased in December 2008 and for the 2008 year increased 2.6% according to USDA data.
Just as US corporations shipped jobs to low wage workers overseas, Kraft and Dean Foods welcome the products of lower wage overseas farmers. Just as low priced foreign textiles, electronics and auto parts put US workers out of their jobs, so are foreign farm imports putting US farmers out of business.
Clearly, supply and demand does not control farm prices, nor do low priced imports mean lower consumer prices. Just as in the financial sector or the manufacturing sector, prosperity is intentionally funneled to the top at the misery and expense of the workers and taxpayers.
Government regulation on behalf of the worker and consumer appears to be non-existent. Yet we continue to listen to the economists, the corporate oligarchs and Congress who keep telling us prosperity is just around the corner, globalization and the free market will deliver us all.
More kool-aid anyone?
Jim Goodman is a dairy farmer and activist from Wonewoc, WI and a WK Kellogg Food and Society Policy Fellow. 
6-5-09
Sacramento Bee
Editorial: Free market time for state's dairies
http://www.sacbee.com/editorials/story/1920464.html
Farmers can be a hardy lot, working in tough physical conditions, battling the weather, and dealing with an increasingly volatile global economy that sends prices soaring one year and plummeting the next.
But sometimes farms are like many other big businesses, looking to control their markets and minimize risk while turning to government to protect them from competition and the business cycle.
These days, unfortunately, California's massive dairy industry is acting more like the OPEC oil cartel than the friendly family farmer many of us envision when we think of the state's bountiful agriculture industry.
Milk prices have been low lately, and while that's good for consumers, it's not good for farmers. Naturally, they want to do something about it.
But threatening to collude to limit supply – or, worse yet, asking the government to do it for them – is not the right approach.
Last week a group of California farmers started talking about dumping 2 million gallons of milk to drive up prices. Another plan in the works has the government fining farms that expand more rapidly than the industry leaders deem appropriate, say 2 percent to 3 percent a year, and giving that money to farmers who agree to limit their production.
So far both of these approaches seem unlikely to happen. But a herd-reduction program funded by farmers is sending 100,000 cows to slaughter nationwide, and the federal government has stepped up its efforts to increase demand and send milk prices higher.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture has been buying more milk powder at taxpayer-supported prices, and the agency plans to start subsidizing bulk exports of milk powder, butter and cheese.
The sad truth is that many farms expanded too rapidly when prices were high and export markets were healthy. As they made good money in 2007 and 2008, they grew their herds to 9.3 million cows nationally. Yields increased to a record 22 billion gallons in 2008.
Now the worldwide economy has slowed, demand has slackened and prices have dropped. The farmers want relief.
California's dairies amount to a $7 billion industry that is the single largest agricultural sector in the state. They employ thousands of people, pay taxes and have become an integral part of their local economies.
But they also rely on subsidized water to grow the feed that keeps them in business, and their factory-farm methods can be hazardous to the health of the waterways around them. Many critics question whether California is the best place for these huge operations.
Now these farmers want consumers to pay artificially high prices to get them through bad times, warning that letting some of them go out of business will ultimately be bad for us all.
We don't wish ill on any business, but we're not convinced that the plight of the dairy farmer rises to a level of concern requiring government intervention in the economy. Perhaps it is time to end the long history of such meddling and let consumers and the industry find their own equilibrium in a free exchange in the marketplace.
It is time to let the cheese – and the milk from which it comes – stand alone
Merced Sun-Star
Our View: Let dairies find own equilibrium
Milk industry is suffering greatly; maybe it's time to look for new solutions.
http://www.mercedsunstar.com/181/v-print/story/883980.html
Farmers can be a hardy lot, working in tough physical conditions, battling the weather, and dealing with an increasingly volatile global economy that sends prices soaring one year and plummeting the next.
But sometimes farms are like many other big businesses, looking to control their markets and minimize risk while turning to government to protect them from competition and the business cycle.
Milk prices have been low lately, and while that's good for consumers, it's not good for farmers, a good number of them here in Merced County. Naturally, they want to do something about it.
But threatening to collude to limit supply or, worse yet, asking the government to do it for them, are not the right approaches.
Last week, a group of California farmers started talking about dumping 2 million gallons of milk to drive up prices.
Another plan in the works has the government fining farms that expand more rapidly than the industry leaders deem appropriate, say 2 percent to 3 percent a year, and giving that money to farmers who agree to limit their production.
So far, both of these approaches seem unlikely to happen. But a herd-reduction program funded by farmers is sending 100,000 cows to slaughter nationwide, and the federal government has stepped up its efforts to increase demand and send milk prices higher.
The impact is very real for Le Grand dairymen Fernando De Silva and Jose Rodrigues who decided to sell off their 424 dairy cows and get out of the business.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture has been buying more milk powder at taxpayer-supported prices, and the agency plans to start subsidizing bulk exports of milk powder, butter and cheese.
The sad truth is that many farms expanded too rapidly when prices were high and export markets were healthy. As they made good money in 2007 and 2008, they grew their herds to 9.3 million cows nationally. Yields increased to a record 22 billion gallons in 2008.
Now the worldwide economy has slowed, demand has slackened and prices have dropped. The farmers want relief.
California's dairies amount to a $7 billion industry that is the single largest agricultural sector in the state. They employ thousands of people, pay taxes and have become an integral part of their local economies.
But they also rely on subsidized water to grow the feed that keeps them in business, and their factory-farm methods can be hazardous to the health of the waterways around them. Many critics question whether California is the best place for these huge operations.
Now these farmers want consumers to pay artificially high prices to get them through bad times, warning that letting some of them go out of business will ultimately be bad for us all.
We don't wish ill on any business, but we're not convinced that the plight of the dairy farmer rises to a level of concern requiring government intervention in the economy.
Perhaps it is time to end the long history of such meddling and let consumers and the industry find their own equilibrium in a free exchange in the marketplace.
It is time to let the cheese -- and the milk from which it comes -- stand alone.
6-8-09
Modesto Bee
Dairy farmers shouldn't expect a government bailout
http://www.modbee.com/editorials/story/735079.html:  
Farmers can be a hardy lot, working in tough physical conditions, battling the weather, and dealing with an increasingly volatile global economy that sends prices soaring one year and plummeting the next.
But sometimes farms are like many other big businesses, looking to control their markets and minimize risk while turning to government to protect them from competition and the business cycle.
California's massive dairy industry is in big trouble. Milk prices have been low lately, and while that's good for consumers, it's not good for dairy farmers. Naturally, they want to do something about it.
But it needs to be the right approach that's fair to farmers and consumers. Threatening to collude to limit supply or, worse yet, asking the government to do it for them, are not the right approaches.
Recently, a group of California farmers started talking about dumping 2 million gallons of milk to drive up prices.
Another plan in the works has the government fining farms that expand more rapidly than the industry leaders deem appropriate, say 2 percent to 3 percent a year, and giving that money to farmers who agree to limit their production.
So far, both of these approaches seem unlikely to happen. But it's interesting to us that agricultural interests, not unlike other industries, want government to keep its nose out of their business -- until they need a bailout.
Then there's a herd-reduction program funded by farmers that's sending 100,000 cows to slaughter nationwide.
The federal government has stepped up its efforts to increase demand and send milk prices higher.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture has been buying more milk powder at taxpayer-supported prices, and the agency plans to start subsidizing bulk exports of milk powder, butter and cheese.
The reality is that many farms expanded too rapidly when prices were high and export markets were healthy. As they made good money in 2007 and 2008, they expanded their herds to 9.3 million cows nationally. Yields increased to a record 22 billion gallons in 2008.
Now the worldwide economy has slowed, demand has slackened and prices have dropped. The farmers want relief.
California's dairies amount to a $7 billion industry, and are an important ag sector in the state's economy. They employ thousands of people, pay taxes and are integral parts of their local economies -- including here in Stanislaus County, where they are the largest ag industry.
But now these farmers want consumers to pay artificially high prices to get them through bad times, warning that letting some of them go out of business will ultimately be bad for us all.
As much as we value the dairy industry and the major role it plays in our local economy, and as much as we don't want to see hardworking dairy farmers go under, we believe the government must move very cautiously.
And, perhaps it is time to end the long history of government meddling, and let consumers and the industry find their own equilibrium in a free exchange in the marketplace.
Merced Sun-Star
Hoping to revive building, city of Merced lowers development fees...SCOTT JASON
http://www.mercedsunstar.com/167/v-print/story/894233.html
Merced's development forecast this fiscal year is particularly bleak.
No office space is expected to be built. No commercial centers are in the works. No industrial parks will break ground. A meager 25 homes will be added, city leaders think.
So in an effort to jolt the year's flat-lined development projection, Merced leaders have lowered impact fees for commercial projects and for all projects that fall within the city's core.
Merced's not alone in cutting fees to grease the wheels of construction.
Santa Maria cut impact fees by 7 percent. Menifee in Riverside County and a handful of Bay Area cities have also cut their fees, according to the Building Industry Association, which has a task force to lobby for reductions.
There's debate about whether the move will result in more swinging hammers now or later on. It does provide some incentive, but with a deep recession and a glut of available space, there may be little need for development to begin soon.
"You could cut the fees to zero and it's not going to cause development," Councilman Bill Spriggs said Wednesday.
Normally opposed to fee cuts, Spriggs voted in favor of the reduction because the city won't need to build the Nevada Street-Old Lake Road connection on the extreme north end of town within the next 20 years after all.
If the city takes major projects off its to-build list, the fees can be reduced. The two-mile road, estimated to cost $15 million, will be added back later.
He dismisses the notion that the city's fees are too high because they're driven by the list of road projects needed to accommodate growth.
"You can't compare Merced to other cities," Spriggs said. "(Fees) are directed by geography. We have creeks and railroads."
The move is a precursor to City Hall's full-scale review of impact fees, which are what developers pay to account for the stress put on services, such as roads and emergency responses.
Mayor Pro Tem John Carlisle cast the sole vote against the cuts, calling them "situational economics" with "smoke and mirror financing."
He wondered if the city was veering away from its growth-pays-for-growth mantra.
Commercial projects, which bring business and jobs, will be charged 25 percent less in impact fees.
Assistant City Manager Bill Cahill argued that because roughly a third of the shoppers come from nearby cities and don't use Merced's services, the city could safely cut fees by a quarter.
All development in the city's core -- roughly bounded by Childs and Glen avenues, Bear Creek Drive and V Street -- will see a 28 percent decrease to encourage in-fill development and redevelopment of old buildings.
The in-fill cut was higher because the area's already established and isn't in need of infrastructure upgrades, Cahill told the council during the May meeting when the changes were approved.
The city staff plans to study the fee rates during the next year as it updates Merced's general plan. The largest project on the city's horizon -- the proposed Wal-Mart distribution center -- isn't eligible for the reduced rates. The development has its own slate of road improvements to make if it's approved.
Councilman Jim Sanders said the city needs to market the lower fees, along with its airport and UC Merced, to lure more business.
"We're always in competition with every other city and county in the nation," Sanders said. "We're using this to help jump-start our economic engine."
Our View: Foreclosure money -- too little, too late?
Merced County is getting $9.3 million, but we needed it months ago.
http://www.mercedsunstar.com/181/v-print/story/894237.html
Is the money that Merced County and county cities are finally getting from the federal foreclosure aid too little, too late?
Many large cities -- including Modesto just up Highway 99 -- have already received their funding and have plans in place to spend it. Modesto got $8.1 million.
Congress passed the Housing and Recovery Act of 2008 last July, which included about $4 billion in so-called neighborhood stabilization funds to be passed along to areas across the country hit hardest by the foreclosure crisis.
That certainly describes us.
Late last year and in February, Rep. Dennis Cardoza was holding foreclosure workshops around the Valley. In March, Cardoza asked President Barack Obama and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to declare the entire San Joaquin Valley an "economic disaster area."
In contrast to what Modesto got, Merced County and its cities are getting a combined $9.3 million. And we had to apply for that through the California Department of Housing and Community Development, not from the federal government as other cities have.
The money, of which the city of Merced gets $2.04 million, will help first-time home buyers with down payments and closing costs. Cities can also use the money to buy and fix up foreclosed homes.
But the foreclosure problem in Merced County is just as bad, if not worse, than in Stanislaus and San Joaquin counties -- and both received their aid months ago.
In March, Cardoza said, "This is a huge human crisis. A family that loses its home due to a foreclosure is no less affected than a family that loses its home due to a hurricane."
The county and the cities of Merced, Los Banos, Atwater, Dos Palos, Gustine and Livingston are all making plans on how to spend the money. The county is forming a committee next week to oversee the spending and look at ways to increase affordable housing.
"It's a delayed response to the boom," said Board of Supervisors Chairwoman Deidre Kelsey.
That's because before the money even arrives, the local housing market has been flooded with buyers, both local and out-of-town, looking for good deals.
"For a decent home, it's a feeding frenzy," said local real estate agent Andy Krotik. "Every Realtor I know has clients who can't find a house."
And since the state's 90-day foreclosure moratorium ended last month, Krotik told the Sun-Star on Tuesday he expects another round of foreclosures to begin.
Whatever money we can get to help with our foreclosures is certainly welcome.
But it would have been better if we had gotten it sooner.
Letter: Why not jet-pool?...FRED WARCHOL, Atwater
http://www.mercedsunstar.com/180/v-print/story/894245.html
Editor: Almost every weekend, a U.S. Air Force Boeing 757 airliner roars down the runway at Andrews Air Force Base, bound for California.
On board this 200-seat plane is House Speaker Nancy Pelosi heading home to visit her constituents in San Francisco at a cost in fuel of $120,000, round-trip.
I suggest, Rep. Dennis Cardoza hitch a free ride to Merced. Then he would be able to see, first hand, the desperation and economic misery here in Merced County.
Of course, he will be away from his family and friends, back in Maryland. But, that's the price he would have to pay for being a California congressman.
Modesto Bee
99 push fails to draw support...Garth Stapley
http://www.modbee.com/local/v-print/story/739501.html
If Highway 99 ever becomes Interstate 99, it will owe no thanks to Stanislaus County.
A regional push to elevate the San Joaquin Valley's backbone to federal interstate status failed to gather an iota of support Wed-nesday from transportation leaders here.
The cost of upgrading to meet federal standards, $900 million, is too risky a gamble for the benefits an interstate freeway might bring, Stanislaus Council of Governments policy board members decided.
A bipartisan pair of Southern San Joaquin Valley congressmen had asked transportation leaders in each of the valley's eight counties to unite behind the interstate push.
An upgrade would help recruit large companies with jobs, say Reps. Devin Nunes, R-Visalia, and Jim Costa, D-Fresno. Highway 99 would boast at least six lanes, with eight in Stanislaus County and on other high-volume stretches.
"You've got one of the busiest corridors in the state, from Bakersfield to Sacramento, moving not only agricultural goods but thousands of valley residents every day," said Turlock native Bret Rumbeck, Costa's communications director, in an interview. "Turning 99 into an interstate would help bring federal funds needed for more improvements."
Each day, Highway 99 carries up to four times as many vehicles and 40,000 more large trucks than its parallel track to the west, Interstate 5, in the valley. But Highway 99 doesn't even measure up to the California Department of Transportation's freeway standards, which would require $700 million in improvements.
Stanislaus County Supervisor Jim DeMartini, a StanCOG member, said some federal standards set decades ago no longer are relevant. For example, many overpasses would have to be widened or raised -- reportedly to allow for smooth transport of since-outdated nuclear arms.
"It's senseless to raise them up for missiles we don't have anymore," DeMartini said after the meeting.
The issue, having been vetted in lower-level committees, provoked no comment Wednesday from the 12 StanCOG members, representing the county and its nine cities.
"I think it was clear to the policy board that there is not a benefit," county Supervisor Jeff Grover said afterward. He has complained in the past about south valley officials using the entire valley's clout for their own roadway advantage while excluding north valley counties.
Whether the other seven counties support the idea could not immediately be determined. Caltrans District 10 spokeswoman Lisa Balcom said her agency remains neutral.
A Caltrans consultant in April drew no audible support from StanCOG's policy board when he pitched the idea of the eight valley counties setting aside 10 percent of their precious federal transportation money for Highway 99. That would cost the county and its nine cities $2.1 million every two years for about 24 years. Pursuing improvements independently could take decades, he said.
Behind on Mello-Roos bill...Adam Ashton
http://www.modbee.com/local/v-print/story/739515.html
For the second year in a row, the city could threaten residents in a south Modesto subdivision if they remain delinquent on special property taxes that support public services in their neighborhood.
Nearly a fifth of the Mello-Roos property taxes owed in Fairview Village are late.
That's significant because those taxes pay for bonds that are tied to the subdivision's parks, sewers and roads.
Those bond agreements require the city to issue foreclosure notices immediately if more than 5 percent of what's owed in the special tax district is delinquent. Typically people have five years to catch up with standard property taxes before they face foreclosure.
Almost $63,000 in Mello-Roos taxes from 85 parcels in the 382-lot Fairview subdivision is late, though property owners have until June 30 to square up with the city, according to a report to the City Council's Economic Development Committee.
Those taxes are 17.8 percent of what's owed this year in the Fairview tax district, setting up probable foreclosure notices this summer.
"I anticipate that the district is going to be above 5 percent again," said Tina Rocha, who oversees special tax districts for Modesto.
Typically pay $900 a year
Despite the outstanding charges, Rocha said the city has issued one foreclosure notice because of late Mello-Roos taxes in two years.
More often, property owners catch up on the fees before the city reaches the point at which it would file for foreclosure. The landowner who received the foreclosure lawsuit, for example, kept his property by paying back taxes.
Fairview property owners typically pay about $900 a year in Mello-Roos taxes.
The city charges are a little more in east Modesto's Village I subdivision, which also has Mello-Roos taxes tied to public service bonds.
Rocha said the city likely would receive enough taxes from the Village I district to avoid the accelerated foreclosure process that Fairview homeowners could experi- ence.
Neither tax district has missed a debt service payment, according to the development committee's report.
The late taxes could represent homeowners juggling bills in a recession, people walking away from the properties or large landowners holding on to multiple parcels to develop later.
Fresno Bee
Judge finds violation in SoCal forest planning...NOAKI SCHWARTZ, Associated Press Writer
http://www.fresnobee.com/384/v-print/story/1463296.html
LOS ANGELES A federal judge ruled that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service violated the Endangered Species Act when issuing opinions on how the plans for four Southern California forests would impact wildlife.
The decision covers the Angeles, Cleveland, Los Padres and San Bernardino forests. It will require upfront estimates of how forest projects may harm endangered or threatened plants and animals such as the California condor and the gnatcatcher.
"This ruling is a great victory for the rare and endangered species that call the Southern California forests home," said Ileene Anderson, a biologist with the Center for Biological Diversity, one of the groups that sued the federal agencies.
The Forest Service revised plans for the four forests in 2005. Such plans lay out how the land and resources would be overseen for the next decade, including the management of roads, trails and recreation.
The federal agencies provided biological opinions on the potential impact of these plans on wildlife but critics said they failed to include required measures to minimize harm to the endangered species.
Groups including the Center for Biological Diversity and Sierra Club sued U.S. Fish and Wildlife, the National Marine Fisheries Service, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the U.S. Forest Service.
Judge Marilyn Hall Patel ruled Monday in San Francisco.
Patel specifically found that the agencies did not follow the law when they failed to file so-called incidental take statements with their opinions. "Take" is jargon for the killing, trapping, wounding or other harm to protected species.
She noted, for example, that the Fish and Wildlife Service biological opinion identified Forest Service programs likely to adversely affect listed species, such as management of road, trails and recreation.
"The opinion noted that the use of roads and recreation sites under the plan can result in effects such as the crushing of animals, invasion of non-native species and harmful vegetation clearing," Patel's ruling said.
The biological opinions indicated that incidental take statements would be provided when site-specific projects are undertaken, she wrote.
The plaintiffs contended that the effect of that process would be to eliminate triggers for reviewing the forest plans if an actual take exceeded estimates.
The ruling gave the parties 21 days to respond.
Scott Flaherty, a spokesman for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Pacific Southwest Region that oversees California and Nevada said ruling was being reviewed
US to reconsider species protection for wolverines...SUSAN GALLAGHER, Associated Press Writer
http://www.fresnobee.com/641/v-print/story/1463875.html
HELENA, Mont. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service intends to reconsider its decision that denied wolverines protection under the Endangered Species Act.
The reconsideration is part of a settlement of a 2008 lawsuit filed by wildlife groups challenging the agency's denial. The settlement filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Missoula must be approved by a judge.
The lawsuit last year charged that the government disregarded scientific conclusions that wolverines were in jeopardy. The groups challenged as too high a government estimate that about 500 wolverines live in the Lower 48.
The settlement requires the Fish and Wildlife Service to issue a new determination of the wolverine's status by December 2010.
"We're very pleased that the wolverine is going to get a second chance," said Tim Preso, a lawyer at Earthjustice, an environmental law firm based in Bozeman.
Fish and Wildlife Service spokeswoman Diane Katzenberger at the agency's regional office in Denver said the case still is considered ongoing litigation and therefore she had no comment on it.
Obama looks to end expedited mining reviews...DINA CAPPIELLO,Associated Press Writer
http://www.fresnobee.com/641/v-print/story/1464361.html
WASHINGTON The Obama administration wants tougher environmental reviews for coal companies that mine the Appalachians by blasting off mountaintops and discarding the rubble in stream valleys.
The administration plans to announce Thursday a proposal to eliminate the expedited reviews that have made it easier for mining companies to get approval for mountaintop mining.
The proposal is part of an agreement between three federal agencies that will lead to a series of changes to boost federal oversight and environmental screening of the practice.
Nancy Sutley, head of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, said in an interview with The Associated Press that the Interior Department, Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps of Engineers will establish clear standards that will ensure the environment, economy and health of Appalachia are adequately protected.
Mining waste dumped into waterways can diminish water quality for fish and other aquatic organisms, and taint sources of drinking water.
"We need to give the right amount of scrutiny to these activities," Sutley said.
President Barack Obama, while campaigning for the White House, expressed concern about the mountaintop mining, saying at one point that it was tearing up the Appalachian Mountains.
His administration has already cast a more critical eye on the process than its predecessor, which was accused of granting permits with little scrutiny. In March, the EPA announced it would more take a closer look at about 150 mountaintop mining permits pending before the Army Corps of Engineers to ensure they will not harm streams and wetlands.
The agency objected to some projects but has said dozens would likely proceed.
Then in April, the Interior Department asked a federal judge to vacate a Bush rule that makes it easier to dump mining waste near waterways.
On Thursday, the Obama administration will take another step by proposing to eliminate a short cut in place since 1982 that allows mining companies proposing similar projects to get a general permit under the Clean Water Act, rather than being evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
About 30 percent of mountaintop removal projects are permitted under the general permit to discharge waste into streams, according to administration officials.
Mountaintop mines in West Virginia, Virginia, Kentucky and Tennessee produce nearly 130 million tons of coal each year, or about 14 percent of the coal that produces electricity. It also employs about 14,000 people with high-paying jobs.
The agreement to be announced Thursday will address those concerns, too, officials said, by having federal agencies work together to diversify and strengthen the regional economy, including the development of clean energy jobs.
Tulare Voice
Partner: Racetrack Financing Secured...John Lindt
http://www.valleyvoicenewspaper.com/tv/stories/2009/tv_racetrack_
0090.htm
Proponents of the 711-acre racetrack project are about ready to go on a victory lap after four years of struggle.
Not only did the Tulare County Local Agency Formation Commission last week stand by its decision allowing the city to annex land needed for the project, but Tulare Motor Sports Complex partners report they have found financing.
“What I can say today is that all entitlements are in place and we have now inked a deal for our financing that will allow everything to move forward,” partner Dave Swindell said late last week.
Swindell said he will be able to name the lender of more than $100 million for infrastructure and other work within a few days. “The commitment has been made.”
He estimated the project, which is expected to include a speedway, drag strip, hotels, a recreational vehicle park, industrial and office space, housing and other features, is valued at more than $400 million.
The fact it has taken four years to get to this point is not unusual, Swindell said. “It's taken this long or longer with my other two race tracks at Pikes Peak and Las Vegas.”
The news came only a few days after Tulare International Agri-Center officials said a new escrow had been opened up with the Fresno-based racing group.
Source say the group put down a $500,000 non-refundable deposit to get the escrow reopened after a deal stalled last January. When the latest transaction closes the Agri-Center stands to take in about $25 million from its sale of approximately 350 acres.
Swindell estimated fans can now look for the first race in Tulare to take place in Spring 2011.
Construction in August
“The next big thing people will see is that public improvements will start – putting in infrastructure, sewer, storms drains and new streets,” Swindell said, adding that work should begin Aug. 24.
About 45 days later the group expects to begin construction on ground facilities, such as the race tracks and grandstands, which will take about 18 months to complete.
“Already the construction drawings are nearly done,” said the promoter, who like fellow partner Bud Long has been mostly quiet during this long application process – at least in the media – but now appears ready to go on a media offensive.
“We will soon have weekly publicity updates and a new web site where people can ask questions and buy tickets in the future,” Swindell said.
What has been mostly vacant field crop land has now been “parceled up “ into 60-plus divisions of which about 30% has being sold off already, said Swindell, adding a part of the financing plan is to get this project moving quickly.
He says that the proposed RV park and shopping center identified in the master plan have been sold off to developers who will begin construction on their own projects at the same time the race track construction is underway. Included in these developments are an anticipated 1,000 new hotel rooms.
Promise of Jobs
“The really big thing for our area is that we expect all this to mean some 8,000 jobs,” Swindell said. While these race track and hospitality industry jobs won't materialize for two years, hundreds of construction related jobs are likely to surface as soon as this fall.
“This is very big deal for Tulare,” Councilmember Phil Vandergrift said. “It's a lot more than cars going around in circles.”
Swindell points out that it's not a circle but an oval track, of which there are only three west of the Rockies. On an oval track everybody has good seat and racers prefer this configuration, he explained.
Weather plays a part in the attractiveness of Tulare to the race industry, he said, explaining that “in many Midwest areas you can race only six months of the year. Tulare is a year-round venue.
“We expect Tulare to be a daily destination stop – half way between LA and Sacramento and help the Tulare Agri-Center become a daily destination stop as well.”
He said he expects tours that include educational offerings for children from the cities “who have never seen a cow” to provide a link between the farm community and the motor sports venue.
Car clubs, charities, RV groups, motocross fans, dragster enthusiasts and others will keep the sports complex busy, he said. He expects the facilities will host concerts and other entertainment as well.
Elk Bayou
Swindell said the building of the complex includes restoration work on Elk Bayou, which “once again should see running water.” Concerns about the impact of the project on the bayou were raised during the environmental impact review.
As for NASCAR, Swindell says he is convinced there will be NASCAR races in Tulare and an Indy race as well.
“We were in Indianapolis a few weeks ago and all they could talk about in the pit was Tulare,” he said
Sacramento Bee
Editorial: In this case, a muddle was best
http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/v-print/story/1936605.html
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday delivered a muddy decision on corruption in state judicial elections. But this is a case where muddy is good.
In Caperton v. Massey Coal Company, the nation's high court faced a situation where a mining company executive in West Virginia spent more than $3 million to influence a judicial election – in an audacious attempt to get a favorable ruling in a lawsuit involving his company.
The five-justice majority (with Sacramento's Anthony Kennedy writing the opinion) could have dictated a one-size-fits-all solution for judicial elections in all the states. Instead, the five concluded that the buying of judicial elections is a problem that can be solved in many ways in the 39 states that hold judicial elections. This decision affirms the role of states as "laboratories of experimentation."
Here's what happened in West Virginia. A mining executive seeking to overturn the decision of a lower court against his mining company decided to promote the candidacy of an attorney to replace a justice in the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia. He spent more than $3 million to unseat the incumbent and get his candidate elected – more than the total amount spent by the campaign committees of both judicial candidates combined.
His guy, Brent Benjamin, won. The mining company then moved to appeal the case. Another justice who had vacationed with the mining executive in the French Riviera while the case was pending did the right thing and recused himself. But Benjamin did not.
Benjamin then was the deciding vote in a 3-2 decision in favor of the mining company.
Imagine if you were the other party trying to persuade the court to take your side in this case. Would you believe that Justice Benjamin could be fair and impartial?
With Benjamin's refusal to recuse himself, the U.S. Supreme Court had to act in this case. It had to make a statement in favor of the basic right of all parties in a case to a fair trial in a fair tribunal – a requirement of due process under the U.S. Constitution.
Some critics, including four dissenting justices (led by Chief Justice John Roberts), have denounced the majority's lack of a clear, bright-line rule to apply in all state judicial elections.
But this criticism is misplaced. The U.S. Supreme Court does not have to solve all the problems arising from the West Virginia case. It has done the right thing in signaling to states that they have to solve the problem. The decision is an invitation to the states, including California, to craft constructive solutions regarding campaign finance and judicial elections.
The dissenting justices' alternative was to do nothing – to allow massive corruption to go unchecked. If that view had prevailed, it would have given a green light to all sorts of mischief in judicial elections in the states.
The integrity of our state courts depends on people thinking they can get a fair shake – that the judge isn't predisposed, from the outset, to favor one of the parties.
In the Caperton v. Massey case, the Supreme Court established a constitutional floor: In cases where there is "probability of actual bias," the Constitution requires that a judge recuse himself or herself. But the court left it to the states to craft the rules. That's as it should be.
Ward Connerly: UC admission plan allows discrimination...Ward Connerly is president of the American Civil Rights Institute and a former regent of the University of California. He is the author of a newly released memoir, "Lessons From My Uncle James."
http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/v-print/story/1936447.html
About five years ago, shortly before my term ended as a regent of the University of California, I was having a conversation with a high-ranking UC administrator about a proposal he was developing to increase "diversity" at UC within the dictates of California's Constitution and the prohibition against race, gender and ethnic preferences.
I asked him why he considered it important to tinker with admissions instead of just letting the chips fall where they may. In an unguarded moment, he told me that unless the university took steps to "guide" admissions decisions, UC would be dominated by Asians. When I asked, "What would be wrong with that?" I got an answer that speaks volumes about the underlying philosophy at many universities with regard to Asian enrollment.
The UC administrator told me that Asians are "too dull – they study, study, study." He then said, "If you ever say I said this, I will have to deny it." I won't betray the individual's anonymity because to do so would put him in a world of trouble. Yet, it is time to confront the not-so-subtle hand of discrimination against Asians that masquerades as "building diversity" at many campuses.
It is a mistake to believe that all forms of discrimination flow from hate and inherently foul motives. Certainly, the desire to attract more black students to a campus that is lacking in blacks is not an evil aspiration; however, when it becomes necessary to reject those who "study, study, study" in order to admit those who study insufficiently, then the mission to include more blacks becomes a much more ominous one.
Since the passage of Proposition 209 in 1996, Asian enrollment at UC has skyrocketed. For example, UC Berkeley has a 42 percent Asian undergraduate enrollment; UC Irvine is at 55 percent; UC Riverside is 43 percent; and UC Los Angeles is 38 percent. The overall percentage in the nine undergraduate UC campuses is more than 40 percent, in a state where the Asian population is about 13 percent. Thus, Asians are excelling under policies that emphasize and reward academic achievement at a ratio that is more than three times their actual statewide population.
As the percentage of Asians has skyrocketed, there is no question that UC administrators and social engineers on the UC faculty have become increasingly alarmed and feel a sense of obligation to do something and, clearly, the only way to reduce the Asian presence is to de-emphasize academic achievement.
In recent months, the UC regents have deliberated about – and approved – a proposal that would significantly revise the admissions policies of the university. Beginning in 2012, UC will no longer automatically admit the top 12.5 percent of all students based on statewide performance and will no longer place the reliance that is currently placed on grades and test scores.
Instead, the eligibility pool will be expanded by a projected 40 percent by eliminating the requirement for applicants to take the SAT subject matter tests. The net effect of these changes is that academic achievement will be less significant and UC admissions administrators will have the "flexibility" to discriminate against those allegedly "dull" Asians.
As is generally the case, the UC faculty was well aware of the probable effect of its proposed changes. Until now, it was certain that any change in policies that would adversely affect Asians would go unchallenged by Asians. The so-called Asian civil rights groups, such as Chinese for Affirmative Action, that purport to represent the interest of Asians have not served their communities with distinction. Having cast their lot with the "diversity" and inclusion crowd, they have looked the other way when Asians have been the victims of blatant discrimination. The absence of a squeaky wheel demanding grease allowed the UC faculty and regents to roll right along with their proposal and to approve it.
The proposed UC admissions policies are so egregious and so dramatically discriminatory against Asians that these groups could not remain silent – and have credibility within their communities – as the grass-roots opposition from within specific Asians groups began to surface. It is noteworthy that what concerns these groups most is not the discriminatory effects of UC's proposals upon Asians, or the prospect of more blacks and Latinos being admitted, but the possibility that those devilish whites might stand to benefit from the changes. As one Asian advocate put it, "It is patently unreasonable to herald any sort of increase in student diversity if it comes with an increase in white students; this is unacceptable."
There is one truth that is universally applicable in the era of "diversity," especially in American universities: an absolute unwillingness to accept the verdict of color-blind policies. Until that fact changes, UC and other American institutions will continue trying to fix that which is not broken to achieve their arrogant version of "diversity," by discriminating against those "dull" Asians, such as two of my grandchildren whose mother is half-Vietnamese.
Stockton Record
Stockton No. 2 nationally in foreclosures
Filings decline, but numbers likely to remain high...The Associated Press
http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090611/A_BIZ/906110317
WASHINGTON - The number of U.S. households on the verge of losing their homes dipped in May from April, and the annual increase was the smallest in three years.
But as layoffs, rather than risky mortgages, become the main reason that borrowers default on their home loans, foreclosures likely will remain elevated this year and into 2010. Many economists expect unemployment, now at 9.4 percent nationwide, to rise as high as 10 percent, and some project it will exceed the post-World War II record of 10.8 percent.
Among large cities, Las Vegas led the way with one in every 54 households receiving a filing. Four California metropolitan areas - Stockton, Modesto, Riverside-San Bernardino and Merced - were next, followed by Cape Coral-Fort Myers, Fla.; Bakersfield; Orlando, Fla.; Vallejo-Fairfield; and Miami.
On a state-by-state basis, Nevada had the nation's highest foreclosure rate in May with one in every 64 households receiving a filing. California took the No. 2 slot previously occupied by Florida. California's rate was one in every 144 households.
Foreclosure filings fell 6 percent in May from April, according to RealtyTrac Inc. More than 321,000 households received at least one foreclosure-related notice last month - 18 percent more than a year earlier - but the smallest annual gain since June 2006.
Despite the drop from April, it was the third-highest monthly rate since Irvine-based RealtyTrac began its report in January 2005 and the third straight month with more than 300,000 households receiving foreclosure filings.
One in every 398 U.S. homes received a foreclosure filing last month, according to the foreclosure listing firm's report.
The mortgage industry has resumed cracking down on delinquent borrowers after foreclosures were temporarily halted by mortgage finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and other lenders.
"It would not be a huge surprise to see the numbers level off a little bit at this point," said Rick Sharga, RealtyTrac's senior vice president for marketing.
Banks repossessed about 65,000 homes in May, up from 64,000 in April, due to big increases in several states including Michigan, Arizona and Nevada.
After banks take over foreclosed homes, they usually put them up for sale at deep discounts, pulling down prices for other sellers. Nationwide, sales of foreclosures and other distressed properties made up about 45 percent of the market in April, according to the National Association of Realtors.
The supply of new foreclosures had diminished in recent months as banks held off on taking back properties, but it's starting to surge again, said Gary Kent, a San Diego real estate broker who focuses on the foreclosure market.
"Everything I've got that's priced right is just flying off the shelves," he said.
In Florida, one in every 148 households received a foreclosure filing. Rounding out the top 10 were Arizona, Utah, Michigan, Georgia, Colorado, Idaho and Ohio.
The Obama administration announced a plan in March to provide $50 billion from the financial industry rescue fund as an incentive for the mortgage industry to modify loans at lower monthly payments.
But the effectiveness of the relief plan remains unclear, with questions lingering about how much the lending industry will cooperate. Many housing counselors say it hasn't made much of a difference so far.
San Francisco Chronicle
UH selects M.R.C. Greenwood as new president...HERBERT A. SAMPLE, Associated Press Writer
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/06/10/state/n161345D53.DTL&type=printable
Honolulu, HI (AP) -- After a nearly eight-month search, the University of Hawaii Board of Regents on Wednesday chose M.R.C. Greenwood as the next president of the 10-campus system.
"I am honored to be selected as the next president of the University of Hawaii," she said in a statement. "I know, and appreciate, how vitally important the university is to the State of Hawaii."
Greenwood, 66, also said she has "much to learn about Hawaii and its rich cultural and linguistic heritage."
Her selection was unanimous, but critics had voiced concerns about Greenwood having no connection to Hawaii and an ethical controversy that led to Greenwood's resignation from the second-highest University of California post in November 2005.
But regents chairman Allan Landon said the search committee and the full board were confident that Greenwood's participation in the hiring of a friend and business partner was an uncharacteristic mistake and that she had learned from it.
"If anyone has ever gone through this, it is a painful, painful experience," Landon said. "Dr. Greenwood brings the silver lining of that dark cloud with her."
Greenwood will replace President David McClain after he retires July 31. She will earn $475,000 a year, almost $61,000 more than McClain, plus receive housing at the president's residence at College Hill, a car allowance and other expenses. But Greenwood and other top administrators are likely to take pay cuts in the next fiscal year, beginning July 1, because of the state's budget crisis.
The state's financial woes will make Greenwood's new job a trying one.
As part of a larger plan to close the state's $729 million budget shortfall, Gov. Linda Lingle has said she will cut appropriations to UH in the next two fiscal years that will equal the amount saved if the system agrees to order its 7,400 employees to take three unpaid days off each month, beginning in July.
However, the university could choose to avoid furloughs by cutting expenses elsewhere.
Already, UH-Hilo administrators are pondering a nearly 10 percent cut in its $50 million annual budget.
Greenwood alluded to the financial pinch in her statement. In these times, she said, it should be remembered "that educating citizens and producing new knowledge is the 'seed' of our society."
At the same time, the recession is driving more students to enroll in the UH system, which operates a research university in Honolulu, baccalaureate universities in West Oahu and Hilo, and seven community colleges on Oahu, Maui, Kauai and the Big Island.
Currently, almost 54,500 students attend the 10 campuses.
Greenwood had been the lone remaining candidate the last two weeks after another finalist, Robert J. Jones, a senior academic and chief operating officer for the University of Minnesota, dropped out.
But a cloud on her record worried some.
An accomplished nutrition expert, Greenwood was the chancellor of the University of California, Santa Cruz, from 1996 to 2004 before becoming UC provost, that system's number two administrator, in 2004.
But the next year, Greenwood resigned shortly before a university investigation concluded she had violated conflict-of-interest rules when she hired her friend Lynda Goff, a UC Santa Cruz administrator with whom she owned rental property, to two lucrative positions in UC's office of the president.
Greenwood described her actions related to Goff as "an unfortunate and inadvertent mistake."
But the golden parachute UC gave her rankled many in California. She was granted a 15-month leave at almost $302,000 a year, the right to return to UC Davis as a tenured professor earning $163,800 a year, and $100,000 in research funding.
Since then, Greenwood has directed the Foods for Health Initiative and held the title of distinguished professor of nutrition and internal medicine at UC Davis.
The ethical controversy led some UH employees to voice their displeasure to the regents Wednesday.
"This particular candidate has a shadow over her," testified Doodie Downs, an employee at Hawaii Community College who urged the regents to look for other choices. "One candidate left standing is not enough. This is not a choice."
But professor David Ross, speaking for the Faculty Senate, testified his organization's members "do not believe we can do better than Dr. Greenwood by going down the list. ... We think the choice is clear."
Los Angeles Times
Cadiz water deal was all wet the last time
Keith Brackpool's latest plan to tap 'surplus' Colorado River water for the Southland had been rejected in 2002. Now he's got some powerful backing...Michael Hiltzik
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hiltzik11-2009jun11,0,4714172,print.column
People who say that nothing's harder to get rid of than a bad penny must never have met Keith Brackpool.
The British-born promoter, who has spent the last dozen years pushing a scheme to pump water to Southern California from beneath 35,000 acres his Cadiz Inc. owns in the Mojave Desert, just won't go away.
On the contrary, he continues to attract political sycophants happy to attest to his wisdom in the ways of water policy -- while they accept campaign contributions and consulting fees from him and his company.
In the past his posse has included ex-Gov. Gray Davis and Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. Now he has added Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who last week publicly endorsed the scheme as "a path-breaking, new, sustainable groundwater conservation and storage project."
The endorsement was embedded in an announcement Cadiz issued Friday, saying it executed letters of intent with four Southern California municipal water agencies to jointly investigate reviving the water scheme, which was rejected by the Metropolitan Water District seven years ago.
Curiously, the release didn't identify the four public agencies. Schwarzenegger's office and a Cadiz spokesman both turned down my request for their names.
So we're left with a company headed by a man with political juice making a deal with four unidentified public water agencies to revive a $200-million project that was already shelved once.
As taxpayers, do you smell something? Me too.
One might feel better about such maneuvering if Cadiz Inc. were a strong company, but it hasn't had a profitable year since at least 1999. Last year’s loss was nearly $16 million. The Los Angeles-based company has been kept on life support by its lenders, who have repeatedly extended their loans, presumably on a bet that Brackpool's project will someday take flight.
At the end of March the company disclosed that its working capital was down to $4.3 million, enough to last another year.
Failure to get the water project moving or to line up new investments by then could force it to cut back in a way that might affect its "viability as a company."
As for Brackpool, 51, Cadiz's chairman and chief executive, The Times has pointed out that in 1983 he pleaded guilty in London to criminal charges that included dealing in securities without a license.
Cadiz has shown a sure feel for publicity under Brackpool, who according to a company disclosure in April owned or controlled more than 132,000 shares at that time.
The release featuring Schwarzenegger's name helped send Cadiz shares rocketing by more than 45% in Nasdaq trading Friday. It closed Wednesday at $12.46, up 56 cents.
It's worth detouring a moment here for another look at that "path-breaking" water project.
As it was presented to the Metropolitan Water District in 2002, the idea was to pump surplus Colorado River water into the aquifer underlying the firm's desert acreage. During droughts, the stored water (along with some indigenous groundwater) would be pumped out for delivery via the aqueduct to a parched Southern California.
If you don't look too closely, the plan has a sort of shimmering authenticity, like a desert mirage. Yes, the state faces a long-term water shortage. And yes, in the midst of drought, sometimes the rain comes down in torrents.
Yet as the MWD realized, reality isn't so simple.
First, there isn't any surplus water in the Colorado. Rather, the basin is in a long-term drought. For the foreseeable future California will be lucky to get its full statutory apportionment of river water. A single extra drop? Forget it.
Second, there's considerable disagreement over how much groundwater really underlies the Cadiz parcels, not to mention how much the company is legally permitted to pump out and how much could be pumped before neighboring aquifers become contaminated with carcinogenic minerals.
Then there's the 35 miles of desert separating the Cadiz property from the aqueduct. Cadiz's proposal to connect them with a pipeline drew vehement opposition from environmentalists. That was a major factor in MWD's rejection, as was its fear that Cadiz might not be able to afford its half of the costs.
When I met this week with Cadiz's spokesman and general counsel, they argued that the water project was a worthy idea that got short shrift from the MWD and was needed now more than ever, given the state's growing water shortage. (Brackpool didn't reply to my request for comment late Wednesday.)
The general counsel, an experienced water lawyer named Scott Slater who joined the company late last year, says he's reworking the project to scale down its reliance on stored water and orient it more toward conservation -- preferably by capturing rainfall that runs off the desert ranges and evaporates from dry lake beds in the Cadiz area.
The new plan would run the pipeline along an existing railroad right of way, reducing its environmental footprint.
Slater acknowledges that numerous environmental approvals still would be needed, though he contends that the process could be completed in a year after the project is formally proposed. Considering the opposition the last version generated from local activists and environmentalists, that sounds a teensy bit ambitious.
Arguably, the best thing the project has going for it is Brackpool's ability to attract political friends, as a flame attracts moths. Some say the secret is his British charm, but the record points more to money.
From 1999 through 2005, Brackpool and others associated with Cadiz donated $43,650 to Villaraigosa, who also worked for Cadiz as a "consultant" before becoming mayor. Over the years, Cadiz donated $345,000 to Davis' campaigns.
San Bernardino County Supervisor Brad Mitzelfelt, who is quoted in the Cadiz release predicting "an immediate infusion of economic stimulus" thanks to the water project, got a total of $10,000 in campaign contributions from Cadiz in 2007 and 2008. Also quoted admiringly in the release is Rep. Jim Costa (R-Fresno), who has been active on water issues and has received more than $12,000 in campaign contributions from Brackpool and Cadiz associates.
Neither Brackpool nor Cadiz appears to have contributed money to Schwarzenegger.
But the governor's chief of staff, Susan Kennedy, used to work for Cadiz: In 2005, while she was serving on the state Public Utilities Commission, the firm paid her $120,000 in consulting fees.
When I asked the governor's office if Kennedy helped secure Schwarzenegger's testimonial for Cadiz, the reply was, "We're not going to elaborate . . . on our internal process."
There may be a lesson in all this about how to mix politics and water: For a catalyst, try liberal amounts of cash.
San Diego Union-Tribune
Wind-farm project set for Campo reservation
160 megawatts to power 104,000 homes at peak...Onell R. Soto
http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/jun/11/wind-farm-project-set-campo-reservation/?metro&zIndex=114539
An Indian tribe, an energy company and San Diego Gas & Electric Co. are announcing today that they are partnering to build California's second-largest wind-power project in the mountains east of San Diego.
When completed in two years, the 160-megawatt wind farm on the Campo Indian Reservation would produce more than three times the power generated by a similar project on the same reservation 60 miles east of San Diego.
That 25-turbine project, visible to motorists on Interstate 8 since its completion in 2005, is the only wind farm on an Indian reservation in the country, although more are in the works.
The location of as many as 100 new windmills on the reservation depends on the results of tests involving meteorological towers and an environmental review.
Chicago-based Invenergy will build and run the $300 million project and SDG&E will buy the power, enough for 104,000 homes at peak production. Energy production will depend on how often and how hard the wind blows.
The tribe will have an equity stake and hopes to eventually own the project, tribal Chairwoman Monique La Chappa said.
SDG&E's participation beyond buying the power is undetermined.
“We're still negotiating the final details of the terms,” spokesman Brian Brokowski said.
The project will provide revenue for the tribal government at a time when the economic slump has hit its Golden Acorn Casino & Travel Center, La Chappa said.
“I'm just thankful we have the opportunity to expand and to utilize the environment to provide a service to not only our community, but also to the outside community and the state of California,” she said.
Invenergy will help the tribe build two turbines to power the casino, La Chappa said. Other projects on the reservation have been delayed, including a hotel and a landfill.
Because the energy project is on a reservation, it will require approval from federal and tribal governments, but not state officials.
“We anticipate a very thorough permitting process where the public will be able to comment on the project,” La Chappa said. “We look forward to a dialogue with the community.”
Experts say the county could produce 1,000 to 2,000 megawatts from wind, but many of the windiest areas have not been developed for energy production because they are protected as parks, forests or wilderness, or because the transmission lines don't exist.
Wind developers are now looking to put turbines on ridge tops — primarily on federal or tribal land — to capture steady breezes and cash in on a movement toward green energy production.
“Development in the region will be on tribal land first,” said Scott Debenham, a Lakeside businessman whose company develops wind projects. On reservations, miles of ridges are under the same ownership and the permit process is more streamlined.
Federal land, including vast tracts owned by the Bureau of Land Management, will be next, Debenham said.
The Obama administration is supporting wind projects on reservations and is holding Campo up as an example.
“Indian country offers some of the premier wind-energy sites in the United States,” Interior Secretary Ken Salazar told Indian leaders in March, when he announced that his department has identified 77 reservations that could support “wind-based economies.”
Activists in East County's backcountry have warned that big wind projects threaten to industrialize a rural and sparsely populated part of the county.
Donna Tisdale, who heads a local planning advisory group, has complained that the wind turbines are ugly and noisy, and could cause fires. She has long worried about an expansion on the Campo reservation.
“It would be pretty devastating to property values,” Tisdale said in an interview a few months ago. She couldn't be reached for comment last night.
Tisdale's fear is that the area would replicate the landscape in Riverside County's San Gorgonio Pass, where developers have built electric windmills that stretch seemingly to the horizon.
That and two other regions — the Tehachapi Pass north of Los Angeles and the Altamont Pass east of San Francisco — dominate the state's wind production, which totals 2.6 gigawatts. Texas and Iowa produce more power from wind.
The largest wind project in California is in Solano County.
Invenergy Vice President Mick Baird said the effects of wind turbines have to be looked at in context.
“It's in the eye of the beholder,” he said when told that some people find windmills ugly.
The company will work with tribal and federal officials to place the windmills where they will affect the fewest people and limit the possibilities of fires and injuries to wildlife, Baird said.
He said an increase in wind energy will mean less electricity produced from burning natural gas or coal — helping SDG&E meet its goal of providing more than one-third of its power from renewable sources by 2020.
State law requires investor-owned utilities to get 20 percent of their power from non-fossil-fuel plants. SDG&E won't meet that goal, but it said yesterday that it has contracts to get 26 percent of its power from renewable sources by 2012 and is seeking more.
Right now, it buys the production from the 50-megawatt Kumeyaay wind farm on the Campo reservation. It also gets power from two projects in Los Angeles and Riverside counties that total 88 megawatts of capacity, according to the American Wind Energy Association.
SDG&E says it plans to seek more power from wind in East County. A sister company, Sempra Generation, is building a 150- to 200-megawatt wind farm just across the border in Mexico that it says will be the first phase of up to 1,000 megawatts from the wind there.
Bloomberg.com
U.S. Foreclosure Filings Top 300,000 as Bank Seizures Loom...Dan Levy
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aHEpXU3Pg_oU
June 11 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. foreclosure filings surpassed 300,000 for the third straight month in May and may hit a record 1.8 million by the first half of the year, RealtyTrac Inc. said.
A total of 321,480 properties received a default or auction notice or were repossessed last month, up 18 percent from a year earlier, the Irvine, California-based seller of default data said today in a statement. One in 398 U.S. households received a filing last month.
“The foreclosure bucket is filling faster than it’s emptying,” Jay Brinkmann, chief economist of the Washington- based Mortgage Bankers Association, said in an interview. “It will continue through next quarter at least.”
Job losses and falling property prices are delaying the housing recovery as more homeowners are unable to pay the mortgage or have difficulty selling or refinancing. The unemployment rate climbed to 9.4 percent in May, the highest since 1983, the Labor Department said last week. Prices in 20 U.S. cities dropped 18.7 percent in March, according to the S&P/Case-Shiller home-price index.
More home loans originated in 2005 or before are likely to default as unemployment climbs, said Rick Sharga, executive vice president for marketing at RealtyTrac.
A record 1.37 percent of all loans entered the foreclosure process in the first quarter, with 29 percent tied to borrowers with prime, fixed-rate mortgages, the MBA reported May 28. Homes in foreclosure totaled 3.85 percent of all loans in the quarter, up from 2.47 percent a year earlier, MBA said.
Balance Sheets Worsen
“The numbers are getting bigger and that’s what is bothering me,” said Patrick Newport, economist at IHS Global Insight in Lexington, Massachusetts. “You have banks holding these toxic loans, which means bank balance sheets are in even worse shape with the increase in delinquencies.”
Additional U.S. home foreclosures will probably total 6.4 million by mid-2011, and inventories of foreclosed homes awaiting sale will probably peak in mid-2010 at about 2 million properties, JPMorgan Chase & Co. analysts led by John Sim wrote in a June 5 report. U.S. prices will likely drop 39 percent on average, they said.
The May total was the third-highest in RealtyTrac records dating to January 2005.
Nevada had the highest foreclosure rate, one in every 64 households, more than six times the national average. California ranked second at one in 144 households.
Florida had the third-highest rate at one in 148 households. Arizona ranked fourth with one in 158 and Utah was fifth with one filing per 316 households, RealtyTrac said.
Other states among the top 10 highest rates were Michigan, Georgia, Colorado, Idaho and Ohio.
California Leads
California had the highest total number of filings at 92,249, 23 percent more than a year earlier. Scheduled auctions rose 18 percent from the previous month while bank seizures fell 1 percent and defaults fell 18 percent.
Florida had the second-highest total with 58,931 filings, up 50 percent from May 2008. Nevada was third with 17,157 filings, up 83 percent, as bank seizures there rose 23 percent from the previous month.
Arizona, Michigan, Ohio, Illinois, Georgia, Texas and Virginia rounded out the top 10, which accounted for 77 percent of total U.S. filings, according to RealtyTrac.
New Jersey had the 24th highest rate, one in 794 households, and 4,408 filings. Connecticut ranked 33rd, with one in every 1,301 households in some stage of default. The state had 1,106 filings. New York was 37th, with one in 1,646 households getting a filing for a total of 4,825.
Vegas Still Climbing
Las Vegas had the highest foreclosure rate among metropolitan areas with a population 200,000 or more. One in 54 households got a notice, up 78 percent from a year earlier and up 4 percent from the previous month.
California had six cities among the top 10. Stockton, Modesto, Riverside-San Bernardino and Merced ranked second through fifth, respectively, Bakersfield was seventh and Vallejo-Fairfield was ninth.
Florida had three cities in the top 10: Cape Coral-Fort Myers ranked sixth, Orlando-Kissimmee was eighth and Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach was tenth, according to RealtyTrac, which collects data from more than 2,200 counties representing 90 percent of the U.S. population.
 
6-11-09
Meetings
6-15-09 Merced City Council/Redevelopment Agency agenda...7:00 p.m.
http://www.cityofmerced.org/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=7460
 
6-16-09 Merced County Board of Supervisors meeting...10:00 a.m.
http://www.co.merced.ca.us/BoardAgenda/
View Current Agenda (Posted 72 Hours Prior To Meeting)
 
6-17-09 Merced City Planning Commission meeting…7:00 p.m.
http://www.cityofmerced.org/depts/cityclerk/boards_n_commissions/
planning_commission/2009_planning_commission/2009_planning_
commission_agendas.asp
Agendas are posted the Monday before a Wednesday Planning Commission Meeting
 
6-18-09 MCAG Governing Board meeting...3:00 p.m.
http://www.mcagov.org/govbrd.html