7-9-09
7-9-09
Badlands Journal
A state bank for California?...Badlands Journal editorial board
http://www.badlandsjournal.com/
Since 1919 North Dakota has had a state bank, one the state government owns. North Dakota and neighboring Montana are the only two states in the nation this year that don't have budget deficits.
Are there any other ideas for taking control of the state government out of the hands of finance, insurance and real estate (FIRE) special interests? By law, these special interests must defend corporate profits, not state and local governments. The people represented by these governments do not even figure in the conversation behind the glass wall that surrounds the state Capitol. Of course, such a decision would take great political leadership within the state Legislature and from the governor, who, at the moment look like the pathetic playthings of private corporations. It would take an astounding act of real political leadership for elected officials to stand up against lobbyists on behalf of those who actually cast the votes. It would be equally astounding to see the two political parties, whose "legitimacy" these days lies largely in their demonization of each other, to reach the sort of serious compromises around honest statements of the interests of their constituents that we dimly remember as government in this state a few decades ago.
The California economy remains one of the world's largest. The problem is government. Special interests can seize control of government, as we have seen, but they cannot govern, as we have also seen. To influence government is one of their prime objectives; but to profit, not to govern, is their goal. Their activities aim at weakening government, creating a sort of chaos and even anarchy that favors private oligarchy over the Common Good. The measure of special interest-lobby success in California is before us at this moment. A free market in legislators is a failed model of government.
We have no illusion that a proposal for a state bank would not precipitate one of the greatest political battles in California history, given the power of the FIRE lobby at all levels of state and local government here. The propaganda against such a responsible financial reform would make Burson-Marteller's lies about the water situation south of the San Joaquin River look like verses from the Hymnal. It might even set the Obama administration against the state -- they never met a private bank they didn't like. But, just because reform is dangerous and difficult, it doesn't mean that it isn't necessary. It wouldn't be the first time that Necessity created political leadership where none had been apparent.
The merit of Ellen Brown's ideas below is that they are positive in the best sense of the term -- creative, well-researched, hopeful and above all, responsive to the situation. For all those good reasons, Brown's idea probably won't go anywhere soon. But, we believe the half-life of the careers of politicians who continue to defend the collapsing status quo is growing shorter with each foreclosure and every cut to health and human services and public education. There is actually a limit to that sort of "leadership." You cannot fool everybody all the time.
Badlands Journal editorial board
Global Research
California Dreamin': How the State Can Beat Its Budget Woes...Ellen Brown...7-8-09
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14270
As goes California,” says the adage, “so goes the nation.” All eyes are therefore on the Golden State as it attempts to solve its $26 billion budget deficit. The world’s eighth largest economy is not going quietly into that pit of debt and devastation that has devoured Third World countries whole. The State’s voters have drawn a line in the sand against further tax hikes, while Democratic leaders have drawn a line at further cuts in services or selloff of public assets. State legislators are deadlocked, caught between the rock of tax ceilings and the hard place of debt limits.
“Expect the best and accept nothing less,” says another adage that typifies the attitude sometimes called “California dreaming.” You create your own reality. Instead of trying to prop up an old model that has failed, you can dream up a new one. If anyone can come up with an original solution to the problem, Californians should be able to. But what? While waiting for developments, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has started paying the State’s bills with IOUs (“I Owe You”s evidencing debt, technically called “registered warrants”).
Hmm ... Pay the bills with IOUs. Not a bad idea! That was, in fact, the original innovation that got the American colonists out of their financial straits back in the 18th century, when they lacked the silver and gold used in the Old World for conducting trade. Money, after all, was just a medium of exchange, an acknowledgment of goods and services delivered or a debt owed. The notion that the government could pay in paper receipts was first hit on by the governor of the province of Massachusetts in 1691, when he needed money to fund a local war. The use of a paper currency had been suggested in an anonymous British pamphlet in 1650, but the proposal was modeled on the receipts issued by London goldsmiths and silversmiths for the precious metals left in their vaults for safekeeping. The problem for the colonies was that they were short of silver and gold. The Massachusetts Assembly therefore proposed a different kind of paper money, a “bill of credit” representing the government’s “bond” or IOU. The paper money of Massachusetts was backed only by the “full faith and credit” of the government.
Other colonies followed suit with their own issues of paper money. Some were considered government IOUs, redeemable later in “hard” currency (silver or gold). Others were issued as “legal tender” in themselves. They were “as good as gold” in trade, without bearing debt or an obligation to redeem the notes in some other form of money later. The new paper money not only made the colonies independent of the British bankers and their gold but actually allowed the colonists to finance their local government without taxing the people. Colonial assemblies discovered that provincial loan offices could generate a steady stream of revenue in the form of interest income by taking on the lending functions of banks.
The same solution was employed in other countries later. When Argentina’s government workers were faced with massive layoffs, their unions persuaded six state governments to pay them instead with state bonds or IOUs in small denominations. The IOUs could then be used to pay for state services and taxes, and everyone in the local economy accepted them in trade.
There’s Just One Problem...
Why couldn’t California do the same thing? The problem with calling its IOUs “legal tender” today is that the ruse violates the U.S. Constitution. Article I, Section 10, says, “No State shall . . . coin money [or] emit bills of credit.” The Cornell University Law School Annotated Constitution gives this definition:
“Within the sense of the Constitution, bills of credit signify a paper medium of exchange, intended to circulate between individuals, and between the Government and individuals, for the ordinary purposes of society.”
U.S. Supreme Court cases are cited from the 1830s, in which “interest bearing certificates, in denominations not exceeding ten dollars, which were issued by loan offices established by the State of Missouri and made receivable in payment of taxes or other moneys due to the State, and in payment of the fees and salaries of state officers, were held to be bills of credit whose issuance was banned by this section.”
That all seems pretty clear cut, until you read a bit further. Article I, Section 10, also says that no State shall “make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts.” When was the last time any State paid its bills only in gold and silver coin? The States could argue that the Constitution needs to be updated.
They could make some other compelling arguments. The States agreed to give up their right to issue their own currencies because they delegated that power to Congress. Article I, Section 8, enumerates among the powers given to Congress, “To coin Money [and] regulate the Value thereof.” Scholars continue to argue about the meaning of “to coin money,” but the Constitution clearly gives no entity except Congress the power to create money and regulate its value, and Congress failed to properly husband that authority. It issued coins, but it allowed privately-owned banks to issue “banknotes,” which soon made up the bulk of the nation’s money supply. Bankers, not Congress, thus “regulated the value” of the currency, through the laws of supply and demand: the more notes they created, the smaller the value of each. In 1913, Congress went so far as to allow a privately-owned central bank called the Federal Reserve to issue its own Federal Reserve Notes and call them the exclusive national paper currency. These notes were then lent to the U.S. government, at interest.
Today, however, Federal Reserve Notes compose only about 3% of the money supply (M3). The other 97% is issued by private banks in the form of loans. “Bank credit” is created simply by entering numbers into the accounts of borrowers, as many authorities have attested. One of the most clear statements of this process came from Graham Towers, Governor of the Bank of Canada from 1935 to 1955, who acknowledged:
“Banks create money. That is what they are for....The manufacturing process to make money consists of making an entry in a book. That is all.... Each and every time a Bank makes a loan ... new Bank credit is created -- brand new money.”
Congress has not only reneged on its agreement to create the national money supply, but it has refused to front the funds to bail out California from its relatively modest $26 billion budget shortfall. Californians are justifiably upset, since Congress hardly batted an eye before earmarking some $700 billion in bailout money for the private banking system, and the Federal Reserve has committed trillions more for that dubious purpose. Nearly ten times the sum needed by California was allotted to bailing out AIG, a private insurance company; and half the sum needed by California went to pay off the gambling debts of AIG to Goldman Sachs, a single bank. California underwrites a substantial portion of the federal government’s budget, sending a dollar in tax revenue for every 80 cents it gets back. Yet the federal government has even rejected California’s request for a loan guarantee, which could have saved the State hundreds of millions of dollars in interest. The clear message is, “You’re on your own.”
Creative Problem Solving
The situation looks pretty dire, but it may just need some thinking outside the box. The law does not allow the States to issue “bills of credit,” but it does allow them to create another form of money called “checkbook” money. All a State has to do is to form its own bank. Quoting again from the Cornell University Law School Annotated Constitution:
“Bills issued by state banks are not bills of credit; it is immaterial that the State is the sole stockholder of the bank, that the officers of the bank were elected by the state legislature, or that the capital of the bank was raised by the sale of state bonds.”
If private banks can create credit on their books, so can the world’s eighth largest economy. Indeed, there is longstanding precedent for this approach. The State of North Dakota has owned its own bank for nearly a century. North Dakota is one of only two States (along with Montana) that are not currently facing budget shortfalls. North Dakota has beaten the Wall Street credit freeze by generating its own credit. By law, ever since 1919 the State’s revenues have been deposited in its own bank, the Bank of North Dakota (BND). Using the “fractional reserve” lending scheme open to all banks, these deposits are then available to be used as the “reserves” for creating many times their face value in loans. Other banks in the State do not see the BND as a threat, because it partners with them and backstops them, serving as a sort of central bank for North Dakota. BND’s loans are not insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) but are guaranteed by the State.
If California followed suit, it would not need to meet the FDIC’s capital requirements but could designate state-owned property (parks, buildings and so forth) as its capital base. Applying the “multiplier effect” by which capital is lent and relent many times over, this base could then generate hundreds of billions of dollars in “credit.” The State could deposit its revenues in the State bank and pay its payroll through it, generating an even larger deposit base for making new loans. Enough credit could be generated to allow the State not only to meet its short-term budget needs but to buy back its outstanding bonds (or debt). Bond interest and redemption costs on California’s General Fund for the current year are estimated at nearly $5 billion -- about 20% of the budget shortfall. All of that money could be saved in interest, since the State would be paying interest to itself.
The State could do more than just chase the wolf from its door. It could generate enough credit to engage in the sort of economic “stimulus” being undertaken by the federal government. It could create jobs for the 11.5% of the State’s population that are currently unemployed, augmenting the tax base and supplying the incomes necessary to prop up the languishing housing market. Loans for income-producing projects (transportation, energy, housing) could be repaid with the profits generated by the funded projects. And if some of the newly-issued loans were not paid back, they could simply be refinanced. The federal government has been rolling over its loans ever since 1835, the last time the federal debt was actually paid off (under Andrew Jackson).
In boom times, this approach could result in unwanted inflation. But today the economy is suffering from a serious shortage of money, because virtually all of our money comes from bank loans, and bank lending has dried up. Since neither the federal government nor the Federal Reserve has stepped in to fill the void, the States must do it themselves; and like the 18th century colonial governments, they can do it by taking over the lending functions of banks.
California’s taxpayers and legislators are doing the right thing digging in their heels and drawing the line at further austerity measures. California is being watched not only by the nation but by the world. We the people did not precipitate this credit crisis; the banks did. We should not have to pay for the damage with increased taxes or decreased services or our public parks and parking meters. Like the American colonists, we can replace the old model with something better. If California legislators act quickly, they can have a State-owned bank up and running before their 45-day IOUs run out. With today’s new online banking possibilities, the State would not even need to invest in a “brick and mortar” building. The whole business could be done by computer. Weary legislators trying to agree on a budget could all shake hands and go home, without budging an inch from their respective platforms. They could have it all, and so could we the people.
Ellen Brown developed her research skills as an attorney practicing civil litigation in Los Angeles. In Web of Debt, her latest book, she turns those skills to an analysis of the Federal Reserve and “the money trust.” She shows how this private cartel has usurped the power to create money from the people themselves, and how we the people can get it back. Her earlier books focused on the pharmaceutical cartel that gets its power from “the money trust.” Her eleven books include Forbidden Medicine, Nature’s Pharmacy (co-authored with Dr. Lynne Walker), and The Key to Ultimate Health (co-authored with Dr. Richard Hansen). Her websites are www.webofdebt.com and www.ellenbrown.com.
Merced Sun-Star
UC San Diego profs come up with budget fixer: Close UC Merced...DANIELLE GAINES
http://www.mercedsunstar.com/167/v-print/story/942002.html
UC Merced is the target of a group of 23 San Diego professors who have proposed the University of California shutter the campus to save money.
The proposal was written as a letter to leaders at the UC San Diego campus and University Office of the President. The letter was sent anonymously to the Sun-Star on Wednesday afternoon.
As part of a three-point plan, the professors suggested that either one or two campuses should be closed to create an eight- or nine-campus system. They also put Riverside and Santa Cruz on the chopping block.
UCSD professor Andrew Scull, chair of the sociology department, confirmed that he was the author of the letter. Twenty-two other department chairs in San Diego also signed the letter. There are 111 departments on campus, according to the UCSD Web site.
Officials at UC Merced and the University Office of the President passed the idea off as an improbable course of action crafted by employees upset by impending pay cuts.
"At a time such as now, when the UC Office of the President is proposing system-wide salary reductions in the form of pay cuts and furloughs, it is no surprise that employees would go public with alternate plans of action," UC Merced spokeswoman Tonya Luiz said.
UC President Mark Yudof said he was utterly opposed to closing campus doors.
"I am 100 percent behind Merced, Riverside and Santa Cruz, and do not see the call to reduce expenditures on those campuses, beyond their proportionate share of the systemwide deficit, as a solution to our budgetary ills," Yudof said in a statement to the Sun-Star.
Scull said he received an e-mail from the University Office of the President thanking him for the budget suggestions.
Pete King, a spokesman at the systemwide offices in Oakland, said an automatically generated response is sent to each sender due to the high volume of responses. More than 3,000 budget reduction suggestions have been sent to Yudof's office and all suggestions will be reviewed, King said.
Scull said the letter was crafted after an informal campus meeting in June, at which UCSD Chancellor Marye Anne Fox explained how systemwide budget cuts would specifically affect the San Diego campus.
"It was disastrous," Scull said of the cuts to the San Diego campus. "It would result in the end of the campus as we know it."
Scull said the decision to suggest campus closures was not taken lightly.
"In that kind of situation, you have to contemplate very, very unpleasant choices," Scull said. "It seems to all of us that choices none of us want to see happen nonetheless have to be faced."
The wording in the letter is more brusque.
"We suggest, more generally, that in discussions system-wide, you drop the pretence that all campuses are equal, and argue for a selective reallocation of funds to preserve excellence, not the current disastrous blunderbuss policy of even, across the board cuts," reads the letter. "Or, if that is too hard, we suggest that what ought to be done is to shut one or more of these campuses down, in whole or in part."
Scull still stands behind the statements, he said Wednesday.
UC Merced responded with a statement through Luiz late Wednesday:
"The University of California is a 10-campus system of prestigious research universities that has managed to weather the storm of financial crisis time after time in the hundred-plus years since its creation.
"We share President Mark G. Yudof's position that the system must be united in facing the tough economic road ahead. UC Merced is the system's youngest and smallest campus, having officially opened its doors in 2005, and it is making great strides as it matures into a full research university campus.
"UC Merced stands behind its track record of success and looks forward to a bright future of serving the people of California, the nation and the world."
This is not the first time campuses -- or parts of them -- have come under pressure during economic crises. UC Riverside was the target of a similar campaign in 1993 and a newly-formed school of architecture at UCSD was disbanded around the same time.
The University of California must cut costs to cope with a combined $800 million funding shortfall for the 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 school years.
A 9.3 percent increase in student fees will produce an additional $211 million to cover one-fourth of the shortfall. Systemwide pay reductions could chip in an additional $195 million.
The rest of the cuts will probably be dealt with on a campus-by-campus basis.
The UC Board of Regents is scheduled to meet July 14-16 to vote on how to impose an 8 percent pay cut on all university employees earning more than $46,000 yearly. All other salaries -- with the exception of student workers -- would be cut 4 percent.
---------------
The following is an excerpt from the letter signed by 23 department chairs at the University of California at San Diego. The letter was dated June 15, 2009 and was forwarded to the University of California Office of the President:
3. Establish different budget priorities for the profiles of different UC campuses. Every state system of public education save California manages to sustain (at best) one flagship campus. Many, including such states as New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts, do not manage even that. We pretend we have ten such campuses. In better times, there were in reality four flagships (Berkeley, UCLA, UCSD, and – in its highly specialized way, UCSF). Rather than destroying the distinctiveness and excellence at Berkeley, UCLA, and UCSD by hiring temporary lecturers to do most of the teaching (and contribute nothing to original research, nothing to our reputation, nothing to the engine of economic growth a first rate research university represents), we propose that you urge the President and Regents to acknowledge that UCSC, UCR, and UC Merced are in substantial measure teaching institutions (with some exceptions – programs that have genuinely achieved national and international excellence and thus deserve separate treatment), whose funding levels and budgets should be reorganized to match that reality.
We suggest, more generally, that in discussions systemwide, you drop the pretence that all campuses are equal, and argue for a selective reallocation of funds to preserve excellence, not the current disastrous blunderbuss policy of even, across the board cuts. Or, if that is too hard, we suggest that what ought to be done is to shut one or more of these campuses down, in whole or in part. We have suffered more than a 30 per cent cut in our funding from the state, and we can thus no longer afford to be a ten campus system – only a nine, or an eight (and a half) campus system. Corporations faced with similar problems eliminate or sell off their least profitable, least promising divisions. Even General Motors, which for decades resisted this logic, to its near-fatal cost, is lopping off Hummer, Buick, GMC, Opel, Saab and who knows what else.
Our View: Facts, fiction about water
Challenges abound for experts, but the main problem facing the Valley is years of drought.
http://www.mercedsunstar.com/181/v-print/story/942006.html
Faced with a pitchfork rebellion in the San Joaquin Valley, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar last month appointed a "water czar" to deliver extra water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to farmers in certain districts south of the delta.
That prompts a question: Will the Obama administration also appoint a "salmon czar" to help bring relief to the North Coast fishing industry, which is dependent on healthy flows in the delta so salmon can migrate and spawn?
So far, Salazar's water agenda in California has focused almost completely on Fresno-area farmers, whose wealth and clout tend to demand attention.
That's why Deputy Interior Secretary David Hayes has been tasked to bring together federal agencies to expedite certain delta projects, including a pair of gates that would block imperiled smelt and salmon from being sucked into pumps that deliver water to the south.
It's commendable that Salazar, a former congressman from Colorado, would want to wade into the swamp of delta politics. For the last four years, the Bush administration barely got its toes wet.
Yet because they are not from this place, Salazar and Obama may not understand the need for a balanced approach to resolving conflicts over water and natural resources. They also should be careful not to fuel certain myths that make resolution more complicated.
Some of these myths:
The Endangered Species Act and related court rulings are the main causes of the water shortages in the San Joaquin Valley.
Not true. As of the end of April, the water content in the state's snowpack was 66 percent of normal, the third dry year in a row. Drought is the main cause of water cutbacks in the San Joaquin Valley.
All water districts in the Valley are suffering. Again, not true. Some water districts have senior water rights, meaning they get first dibs on available supplies. While holders of junior water rights, such as the Westlands Water District, have been cut back severely, other districts are close to their normal allotments.
Central Valley salmon are suffering only because of ocean conditions. Another falsehood. Salmon runs have bounced around but have generally declined since the 1960s, even with gyrating ocean conditions. Clearly, their habitat in the Valley has degraded -- a habitat that is dependent on clear, cold, abundant water.
Through improved conservation, water banking, groundwater storage and other projects, California can help its farms and cities weather the dry periods while rebuilding a healthy fishery. That will take a cooperative approach.
Yet if certain farm districts and their congressional representatives choose to point fingers and inflame myths, cooperation will be hard to come by.
The challenge for the Obama administration will be to bust through those falsehoods and serve as a moderating force for a more efficient and equitable use of water in California.
Merced County Times
HUD Secretary tours subdivision which has become Ground Zero in the foreclosure crisis...Beverly Barela
http://www.mercedcountytimes.net/content/2009-07-09/001743
On July 2nd, U.S. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan and Representative Dennis Cardoza (D-Merced) walked grimly through the empty lots and vacant, foreclosed homes that make up the Sierra Vista subdivision in southeastern Merced (near N. Coffee Road and E. Childs Avenue).
The tour was one of two in Merced which Congressman Cardoza arranged that day so that HUD Secretary Donovan could see firsthand the economic devastation suffered by residents of his district, California’s 18th Congressional District, due to the tough economy.
After walking through the desolate streets, Secretary Donovan said, sadly, “I’ve been to New Orleans [after Hurricane Katrina] and to Cedar Rapids a year after the floods, and some of this reminds me of the same streets I walked down.”
He said, reassuringly, “The President is taking these issues very seriously and looking at them comprehensively. I’m the second Cabinet member to be in the area this week.” Secretary Donovan was referring to the fact that Ken Salazar, Interior Department Secretary, had just visited Fresno to discuss the area’s issue regarding water.
Describing a solution to help those who took out loans through Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, Donovan announced, “The Making Homes Affordable program covers those on the edge of foreclosure or in foreclosure to be able to get modifications to stay in their homes. We are raising the limit for the refinancing part of the program. Congressman Cardoza said, ‘The 105% loan to value cap on refinancing isn’t enough for my district.’ We are raising the loan to value cap to 125%. This will increase the pool of people in California that can benefit by about 60%.”
He added, “We will be able to make direct allocations instead of having to go through the extra layer of red tape with the State.”
Congressman Cardoza said, “We’ll be having a conference call so my district will have an enhanced ability to access the funds.”
Commenting on the increase in the loan to value cap on refinancing, Mike Conway, Merced’s Public Information Officer, explained that if one bought a home for $500,000, and it is now worth $200,000, that owner is “underwater for that $300,000".
Conway said, “105% of the value of the home doesn’t help enough, so this would allow you to refinance taking into account the equity you lost. There will be more leeway with refinancing for a lower rate.”
Commenting on another solution to the economic devastation, the Neighborhood Stabilization Program, Secretary Donovan said, “The Recovery Act has pumped billions into the State of California and of this $14 billion in HUD funding in the Recovery Act, part of it is in the Neighborhood Stabilization Program. Statistics have shown there is a 10% decline in the value of surrounding properties when a home is in foreclosure. If it sits on the market, it gets damage and gets graffiti. Through this program, we buy up and renovate foreclosed homes.”
He continued, “We have a problem with the additional $2 billion through the Recovery bill because of the way it was structured. The applications are coming in July 17th, and we will need to have discussions about how to make sure this community can benefit from this funding.”
Describing a third effort to help stressed residents, Secretary Donovan said, “We have proposed a single, powerful consumer protection agency whose sole job is to make sure people are not taken advantage of. The lender knew on the day the loan was made that a family could not afford that loan.”
Congressman Cardoza then described the situation of an 86-year-old woman who virtually had her life savings stolen from her when she was offered a $200,000 loan on the telephone, but only earned $960 per month on Social Security.
He said, “This is the case of a person already financially stressed being preyed on a second time.”
He continued, “I think it’s a disaster area, economically. It doesn’t matter to a family if a wind storm put their possessions on the front yard or if a foreclosure agent put their possessions on the front yard. You’re still homeless. You’re still having to look your family in the eye and explain to them you have no place to go tonight.”
He said, “Local and State agencies cannot handle the crisis. The only one who can help us is the Federal Government.”
About how Secretary Donovan and Congressman Cardoza began to work together on the area’s economic straits, Mike Jensen, Communications Director for Congressman Cardoza, said, “As soon as Secretary Donovan took his Cabinet position, Congressman Cardoza began trying to get him here. He is trying to introduce a Home Act lowering mortgages for everyone. The Congressman is trying to introduce some legislation to make this area an economic disaster region. People are losing their jobs, and losing their homes. Merced has about the highest unemployment rate in the country. Based on the statistics, such as the unemployment rate, we can show it is worse than everyone else in the country. We are trying to get this recognized and get additional Federal funds.”
The recent economic statistics for the city of Merced compiled by Congressman Cardoza re indeed grim. According to Congressman Cardoza’s two-page report, RealtyTrac listed Merced as having the second highest foreclosure rate in the country at the end of the first quarter of 2009, with 4.2% of properties in foreclosure (seven times the national rate) and 13% of mortgages in foreclosure. From December 2005 to December 2008, home values in Merced dropped 70%! In 2008 alone, the home values in Merced plummeted 42%, although the national average was 8.2%.
At the same time, Merced’s unemployment rate is 18.3% or higher, the third highest in the country. The national unemployment rate is about 9%. In the 18th Congressional District, which includes the cities of Merced, Modesto and Stockton, the per capita income is $16,979, whereas the national per capita income is $26,178. One-fifth of the residents in the district live below poverty level.
On a positive note, Congressman Cardoza concluded, “I’m very grateful the Secretary has made this trip out to help us with our problems and issues. We will get back to where we were before and better, but only with the Secretary’s and the President’s help can we achieve that.”
Modesto Bee
565K new jobless claims, lowest level since Jan....CHRISTOPHER S. RUGABER, AP Economics Writer
http://www.modbee.com/business/v-print/story/775779.html
The number of newly laid-off workers filing initial claims for jobless benefits last week fell to lowest level since early January, largely due to changes in the timing of auto industry layoffs.
Continuing claims, meanwhile, unexpectedly jumped to a record-high. While layoffs are slowing, jobs remain scarce and the unemployment rate is rising, which some economists worry could weaken or delay a recovery. The unemployment rate rose to 9.5 percent last month and is expected to top 10 percent by the end of this year.
Separately, many retail chains reported disappointing June sales, as consumers are saving more and spending less.
New claims for unemployment insurance plummeted by 52,000 to a seasonally-adjusted 565,000, the Labor Department said Thursday. That's significantly below analysts' expectations of 605,000 for the week ending July 4, according to Thomson Reuters. The last time new claims were below 600,000 was week of Jan. 24.
"This is not as positive as it looks," Jennifer Lee, an economist at BMO Capital Markets, wrote in a note to clients. "There are a number of special factors at play here, including the fact that the holiday-shortened week skewed the data."
The drop resulted partly from technical factors, a Labor Department analyst said. Auto layoffs that normally take place in early July, as factories are retooled to build the next year's models, occurred in the spring instead as General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC implemented sweeping restructuring plans.
The department's seasonal adjustment process expected a large increase in claims from auto workers and other manufacturing workers, the analyst said. Since that didn't occur, seasonally-adjusted claims fell.
The non-seasonally adjusted figure increased by about 17,000 to 577,506 initial claims.
The retail weakness cut across all sectors but hit mall-based clothing stores particularly hard. Companies also are cutting wages and jobs, limiting Americans' buying power.
Still, the financial markets rose slightly in morning trading. The Dow Jones industrial average added about 20 points, while broader indices also ticked up.
Still, continuing claims jumped 159,000 to 6.88 million, the highest on records dating from 1967. Analysts had expected 6.71 million continuing claims.
Continuing claims had fallen in two of the previous three weeks. The data lag initial claims by a week.
Economists are closely watching the level of first-time claims for signs the economy will recover in the second half of this year, as many predict.
But the change in the timing of auto layoffs will likely muddy the picture for several weeks, the Labor Department analyst said.
The four-week average of initial claims, which smooths out fluctuations, fell to 606,000, down more than 50,000 from its peak in early April.
Still, claims remain elevated: they were at 367,000 a year ago.
Consumers and businesses have cut back on spending in response to the bursting of the housing bubble and the financial crisis, sending the economy into the longest recession since World War II.
The Labor Department said last week that employers cut 467,000 jobs in June and the unemployment rate rose to 9.5 percent, the highest in 25 years.
The payroll cuts last month were greater than analysts expected, renewing concern that jobs will remain scarce even if the economy does eke out growth later this year.
Some employers are still shedding jobs. Gannett Co. Inc., which publishes USA Today and 85 other daily newspapers, said last week that it will eliminate about 1,400 jobs, or 3 percent of its work force.
Among the states, New Jersey reported the largest increase in initial claims, with 7,876, which it attributed to seasonal layoffs related to school closings and manufacturing job cuts. The next largest increases were reported by Massachusetts, Kansas, Kentucky and New York. The state data lags initial claims by one week.
Florida reported the largest decrease, with 12,493, which it attributed to fewer layoffs in the construction, manufacturing and agriculture industries. Illinois, Pennsylvania, California and Tennessee reported the next largest drops.
Fresno Bee
House panel rejects Nunes protest of water diversions...Michael Doyle, Bee Washington Bureau
http://www.fresnobee.com/1072/v-print/story/1523270.html
WASHINGTON -- A key House committee has slapped down the latest effort by Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Visalia, to protest the diversion of Central Valley water for environmental protection.
On Tuesday night, the House Appropriations Committee rejected Nunes' recurring water amendment by a 33-25 vote. If it had passed, the amendment would have blocked federal spending on decisions that divert irrigation water to protect salmon, the delta smelt and other species.
"People and communities have been replaced by a parade of extreme environmental activists and their misguided causes," Nunes said Wednesday in a statement.
The committee voting on the proposed amendment for the fiscal 2010 energy and water spending bill fell largely along party lines, with all Republicans supporting Nunes and all but three Democrats opposing him.
In recent weeks, Nunes has brought similar amendments to the House floor and to the House Rules Committee. In each case, the amendments lost. Nunes has threatened to keep offering similar amendments wherever possible.
Status quo for farm bill 2010
$124 billion funding legislation is loaded with earmarks...Michael Doyle, Bee Washington Bureau
http://www.fresnobee.com/business/v-print/story/1523872.html
WASHINGTON -- The House of Representatives has written a $123.8 billion farm-spending bill that's loaded with congressional earmarks.
Brushing off conservative criticism, lawmakers are steering funds toward California pest detection, wine-grape research and "asparagus production technologies," among other targeted projects.
More broadly, the funding bill largely retains the farm-policy status quo some had hoped to change.
The bill -- set for approval late Wednesday or early today -- funds the Agriculture Department and related agencies for fiscal 2010. It closely resembles past appropriations bills, passed under both Democratic- and Republican-controlled Congresses.
House members ignored President Barack Obama's requests to impose tighter limits on crop subsidies. Obama also wanted higher fees on some agricultural inspections. Lawmakers said no.
Obama proposed a 20% cut in the Market Access Program much beloved by California farm organizations. Lawmakers kept the funding steady. For the nation's specialty crop producers, the $200 million-a-year Market Access Program is among the most closely watched farm programs.
Each year, the Market Access Program provides money to help such groups as the California Table Grape Commission, the California Walnut Commission and the California Asparagus Commission promote overseas sales. Last year, roughly one-third of the funding recipients represented California farm products.
Obama's proposed fiscal 2010 budget contended the program's "economic impact is unclear" and suggested it amounted to "corporate welfare." A Pennsylvania Democrat, Rep. Patrick Murphy, prepared an amendment to cut the funding in half; another lawmaker wrote an amendment to eliminate the funding altogether.
"Congressman Murphy believes that taxpayers shouldn't have to foot the bill for multimillion-dollar corporations' overseas marketing campaigns, and that corporate giveaways such as the Market Access Program should be cut to pay down our debt," said Murphy's spokeswoman, Kate Hansen.
The leadership-controlled House Rules Committee, however, would not permit either Market Access Program amendment to the floor for a full House vote. The rules panel, including Rep. Dennis Cardoza, D-Merced, permitted 13 amendments to be offered out of 90 that been written.
The overall bill is a 14% increase over 2009 spending, largely because of higher food-stamp expenditures during the ongoing recession.
Tulare Voice
Racetrack Agreement Undecided...Julie Fernandez
http://www.valleyvoicenewspaper.com/tv/stories/2009/tv_
racetrackundecided_0129.htm
Tulare - Developer Bud Long failed to get City Council approval for a much-needed agreement after telling Councilman Richard Ortega that the Tulare Motor Sports Complex limited partnership “cannot or will not” repay within two weeks the $1 million it owns the city...
Immediately after that June 30 vote, the council – upon Ortega's motion – decided unanimously to bring the matter back at its June 21 meeting...
Long's group needs the development agreement to move forward with the project, but the council wants assurance the $1 million it spent on an environmental impact report will be repaid...
Attorney Michael Lampe, who represents opponents of the lawsuit, read several excerpts from 90-plus pages of correspondence he had obtained under the Public Records Act that indicated Kabot's concern about TMSC's willingness to reimburse the city.
The City Council originally was scheduled to give final approval to a development agreement with TMSC at its Jan. 6 meeting, but withheld that approval after learning the developer was behind in funding an account at Citizens Business Bank that was established to guarantee reimbursement. Council members said they would not approve the agreement until the $1 million-plus was in the city's general fund.
'Just for Show'
In an e-mail sent from Kabot to TMSC attorney Myron Smith after that meeting, Kabot expressed concern about a comment Long had made to the city's consulting attorney Tim Sabo...
'Serious Breach'
Kabot also e-mailed Myron Smith to tell him the bank had no record of an agreement and is telling the city it has no interest at all in the account. He insisted the situation be fixed that day “or we have a serious breach of our agreement since technically that money is totally at the disposal of TMSC without city controls.”
Smith's assistant replied that her boss was not in the office and would likely be unavailable until the following week...
Sacramento Bee
California counties see property revenue fall...Robert Lewis
http://www.sacbee.com/topstories/v-print/story/2011690.html
For the first time since the taxpayers' revolt of the 1970s, the total assessed value of properties is dropping in Sacramento and across California.
The property tax roll in Sacramento County is down 6.4 percent from last year – to $131.6 billion; in Contra Costa County it's down 7 percent; and in Merced County it's down almost 13 percent.
The slide means less revenue for cash-starved cities and counties that rely on property tax proceeds to fund services. But there's an upside: Some homeowners struggling with the recession will see smaller tax bills later this year.
Since 1978, when voters approved both Proposition 13 and Proposition 8, assessed values have rarely gone down in California counties.
Proposition 13 rolled property assessments back to 1975 levels and capped the annual increase at 2 percent – until a property is sold or the living area enlarged, in which case the value is reset.
Proposition 8 – a companion to Proposition 13 (and not to be confused with last year's controversial gay marriage ban) – requires counties to reassess properties when market value falls below the assessed value.
The housing bubble and availability of credit in recent years artificially inflated home prices, said Dan Goodwin, Ventura County assessor and president of the California Assessors' Association. Many people bought expensive homes with a high initial assessed value.
The economic crash then sent home prices below assessed values, forcing counties to lower their taxable values.
More than 170,000 property owners – mostly residential – will see their tax bills go down this year, said Ken Stieger, Sacramento County assessor.
"In the written history of El Dorado County we've never gone negative," said Tim Holcomb, El Dorado's assessor, reflecting on his county's 1 percent dip.
Local government officials for some time have been anticipating a drop in property tax revenue. Most built those assumptions into the budgets they passed last month.
Yolo County, for example, budgeted assuming that it would have 4 percent less property tax revenue to spend this year, said Assessor Joel Butler.
The question is how conservatively local officials planned, and if the loss of property tax revenue will prove worse than anticipated.
"Even within the counties there's some wide variances," Butler said, adding that some cities are seeing worse drops than others.
Assessors primarily reduced the value of homes bought in the past six or seven years since those are the properties most likely to qualify for a Proposition 8 reduction.
Stieger said his staff reviewed homes that changed hands after 2002, although in some areas with high foreclosure rates they went as far back as 2000.
This is a good news for homeowners like Marina Shapiro, who bought her Sacramento home for $229,000 in May 2004 and put in another $50,000 fixing it up.
"You know how much money I lost on this house?" she said, pointing out that her neighbor's home recently went on the market for $95,000.
The county is dropping Shapiro's assessment almost $86,000 – to $167,000. That should help the long-time Verizon store manager who has gotten notice her job will disappear by the end of this month.
Melissa Young, a Citrus Heights resident, will also see the assessed value go down on her family house, owned for three years. It's down $149,000, to $206,000.
"That's wonderful," Young said when notified by The Bee that her property taxes would likely shrink. "We're expecting our first child so it's going to help."
Not all homeowners will be so happy come October when property tax bills arrive.
While Sacramento County is dropping the assessed value on more than 170,000 properties, most of the remaining 230,000 residential properties won't see a reduction. Those owners can expect their normal 2 percent annual increase, county Assessor Ken Stieger said.
Assessed value is based on the value of the home as of Jan. 1. So even if a property's market value has fallen sharply in the past six months, it might not matter this year with the county.
Also, the current assessment on many homes is still well below their actual market value, meaning they don't qualify for a reduction.
This is often the case for people who have owned their home for many years. The Proposition 13-mandated 2 percent annual increase has likely not kept pace with the double-digit annual percentage increases in market value.
Sacramento County residents can check out their new property assessments at the assessor's Web site, www.assessor.saccounty.net.
The site features a list of properties that saw their assessed value decline.
Assessors like Stieger initiated the review of properties in their counties, said Goodwin. He called this an example of good government – officials working for the people.
If owners feel they should have qualified for a reduction but didn't get one, or that they deserved a bigger reduction, they can request a review from the assessor's office, Stieger said.
Reviews are free and residents don't need to hire companies – many are considered scams – that offer to file assessment appeals for a fee, he said.
Property owners have until Nov. 30 to appeal their assessment, Stieger said.
Developer Skidmore files for bankruptcy...Dale Kasler
http://www.sacbee.com/business/v-print/story/2013145.html
Sacramento developer and builder Kip Skidmore, a founder and former chairman of Greater Sacramento Bancorp, has filed for bankruptcy after running up millions in construction-related debts.
Skidmore and his wife Illa filed for Chapter 11 protection in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Sacramento. The filing came last Thursday, about a week after he resigned as non-executive chairman of the bank's board of directors. Greater Sacramento Bancorp is the parent of Bank of Sacramento. When Skidmore resigned, the bank said he was leaving "in order to concentrate his attention on personal business matters."
The bankruptcy filing wasn't complete but said the Skidmores' debts exceed $10 million.
Skidmore's problems began about a year ago, when he was sued by Umpqua Bank and Bank of the West in connection with two suburban Sacramento housing projects. Skidmore had personally guaranteed millions in loans for another Sacramento developer, Sixells LLC.
"You're going to have all kinds of things going on in a business career," Skidmore said in an interview last July. He couldn't immediately be reached for comment today.
Skidmore, 60, is president of Sacramento contractor Sierra National Construction and has developed such projects as the Riverbank Marina commercial complex off Garden Highway.
He co-founded the bank 11 years ago. He was replaced as chairman by William Martin, who was already president and chief executive. Martin will remain CEO.
Greater Sacramento Bancorp, like most other banks, has struggled under the weight of the slumping real estate market in the past year. Profits fell 41 percent in the first quarter, to $460,000.
Capital Press
Project pumps water hopes
‘Two Gates’ proposal authors say project won’t solve Delta’s problems...Wes Sander
http://www.capitalpress.info/main.asp?SectionID=67&SubSectionID=616&ArticleID=52716&TM=50042.37
As the proposed "Two Gates" project gains popularity in California water discussions, the plan's authors caution against expectations that it will significantly increase deliveries from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
The project, much talked-about at recent water gatherings in the Central Valley, would include two temporary, mechanically operated gates that could help restore some of the Delta pumping recently lost because of biological opinions to protect fish. But they would together function as only one tool among many that could allow for successful Delta management in the future, water managers say.
As currently proposed, the gates would amount to a temporary "Band-aid" to help manage fish habitat, said Roger Patterson, assistant general manager of Metropolitan Water District.
"We're not looking at this being a huge gain in water supply," Patterson said. "In no way will it improve water supplies to where we were ... before the new rules were in place. What we're trying to do is get by for the next eight to 10 years, before we can get some infrastructure in place."
Most of the Delta's flow-restricting gates in the past were intended for salinity control. The Two Gates project would instead target fish protection, reducing the impact of south-Delta pumping on threatened species like the Delta smelt.
The plan's authors expect construction to total $29 million. Funding is still uncertain, but Metropolitan has put up $4.5 million, and much of the rest could come from state water bond funds, Patterson said.
The authors say the gates will help keep turbid water, washed into the Delta with rains and spring runoff, upstream and away from the pumps. Smelt populations have been shown to follow turbid water.
If all goes according to the districts' plans, the gates could be up and running by January. That would require fast-tracking the project, which Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger recently declared he would do.
The gates would be removed after a five-year trial period, according to the proposal, which is now before the state Department of Water Resources.
"It will increase the level of protection substantially for the Delta smelt," Patterson said. "This is the theory, and that's why we're proposing to do this as a demonstration project."
Three water-management entities - Metropolitan, Contra Costa Water District and the San Luis and Delta-Mendota Water Authority - first formulated the idea two and a half years ago, said Greg Gartrell, Contra Costa's assistant general manager.
To help speed the approval process, the districts included draft environmental documents when they handed the proposal to the state last year, Gartrell said. The project is physically simple, a fact that could further contribute to its quick construction.
Barriers previously employed in Delta channels have mostly consisted of rock piles. The Two Gates design involves surplus barges on which swiveling gates would be mounted. The barges could be towed to any location and sunk onto a platform. They could later be refloated and moved to other locations.
For the pilot project, two rock platforms would be laid in the central Delta, one in Old River and the other in Connection Slough.
"It should go fairly quickly," Gartrell said. "We designed it with the thought in mind that in can go in very, very quickly. The thought was, the situation we're in right now requires immediate action."
The project is now being considered by the state's Bay-Delta Office.
"We have reviewed their administrative documents," said Bay-Delta Office chief Katherine Kelly. "It would truly be a test to see if smelt can be encouraged to stay in the north and west area of the Delta."
Kelly said the office expects the federal Bureau of Reclamation and the Delta-Mendota authority to take the lead for implementing and operating the gates.
Patterson says the water districts want the Bureau to take the lead on construction, while the Delta-Mendota authority could operate the gates, as it does other delta facilities.
Regardless of future plans for Delta infrastructure, this project is one of many - some of which the districts have already proposed - that will always be necessary, said Gartrell of the Contra Costa district.
"If it helps the water supply, that's great, but right now it's needed to protect fisheries," Gartrell said. "It's needed now, it's needed in the future."
Capitol Weekly
Peripheral Canal, crux of state water wars, draws fire...Kevin Hefner
http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=y3ykqltisyt4kp&xid=y3ykcmuiadp3oa&done=.y3ykqltiszc4kp
Legislators backed by farmers, fisherman, environmentalists, and community activists rallied at the Capitol this week against the proposed Peripheral Canal, which would shift Northern California water to the south around the Delta.
Protesters feared the canal would damage the heart of the Delta, through which most of California’s drinking water flows. The canal has not been officially approved, but there are persistent rumors in the Capitol that the project is gaining new traction.
The group’s main concerns were that they have had no say in the process, citing the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP), which has not yet been made available to the public.
“You can’t fix the Delta without the people of the Delta as your partner,” said Assemblywoman Lois Wolk, D-Davis. “Some say it’s a roadblock for progress, but the Delta is our home, and we have a right to be involved in the discussions.”
Lt. Governor John Garamendi, a candidate for Congress in the 10th C.D., also spoke out against the plan saying, “This is too critical of a public policy issue to be done in secret. There needs to be light and transparency brought to this process. We aren’t trying to stop the process entirely; we just want to be involved.”
Also under scrutiny were the possible impacts on the region of the canal.
Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan, D-Alamo, said that the proposed canal would, “redirect 15,000 cubic feet of water a second through a 500-700 foot wide, 47-mile-long canal, into the southern part of the state… More often than not, the Delta cannot sustain that kind of diversion, for example, the Delta would have only been able to achieve that kind of output only 3 months out of the entire year in 2007.”
A BDCP spokesperson, responding to Buchanan, said that “15,000 would be the maximum capacity that could be redirected by the canal. Environmental laws prevent the canal from moving that much at any one time.”
Delta resident Bob Kirtlan responded, “If you build it, they’ll use it. Once it’s built, they’ll always change the law.”
Jennings, Chairman of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance said that “discarding prudent legislative deliberation and oversight is likely to lead to wasting tens of billions of dollars constructing a massive white elephant that will destroy Delta fisheries and water quality, gravely damage the Delta economy… and cause increased litigation because of legal flaws and bad science… They treat the Delta like a reservoir, when it is really a delicate ecosystem.”
In response, the BDCP was quick to add that the canal would redirect the flow of water so that the Delta would become more natural and environmentally friendly.
The Delta community group estimated the project would cost taxpayers $20 billion to $40 billion dollars including taxes, and would affect more than 6,000 people.
They also contend that an estimated $100 million dollars would be lost from the Delta economy every year, should the canal be built.
“At a time when we are making the most regrettable cuts to basic health programs, the public must be told how much they will be asked to pay…” said Charlotte Hodde of the Planning and Conservation League, “(and) how many in-home services or classrooms it costs to pay for this expensive project.”
“The canal would be the biggest public constructions ever made in the United States, equivalent to the Panama Canal” said Assemblywoman Buchanan, “and I want to make it clear I will not vote for a Panama Canal.”
Vacaville Reporter
Wolk, farmers call for Delta input...Reporter Staff
http://www.thereporter.com/ci_12791835?IADID=Search-www.thereporter.com-www.thereporter.com
State Sen. Lois Wolk, D-Solano, and a broad coalition of Delta farmers, fisherman, community advocates, environmentalists, state and local elected representatives converged on the steps of the State Capitol Tuesday to demand that the voice of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta community be heard as plans are written and carried out to restore the Delta. "You can't fix the Delta without the people of the Delta as your partners," said Wolk, chair of Senate Select Committee on Delta Stewardship and Sustainability. "Nobody is more concerned about the decline of the Delta than those who live in the Delta, the people who work, farm, fish, and recreate here. We know the Delta is not a blank slate. We love the Delta's many facets, not just the water that flows through it. We love the Delta for the place that it is and the people who live, work, and play here, and we are committed to preserving and protecting it." Along with Lt. Gov. John Garamendi, Sen. Mark DeSaulnier, and Assembly members Joan Buchanan, Alyson Huber, and Mariko Yamada, Solano County Supervisors John Vasquez joined the gathering along with supervisors from Yolo, Sacramento and Contra Costa counties. The event was coordinated by Restore the Delta, a coalition of farmers, environmentalists, fisherman and Delta advocates. The Delta encompasses five counties, 27 cities and two ports. It provides world-class birding, hunting, wind-surfing and hiking. It is home to 500,000 acres of small family farms that produce prized pears, asparagus, wine grapes, and contributes $2 billion to California's economy. It provides habitat for 90 percent of California's salmon, which not only support the West Coast's $1 billion salmon fishery but are also a critical food source for killer whales. "All that depends on the health of the Delta and its watershed," Wolk said. "Those of us that live in and love the Delta are tired of failed attempts, we need real solutions. It is time that the Delta voice is heard, and that the health of the Delta is restored."
Stockton Record
Delta supporters rally at Capitol's doorstep...Alex Breitler
http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090708/A_NEWS/907080314/-1/A_NEWS14
SACRAMENTO - It seems all the attention has gone to the south San Joaquin Valley, where marches, public demonstrations and news conferences have highlighted the cry for water there.
Tuesday it was the Delta's turn.
More than 200 farmers, fishers and Delta residents turned out for a rally at the steps of the Capitol, inside of which negotiations on a series of water bills continue even while the budget takes center stage.
While advocates condemned a peripheral canal - the "Panama Canal North," as some now call it - Tuesday's event was more about demanding a voice in the proceedings. Advocates say they're worried behind-the-scenes legislative maneuvering could alter existing water bills, authorizing and funding a canal with little opportunity for the public to comment.
"You can't fix the Delta without the people of the Delta as your partners," said state Sen. Lois Wolk, D-Davis, who argues that water officials in their endless debates have largely forgotten the unique people and features of the largest estuary on the West Coast. Her 5th Senate District includes portions of San Joaquin County.
She described the canal, which would divert Sacramento River flows around the Delta to state and federal pumps near Tracy, as a "100-lane freeway" cutting through Delta farmland; a 2006 report described the canal as anywhere from 500 to more than 700 feet wide at its top. The state has estimated the cost at $4.2 billion to $7.4 billion.
"It will not provide one drop of additional water," Delta fly fisherman Robert Johnson said. "All this while we're firing teachers and furloughing state workers."
A number of politicians weighed in at Tuesday's rally, including Delta resident and Lt. Gov. John Garamendi, who called for public hearings on the water legislation and said in a statement that "any discussion of a peripheral canal must follow a solid guarantee that protects (the Delta)."
At this point, he said, the canal should not be part of any legislation.
Supporters believe a canal will safeguard the state's largest water supply source by shipping flows around the Delta, avoiding its fragile levees and decreasing the number of fish sucked into the giant pumps. Opponents call it a water grab that will allow greater exports from the Delta.
Rumors have circulated for two weeks that the negotiations were moving rapidly, prompting the hastily arranged rally. Water hearings originally scheduled for this week were canceled because of the budget crisis.
Alicia Trost, a spokeswoman for Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, said at least five public hearings have been held on this year's water bills, and she said that once the budget is decided, the bills will go before committee, offering yet another opportunity.
"It's a process, and it's not over yet," she said.
Still, Delta interests worry that it will indeed be over all too soon if they don't speak up. Those interests include San Joaquin County supervisors, who did not attend the rally because of their regularly scheduled meeting.
"I feel that we'll be on the outside with our face pressed against the candy store window," Supervisor Larry Ruhstaller said.
Manteca Bulletin
State dragging feet on crucial water transfer to help keep crops alive...Dennis Wyatt
http://www.mantecabulletin.com/news/article/5250/
The San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority that serves 2.1 million acres is in a world of hurt due to lack of water.
The South San Joaquin Irrigation District wants to help by selling them 25,000 acre feet of water that district farmers have helped them conserve through prudent water practices.
The only problem is the State of California is holding up the transaction.
It was less than three months that Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger declared a statewide emergency due to a third year of drought and called upon Californians to help others by conserving and sharing water.
The SSJID board is frustrated since it has been more than two weeks since they’ve asked for state approval of the water transfer. Not only did Schwarzenegger promise nimble responses to such transfers by appointing a water czar, but the board which is comprised primarily of farmers understands how dire the situation is for the growers and workers dependent on ag production elsewhere in the Northern San Joaquin Valley.
The authority represents a number of water agencies serving 2.1 million acres of farmland in the western San Joaquin Valley as well as San Benito and Santa Clara counties. The Delta-Mendota Canal delivers about 3 million acre feet of water within the authority’s service area. Those deliveries are being slashed by as much as 85 percent this year.
As a result, many farmers have plowed under crops and pulled out orchards. Water is critical for those who kept crops in the ground to make sure they survive to the point crops can be harvested.
Estimates from University of California Davis economists have indicated up to 80,000 jobs and upwards of $2.2 billion will disappear from the San Joaquin Valley alone due to reduced water supplies.
San Francisco Chronicle
Wal-Mart in final settlement of $17.5M bias suit...CHUCK BARTELS, AP Business Writer
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/07/09/financial/f075426D63.DTL&type=printable
Little Rock, Ark. (AP) -- A federal judge has given final approval to a $17.5 million settlement of a discrimination lawsuit that accused Wal-Mart Stores Inc. of not hiring black truck drivers.
U.S. District Judge William R. Wilson Jr. on Wednesday signed an order in Little Rock approving the settlement in the class-action case, a ruling that will also have the world's largest retailer take steps to hire more black drivers.
Attorney Morgan "Chip" Welch said Thursday that members in the class applied to drive for Wal-Mart between 2001 and 2008 and were turned away in disproportional numbers. Of the approximately 4,500 plaintiffs, those that applied earliest stand to receive the greatest settlement payments.
The settlement includes job placements for 23 of the black drivers who sued. The company will also have to notify other members of the class of future openings and establish hiring goals so that the company hires in proportion to the ethnic makeup of its applicants.
Wal-Mart also agreed to put greater effort into minority recruitment and target some of its jobs advertising to reach African-Americans.
The Bentonville-based company said Thursday it would not comment beyond a Feb. 20 news release it issued when the settlement proposal was announced. The company denied any unlawful discrimination and said resolving the case would be in Wal-Mart's best interest.
Wilson still has to rule on fees in the case, which are proposed at $6.3 million, including up to $450,000 in costs. That sum would come out of the $17.5 million settlement, leaving $11.2 million for members of the class to divide.
That would provide an average of about $2,500 for individual plaintiffs, though Welch noted "there is no average member" of the class.
The settlement stipulates that the agreement is not evidence that Wal-Mart engaged in discrimination or any other unlawful conduct.
Court dismisses challenge to seabird protection...JEFF BARNARD, AP Environmental Writer
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/07/08/state/n171514D86.DTL&type=printable
A federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., has dismissed the timber industry's lawsuit challenging threatened species protection for the marbled murrelet, a seabird that nests in old growth trees.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled Wednesday that the issue was moot after the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service last month found the bird still merits protection in Washington, Oregon and Northern California.
Tom Partin of the American Forest Resource Council says his organization expected the action, but is looking forward to another status review that takes into account murrelets in Canada and Alaska.
Partin adds the council continues to believe that food shortages in the ocean are a bigger problem for the birds than limited nesting habitat.
Condor science group opposes Tejon development...Wednesday, July 8, 2009
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/07/08/state/n134715D56.DTL&type=printable
(07-08) 13:47 PDT Los Angeles, CA (AP) -- A group of California condor experts is opposing the proposed development of the sprawling Tejon Ranch north of Los Angeles, fearing harm to the endangered bird.
The group, which includes former members of a federal condor recovery team, says the plan will reduce natural food supplies for the giant bird species. The scientists' opposition was announced Wednesday by the Center for Biological Diversity. Both groups submitted comments to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which is considering Tejon's conservation plan.
Last year, Tejon and several environmental groups agreed to preserve a swath of wilderness in the Tehachapi Mountains 60 miles north of Los Angeles in exchange for not opposing development on other parts of the ranch.
Tejon has maintained that its proposed development will not adversely affect the condor.
Union sues UC over financial records...Nanette Asimov
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/07/09/BABC18L43H.DTL&type=printable
A union representing health care and service workers at the University of California is suing the Board of Regents, claiming UC is illegally barring access to public financial records.
The union has been trying since October to examine three years of records at all 10 UC campuses "to look at how they're spending taxpayer dollars," said Kevin Christensen, a researcher working with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 3299.
The union asked to see electronic copies of the data, including lists of purchase orders and contracts, according to the suit filed in Alameda County Superior Court on June 29.
"They're telling us very directly that they don't keep track of that," Christensen said. "It's really disturbing. They're a public institution, and they should be able to show us this information."
Some UC campuses wanted to charge hundreds or thousands of dollars for some records, the suit says. In all, the union was charged $6,730.
The California Public Records Act allows the public access to existing electronic records at virtually no cost.
UC officials said they have tried to comply, but the union keeps changing its requests and has asked for a great deal of data. In addition, each campus keeps information in a different format, they said.
"We consider this a frivolous lawsuit and will pursue vigorously all remedies available to us," said Charles Robinson, UC's general counsel. "The University of California is in full compliance with public records laws."
Indybay.org
Delta Advocates Rally Against the Canal at State Capitol...Dan Bacher
Jerry Neuburger, webmaster for the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, has written a good report on the rally against the peripheral canal at the State Capitol yesterday. To check out video clips of speakers and photos of the event, go to: http://www.calsport.org/7-7-09.htm.
The Delta Press Conference...Jerry Neuburger...July 7, 2009
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/07/08/18606338.php
July 7, 2009 -- Over 250 fishermen, farmers, businessmen and conservationists gathered at the north steps of the capital to listen to Senator Lois Wolk, Lt. Governor John Garimendi, other legislators, and citizens speak in opposition to a series of bills moving through the legislature designed to fund a peripheral canal and two additional dams.
CSPA was well represented at the conference with Executive Director Bill Jennings, President Jim Crenshaw, Conservation Director John Beuttler, Director and Attorney Michael Jackson, Webmaster Jerry Neuburger and Advisory member John Ryzanych, who also represented the Allied Fishing Groups.
The first of the speakers was Senator Lois Wolk, who was instrumental in organizing the press conference. She was followed by Lt. Governor John Garimendi, Senator Mark DeSalnier, Assemblymember Alyson Huber, Assemblymember Mariko Yamada, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors representative Mary Piepho speaking for the assembled County Supervisors, and Assemblymember Joan Buchanan.
The theme from the speakers was universal in opposition to any secret deals in the legislature to move bills to fund a peripheral canal and additional water structure.
A reoccurring point in the presentations was the fact that delta residents and governments demand input into the future of the delta. Emphasizing that fact was the presence of five supervisors from the five counties surrounding the delta, Sacramento, Yolo, San Joaquin, Contra Costa and Solano.
The first of the private citizens to speak was Rudy Mussi, (Video) a third generation Delta farmer who spoke of the changes he's seen in the delta, a huge decline in fish and in water quality and the threat that a peripheral canal would finish the job.
Next Zeke Grader, executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fisherman’s Associations, spoke of the devastation that excessive pumping has caused to the salmon industry, the 100% unemployment of commercial family fishermen, the loss of over 200 million dollars in annual revenue and the depressed state of many coastal towns with boats at the dock and tourism down.
CSPA's Bill Jennings gave a fiery presentation on the wrongs that have occurred over the years in California's water policy, giving little credence to any promises that the state may make in the future regarding the volume of water to be pumped from the delta or any attempt to restore the delta's fisheries.
Robert Johnson, a private fisherman and now political activist spoke how the millionaire farmers of the west San Joaquin valley, while the most junior of water rights holders, have attempted to mount a PR campaign depicting themselves as victims of "fish vs. people" all the while knowing that their water supplies were entirely dependent on the availability of water on a year to year basis with no promise of any guaranteed amount.
Restore the Delta's Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla (Video) spoke of the size and cost of the canal and the havoc it would cause to delta farms, fishermen, businesses and recreation.
Fredy Morales, a young farmworker from Alpaugh in the San Joaquin Valley, described the contradictions between corporate growers pushing for more water from the Delta when people in rural communities are denied clean drinking water.
“We need clean drinking water and the water is bad in my community,” he said. “People get sick from it.”
Last minute additions to the speaker's list were Charlotte Hodde, Water Program Manager, Planning and Conservation League, Debbie Davis, Legislative Analyst, Environmental Justice Coalition for Water, Jim Metropulos, Senior Advocate, Sierra Club California and Steve Evans, Conservation Director, Friends of the River. All spoke of the need for openness in the planning of any new "plumbing" for the delta, the need to put the ecology and the economy of the delta first and the folly of billions in bonds to build what may amount to an ecological disaster.
At the end of the conference, five teams were assembled to visit various legislators, with the intent that any planning for the delta be done in open hearings with full input by the public in general and the people and governments of the delta
Los Angeles Times
Proposition 13 isn't the problem
When times get tough, the property tax measure comes under attack, but it's no boogeyman...Joel Fox. Joel Fox, president of the Small Business Action Committee and co-founder and editor of foxandhoundsdaily.com, was president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. from 1986 to 1998.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-fox9-2009jul09,0,432602,print.story
The "Blame 13" chorus is at it again. You can always count on it to sing "It's all Proposition 13's fault" during difficult economic times. The story has gone national, with columns in Time magazine and the New York Times taking shots at Proposition 13. The attacks are probably best summed up by an editorial cartoon picturing Proposition 13 as the beginning of the end for California civilization.
Let's get the facts straight. Despite the cap instituted by Proposition 13, property taxes have increased dramatically in California. According to Board of Equalization data, property tax revenue has increased 800% since the measure passed in 1978 -- from $5.6 billion a year to $50 billion. Compare that with general fund revenue -- made up largely of sales, income and corporate taxes -- which has increased 500% over the same period.
Attempts to change Proposition 13 tend to focus on two approaches. One is to divide residential property and commercial property and tax them on a different basis, using either a different tax rate or a different assessment schedule. Such a procedure is called a "split roll" because the property roll is split into different categories.
The other approach is to reduce the requirement to pass a state tax from the two-thirds legislative vote established by Proposition 13 to a lesser percentage. (Proposition 13 is often mistakenly charged with the requirement of a two-thirds vote in the Legislature to pass the state budget. Not true. That requirement took root during the Depression.)
The split-roll proposal is self-defeating for an economy trying to dig itself out of a hole, and implementing it would cost jobs. Former state legislative analyst William Hamm co-wrote a study last year that claimed a 1% increase in business property tax rates would lead to 43,000 jobs lost. With double-digit unemployment, that is something California can ill afford.
Of course, businesses, where they can, will pass tax increases on to consumers through higher prices, to tenants through raised rents or to employees through lower wages. Passing through the tax is an important notion to understand, especially for those who rally around a split-roll proposal in hopes of sticking a tax to big business. But it's small businesses that would be hurt the most. Many live on close margins, and a tax increase would be a considerable burden.
Further, business property owners do not enjoy a break over homeowners under Proposition 13, as some have charged. The Hamm study, using Board of Equalization data, found that owner-occupied residential property is assessed at 53% of the current market value; at 60%, commercial/industrial property is assessed closer to the higher current market value.
Voters have shown that they appreciate the protection a two-thirds legislative vote on taxes provides. Five years ago, a measure to lower the two-thirds threshold for taxes and the budget to 55% was crushed 2 to 1 at the polls.
Legislators centralized some power in Sacramento after Proposition 13, in great part because of state Supreme Court decisions on how schools are funded. There is talk that some power should be shifted back to local government and that the legislation must be undone or taxes raised to accomplish this goal. Keeping government decisions closer to the people is a good idea. But Proposition 13 does not have to be dismantled in the process.
Supporters of increased state spending have spent 31 years trying to make Proposition 13 the boogeyman. The measure has been held responsible for a freeway collapse during an earthquake and even for O.J. Simpson's not-guilty verdict in the 1995 criminal trial, to name a couple of examples.
But for a great majority of Californians, the boogeyman label doesn't stick. The measure passed 2 to 1 in 1978, and polls indicate 2-to-1 support today. Who do you trust, the politicians who want to change or repeal Proposition 13, or Proposition 13 itself? For the voters of California, the answer has never been clearer.
Building a new UC -- in cyberspace
Online instruction would allow an institution faced with budget pressures to do more with less...Christopher Edley Jr. Christopher Edley Jr. is dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law...7-1-09
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-edley1-2009jul01,0,5929490,print.story
It is time for an 11th University of California campus: a cyber-campus devoted to awarding online degrees to UC-eligible students.
No budgetary alchemy will allow us to educate the state's future university students in the same way we do now but with less money. The budget cuts caused by the state economic crisis are real and huge, leaving two choices. Educators can do less with less, or we can explore new ways of providing value to California and the nation by doing more -- albeit differently -- with less.
UC XI would have selective admissions; tuition somewhere between community college and the on-campus UC price, part-time and "anytime" options and lectures by the best faculty from the entire UC system. Our online students might miss the keg parties, but they would have the same world-class faculty, UC graduate student instructors and adjunct faculty.
We have the social networking technologies to support student interactions with instructors and each other. Science laboratories could be provided on weekends, at night or during summers, and not exclusively on UC campuses. The faculty can develop powerful academic controls to guarantee UC-caliber instruction and learning.
There are examples of failure in online instruction, but none involved degree-granting instruction by a premier institution with the kind of market appeal that UC campuses enjoy not just in Barstow but in Bangor and Beijing. Moreover, there are some important success stories. Britain's government-funded Open University, begun 40 years ago, offers some lectures in partnership with the BBC. It claims 5% of Britain's adult population has taken at least one of its courses, and it ranks second in student satisfaction out of 258 British institutions, with high marks from government inspectors too. Closer to home, many talented Californians opt for the pricier online University of Phoenix over our public four-year campuses, presumably for convenience and schedules -- or because of our shortage of seats.
Five years ago, when I became dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law, I worried that California leaders were no longer committed to having a world-class university, especially law schools. Nowhere is it decreed that a state must challenge the best private universities, though California was proudly unique in that regard. But a generation of stingy state investment suggests that the goal of "world-class K-16 education for all" has become, simply, "better than Mississippi."
We still have unsurpassed excellence, but it is now rationed and increasingly threatened. The higher education master plan's bold promise of access for the many has been shredded in slow motion. We've had decades of increasing dysfunction in Sacramento and smoldering doubts in some quarters about the value of supporting public education. Now comes the resulting surge in victims -- present and future -- in families and throughout the economy.
Many thoughtful people recognize the importance of education to the state's greatness, but President Obama's call for expanding post-secondary education sounds otherworldly to mid-crisis Californians. Based on data from the census and the National Center for Education Statistics, the state is 49th in the percentage of high school graduates going on to degree-granting colleges. So, employers must import higher-end workers, and Californians have comparatively fewer opportunities for the education that builds middle-class security and prosperity.
The UC XI cyber-campus could be a way to put high-quality higher education within reach of tens of thousands more students, including part-timers, and eventually provide a revenue boost for higher education.
A new California master plan should define and deliver state-of-the-art online education. There are scores of tough questions to be answered, and business plans to be drafted and redrafted. But every cliche about a crisis tells us that the best offense is often innovation.
7-9-09
Meetings
MCAG
MCAG Seeks Public Comments
http://www.mcagov.org/Tcomments070709.html
Notice of Public Comment Period - Redetermination of Conformity for the 2009 FTIP Amendment #3 and the 2007 Regional Transportation Plan Amendment #2
· July 6, 2009 - Public Notice http://www.mcagov.org/pdfs/2009/1PN2009-07-06.pdf
· MCAG Conformity Analysis http://www.mcagov.org/pdfs/2009/2Conform2009-01-15.pdf
· Kern Council of Governments - memo http://www.mcagov.org/pdfs/2009/3KernIACMemJul2009.pdf
· Attachment 1 - Project List http://www.mcagov.org/pdfs/2009/4KernAttach1PList.pdf
· Attachment 2 - Updated Financial Plan http://www.mcagov.org/pdfs/2009/5KernAttach2Fin.pdf
· Attachment 3 - 2007 RTP Amendment #2 http://www.mcagov.org/pdfs/2009/6KernAttach3RTP.pdf
· Attachment 4 - Addendum Environmental Impact Report http://www.mcagov.org/pdfs/2009/7KernAttach4AEIR.pdf
· Attachment 5 - Kern Conformity Analysis http://www.mcagov.org/pdfs/2009/9KernAttach6PInvolvement.pdf
· Attachment 6 - Draft Public Notices, Draft Adoption Resolutions, Adoption Schedule http://www.mcagov.org/pdfs/2009/9KernAttach6PInvolvement.pdf
The 30-day public review and comment period will commence on July 8, 2009 and conclude on August 6, 2009 at 5 p.m. The draft documents are available for review at the Merced County Association of Governments office, located at 369 West 18th Street, Merced, CA 95340, and draft documents can be found above.
Public comments may be submitted in writing by 5 p.m. on August 6, 2009 to Matthew Fell at the address below. After considering the comments, the documents will be considered for adoption, by resolution, by the MCAG Board of Directors at a regularly scheduled meeting to be held on September 17, 2009. The documents will then be submitted to state and federal agencies for approval.
If you have any questions or would like to submit comments, please contact:
Matthew Fell, Senior Planner
Merced County Association of Governments
369 W. 18th Street, Merced, CA 95340
(209) 723-3153, ext. 320
matt.fell@mcagov.org
7-16-09 MCAG...Governing Board meeting...3:00 p.m.
http://www.mcagov.org/govbrd.html