The quote of the week goes to Mark DiCamillo, director of the Field Poll, which is just out with a poll that shows Arnold Schwarzenegger with a 75% disapproval rating among voters and with 90% of Los Angeles residents rejecting him.
In a time when Lester Brown is writing about a World on the Edge: How to Prevent Environmental and Economic Collapse it seems that the political forces in California make for strange reading. Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger, whose overall environmental polices were as destructive as any CA governor, made an impassioned speech this week on the need for strong action on climate change. It may be the only environmental issue that he got right.
At the same time, Representative Jim Costa was voting with the Republicans to continue subsides to the petroleum industry... subsidies that cost the US Taxpayers Billions a year. It is yet one more piece of evidence that cutting the federal budget is not really a goal, but rather a question of whose ox is going to be gored. In this case, Republicans in Congress are making sure that their ox is protected.
Since taking office, Governor Jerry Brown has been working bravely to knock down California’s dangerous deficit. He’s looking high and low for new funds – from reducing the number of state paid cell phones by half, halting new agency car purchases and by issuing a statewide hiring freeze that could save $363 million.
Gov. Brown isn’t just looking to cut out waste in government. He is also looking to continue collecting vital revenue by extending the Schwarzenegger era tax increases.
In fact, Governor Brown has been just about spot on. But even Jerry Brown can make mistakes – and he will make a big one if he follows through on his proposal to cut the state funds used to support California’s excellent open meeting laws.
In order to clean up California’s fiscal mess, our government is going to have to make some more tough decisions in the months and years ahead. Very important services are going to be cut. And taxes are almost certain to be raised.
Winning public support for these tough choices relies on making sure Californians understand how these choices were made. And thanks to our open meeting laws, we know that the public’s business is conducted in pubic.
But this week Governor Brown has put one of the foundations of a better government on the chopping block. He is seeking to cut several unfunded state mandates including ones that deal with providing notices to the public regarding open meetings of local bodies. Since the passage of the Brown Act in 1953, Californians have been guaranteed the right to attend and partake in public meetings. Cutting this funding will put the law in “legal limbo.”
While it is tempting to look at across the board cuts in times of budget crises, keeping our local governments open, transparent and responsible to the people remains paramount to a successful democracy. That’s why these cuts that are threatening our open meeting laws should be permanently off the table.
An open government is something that we all should demand, if not expect. We need only to look at the scandal in the City of Bell to understand how important the Brown Act – and public awareness – is to an effective and ethical government. The lack of transparency in Bell allowed city leaders to take about $5.5 million from the city. We must learn from the Bell example and make local governments even more open – not less.
When voters passed Proposition 59 in 2004, our Constitution changed for the better. Prop 59 mandated that meetings and records of local governments and officials be accessible to the general public. For that to happen, local governments are required to – among other things – print notices and agendas for upcoming meetings. The state is then required to reimburse them, to the tune of $16.6 million for 2008-2009.
Technically, the funding that went towards reimbursing local governments for photocopying and posting notices and agendas for public meetings was suspended by the legislature in last year’s budget. But Governor Brown is seeking to keep it suspended for the next fiscal year.
But at what cost?
According to the California League of Cities, no city has yet used the loophole of suspended funding to stop following the law. But that could change anytime.
Because of laws like the Brown Act and Proposition 59, California has truly been able to say that we have an open state government that encourages civic participation. This is a cornerstone of who we are as Californians. We understand that cuts must be made, but for the benefit of our state – and our democracy – let’s keep the meetings open and the sun shining in.
Phil Ting is Assessor Recorder of San Francisco. He is working on a state level to organize support for a split-roll tax system. On a local level, he is a candidate for Mayor of San Francisco looking to find ways to promote greater public participation and User-Generated Government.
California's clean air and water, pristine coastline, wild open spaces and public health protections don't happen by accident. They happen because champions for the environment run for office, and once they're elected, they work to pass laws that protect our natural resources and improve our quality of life.
Today the California League of Conservation Voters released our annual California Environmental Scorecard. The Scorecard is the behind-the-scenes look at the battle to protect the Golden State's natural legacy and public health, and reveals how the governor and members of the state legislature voted on critical environmental proposals in the 2010 legislative session. Take action and let your legislators know what you think about their 2010 scores: Visit http://www.ecovote.org/
The story of the 2010 Scorecard is as much about how the environmental community stopped multiple attacks on the environment as it is about how we passed strong laws that protect our quality of life. But the story doesn't end there, because we expect more attacks in 2011 that falsely claim we need to sacrifice the environment in order to improve the economy.
Emboldened by the tough economic climate, anti-environmental legislators introduced dozens of so-called "regulatory reform" bills in 2010 in an attempt to weaken environmental protections. The good news is that, with the help of environmental champions in the state Senate and Assembly, CLCV and our allies successfully defeated the bills that posed the most serious threats to the environment and public health. At the same time, environmental advocates were able to deliver several important proposed laws to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's desk, including bills dealing with energy storage, recycling, water conservation, pesticides, clean energy jobs, and oil spill prevention.
Schwarzenegger's 2010 score of 56% factored into an average lifetime score of 53 percent over his seven years as governor. The governor received national recognition for leadership on environmental issues. However, he leaves office with a mixed legacy, having championed some issues-notably, bold solutions to climate change-and having proven less reliable on others, including protecting public health and state parks.
How did your legislator perform on the environmental community's priority legislation to protect the environment and public health? Learn your legislators' scores and then let them know what you think! (More after the jump).
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has received awards for his "green" leadership from NRDC, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the "Beautiful Earth Group" and others in recent weeks in a carefully orchestrated campaign to greenwash his legacy before he leaves office.
In spite of the claims of his collaborators, Schwarzenegger's true legacy is the unprecedented collapse of Central Valley salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, threadfin shad, young striped bass, Sacramento splittail and other fish populations spurred by record water exports out of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta from 2004 to 2006.
Rather than taking the necessary measures to restore these imperiled these fish populations, the Governor only tried to make things worse by attacking the biological opinion protecting Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River spring and winter run chinook salmon, green sturgeon and southern resident killer whales, along with the biological opinion protecting the endangered Delta smelt.
He relentlessly campaigned for a peripheral canal and new dams that are likely to lead to the extinction of many of these species while fast-tracking a corrupt Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative that does nothing to "protect" the ocean from water pollution, oil drilling and spills, military testing, corporate aquaculture, habitat destruction and other human uses of the ocean other than fishing and gathering.
Schwarzenegger will finally leave office on January 2, 2011 after waging an unprecedented war on California fish populations and fishing communities. Millions of us will celebrate the departure of Schwarzenegger, the worst Governor for fish, water and the environment in California history.
Faced with the environmental wreckage that Schwarzenegger has left in his wake, Jerry Brown will have a monumental task ahead if he plans to restore California salmon and other fish populations. Here are seven immediate actions that I advise Brown to take to begin the recovery of California fish and fishing communities.
First, issue an executive order mandating all state agencies to comply immediately with the provisions of the federal biological opinions protecting Central Valley salmon, Delta smelt and other species. To comply with these decisions, the state and federal governments must reduce water exports, better manage water releases from dams, remove dams and provide fish passage for fish above dams.
Second, direct all state agencies, in cooperation with the federal government, to comply with the "doubling goal" of the Central Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA) of 1992. The law set as its goal the doubling of all natural spawning anadromous fish populations - chinook salmon, steelhead, white sturgeon, green sturgeon, American shad and striped bass - by 2002. However, rather than doubling, these populations of fish collapsed to record low levels because of abysmal management by the state and federal governments.
Third, abolish the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) that was instituted under Schwarzenegger and all state plans to build a peripheral canal and new dams. Instead of continuing the BDCP's path to the Delta's destruction, Brown should establish the first ever "Blue Collar Task Force" (a concept inspired by Troy Fletcher, acting executive director of the Yurok Tribe), to recover fish populations and restore the Delta. The task force would be made up of representatives of California Indian Tribes, recreational fishing groups, commercial fishing organizations, grassroots conservation groups, family farmers, environmental justice organizations and those who have been marginalized in the BDCP and Delta Vision fiascos.
Fourth, cancel or suspend the controversial MLPA Initiative and work with the Legislature to begin an investigation of corruption, conflicts and the violation of numerous state, federal and international laws, including the American Indian Religious Freedom Act and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, under the process. The investigation would begin with an executive order by Brown, citing the provisions of the California Public Records Act, asking the Resources Legacy Fund Foundation, MLPA officials, Department of Fish and Game to turn over all of their records relating to the implementation of the MLPA.
Fifth, remove Lester Snow, Schwarzenegger's Natural Resources Secretary, and appoint a new Secretary, a person with integrity and environmental ethics, who will work closely with Tribes, fishermen, conservationists and family farmers to restore California's declining fish populations. While he's at it, Brown should also immediately remove Jack Baylis, a Schwarzenegger stooge, from the California Fish and Game Commission. You can't rebuild California fish populations by keeping the people appointed by the "Fish Terminator" in power!
Sixth, Brown should meet with Jane Lubchenco, NOAA administrator, and demand she terminate the "catch shares" program being instituted on the West Coast, since it is a failed environmental strategy that will result in local, sustainable fisheries being replaced with corporate, unsustainable fisheries. This policy, if implemented, will result in the privatization of public trust resources and the concentration of West Coast fisheries in a few corporate hands.
Seventh, Brown should officially oppose the Water Bond on the November 2012 ballot and should find an alternate source of money to finance California's costs for removing the four PacifiCorp dams on the Klamath River, like the State of Oregon has done. Schwarzenegger stuck $250 million for Klamath dam removal in the water bond, an initiative that funds new dams in the Central Valley.
These seven actions by Brown would help to reverse the fishery collapses that the Schwarzenegger administration helped to engineer and will begin to put California fish and fishing communities back on the path to restoration and sustainability.
Political leaders, NGO representatives and the corporate media have incessantly greenwashed the deplorable environmental legacy of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in a series of photo opportunities, press releases, news conferences and awards ceremonies over the past several months. This disgusting campaign by the Governor and his collaborators to portray Schwarzenegger as the "Jolly Green Giant" is bound to get even worse as Schwarzenegger prepares to leave office.
On December 2, Schwarzenegger accepted an award from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) Region 9 Administrator Jared Blumenfeld for his "environmental leadership."
According to a news release from the Governor's office, "The award ceremony coincides with the celebration of U.S. EPA's 40th anniversary. Governor Schwarzenegger has made California a national and world leader in enacting some of the most ambitious policies to fight climate change, including: AB 32, a first-in-the-world comprehensive program of regulatory and market mechanisms to achieve real, quantifiable, cost-effective reductions of greenhouse gases; the world's first Low Carbon Fuel Standard; and a directive for the California Air Resources Board to adopt regulations increasing California's Renewable Portfolio Standard to 33 percent by 2020."
The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and E2 also gave Arnold the first-ever "climate leadership" award for his cap and trade corporate "green" energy scams at an event at Bimbo's in San Francisco on October 28.
Greenwashing of the Governor's record is nothing new. The mainstream media and corporate environmental NGO's have worshipped Schwarzenegger as the "Green Governor" since he took office in November 2003, in spite of his relentless war on fish, fishermen and California Indian Tribes and his complete subservience to corporate water privateers, agribusiness and southern California water agencies.
On April 14, 2010, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., greenwashed the abysmal environmental record of Schwarzenegger by honoring him with an "environmental advocacy" award at the Hudson Riverkeeper's annual "Fisherman's Ball" in New York City (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/04/14/18644697.php). This was done in spite of a protest where three grassroots environmentalists were arrested for exercizing their rights of freedom of speech and assembly.
However, Schwarzenegger's real environmental legacy is much different from how Schwarzenegger and his collaborators portray it. What is his actual environmental record?
• Schwarzenegger allowed the Department of Water Resources to pump record levels of water out of the Delta from 2003 to 2007, resulting in the Central Valley salmon and California Delta pelagic species collapses.The largest annual water export levels in history occurred in 2003 (6.3 million acre feet), 2004 (6.1 MAF), 2005 (6.5 MAF) and 2006 (6.3 MAF). Exports averaged 4.6 MAF annually between 1990 and 1999 and increasing to an average of 6 MAF between 2000 and 2007, a rise of almost 30 percent, according to the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance.
• He has constantly attacked two federal biological opinions, released in 2009, protecting Delta smelt, Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River chinook salmon, green sturgeon and southern resident killer whales.
• His administration did nothing while tens of thousands of striped bass, Sacramento blackfish, Sacramento splittail and other species perished during a levee repair project at Prospect Island in the California Delta in November 2007.
• He has vetoed numerous environmental bills, including vetoing a badly needed bill sponsored by Senator Lois Wolk (D-Davis) in 2008 that would provide for emergency fish rescue plans on the Delta.
• He has consistently slashed funding for game wardens in the field while California has the lowest ratio of wardens to residents of any state in the nation.
• He has constantly directed the Central Valley Regional Water Control Board to continue to grant waivers to agricultural polluters, in spite of the dire condition of Delta fisheries.
• Since 2004, he has fast-tracked a controversial Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative filled with conflicts of interest and corruption. Rather than creating marine protected areas that truly protect the ocean, this initiative kicks sustainable fishermen, Indian tribal members and seaweed harvesters off the water while refusing to deal with pollution, coastal development, military testing, wave energy projects and other human uses of the ocean that imperil marine life and ecosystems.
• As Schwarzenegger fast-tracked the privately-funded MLPA fiasco, he twice vetoed two crab pot limit bills needed to preserve California crab fisheries.
• Schwarzenegger introduced a bill that would allow the lame-duck Governor to choose 25 development projects each year that would be exempt from the state's strict standards under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (http://www.ecovote.org/blog/?p=1674).
• The Governor's Office of Pesticide Regulation on December 1, 2010 inexplicably approved methyl iodide to replace the soil fumigant methyl bromide, even though methyl iodide is even more toxic to animals, fish and people than methyl bromide (http://www.sacbee.com/2010/12/04/3231811/inexplicably-state-approves-new.html).
However, the "crown jewel" of Schwarzenegger's water policies is his campaign to build a peripheral canal/canal and new dams through his Delta Vision and Bay Delta Conservation Plan processes. This construction of a canal/tunnel, estimated to cost anywhere from $23 to $53.8 billion, is likely to lead to the extinction of Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River chinook salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, green sturgeon, Sacramento splittail and other species.
In his zeal to build the canal, Schwarzenegger attempted to sabotage the campaign by the Klamath, Yurok, Karuk and Hoopa Valley Tribes, fishermen and environmentalists to remove four Klamath River dams by making $250 million for dam removal contingent upon the voters' passage of an unpopular water bond that creates the infrastructure for a peripheral canal and new dams. Because it would have faced certain defeat at the polls this November, Schwarzenegger and the Legislative leadership postponed the water bond until November 2012.
In addition, the Schwarzenegger administration has granted agribusiness permits to divert water from the Scott and Shasta rivers, resulting in the de-watering of these Klamath River tributaries at tremendous risk to endangered coho salmon. Schwarzenegger's "scorched earth" policy towards the Scott and Shasta forced Earthjustice to file a lawsuit against the Department of Fish and Game on behalf of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, Klamath Riverkeeper, the Sierra Club, the Quartz Valley Indian Tribe, Northcoast Environmental Center and Environmental Protection Information Center (EPIC).
While his record regarding fishery and water issues is arguably the worst of any Governor in California history, Schwarzenegger's portrayal by the corporate media and corporate environmental NGOs as a relentless advocate for "clean energy" is also very deceptive. Former Senator Sheila Kuel eloquently exposed the myth of the "Jolly Green Giant" in her article, "A Lame Duck Governor Fabricates A Hoped-For Legacy," in the California Progress Report on July 29 (http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/site/?q=node/8010).
"One of the myths Arnold has floated out to the world is the story of his wonderful environmental credentials," said Kuehl."He takes credit for Senator Fran Pavley's greenhouse gas bill that is now under attack in the November election in an initiative sponsored and funded by Texas oil companies. However, virtually minutes after he signed AB 32 and had multiple press conferences touting this act, he issued an Executive Order undermining the center of the bill, which was environmental regulation of greenhouse gases, and, instead, insisted on joining a multi-state cap and trade system, creating a market for pollution. This solution was allowed in AB 32, but only after stricter regulations were in place."
"In addition, in every single budget negotiation, he has insisted on 'waiving' (read: doing away with) the requirements of the California Environmental Protection Act for big construction projects. He adopted and further promulgated the myth that analyzing the environmental effects of projects (which is all CEQA does) was tantamount to stopping them and that, therefore, that step should be skipped," Kuehl concluded.
We cannot allow Schwarzenegger's deplorable environmental legacy to be greenwashed. People who care about the restoration of collapsing Central Valley salmon and Delta fish populations, environmental justice and the truth must counter the myths being spread about the "Jolly Green Giant" every chance they get!
The Obama administration has joined the Schwarzenegger administration in supporting the peripheral canal/tunnel, according to the latest newsletter from Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, campaign director of Restore the Delta. Canal opponents fear that the construction of the peripheral canal will lead to the extinction of collapsing populations of Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River chinook salmon, Delta and longfin smelt, Sacramento splittail and other fish species.
Both the federal and state governments are going out of their way to serve corporate agribusiness and southern California water agencies at the expense of imperiled fish populations, the recreational and commercial fishing industries and family farmers on the California Delta.
Dan
News from Restore the Delta, Oct. 22, 2010
Never mind the NHA. Keep your eye on the Department of Interior.
We now know something about what has been going on the BDCP Principals' meetings, (which were not "secret" but which anybody present had to promise not to talk about).
We reported on October 10 that Lester Snow has said that decision-making about the BDCP would take place in public meetings.
Forget that.
Last week Interior Secretary Salazar met with the State and the Principals. His deputy, David Hayes, said that Delta conveyance is necessary and that "short term" protections and restoration of the Delta should be weakened.
We shouldn't be surprised at this position, considering that Hayes was formerly an attorney with a firm that represented the Metropolitan Water District. Before that, he was one of the architects of the failed Cal Fed process.
Salazar isn't contradicting Hayes. David Nawi, Senior Advisor to Secretary Salazar for California and Nevada, is apparently deferring to Salazar and Hayes on this issue.
On November 9, Salazar is scheduled to meet with BDCP Principals in Washington, D.C. The expectation is that the product of the Principals' meetings, a report titled "Issues for Discussion for the Bay Delta Conservation Plan" (available at http://www.resources.ca.gov/re... will form the basis of a federal/State agreement.
This is the report that Lester Snow said was not a draft plan, just a progress report on what has been considered throughout the planning process.
A public draft of the BDCP and a draft EIR/EIS are coming due. It has become apparent to everyone that they won't be ready. Alternative approaches? There don't seem to be any. The long, costly BDCP charade may be coming to any end as the State and the feds push forward with the conveyance they always wanted.
Once again, as so often in the past, environmental protections are being treated as an inconvenience. It will be interesting to watch the Department of Interior contradict the biological opinions that shaped the most recent pumping limits.
And, of course with increased pumping, fragile fisheries hanging on by a thread may be wiped out all together. Then again, that may be the intent. No need to protect fish species that no longer exist.
The expectation is that Interior will lift pumping restrictions soon.
So what do Delta Counties do?
It is our understanding that representatives from the Five Delta Counties participated in this October 15th meeting in Tracy with Salazar and Hayes, either in person or on the phone. We have also heard that the Five Delta Counties have to decide if they as a group or individually want to participate in the BDCP discussions with the caveat that they cannot offer input and cannot vote.
Restore the Delta staff certainly understands that local government entities have a responsibility to interact with Federal and State officials in order to represent local communities. And in the case of these BDCP meetings, having the Five Delta Counties gathering information is better than having local government not knowing what is happening.
But, Restore the Delta strongly objects to a process directed by the BDCP Principals, in which officials from State and Federal government agencies can make the decisions on behalf of Delta fisheries, Delta resources, Delta communities, and Delta people without our input and consent.
We believe that this defiles what American democracy is all about.
This is not representative government.
More contempt for science?
The Environmental Water Caucus (EWC) gave the Delta Stewardship Council (DSC) recommendations for meeting California's water needs without building a canunnel, and - no surprise - the BDCP folks didn't like those recommendations.
Byron Buck, Executive Director of the State and Federal Contractors Water Agency, fired off a letter to Phil Isenberg taking issue with the recommendations, which are taken from EWC's publication "California Water Solutions Now."
EWC recommendations include aggressive statewide conservation, reductions in Delta pumping, and retirement of toxic farmlands. Byron Buck objected to the "emotional pejorative" of referring to lands on the west side as "toxic."
"The reality," he said, "is that the West Side Drainage Plan . . . has halved the salt and selenium loads to the Delta from this region. State mandated water quality requirements have been consistently met for over ten years and completion of the plan is expected to eliminate regular subsurface farmland drainage from the Grasslands drainage area to the Delta."
Westlands, according to Buck, is proposing to use similar techniques. Fallowing of select lands is part of salt management plans, but whole scale retirement is not necessary.
We'd just like to note that half of too much salt and selenium is still too much. We'd also like to note that it isn't too hard to meet state-mandated water quality requirements when you are in a position to bully the Water Board into mandating only the quality of water that is convenient for you to deliver.
Bethel Island Bass Tournament benefits the Delta
The first rain of the season didn't keep some dedicated bass fishermen from turning out last Sunday for a Bass Tournament at Russo's Marina benefiting Restore the Delta and the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA). The largest fish was caught by the youngest fisherman. Thanks to all those who donated raffle items, including Steve Herringer of Heringer Wines. And a special thanks to Michael Frost, Bobby Barrack, Russo's Marina, and Cooch Cuchera for organizing the event. In our next issue, we will have a special section on the good works of our tournament sponsors and winners.
Give the Delta Protection Commission your input
DPC Primary Zone Study Updates, all from 6-8 p.m.
Wednesday, November 3, Brentwood
Thursday, November 4, Thornton
Tuesday, November 9, Rio Vista
DPC Economic Sustainability Plan Forums
Monday, November 8, Oakley, 9-10:30 a.m.
Wednesday, November 10, West Lodi/North Stockton, 6-8 p.m.
Governor Schwarzenegger leaves behind a legacy of devastating budget cuts and huge tax giveaways for corporations. In the last two years alone, Schwarzenegger has slashed $32.5 billion from the state budget-- and now our schools and roads are crumbling, public safety is at risk, and vital state services have been decimated. And while state workers have endured deep wage cuts, corporations have enjoyed massive new tax breaks.
Now, Meg Whitman is on a mission to ratchet up the pain on working people in California -- above and beyond the misery that Governor Schwarzenegger has already imposed.
State Workers' Jobs In February, Schwarzenegger announced two-day-a-month furloughs for state workers, which effectively reduced worker pay but did little to help our long-term economic crisis. In fact, economists report that the furloughs will result in a loss of $503 million over the subsequent years. When asked at the time what she would do to balance the budget, Whitman said that she would double the furloughs to four days a week, even though the furloughs actually caused the state to lose money.
When Schwarzenegger increased the furloughs to three days a month (resulting in a 12.8 percent pay cut and loss of an estimated $2.1 billion in wages and benefits for hundreds of thousands of state workers), Whitman went one step further. She announced that she plans to fire 40,000 state workers because she believes the state is "over-staffed" (In fact, California ranks second to last in the number of state workers per capita, and the ratio of all government employees to population in California is 28 percent below the national average.) This mass layoff would cause unemployment in the state to spike a full percentage point.
Public Employee Pensions Schwarzenegger has made pension takeaways a major issue and has threatened to not sign a budget without reforms. But despite his rhetoric the Governor has been forced to negotiate directly with unions representing state workers to get agreement on any changes to current pension benefits and contributions.
Whitman supports Schwarzenegger's proposals, which include raising the retirement age, increasing what workers pay into the pension and ending defined-benefit pensions for new hires and sticking them in risky 401(k)-style retirement plans. But she doesn't stop there. She's willing to circumvent collective bargaining, and the elected legislature, by putting a pension cuts initiative on the ballot, and using her personal fortune to fund the ballot measure.
Californians, including those stricken by autism, and their parents and caregivers, expect regulators to enforce the law, not to side with insurance companies seeking to boost their profits by denying patients the care they need.
Governor Schwarzenegger, however, a longtime and vocal supporter of the Special Olympics and developmentally disabled children, is allowing health insurers to evade state mental health laws and shift health care costs to already beleaguered taxpayers. Last Friday, Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed SB 1283 by Senate President pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento). The bill would have improved, but not fixed, a broken regulatory system.
By Assemblymember Felipe Fuentes and Mark Schlosberg
For the past two years, water issues have dominated political debate in Sacramento and throughout the state, however there is one water bill on the Governor's desk that we should all be able to agree on - AB 301 (Fuentes).
AB 301 would give Californians the right to know how much of their communities' water is being bottled for sale and where that bottled water comes from. With water scarcity being a top concern, this modest bill is an important step towards better managing our water.
Currently in California, there are over 100 bottled water facilities, some operating in parched areas of the state including Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Diego Counties. About half of water that is bottled comes from municipal sources at the same time that companies then sell essentially the same product we get from our tap back to us for up to a thousand times the cost.
In other areas of California, bottlers seek water from springs that are critical to the health of the local environment including creeks and lakes. Overdrawing on these resources can impact the entire community and the environment. In either case, the community has the right to know how water is being used in order to properly manage community resources.
AB 301 passed the legislature and is supported by over 30 organizations throughout the state. The only opposition on record comes, ironically, from the state's Department of Public Health, the agency that would be responsible for facilitating the disclosure of this information. However, the Public Health Department opposition is unfounded.
First, the DPH claims that the program costs money, but what DPH seems to be ignoring is that not only would this bill carry an insignificant cost, but the entire cost would be covered out of existing fees in the Food Safety Fund. While the overall state budget is severely in the red, there is currently a multimillion-dollar surplus in that fund and the water fees portion has a $500,000 surplus, over 10 times the estimated cost of this modest bill.
Second, the DPH argues vetoing the bill is necessary to protect confidential business information of the bottlers. Putting aside the significant question of why the public health department is arguing against consumer's right to know how community water resources are used, not a single private bottler has gone on record opposing AB 301. If the bottled water industry does not object to this legislation, why is the DPH bending over backwards to stop it from becoming law? Shouldn't the DPH be working to protect public health and consumers instead?
Nationally, bottled water consumption has been declining over the past couple of years and for good reason. The bottled water industry uses excessive amounts of water in production and creates billions of petroleum-based plastic bottles, the vast majority of which are not recycled but discarded and end up on our landfills, lakes, rivers, and oceans. It also promotes a product that is a great consumer rip-off, costing up to a thousand times more than tap water for essentially the same product.
With all these impacts, Californian's should at least have the right to know how much water is being bottled and which communities are being impacted. Last session, Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed similar legislation claiming he did not have time to review it in light of the budget impasse. This year he has a chance to lead.
While there is much debate over the future direction of California water policy, AB 301 will only encourage making California's water use as efficient and responsible as possible. We urge Governor Schwarzenegger to side with California's communities and sign AB 301.
Assemblymember Felipe Fuentes represents the 39th District in Los Angeles County and Mark Schlosberg is the national organizing director for the consumer advocacy group Food & Water Watch (www.foodandwaterwatch.org)
As Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger road a high-speed rail train with high ranking Japanese officials on September 14 during his whirlwind tour of Asia, Schwarzenegger administration officials continued to railroad Delta advocates by excluding them from secret meetings planning the fate of the California Delta.
Closed-door meetings now taking place among top water agency officials, regulatory agencies and three corporate environmental groups threaten every bit of progress made in the past year to curtail pumping from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and give imperiled fish populations a chance to recover.
State Resources Secretary Lester Snow is co-leading these secret sessions to negotiate an agreement regarding the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) before Governor Schwarzenegger leaves office, as disclosed in Mike Taugher's article in the Contra Costa Times on September 7 (http://www.contracostatimes.com/top-stories/ci_16014714).
"Supporters say the closed-door talks, which began in late August without notice to committee members, are needed to try to break a logjam," according to Taugher. "Critics see another example of a long practice of secretly settling high-stakes California water issues in ways that end up favoring powerful water contractors while harming the Delta."
Delta advocates view the BDCP as a thinly veiled plan to build a peripheral canal and new dams to facilitate water exports from the Delta to corporate agribusiness giants including Stewart Resnick, the owner of the 120,000-acre Paramount Farms in Kern County, and southern California water agencies. They fear that the canal would likely lead to the extinction of collapsing populations of Delta smelt, longfin smelt, Central Valley salmon, Sacramento splittail, young striped bass and other species devastated by massive water exports in recent years.
"The Governor really wants that canal, and he prefers to do water policy closeted with a few of his best friends," explained Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, campaign director of Restore the Delta.
Of course, Snow, Schwarzenegger and their collaborators have made sure that recreational anglers, commercial fishermen, Tribal members, conservationists, environmental justice communities, Delta farmers and Delta residents, the people most impacted by Delta water decisions, are completely excluded from these back door sessions.
"No one from the Delta is part of these meetings," Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla said. "Restore the Delta has learned that Snow is now taking a 'non-public' proposal to the group. It includes a proposal for Delta operations and governance that allows flexibility but requires only a 'best effort' from agencies to avoid additional water impacts."
Barrigan-Parilla also said the proposal also allows the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the Bureau of Reclamation to veto any changes to the range of operations.
"This could effectively prevent adaptive management intended to protect fish," Barrigan-Parrilla said. "In fact, it appears that the proposal would allow the feds to gut the biological opinions."
Schwarzenegger has continually attacked the federal biological opinions designed to stop the extinction of Delta smelt, Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River winter run and spring run chinook salmon, green sturgeon and the southern resident population of killer whales (orcas) while the Governor's Office continually issues press releases touting Schwarzenegger as the "Green Governor."
The proposal would require only token funding from water users for habitat restoration. It also would exclude an analysis of the Water Board's new flow criteria.
This penchant for secrecy by the Governor at the same time that he hypocritically calls for greater "transparency" in government is the hallmark of the Schwarzenegger administration, the worst in California history for fish and the environment. This is the same Governor that gave the keynote address on an "undisclosed topic" before global oligarchs at the highly secretive Bohemian Grove near Monte Rio on July 30 of this year (http://www.fishsniffer.com/content/arnold-bohemian-grove-schwarzenegger-calls-transparent-government-484/.)
Have you had enough of the secrecy by the Schwarzenegger administration and its collaborators? Call the Resources Agency at (916) 653-5656 today and tell Lester Snow to stop this closed-door negotiating process and bring to the table all affected parties.
Or email Snow directly at secretary [at] resources.ca.gov and let him know what you think of him presiding over this destruction of the state's public trust resources!
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger received a gift of nine works of art by local school children yesterday. The artwork was created "to save public education" by children and their parents at the Davis farmer's market and third-graders at Dry Creek elementary in Roseville and included a piece titled, "Evil Money-Grubbing Robot Seeking to Destroy Public School."
Twenty students participated in the presentation and asked for the governor's help to get the framed paintings put on display in the Capitol.
Consumer group outlines who's paying for pro-water bond campaign and the surprising winners-and losers-behind the massive $11 billion bond
SAN FRANCISCO - Developers, agribusiness and construction interests would benefit from the water bond on this fall's ballot, while public services-such as education and public health programs-could suffer, according to a new analysis from consumer organization Food & Water Watch.
As California's legislators return to Sacramento this week to decide the fate of Proposition 18, an $11 billion water bond that the governor hopes to postpone to the 2012 ballot, the group today released an independent analysis detailing the funders of the pro-bond campaign and the interests that stand to benefit from the most expensive water bond in the state's history. The fact sheet, Who's Behind the Bond?, can be downloaded here: http://www.foodandwaterwatch.o...
"Proposition 18 is being sold as a solution that will benefit all Californians, but over half of the contributions to the Alliance for Clean Water and New Jobs, the main political action committee behind the bond, come from agribusiness, construction and development interests," said Elanor Starmer, Western Region Director for Food & Water Watch. "The bond provides more money for these interests, which have mismanaged our water in the past."
The bond would cost the state's General Fund an estimated $800 million a year, enough to fund 13,000 teachers' salaries or a quarter of the University of California's state funding each year, according to the report. But while taxpayers would likely see cuts to these and other essential services if the bond passed, they would not be the main beneficiaries of bond-funded projects.
Food & Water Watch examined campaign finance reports and other documents to determine who contributed to the pro-bond PAC directly and indirectly through other PACs, such as Schwarzenegger's California Dream Team.
The group then investigated several primary beneficiaries of the water bond based on the text of the bill and other documents. Some beneficiaries, such as powerful Central Valley corporate farms and The Westlands Water District, are well known. Other less obvious beneficiaries include Warren Buffet, large construction companies like Japan-based Obayashi Corp., and companies in the business of privatizing water resources like American Water Company and Poseidon Resources.
The analysis concludes that these interests, not the general public, are the main beneficiaries of the water bond, although the cost of the bond would be borne by all taxpayers.
With polls showing lagging support for the bond, Governor Schwarzenegger asked the legislature last month to delay the measure until the 2012 ballot. Any adjustment to Prop 18, including postponement, requires a two-thirds majority vote in the legislature. The legislature has until around Aug. 20, when ballots will be printed, to postpone or remove the measure from the ballot.
"Our report shows that the bond does not benefit the taxpayers who would foot the bill for these projects," said Food & Water Watch's Starmer. "In the interest of all Californians, legislators should take this opportunity to repeal the bond and start anew, not postpone it."
Food & Water Watch works to ensure the food, water and fish we consume is safe, accessible and sustainable. So we can all enjoy and trust in what we eat and drink, we help people take charge of where their food comes from, keep clean, affordable, public tap water flowing freely to our homes, protect the environmental quality of oceans, force government to do its job protecting citizens, and educate about the importance of keeping shared resources under public control.
Governor Schwarzenegger isn't the only celebrity weighing in on California's water future. He may be promoting Proposition 18, a massive $11 billion water bond to help big agribusiness at the expense of essential services (see our Terminator video), but most of Californians know the water bond is all wet.
With Prop 18 sagging poll numbers, the Governor and legislative leaders are trying to move the measure until 2012. We asked a few of our friends in Hollywood what they thought of the water bond and the prospect postponing it for two years. They all had the same reaction - they spit in disgust - and we captured it all on video!
Coined by its backers as the Safe, Clean and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act, the only thing the $11 billion water bond is guaranteed to do is increase the state's $19 billion deficit leading to deeper cuts in education, healthcare, public safety and
state park funding, build new dams, and lay the ground work for a peripheral
canal around the San Joaquin River Delta. In reality, it should be named the Expensive, Dubious and Deceptive Corporate Subsidy Act.
To highlight the need to scrap rather than delay the water bond, Food & Water Watch teamed up with creative geniuses Nancy Hower and John Lehr who put together this clever spot featuring well known television personalities. The ad features David DeLuise from Wizards of Waverly Place, Anna Belknap of CSI: NY, Kelli Williams from Lie
to Me and formerly on The Practice, and Justine Bateman, best known for Family
Ties.
"We love Food & Water Watch so much, we happily wiped our celebrities' spit off the plexi-glass protecting the camera," said Lehr. "We support keeping water publicly owned, pure, accessible and drinkable...straight from the tap. Proposition 18 is a massive waste of money and won't help California's future water needs."
"I love water," said David DeLuise. "Without it I would smell funny and be thirsty and I might die."
While the ad makes a serious point, it also had side benefits for some of the actors. Said Kelli Williams, "I have never in my life drunk that much water in one sitting. I was marvelously hydrated."
The spot is part of the No on 18 campaign to scrap the water bond rather than have it delayed until 2012. To take action and get involved, go to www.nowaterbond.com/spit. Help spread the word by sharing the video. Together we can work to stop this bond, and get back to work on real solutions to California's water future.
If nothing else, Governor Schwarzenegger has given us the gift of the endless parody. Even before he was the Governator, we enjoyed snickering at his larger than life caricature. His performance as Governor, however, has been far from funny. Ratcheting up a $19 Billion deficit while pushing public safety professionals out of their jobs, laying off teachers, slashing health and social services, and kicking family farmers where it hurts most has been a real tear-jerker.
To curb the tears with laughter, Food & Water Watch has compiled a simultaneously funny and sad montage of Arnold's most memorable film moments to accentuate the devastating consequences that the $11 Billion Water Bond would have on California.
Unsurprisingly, the bond is unpopular with voters across the state. Seeing the writing on the wall, Schwarzenegger and his cronies -- who represent the interest of corporate backers -- have asked the legislature to move Prop 18 to the 2012 ballot. Why? So they can spend more money trying to hoodwink the public into believing constructing more dams, putting a down payment on a peripheral canal, and giving corporate interests more control of our water supply is in everyone's best interest. Is this Arnold's way of taunting us with his infamous phrase, "I'll be back" long after he rolls his Hummer out of Sacramento? NOOOOO!
This is our chance to play Terminator and say "hasta la vista, baby" to the water bond. Watch the video. Share it with your friends. Send a strong message to your legislators that the water bond should be sent to the scrapyard to be replaced by solid, equitable water policies that benefit all Californians.
Nonpartisan reform group asks leaders to make reform part of budget talks
SACRAMENTO-California Forward's non-partisan leaders today asked legislative leaders to address the long-neglected need for lasting and fundamental budget reform as part of this year's negotiations over the state budget.
Robert Hertzberg and Thomas McKernan, co-chairs of the reform organization, sent the following letter to the four legislative leaders:
May 12, 2010
The Honorable Darrell Steinberg
President pro Tempore of the Senate
The Honorable John Pérez
Speaker of the Assembly
The Honorable Dennis Hollingsworth
Senate Republican Leader
The Honorable Martin Garrick
Assembly Republican Leader
Dear Legislative Leaders:
California Forward recognizes and deeply appreciates the significant commitment of time and energy that you and the other legislative leaders - as well as individual Assembly members and Senators and your staffs - have devoted to thoughtfully examining our non-partisan plan for comprehensive budget reform.
In both the Senate and the Assembly, members of both parties have been engaged in good-faith discussions and deliberations about how to refine the principles we have identified as key to restoring public confidence in the state's fiscal operations. It is particularly noteworthy that these discussions have proceeded even as our proposals have drawn criticism from partisan special interests invested in the status quo and opposed to reform.
As each of you know all too well, another difficult budget season is now upon us. In our judgment, it is critical that long-term budget reform become part of this year's budget deliberations.
In the next few days and weeks, each of you will have to grapple with hard choices, and set priorities about the spending of limited public dollars at a time when needs are great and California's economy remains fragile.
There are no easy answers. But the current crisis does provide California with the opportunity to finally address the long-neglected need for lasting and fundamental budget reform, and we urge you to take it.
Thanks in no small part to your efforts, this goal is in sight. In both the Senate and Assembly, real progress has been made in crafting non-partisan reforms based on the best practices of successful businesses and other states, including improved accountability and oversight, better long-term forecasting, setting unexpected windfalls aside, and adopting a pay-as-you-go mechanism for both legislation and initiatives.
Furthermore, our plan provides the first step in rethinking the relationship between state and local government, providing new incentives and resources for communities to start working together to address priorities and bring government closer to the people.
We understand that this work is not yet complete - and that significant hurdles remain before the principles we've outlined can garner the bipartisan support necessary to place them before voters in November.
We believe, however, that reform remains our best hope for forestalling future difficulties, and that failing to enact significant reforms this year would only hasten the advent of the next fiscal crisis.
That's why we ask you to continue to work together to achieve this elusive goal, and urge you to place the reforms we've proposed on the ballot. As always, we stand ready to provide any and all assistance we can in this endeavor, and we would welcome any suggestions you have about other steps we can take to move this process forward.
The Central Coast Fisheries Conservation Coalition (CCFCC), a recreational fishing group based out of San Luis Obispo, is demanding that Michael Sutton resign from his position as California Fish and Game Commissioner due to conflicts of interest in his votes regarding Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's fast track Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) initiative.
Schwarzenegger appointed Sutton, of Monterey, to the Commission on May 4, 2007. He was reappointed on March 25, 2009 to a six-year term. Sutton has served as vice president and founding director of the Center for the Future of the Oceans at the Monterey Bay Aquarium since 2004 - creating what the coalition claims is a clear conflict of interest when Sutton votes on the MLPA initiative, a process strongly supported by his employer.
The group contends that after almost a year of denials, "Sutton has finally acknowledged that his position as an employee and vice president of the Monterey Bay Aquarium conflicts with his role as a Commission member."
During the Commission meeting on March 3, 2010, Commissioner Richard Rogers, referring to the issue of scientific collection permits in Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), stated, in Sutton's presence: "...Commissioner Sutton has to recuse himself from that discussion because the Monterey Bay Aquarium is actually involved as you know in scientific collections."
Sutton reportedly recused himself from the discussion on such permits in MPAs at the Marine Resources Committee meeting on February 16, 2010, according to CCFCC.
"It is obvious that the Aquarium has a financial stake in any decision relating to scientific collection permits in MPAs," said CCFCC Director Harold Davis. "As Commissioner Rogers said at the Commission meeting on March 3, 2010, scientific collection is 'big business.'"
"This is certainly true in the case of the Aquarium, which profits from the fees it charges to the public to view the marine creatures and plants that it collects and displays," explained Davis. "Moreover, there clearly is a benefit to being allowed to collect these specimens in MPAs, areas designated by the Commission where fishing and other uses by the public are restricted or forbidden."
Sutton's acknowledgment of a conflict is limited to decisions on scientific collection permits. However, the CCFCC charged, in a letter sent to the Commission on March 19, 2010, that his conflict of interest "extends to the formation and amendment of the MPAs in which the Aquarium will have scientific collection permits."
The coalition pointed out that "it would be inconsistent and irrational for Commissioner Sutton to take the position that he must recuse himself from discussions and votes concerning scientific collection permits in MPAs, but that he can vote to establish the very protected areas in which restraints are placed on the general public's use while extraction for scientific purposes by his employer is allowed."
In May 2009, the CCFCC filed a sworn complaint with the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) charging Sutton with violating the Political Reform Act (PRA) of 1974 because of his conflicts of interest on votes on MLPA while serving on the Fish and Game Commission. In a cursory evaluation, the FPPC ruled that it didn't find any financial conflicts of interests regarding Sutton's position.
"After conducting an investigation of your allegations in the sworn complaint, we found insufficient evidence to establish that a violation of the Political Reform Act occurred," wrote Neal P. Bucknell, Commission Counsel.
However, Davis emphasized that conflicts of interest are evaluated not merely under the Political Reform Act, which governs only financial conflicts, but also under the common law rules. "These rules are much broader and relate to any actual or potential conflict and to the mere appearance of a conflict," said Davis.
Former FGC Commission President Cindy Gustafson "apparently recognized this when she resigned last year," noted Davis. Gustafson said that her position as general manager of the Tahoe City Public Utilities District might give rise to a conflict sometime in the future even though according to her resignation letter, "... no past, present or currently foreseen issues have presented any concern whatsoever, [but] there is a hypothetical possibility that a future issue may arise and the law is quite clear that even this possibility creates the incompatibility described in the law."
"We find it amazing that Sutton, who has admitted that he has a conflict of interest, believes he can continue to sit on the Commission and make decisions that benefit his employer," said Davis, "given that Gustafson found it necessary to resign from the Commission with 'no past, present or currently foreseen' future conflicts."
Up until his recent acknowledgement that his position as an employee and vice president of the aquarium conflicts with his role as a Commission member, Sutton has persistently denied any conflict.
"Before I went on the Commission I went through a vetting process to determine if there were any issues like that or any conflicts of interest as defined by the state," Sutton said, as quoted by Ed Zieralski in the San Diego Union-Tribune on March 10, 2009. "There weren't any and nothing since then has changed. I have a deep interest in helping the ocean and working with the Commission to continue that process (http://www.signonsandiego.com/weblogs/san-diego-outdoors-blog/2009/mar/10/commissioner-michael-sutton-wont-recuse-himself-ml/).
Melvin de la Motte, CCFCC president, pointed out the absurdity of Sutton's denial of any conflict of interest until recently. "The Monterey Bay Aquarium leadership has publically admitted that they are pushing for no take zones under the MPLA," he stated. "How can Sutton claim to be neutral on votes on something, the MLPA, that his employer is an advocate for?"
De la Motte's contention was backed up by a San Jose Mercurcy News article by Paul Rogers on March 29, 2010 highlighting how the Aquarium, under the leadership of its executive director, Julie Packard, is "switching from education to advocacy." "Through its Center for the Future of the Oceans, the aquarium is urging the public to send an electronic form letter to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to support broad 'no fishing zones,' or marine protected areas, off Southern California," said Rogers (http://forums.mercurynews.com/topic/new-global-warming-exhibit-shows-steady-shift-from-education-to-advocacy-at-monterey-bay-aquar).
Faced with this egregious conflict of interest, CCFCC has asked the Commission to "confirm that Sutton will not vote on any issues relating to MPAs or, if the Commission refuses to provide this confirmation, for a written explanation of the reasons for its refusal."
The coalition believes the "proper course" would be for Sutton to resign. "We call for Sutton's immediate resignation from the Fish and Game Commission because of his now self-admitted conflict of interest," said Davis.
Schwarzenegger's Web of Corruption and Conflicts of Interest
The latest charge by CCCFA joins a myriad of charges of corruption and conflicts of interest that fishermen and North Coast environmentalists have leveled against officials involved in Schwarzenegger's MLPA Initative, a process that is privately funded by the Resource Legacy Fund Foundation.
Fishing and environmental groups have blasted Schwarzenegger for appointing to the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task force officials from the oil, real estate and marina development industries who have a vested interest in the how marine reserves are designated and implemented.
Advocates of democracy and transparency believe that it is no coincidence that Katherine Reheis-Boyd, the president of the Western States Petroleum Association, is chair of the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force for the South Coast and serves on the North Coast panel at a time when Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and the oil industry want to install more oil rigs off the California coast.
"By setting up these no-take marine reserves and kicking fishermen, Indians, seaweed harvesters and other ocean food providers off traditional areas of the ocean, the Schwarzenegger administration is paving the way for offshore oil drilling," said John Lewallen, North Coast environmental leader and sustainable seaweed harvester. "Twenty-three percent of the nation's offshore oil reserves are off the coast of California. The Point Arena Basin off Mendocino is on track now to be leased for drilling by the Mineral Management Services."
Bob Fletcher, former president of the Sportfishing Association of California, recently claimed in a Fish and Game Commission meeting there was hard evidence that two members of the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force, Bill Anderson and Greg Schem, agreed "to sign off on everything else" in return for not putting a reserve in an area where both had marinas and business interests (http://www.sbsun.com/sports/ci_14523601). Anderson is president of Westrec Marina Management, while Schem is president and chief executive officer of Harbor Real Estate Group.
Cindy Gustafson, chair of the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force for the North Coast, responded to these allegations by saying, "I take personal offense to the allegations that members of the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force lied to the commission about business partnerships. Bill Anderson and Greg Schem have never been business partners and neither of them has ever invested in one another's projects. Further, their ownership interests in marina properties have been fully disclosed and no conflicts of interest exist."
However, how it is possible for her to say that "no conflicts of interest exist?" MLPA critics hold that the conflicts of interests are self-apparent, since both own businesses - real estate and marina development - that can clearly profit or be hurt by the designation of Marine Protected Areas. Just like Schwarzenegger appointed Reheis-Boyd to the task force to ensure that the oil industry's interests are served, the Governor appointed Anderson and Schem to make sure that real estate and marina development businesses are not harmed by the creation of MPAs.
The web of corruption and conflicts of interests is not limited to the MLPA, but extends to numerous other environmental appointments by Schwarzenegger, the worst Governor for fish and the environment in California history. In his zeal to drive collapsing Central Valley salmon and Delta fish populations over the abyss of extinction, Schwarzenegger recently appointed four backers of the peripheral canal/tunnel to the Delta Stewardship Council that will oversee the implementation of the water package that was rammed through the Legislature by Schwarzenegger and Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) last November.
Schwarzenegger on March 19 appointed Francis Randall "Randy" Fiorini, a Turlock agribusiness owner, Philip Isenberg, a veteran political hack and lobbyist for the Irvine Ranch Water District, Henry "Hank" Nordhoff, a bio-tech corporate executive, and Richard Roos-Collins, director of legal services for the Natural Heritage Institute, to the "distinguished" seven-member panel.
Environmentalists and fishermen have also exposed conflicts of interest on the state water boards. On March 21, Matt Weiser of the Sacramento Bee disclosed how "the leader of the state's largest water pollution regulator is married to a lobbyist for agencies it regulates, a potential conflict of interest she did not disclose publicly until an ethics complaint was brought against her (http://www.sacbee.com/2010/03/21/2622315/water-pollution-regulator-failed.html).
The state's Fair Political Practices Commission is investigating a 51-page complaint filed by the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA), against Katherine Hart Johns, chair of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. CSPA alleges that she failed to disclose, as mandated by the Political Reform Act, that her spouse was a registered lobbyist receiving substantial income from entities regulated under the Porter-Cologne and the federal Clean Water Act.
"The Schwarzenegger administration's approach to protecting water quality can best be described as appointing foxes to guard the chickens," summed up Bill Jennings, CSPA executive director.
There is no doubt that the Marine Life Protection Act, a law passed by the State Legislature and signed by Governor Gray Davis in 1999, has been hijacked by corrupt corporate interests. The text of the legislation states very clearly, "Coastal development, water pollution, and other human activities threaten the health of marine habitat and the biological diversity found in California's ocean waters."
Unfortunately, Schwarzenegger, a master corporate greenwasher, has completely taken coastal development, water pollution and other human activities other than fishing "off the table" in his MLPA process. He prefers instead to kick the strongest defenders of the ocean - recreational and commercial fishermen, Indian Tribal members and seaweed harvesters - off public ocean waters to clear a path for oil rigs, corporate aquaculture, marina development and wave energy projects.
My name is Tyrone Dickens and I am a union healthcare worker.
I have worked as a homecare provider in San Francisco for almost six years. My work involves cleaning, cooking and caring for patients in their homes who cannot do these things for themselves. For some of my homecare consumers who don't have family any more, I am the only companion in their lives.
This week I have attended a civil lawsuit in which the officials of the union that currently represent me are suing the former leaders of my local union, leaders that I elected and that I still support. I know that may sound confusing, but I think I can explain it clearly so that you can understand.
An editorial from Saturday's Sacramento Bee: High-tech fix won't stop IHSS fraud
In an effort to cut what Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger claims is rampant fraud in the state's In-Home Supportive Services Program, the Department of Social Services is pushing a pilot program to assess the efficacy of an expensive high-tech system to fingerprint and photograph care providers and their recipients.
The MorphoTrak device, which the state is testing in three counties, including Sacramento, has been used by the military in Iraq. It can fingerprint, snap a photo and transfer data instantaneously. The machines cost up to $5,000 a copy. If deployed statewide, the state would need 600 to 1,000 of these devices potentially. But let's hold on a minute.
Before the state commits to buying this expensive equipment and building yet another expensive police bureaucracy that treats all IHSS recipients and their caregivers as potential criminals, it needs to perform a far more thorough assessment of the potential for fraud within IHSS and the best way to address it.
Here's the latest "high tech" weapon in Gov. Schwarzenegger's war on 450,000 elderly, blind and disabled Californians.
Without any authority from the Legislature, the Schwarzenegger Administration is planning to purchase up to $5 million worth of military/security cameras to take pictures of the 465,000 seniors and people with disabilities who receive In Home Supportive Services (IHSS) homecare.
The "MorphoTrak" cameras are currently being used in Iraq and other military locations. According to their manufacturer, they are also recommended for, among other things, "border crossings, gang enforcement, and airport/maritime security." The camera itself costs $4,200, plus hundreds of dollars more for docking stations and other equipment.
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger received a gift of nine works of art by local school children yesterday. The artwork was created "to save public education" by children and their parents at the Davis farmer's market and third-graders at Dry Creek elementary in Roseville and included a piece titled, "Evil Money-Grubbing Robot Seeking to Destroy Public School."
