Letters to the Editor

Faults government for Valley water shortage

Submitted by George Parker
6/20/09 To the editor:

I listened to Paul Rodriguez speak to Sean Hannity last night concerning the pumping of the delta to supply water for farming because of a minnow, killer whales, salmon, and how jobs would be impacted, or in other words no taxes would be paid, the solution i read was to declare a state of emergency, pay employment benefits with money calif. does not have.

Give me a break! Tell the "Gestapo" I mean the E.P.A. to get out, And Calif. should turn the pumps on!

This would let productive people be productive. This means a greater tax base for Calif. People would not have to pay higher food cost. Seems like a no brainer.

Who the hell is the epa to do this? And when did American Citizens become american subjects? Maybe we should learn from the Iraning citizens, and get to it.

Thanks

George Parker
Orem, Utah

Governor’s budget proposals are ‘Third World’

Submitted by Willie L. Pelote Sr.
6/10/09 To the Editor:

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s proposal to bridge the state’s $24 billion budget deficit by shredding the state’s social safety net through far ranging cuts to such areas as education, health care, social services, and public transportation is both disingenuous and fiscally irresponsible, especially since polls show that a majority of California voters oppose these cuts.

Worse, Schwarzenegger’s proposals will actually cost the state more than $24 billion down the road by exacerbating poverty, creating mass unemployment, breeding ignorance and illiteracy, and producing a public health crisis throughout the state.

This can be extrapolated from a 2006 study published by the American Journal of Public Health.

The study found that when New York City submitted to a set of austerity measures and social spending cuts similar to what Schwarzenegger has proposed in order to balance its budget and avoid bankruptcy in 1975, the resultant crime wave and public health crisis that ensued cost New York roughly five times more ($50 billion in 2004 dollars) in medical costs than the budgetary savings ($10 billion) associated with decimating the city’s public health, education, and social service programs.

If it cost New York $50 billion in medical expenses alone in 1975, it is easy to imagine what would happen in California today. The Golden State’s current budget deficit of $24 billion is nothing compared to what it would take to deal with the masses of unemployed, uneducated, sick, and homeless individuals the state will have on its hands, if the legislature goes along with Schwarzenegger’s proposed cuts.

Moreover, many of Schwarzenegger’s cost-cutting ideas would actually do away with efficiently run, low-cost state programs in favor of high-priced, private sector solutions.

For example, Schwarzenegger has proposed to virtually eliminate the In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) program by changing eligibility requirements for people who receive IHSS, which provides care to seniors and the disabled in their own houses instead of state-subsidized nursing homes.

However, it costs between $60,000 to $80,000 dollars to care for individuals in a nursing home versus $10,000 per person through the IHSS program.

Similarly, the California Department of Mental Health has been using private contractors to staff institutions like the Atascadero State Hospital instead of civil servants, even though private contractors typically earn $78-$95 an hour more than their civil servant counterparts.

Schwarzenegger is right when he says that, “They [his proposals] represent a transformation of what services Sacramento can provide and how those services are delivered.”

The transformation that Schwarzenegger is calling for relies on the same Third World-style fiscal austerity/structural adjustment policies that have succeeded in enriching a small class of wealthy elites in developing countries while simultaneously entrenching poverty and creating squalid living conditions for the vast majority of citizens throughout the Third World.

These observations call into question the governor’s true intentions as well as those who resist calls for beefing up the state’s revenues. Is it really about being fiscally responsible? Or is it about eliminating the state’s ability to create a more equitable society through public policy in order to enrich a select few through tax breaks, tax credits, and subsidies that favor the wealthy and politically connected?

If the governor is really serious about fiscal responsibility and getting California’s economic house in order, he should abandon his blunt instrument approach and embrace the budget proposal advanced by the American Federation of State County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME) which found $44 billion in recurring revenues to balance this year’s budget and all others thereafter.

AFSCME’s approach would fundamentally orient the direction of the Golden State toward a future where all Californians will be served by the greater public good.

(Signed)

Willie L. Pelote Sr.

Assistant Director
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees

Disputes title enforcement article

Submitted by Brian Benson
6/2/09 To the Editor:

RE: Illegal rebates bring down the wrath of the state against title company. Your article espoused the drivel put forth by the Department of Insurance and implies that $10,800 was paid directly to brokers by the title company to secure the business.

What rubbish!

This is a direct inducement in the same way that Jamba Juice illegally induced minors to drink smoothies at your last school fundraiser, thereby resulting in more obesity that drives up the cost of health insurance.

At the heighth of the housing boom, the average title company spent less than $30 per year on a given producer to help them connect consumers to better information about their homes and neighborhoods or better loan terms. This drives down consumer costs, not raises them. This is called "service".

And here's the real punch: when companies are so hindered by short-sighted regulators that they pick up and move out of state--which is currently happening in droves-- that is bad for local communities, local businesses (talk to your local Kinkos or local UPS Store about the net effect of SB-133 on their print volumes), etc.--not to mention a state government that can use all the taxes it can get.

Wake up and smell the coffee. This article could not have been more off base.

Brian Benson

San Clemente

Where is your 10%?

Submitted by Name withheld by request
3/4/09 Dear Editor:

I have been a State employee for 31 years. I have been through several economic crises like this in the past and have always survived but this one is different.

This time the state is letting it be known what they are doing to their own for the benefit of others.

The Governor has deemed it necessary to take away 10% of our wages for 18 months. The last time I checked there are 300,000 state employees. There are 38 million citizens in the state. Does this seem like an unfair ratio as to why so few have to give up so much?

I was at the grocery store at the begining of this pay cut and asked the clerk if they are giving up 10% of their wages to help the state out of this economic crisis and she looked at me as if I had lost my mind.

All I’m asking is that when this 18 month period is over is that we state employees first, get our original wages reinstated and that we get a compensating percent wage increase to make up for the 18 month loss of wages.

I don't think that is asking too much and would do the same for anyone else who has been in the same position.

Further more we have term limits! Vote them all out of office if they are not doing their job to your satisfaction.

All the legislature should not be paid if the budget is not passed on time. Thank you for your support.

Name withheld by request

Faults lack of U.S. sportsmanship at Olympics

Submitted by Paul Casson
8/21/08

Editor:

I think it is sad that the United States has to be so envious of a young Chinese girl, He Kexin, for walking away with a gold medal.

Can we go any deeper in our foul and repulsive demonstration to the international community, that the once world's greatest democracy has sunk so low, that it no longer remembers how to "play games for games sake," and how to be happy for "other's successes, the same as our own."

All while we pick wars with only much weaker nations. What feeble, sore-losers this country's overseers have become! It's sickening and pathetic.

Paul Casson

Union City, CA

Disputes report on fast food and health

Submitted by Trice Whitefield
4/30/08 Editor:

A report about obesity policy released this week by the California Center for Public Health Advocacy (CCPHA) dismisses health measures that focus on personal responsibility or exercise (“Would you like fries with that heart attack,” April 29).

Boiled down, the group’s message reads: “Americans simply can’t be trusted with the complex task of feeding themselves.” While this kind of rhetoric seems outrageous to most of us, it’s becoming increasingly common among activist groups like CCPHA.

The “policy recommendations” section of its report included almost a half-dozen new regulations including fast-food zoning restrictions and menu-labeling mandates. These are consistent with other measures that aim to give bureaucrats control of everything we eat. Think about recent lawsuits against parents of obese children, “sin” taxes on tasty foods, and Girl Scout cookie boycotts.

CCPHA’s president even suggested that the Environmental Protection Agency should define some restaurants as “environmental toxins.” But the real toxic element here is an unhealthy activist-driven public obsession with “junk” food, which redirects energies away from programs that encourage exercise -- and toward ineffective government control of our food choices.

Sincerely,

Trice Whitefield

Senior Research Analyst
Center for Consumer Freedom
Washington, D.C.

www.ConsumerFreedom.com

Comments on animal confinement story

Submitted by Shannon York
4/26/08 Editor:

Thanks for your feature on the Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act, which would simply give egg-laying hens, breeding pigs, and veal calves enough room to turn around and extend their limbs (“Farm animal confinement battle heats up,” April 24).

This common-sense measure is consistent with what hundreds of California businesses and schools are already doing to end their support of the worst factory farming abuses. Companies like Burger King, Safeway, Denny’s, and Wolfgang Puck are moving away from using eggs from caged hens and pork from crated sows. And California universities are increasingly serving only cage-free eggs to their students.

By voting yes on this measure in November, we can support California businesses and small family farmers—and improve the lives of farm animals. Check out www.HumaneCalifornia.org.


Shannon York
Chico

Is it Organic? How would you know?

Submitted by Mischa Popoff
4/3/08 Editor:

Imagine how many world records would be broken at the next Olympics if they quit testing athletes. Imagine if they required only a dated and signed list of all the things athletes ingested over the last four years in order to “prove” they were clean. Well that’s how the organic industry runs.

If this is news to you then perhaps you’re one of the many millions of consumers who assume organic crops are tested. Silly consumer. Organic food isn’t tested. So how the heck are you supposed to know it’s not fraudulent?

Inspections of organic farms occur once a year, never on a surprise basis, and consist basically of a review of the farmer’s paperwork. The way the system is supposed to “work” is that organic farmers “prove” they’re NOT using synthetic fertilizer by documenting that they ARE using composted manure applications, and they “prove” they’re NOT spraying toxic herbicides by documenting that they ARE harrowing weeds mechanically, just to give a couple of examples.

Such honor-based self-auditing, combined with receipts for approved inputs, supposedly guarantees that organic farmers aren’t negligent, and aren’t cheating by using prohibited inputs or by mixing or substituting with non-organic product. But anyone can see it’s like a man trying to prove he wasn’t fooling around on his wife because he was playing poker with his buddies all night and he’s got it all documented in his trusty daytimer, along with a receipt for the pizza he bought. It’s circumstantial, subjective, and open to abuse. But don’t blame organic farmers.

Many honest organic farmers have long wanted to make the system objective by testing their crops. But the private organic certifiers and their federal regulators aren’t interested. And the sorry excuses for not testing abound.

One excuse is the fact that conventional crops can sometimes attain very low, even undetectable chemical levels if they air out long enough. So some say we can’t test organics because it’ll open us up to unfair competition from conventional products which could be marketed as chemical free by the time they get to the store shelf.

But organic farmers want their crops tested in the field, which coincidentally is what consumers assume is already happening. Forget about testing the final product. Organic food isn’t just supposed to be better to eat; it’s also supposed to be better for the environment. An organic crop should be fit for human consumption at any time from seeding to harvest. Conventional growers most certainly can’t claim that, now can they? Even conventional seed is sometimes treated with a toxic brew that’s powerful enough to sterilize a child. As such, testing organic crops in the field would be a fantastic marketing feature if only the industry would embrace it.

Sadly, the private organic certifiers, along with many broker/traders, wholesalers and retail grocers, are too busy making money to concern themselves with organic testing. How much money? Almost $20 billion last year, 85% of which was imported! How do you think a test on a Mexican or Chinese “organic” crop would look?

Consumers have every right to get their money’s worth when they pay a premium for organic food. But, alas, another excuse given in opposition to testing is the fear of obtaining “false positive” readings in otherwise completely organic crops. No one’s ever bothered to investigate this mind you; they just claim it’s possible, and an otherwise innocent organic farmer would lose his certification. But as a former organic farmer myself, and an Advanced Organic Farm and Process Inspector, I’ve tested the crops of many organic farmers who wanted scientific results and I’ve never found any such false positive results.

Sure, there’s lots of spray drifting around if your neighbor is conventional, but an organic farmer is supposed to take measures to protect his crop, not just stand there and watch harmful sprays drift across the fence line. Testing will eliminate fraud, and in this example, negligence as well.

Honest organic want to distinguish themselves from bargain-priced “organic” crops which comply only with the letter of the law on paper. Many are dropping their certifications, leaving the growing organic market to be filled by good paper pushers, many of whom are abroad. Testing organic crops would be the first step to bringing the good, honest, domestic farmers back into the fold by curtailing the useless bureaucracy that exists between them and consumers.

No one will die or get sick if they eat fake organic food; they’ll just get royally ripped off. Scientific laboratory analysis keeps the cheaters out of international sport. Why not use it for value-added, certified organic food? If organic is supposed to be so much better for the environment, and so much better for our health, why not prove it?

Mischa Popoff, B.A. (Hon.), IOIA Advanced Farm and Process Inspector
Author of Is it Organic? (due out this fall)
Osoyoos BC
250-809-2914
mischap@telus.net
www.isitorganic.ca

Disputes Episcopal Church property arguments

Submitted by Robert McLean
4/1/08

Editor:

So much disinformation. All to bolster the impending court cases. Reprehensible. (What part of 1 Cor 6:1-6 do they not understand?)

Bishop Howe of Central Florida has called the gross violations of canon law by Ms Schori "despicable." Bishop Lawrence and the standing committee of South Carolina have declared they will not recognize Bishop Lamb, the vichy planted provisional bishop.

Ms. Schori also tries to twist the canon law with regards to property. She states that the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church say that parish and diocesan property is held in trust for the entire church. Distortions.

The Dennis canon (you can look it up on Wikipedia) says nothing about diocesan property and moreover states... "All real and personal property held by or for the benefit of any Parish, Mission, or Congregation is held in trust for this Church [i.e., the Episcopal Church in the United States] AND the Diocese thereof in which such Parish, Mission or Congregation is located."

So property is held in trust for the national church AND the diocese. In the event of those parties are in conflict, who wins?

Look to the name on the deed. The Episcopal church is fastest declining denomination in America. It hardly needs more buildings.

Robert McLean MD PhD
Pueblo, Colo.

Urges oil company boycott

Submitted by Frank Tobe
3/27/08 Editor:

We've been conditioned to think that the cost of a gallon of gas is CHEAP at $1.75. It's NOT!

And as we head for summer prices near $4.00 -- and oil company profits cross over the OBSCENE barrier -- we need to do something.

Here's what we can do: We target someone in the pocketbook by not purchasing their gas! And, we can do that WITHOUT hurting ourselves.

How? We impact gas prices by acting together to force a price war. Here's what we do: Don't purchase ANY gas from the two biggest producers (which now are one), EXXON and MOBIL.

Here's the concept: We target Exxon/Mobil. If they aren't selling any gas, they will be inclined to reduce their prices to encourage sales. If they reduce their prices, the other companies will have to follow suit. But to have an impact on their sales, we need to reach literally millions of Exxon and Mobil gas buyers and get them to boycott too.

All we need to do is follow this three-step targeting plan: 1. Stop purchasing Exxon/Mobil gas. Buy any other brand instead. 2. Send this message (or make your own) to your whole mailing list and encourage them to do the same. 3. Write one letter to the editor of your local newspaper repeating what we're doing and why. [To find the "Letters to the Editor" for your local papers, simply Google as follows: "contact us" "Letters to the Editor" "your city name".]

I'll bet you didn't think you and I had that much potential for change! We do if we unite and target our actions meaningfully and in significant numbers to be felt. I'm investing 30 minutes writing and mailing this message, sending my letter to the four local paper editors, and switching away from Exxon/Mobil. I encourage you to do so also.

We can make a difference. Let's give it a try and see what happens.

Frank Tobe
Santa Barbara

Assembly bill 1921 could shatter the American Dream

Submitted by Donie Vanitzian, JD
3/24/08
California is presently cash and income strapped to the tune of at least $14.5 billion dollars with proposed cuts to be made in every State Department. Keeping that in mind, nothing is laudable or applaudable about Assemblyperson Saldana’s Assembly Bill 1921, just as nothing is commendable about the countless “paid” hours expended by the California Law Revision Commission in bastardizing the Davis-Stirling Act.

Assembly Bill 1921 complicates an already problematic statute. I am on the record demanding a moratorium on any Davis-Stirling Act rewrites until a “credible” study of the problems can be, and has been, accomplished. AB 1921 is the full employment act for special interest parasitic industries and California's legislators. It is shameful that the remaining few protections for the titleholder's vested property interests are dangerously diluted by the cumulative effect of this bad legislation.

Though they may fancy themselves oracles of legislation, California Legislators are instead, masters of self-delusion. While in the Sacramento Holiday Camp, these public sector parasites are rarely held accountable for the disasters they cause. Once their paychecks end, their pensions begin. For the past three decades or so, California statutes have resulted in a battle-scarred minefield memorializing the delusions of self-congratulatory legislators wanting their names in books of California law--at any cost. The bigger the special interest payments--the bigger the name in the books.

If ABomination 1921 is signed into law, the end game for titleholders is prohibitively expensive litigation.

Heavy on Sweetheart Deals But No Checks and Balances

Assembly Bill 1921's caption reads, "This bill would revise and recast the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act." In other words it is the "rewrite" of an entire Civil Code Title of law.

Assembly Bill 1921 is voluminous in print and anemic in its practicality. It amounts to a wholesale rewrite of law already in force, interpreted by the courts, and relied upon for well over two decades. Notably, the proposed rewrite is short on substance and lacks justification for shredding laws already in place. AB 1921 purports to sacrifice the Davis Stirling Act by codifying vacuous Legislative oratory. Hiding reality under the guise of "legis-speak" lest their intent be exposed, the cumulative outcome of AB 1921 if passed, amounts to condemning owners to subjugate their rights to the whim of their rulers, be they boards, legislators, vendors, attorneys, judges, arbiters, or the like. It is an "implicit submission" to forces outside the homeowner's control.

A sober look at this preposterous legislation--devoid sufficient public input and competent research-- reveals the imposition of unilateral substandard lawmaking. Assembly Bill 1921 consists of bad law: rife with loopholes, titleholder disenfranchisement, and remarkably poor drafting. Without adequate substantiation, one hundred seventeen sections, "Title 6," an entire Chapter consisting of Civil Code sections 1350 through 1378, are hacked out and rewritten in a matter of months by the few, with virtually no meaningful input from the many.

Misleading the Public

Much of the public is unaware that these shenanigans are taking place right under their nose. What homeowner has the resources on such short notice, let alone the time and knowledge to pour over 300 pages of newly conceived laws and then sit down and attempt to craft a letter to their Legislator explaining their views on the matter? I tried to do that and was told the Legislators and the Legislature are only interested in "groups." My letter was not even admitted into the record, so intentionally ignored that the record baldly claimed there was "no opposition."

The level of scrutiny that should have gone into this massive rewrite was, and is, missing. What part of "fiscal impact" does this California Legislature not understand?

Our Legislature has a far higher duty to the public than it is practicing. Without delay, the Legislature should place full-page advertisements in major California newspapers for one year as well as notify every common interest development titleholder that laws profoundly affecting their ownership are in play.

To claim that the Internet provides "notice" is a self-indulgent fantasy. Not every homeowner is computer literate, or has a computer, or has affordable access to the Internet and a printer. And rare indeed is the Internet-enabled titleholder who searches daily to see if the Legislature is tinkering with his property rights. Let alone understanding the bloated Commission's purpose few homeowners have heard of the "California Law Revision Commission." Yet that Commission's dangerously misguided authorship of the proposed Assembly Bill 1921 will effect the lives, property rights, and personal assets of millions of homeowners in this state.

Indifference to Statutory Integrity

Statutory changes tend to be of two types, renumbering-reindexing when societal change renders the current placement inadequate, and substantive changes in the law itself. By doing both simultaneously in Assembly Bill 1921 the Legislature renders impotent the public's ability to understand and comment on it.

Anyone who has ever had to find or follow the law knows the importance of stability of cross-referencing and the agony and cost wholesale renaming and reindexing impose. Moreover this renders much of case law unusable to all but the most sophisticated, well-funded researchers. Nonetheless, under the banner of "simplification" the California Law Revision Commission masks the enormous scope substance of its changes. In its enthusiasm for musical section numbers to cover its tracks, once again the CLRC excises "Title 6" from the Civil Code.

The initial heading of the former Title 6, “Wills”, enacted in 1872 consisting of sections 1270 to 1377 was repealed by Stats.1979, c. 373, sec. 484 to make way for the present version of the Davis-Stirling Act monster. It should be noted that the purpose of moving "Wills" was to place it in Probate Code statutes.

Title 6 "Common Interest Developments" was hatched in 1985. Now its 117 Civil Code sections are littered by the detritus of the CLRC's self-aggrandizing musings also known as "Comments" throughout the Code's annotations. Here, "Common Interest Developments" stays in the Civil Code statutes but changes it numbering and alters text substance.

In 2007 the California Law Revision Commission reported that it would be "several years" before this "project" would be presented to the Legislature. Worth mentioning, is the fact that titleholders did not ask the Law Revision Commission to do this in the first place, but the Law Revision Commission was advised that the owners were against this rewrite of laws in the manner it was occurring. Having slipped this soporific to the public, the CLRC speedily cobbled together AB1921 to be introduced in less than a year.

Moreover, attempting to slip even alert observers another "mickey," it purported to address only "technical and conforming changes," shamelessly mischaracterizing an intentional revision bastardized of form and substance.

"Recast" is Just a Fancy Word for "Rewriting Law" While Bypassing the Democratic Process

The audacity, let alone unmitigated arrogance that somehow the California Law Revision Commission is above the law and can perform such functions that are beyond its mandate, is unnerving. The Commission categorized their so-called "Statutory Clarification and Simplification of CID Law" as the panacea to problems plaguing such developments. What could possibly be "simple" about 300 pages consisting of some 85 cross over laws and no beta test as to its applicability?

Assembly Bill 1921 is not a revision; it is instead a rewrite of the LAW. A legalized pork barrel packed with goodies for the parasitic association industry and its vendors. It is an ill-conceived pork-barrel project that is proceeding without shame and accountability, with no end in sight.

If residential deed-restricted titleholders were ever under the mistaken belief that their Legislator could be an ally--by now they should know better. The public must understand that this cavalier rewrite will detrimentally affect the lives of millions of titleholders and prospective titleholders. Owners, who have dutifully spent decades coming to grips with understanding the Davis-Stirling Act, will be forced to start all over again. Frankly, some may not live long enough to figure it out. Others will likely employ a costlier route, that of hiring lawyers to explain an untested code to them with "on the one hand, on the other hand." Others still, may merely rely on the word of third parties whose interpretation of the codes may be slanted or just plain wrong.

The California Legislature Should Abandon Assembly Bill 1921

While the text in Assembly Bill 1921 may look good on paper, it lacks useful application.

This massive, untimely project has far-reaching consequences for millions of titleholders. For all its pages of paper, and all the rhetoric, pomp, and circumstance, save the back-patting, the hundreds of pages of slop miserably fails to protect titleholder assets. It fails to eliminate longstanding problems of imbalance pertaining to mediation, arbitration, and litigation and the attendant costs thereof. And there are numerous problems related to those issues. Instead, it merely provides a laundry list of statutes as its prelude to a newly created mess with utter disregard as to its implementation in terms of "real life."

Apparently the only people throwing their hands up in disgust at the utter waste of “time,” “resources,” and “excess” in California’s Legislature, are deed-restricted titleholders who lack adequate and meaningful representation in Sacramento. The millions of deed-restricted titleholders are left paying the price for bad laws, interference by special interests, and excess spending created by our legislators. It is scandalous the laws that are passed because some special interest entity wants it and can afford a lobbyist, rather than analyzing and researching laws that are necessary, and then proposing their introduction genuinely subject to public comment.

While the many problems with Assembly Bill 1921 are impossible to adequately address, here's a breathtaking example. Consider this newly hatched phrase slated to become law under Assembly Bill 1921: "An affidavit of delivery of a notice, which is executed by the secretary, assistant secretary, or managing agent of the association, is prima facie evidence of delivery."

Prima facie evidence!!! Might as well say "self-interested and unrebuttable evidence." It matters not what horse the drafter of that provision fell off of, what matters is that with the stroke of a pen something as egregious as what otherwise seem to be an innocuous "phrase" will become law--let alone prima facie evidence to be used against the titleholder with no viable avenue for rebuttable evidence. [FN1]

Imagine a third party vendor who contracts with the association, signing their name to an affidavit stating they did something when in actuality they did not. Imagine the board director secretary trying to cover his or her behind in a breach of fiduciary duty lawsuit for taking a person's home away from them, or instituting litigation against them, or penalizing them--merely by signing an affidavit. How can one disprove dishonesty if it is enshrined in the presumption of truth?

Imagine the same scenario if it were applied to fines, penalties, interest and late charges. The potential for abuse is overwhelming. Phrased alternatively, the venerable certified letter is replaced by the unsubstantiated claim from someone who has nothing to lose and everything to gain. [FN2]

Far-reaching problems with Assembly Bill 1921:

• Assembly Bill 1921 has expunged the word "property" as it relates to the titleholder's vested interest.

• Other than to clarify "escrow" proceedings; define "claimants;" ownership of pets; roof repair or installation; survey questionnaires pertaining to defects; the term "homeowner" is mentioned little, and where it is mentioned it is wholly devoid legal significance rendering the term non-existent as it applies to the titleholder.

• Award of "attorney's fees" are mentioned over twenty-five times and not to the benefit of the titleholder.

• The titleholder is not provided with realistic redress and an avenue for providing penalties against associations, third party providers and advisors, and boards of directors. Assembly Bill 1921 fails to direct the benefits of any such penalties directly to the affected titleholder(s).

• Assembly Bill 1921 fails to provide a "Victims Fund" for any titleholder who is a victim to the bad laws and who suffers at the hands of the association, its third party vendors, providers and advisors, and boards of directors who break the laws.

• There should be no creation of an ombudsman department or agency because of the drastic fiscal impact it will have on the entire state and the owners. No such agency should be funded by residential deed-restricted taxation alone.

• Assembly Bill 1921 fails to provide per se penalties against third-party management companies and their employees and it fails to provide per se penalties against recalcitrant boards. Moreover, it fails to per se assist titleholders in protecting their assets, fails to provide a viable avenue of redress, other than prohibitively expensive litigation, for the mounting problems associated with common interest developments, and homeowner associations. Every avenue the titleholder attempts to pursue for "fairness" is a costly dead-end--thanks to California's obtuse Legislature.

• Assembly Bill 1921 fails to address a huge problem that is created by the lump sum rewrite that did not exist before. That is, the culmination of intersecting procedural demands such as Request for Resolution, mediation and/or arbitration causing a cumulative effect that often costs more and lasts longer than litigation itself. [FN3] Needless to say, there are no guarantees that once initiated, any of those alternatives, ie, request for resolution, mediation, arbitration, will result in a viable resolution. [FN4] Assembly Bill 1921 will only exacerbate these inherent statutory problems.

Law Revision Interference with Legislation

The Commission's time has come and gone. It is no secret that on more than one occasion I have written the Governor imploring him to pull the Law Revision Commission's funding and/or altogether disband it.

Though paid handsomely while the rest of the State suffers great economic loss, cutbacks, and unemployment, the California Law Revision Commission no doubt believes they are only doing their job. That, however, should be a topic for debate. Often patronizing and condescending toward those in disagreement with its agenda, the Legislature not unlike the Commission, appear to side with, if not coddle the special interest industries. The standard response to the non-special-interest public is, "the staff recommends against that change."

Presently, the graveyards of repealed code sections caused by the Law Revision Commission's chainsaw approach in attempting to substantiate its grant money should be investigated. The Commission and the Legislature have created mass confusion for California consumers where none need exist. A first step to clarity and filling the $14.5 billion deficit would be to zero out the CLRC budget and to thoroughly investigate the laws proposed by the State Legislature prior to passage.

For these reasons and much, much more, I oppose Assembly Bill 1921 in toto.


--------------
[FN1] See Vanitzian, Expert Series: Common Interest Developments--Homeowners Guide (Thomson-West)
[FN2]: See Vanitzian, Homeowner Associations: Dynasties of Dysfunction]
[FN3] See Vanitzian, Expert Series: Common Interest Developments--Homeowners Guide (Thomson-West)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ms. D. Vanitzian co-authors the Los Angeles Times Real Estate section column titled Associations. She is the author of the Expert Series: Common Interest Developments--Homeowners Guide (Thomson-West) and Villa Appalling! Destroying the Myth of Affordable Community Living. She can be contacted by writing to: Post Office Box 10490, Marina del Rey, California 90295.

Yacht tax loophole is good for California economy

Submitted by Gene Beley
2/17/08 To the Editor:

I read your item on the yacht tax exclusion, and believe yes, it was a good move, despite what any doubters say.

The previous attempt at tightening up this law made it one year instead of 3 months. When they omitted this tax break, Mexico and Oregon were so happy they began planning to build new marinas to capture California yacht owners. If they would have stayed one year in any marina, they would probably stay there for the life of their ownership of the yacht, because one gets familiar with their homeport cruising waters and mechanic-technicians.

This is free trade on a much more limited geographical basis. If anyone buys a yacht for $1 million, where will you buy it, if sales taxes prevail, Oregon or California? Even with thinking about buying another $20,000 boat, I'm shopping on the Internet via Yachtworld.com as far away as Florida.

The thought has crossed my mind about the cost of keeping it in a slip there three months BEFORE shipping it back to California, perhaps I'd go spend three months there in a "free" hotel.

Cheers...

Gene Beley
Stockton

Paramount Disaster Recovery disputes DOI claims

Submitted by Steve Slepcevic
1/23/08 To the Editor:

Recently the Central Valley Business Times published an AP article about an agreement reached between the state Department of Insurance (DOI) and Paramount Disaster Recovery. Inc. We were not given the opportunity to add our statements to the article.

The DOI alleged that Paramount was acting in a capacity for which a public adjuster’s license was required in South Lake Tahoe following the Angora fire in 2007. Paramount maintained that it was acting within the purview of its license as a general contractor when it prepared a detailed analysis of fire and smoke damage for its clients and never acted as a public adjuster.

The DOI took action against Paramount and certain of its representatives based almost entirely on a complaint made by an insurance company adjuster whom Paramount had exposed for attempting to underestimate two claims.

Paramount demonstrated to its clients that the adjuster was paying less than what Paramount believed was required to fully restore each residence. If Paramount discovers damage to a structure, then they are contractually bound to disclose such information to the client. The adjuster, on the other hand, is under no such duty.

While the obvious damage was acknowledged, the latent and equally dangerous and unhealthy smoke damage was being ignored. Paramount, keeping the interest of its clients as the dominant factor, protested that the insurance company adjuster, unlicensed as a contractor, was attempting to foist an unreasonably low estimate on the clients.

Paramount insisted that its clients acquire all the information necessary to decide how best to restore their homes after comparing Paramount’s estimate with any others. Paramount and its representatives denied that they were acting as a public adjuster and have questioned the constitutionality of the Department’s enforcement of one statute under the California Insurance Code, which regulates the insurance industry when the same acts are authorized by the California Business & Professions Code, which regulates general contractors like Paramount.

Paramount filed suit challenging the authority of the DOI to regulate the actions of a general contractor. In that action, declarations were filed from every consumer with whom Paramount had contact following the Angora fire attesting to the fact that Paramount at all times represented itself or performed work as a general contractor, and that the documents that were signed clearly stated that Paramount was a general contractor.

In fact, although the DOI touts itself as “the largest consumer protection agency in the state,” not one consumer in South Lake Tahoe filed a complaint with the Department about Paramount’s activities.

Paramount agreed to settle the matters it had with the DOI specifically premised on there being no admission of guilt or liability purely as a business decision in order to run the company without legal matters getting in the way. Paramount was confident it would have prevailed in the litigation but it would have cost the business more in the long run.

Simply stated, there is no competent evidence and no legal judgment that Paramount or its representatives committed any illegal act.

For Paramount, the focus will continue to be on helping the property owner prepare for a disaster or recover from one.

Steve Slepcevic
Chief Executive Officer
Paramount Disaster Recovery Inc.
Palos Verdes, Calif. 90274

Questions California’s ‘baselines’ for electricity and gas consumption

Submitted by Gene Beley
1/1/08
(This is a copy of a letter sent by the writer to the California Public Utilities Commission with a copy to CVBT.)


California Public Utilities Commission
505 Van Ness Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102-3298

Regarding our December 07 PG&E bill

Dear PUC:

My wife and I are 67-years-old, living in a single story 2,000 sq. ft. condo, and just received our Dec. 26, 07 bill for $429.79—which almost caused cardiac arrest! In the past six months, we have spent more than $10,000 on a new hybrid electric-gas heating and air conditioning system, $10,000 on dual pane windows, $1,000 on a new top-of-the-line Sears gas water heater, and bought a new refrigerator and dishwasher—all in the hopes of bringing down our energy bill during our senior, low income years.

This December $429.79 bill is more than we ever experienced when living in a 3,000 sq. foot home in Morgan Hill when our three children all lived at home with us.

Needless to say, we are disappointed that there is no payback on our investment as PG&E keeps promising everyone if they will just install such new, energy efficient appliances and equipment.

Then I belatedly asked a PG&E representative how the BASE LINE SYSTEM is calculated. Is it on square footage of our home? No, they told me. And when they cited the criteria, I began laughing out loud, because it sounded like a weird joke written by comedian Steve Martin:

1. Elevation of the land in your area.
2. Geographical location.
3. How my home is heated, whether it is all gas or electric.
4. The season we are in.

Then I learned PG&E refuses to give us credit for the new technology of the hybrid system being both gas and electric, and are classifying it as “all gas.”

Then I learned the worst of their dirty little secrets, or as they told me, the dirty little secret of the California Public Utilities Commission, because PG&E says, this is the agency that makes up these insane rules. I was also told the rest of the insane P.U.C. baseline system:

1. In the winter months of November 1 through April 30, we are allotted only 12.5 kilowatts per day and just two therms of gas per day for the baseline.
2. In the summer months from May 1 through October 31, we are given only 15.9 kilowatts per day and .5 therms per day of gas.

Now that sounds like enough to turn on a light bulb, and perhaps microwave one TV dinner. God forbid we should take a shower! The bottom line is there is no way anyone can operate under the baseline to avoid getting crushed by the economics of this system.

I even tried to go solar to eliminate PG&E, but was told by an honest solar representative from green Dragon Solar that we can’t do that because the city of Stockton has too many trees on two sides of our condo.

I think we need people to rise up against the California P.U.C. in a Howard Jarvis Prop 13 type grass roots movement to claim back some sanity to save us all from the next wave of utility bill caused bankruptcies. I will conclude by revealing that this December bill shows we are paying $24.15 in taxes for the city and county for a Utilities tax, plus a 31¢ Energy Commission tax and PPC (Public Purpose Program)$1.71 tax for low income people, which we will soon qualify at the rate we’re going, because, like the housing situation, this is going to get a lot worse before it gets better. Some of you who aren’t yet retired won’t really understand how retired people fight for every buck they get to make ends meet, but I ask everyone to work for a change in this simply insane system that discourages everyone, because there is no way you can beat the baseline system.

Sincerely yours,

Gene Beley
Stockton, CA 95219
209-956-6575
genebeley@gmail.com

Opposes proposed egg factory

Submitted by Anthony Montapert
12/4/07 To the Editor:


I oppose Olivera Foods' proposed egg factory in Stockton; it would threaten neighboring homes, depress environmental quality and intensely confine animals.

The community of Stockton deserves better.

Anthony Montapert
North Hollywood, Calif.

Writer faults government, builder for mold in home

Submitted by Chay Barkley
10/5/07 To the Editor:

Why is it that if a public, government building gets mold the news is all over it, but if you buy a new home in the valley and before the home turns six years old, it gets condemned due to being substandard and to damp to live in and nobody gives a dam.

My County Supervisor, Health, Building Departments didn't and my District Attorney, State Congressman Cardoza, State Senator Denham and our great Governor Schwarzenegger truly have no time for this issue.

Maybe it's because they take campain contributions from these developers that build these pieces of C--P homes and then drive hardworking people into the ground because they play by the rules and believe that County, State Officials will do the right thing and help them.

My father died in December 2005 with mold contributing to his death, my mother and I have been infected with mold and I was suppose to pay for renting a new home and keep my mortgage up in a home I couldn't live in and the loss of all my personal property contaminated with mold and storage fees.

Being sick all the time because medical insurance doesn't cover mold treatment and homeowners insurance doesn't cover construction defects and mold, this company has gotten away with murder and continues to destroy me and my family without anybody giving a second glance.

So please tell me why the wealthy can get away with anything and the common man gets run over. Maybe this is way some people lose their homes, because the local government only wants a new tax base and turns their heads the other way for the almighty buck and allow the wealthy developers to build these pieces of C--P and screw the unknown buyer.

Chay Barkley
Santa Clara

Reader reacts to autism story

Submitted by Anne McElroy Dachel
8/9/07



To the Editor:


The story about the $7.5 million dollar grant from the EPA to study the relationship between genes and environment triggers with regard to autism and other disabilities again seems to be avoiding a major health care controversy, while seeming to focus on the epidemic. There is no doubt that many factors may be involved in the explosion of autism in the U.S., including exposure to chemicals during fetal development, but here again countless parents who claim their children became autistic after childhood vaccinations, will wonder if the purpose of this study is again to deflect focus on the vaccine issue.

There is also a National Institute of Health five year autism study now in progress which seems to be trying strongly to make the case that autism is present from birth.

SD team to research autism's cause
San Diego Union Tribune
"Others think a combination of genetics and environmental factors is to blame. Some family members have postulated that mercury in certain vaccines may trigger the condition, although researchers have discounted that theory.
"The focus in San Diego will be on early development of autistic children, as well as the genetic footprint of the disorder's earliest stage."
The EPA and NIH are determined to look for any possible cause for autism other than the exposure to known neurotoxins in the dramatically expanded vaccine schedule starting in the 1980s.
This chart compares the vaccine schedule in 1983 and 2007. There is no proof that vaccinating children with endless chemicals is in any way safe.
http://www.generationrescue.org/pdf/cdc_comparison.pdf

The vaccine schedule more than tripled during this time period and many of these vaccines contained mercury. Everyone seems to have just accepted the claims of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that their studies show no link between vaccines and autism. They have the same kind of research used by the tobacco industry in the 1940s and 50s to disprove a link between smoking and lung cancer---easily manipulated populations studies.

This article explains that the vaccine issue doesn't merely involve the mercury-based vaccine preservative thimerosal. There are a host of dangerous and deadly ingredients in vaccines.
http://www.health-reports.com/autism.html?engine=overture!801&keyword=autism+research

We have the most vaccinated kids in the worlds and some of the sickest. As we have dramatically increased the number of vaccines, we've seen explosions in the rate of juvenile diabetes, childhood cancer, bowel disorders, asthma, allergies, and autism.

In the 1970s, the autism rate was one in 10,000. Today it's one in every 150 children, including one in every 94 boys. The CDC attributes this to "better diagnosing and greater awareness" on the part of doctors and no real cause for concern.

Since this is an EPA grant, maybe they'd be interested in the fact that ninety percent of the flu vaccine recommended for six month old babies and pregnant woman at all stages of pregnancy contains a massive mercury assault. A pregnant woman receiving a flu shot gets 25 mcg of mercury. According to the EPA, that's intended for someone weighing 550 pounds. That mercury easily passes the placental barrier and enters the developing baby. It seems that EPA guidelines don't apply to vaccines.


Anne McElroy Dachel
Chippewa Falls, WI USA
amdachel@msn. com

Take a giant step into the 21st Century

Submitted by Jozef Goj
6/20/07 To the Editor:

The first traffic light was installed outside the House of Commons in London in 1868. The first roundabout was installed in 1904 in the USA. The first multi level cloverleaf intersection for a freeway was installed in 1924 in the USA.

All were and are designed to stop and slow traffic!

Too often I hear claims of road construction reducing congestion and yet it never happens.

Imagine if you will a roads infrastructure that allowed all motorists to enter and exit an intersection all day every day without stopping without fail.

Imagine that you can cross town without stopping at any major intersection.

If you can do this, then the only limiting factor is the speed any number of vehicles have to drive at to maintain flow.

If you have unrestricted exit from all major intersections you will never get traffic tailbacks on to a roadway or freeway reducing the lanes as a consequence of the intersections’ inability to cope with the flow.

The problem with the traffic is that we all want to get to where we want to go, and we want every traffic light and intersection we approach to give us a clear run so we don't have to stop at a single intersection.

Not possible you say? Well you would be wrong!

The simple solution to traffic jams and congestion is to design a road system that lets you do this. Well, we have that solution.

This allows all vehicles that approach any intersection on or to an arterial road to enter the intersection and exit it without stopping.

All day, every day, in the worst peak hour traffic and save up to 40 percent on fuel costs and pollution emissions.

At www.ubtsc.com.au are models that allow everyone approaching an intersection to do exactly that!

Jozef Goj
CEO
UBTSC Pty Ltd
Colo Heights, NSW
Australia

Insurance fraud story gets reaction

Submitted by Terence Kelley
5/24/07


To the Editor:

I was encouraged that someone is finally going to jail for fraud. This has been going on for over 40 years.

A conversation with the claims folks at Mercury would give you a list of the attorneys that are involved in these phony claims.

Some of these law firms have clients made up exclusively of participants in fraudulent accident claims.

It is not hard to recognize that there are many more participants. Perhaps the D.A. will soon be filing charges against the attorneys and MD's involved?


Terence Kelley
Policy Officer
California Department of Insurance (ret)


(Editor’s note: For more information on this topic, please try our “search” button on our main page to search for “insurance fraud” stories.)

Name dispute resolved

Submitted by Allan A. Fulsher
5/3/07 To the Editor:

As a follow-up to my letter to the editor dated Feb. 20, 2007, your readers may be interested to know that US Ethanol, LLC of Vancouver, Wash., has successfully settled its dispute with US Ethanol Holdings of New York.

The settlement provides that US Ethanol Holdings of New York must cease all use of the name and mark, US ETHANOL or any similarly confusing name or mark.

US Ethanol, LLC is pleased that our exclusive rights to the mark has been recognized and we anticipate some significant announcements in the near future concerning our ethanol production facility under construction in Longview, Wash., and our proprietary biofuel distribution strategy for the Interstate 5 corridor on the west coast.

Thank you,

Allan Fulsher
Vice President
US Ethanol,LLC
Vancouver, Wash. 98660

Disputes solar claims made by another reader

Submitted by Michael Stuart
4/19/07 To the Editor:

In regards to Gerry Wolff's letter (12/14/2006) entitled, "Solar, Not Nuclear" CSP is no substitute for nuclear energy!

Concentrating Solar Power (or CSP) is inefficient, expensive, and has notable environmental impacts.

According to the California Energy Commission ( http://www.energy.ca.gov/electricity/gross_system_power.html ), all of the utility-generated solar power in the state amounts to two-tenths of 1 percent of the state's electricity production.

Because of the limited availability of sunlight, these systems have notoriously low capacity factors and are therefore cannot be relied upon for baseload power.

According to the California Energy Commission ( http://www.energy.ca.gov/electricity/comparative_costs.html ), at 13 to 42 cents per kWhr, solar power is the most expensive way to generate electricity, hands down.

In a time when energy prices are skyrocketing, few people can afford a large-scale conversion to solar power. What's more, due to its low capacity factors, solar capacity must be backed up with additional stand-by power generation, which adds to the overall cost of solar.

Solar collectors also require a huge area of land, which must be dedicated to solar generation. Even in the desert, this would disrupt the ecology. Additionally, in order for the salts to remain molten at night, CSP requires fossil fuels to be burned for heat.

According to a US Department of Energy study ( http://www.nrel.gov/docs/gen/fy98/24496.pdf ), these systems are "hybridized" with up to 25 percent natural gas. Ironically, this renewable technology is a contributor to greenhouse gas emissions!

Nevertheless, concentrating solar technology, along with many other renewable power sources such as wind, tidal, and geothermal, should continue to be supported in hopes that a breakthrough will someday allow them to be a significant source of energy generation.

Today however, CSP is no replacement for baseload energy generation sources. In the medium term, we cannot abandon the proven, effective, and efficient source of low-emission energy that nuclear power has to offer.

To learn more about the benefits of nuclear energy, check out http://www.nei.org/index.asp?catnum=1&catid=11 and http://www.casenergy.org/WhyNuclear/TheBasics/tabid/66/Default.aspx
http://www.na-ygn.org/

Michael Stuart
Public Information Officer
North American Young Generation in Nuclear
Beaverdam, Va.

Suggests a different headline for our gasoline story

Submitted by Robert Blum
3/30/07 Heeeeere's $4 gas..............

The clean, green, environmental machine taught me that the higher the cost for (petroleum produced) gas, the better.

The headline for the article should have read 'VICTORY' or perhaps 'Transition to renewable energy is truly gaining traction.’

Robert Blum
Houston, Texas

Objects to governor’s dam proposals

Submitted by Steven Evans
3/29/07 To the Editor:

In re: Schwarzenegger pushes for second Central Valley reservoir

We don't need costly and destructive new dams to meet California's water needs. Even the Governor's own California Water Plan (2005) shows that we can reduce water demand and meet our needs, even as the population and economy grows, if we choose to invest wisely in water conservation and reclamation.

Every dollar invested in water conservation produces four times more water than $12 wasted on costly and destructive new dams.

New dams are not a solution to global warming. In fact, both of the projects proposed by the Governor will take more energy than they produce (likely energy from polluting fossil fuel plants) and new studies show that large reservoirs produce greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming.

The Governor has the opportunity to meet our water needs, grow the economy, and protect the environment by investing in water conservation and reclamation.

This won't happen if he gets into a brawl over building costly and destructive new dams.

Sincerely,

Steven Evans
Conservation Director
Friends of the River
Sacramento

Suggests a different location for a new reservoir

Submitted by John Stevens
3/27/07 To the Editor:

How about the White River in southern Tulare County?

There are no flood control reservoirs between Lake Success on the Tule River and Lake Isabella on the Kern River.

When the White River flooded in the past it inundated Earlimart and shut down Highway 99 in both directions.

I'm sure the identified sites are important but I wonder if this Tulare County site is being overlooked?

John Stevens
Visalia

Wants to be proud of California farmers

Submitted by Hyla Bolsta
3/26/07



To the Editor: Thank you for the March 24 article on the proposed egg ranch critique.

You are bringing to light some of the problems inherent in factory farming chickens, and citizens' disapproval of such means of providing food.

I want to be proud of the farmers in this state, and look towards the day they will change their inhumane practices.

I support the citizens and newspapers that work towards this end. Your article is part of the re-education necessary for people to reconsider what they eat and where it comes from.

Hyla Bolsta
Fort Bragg

Urges end to ‘chicken concentration camps’

Submitted by Gail Camhi
3/25/07


To the Editor:

San Joaquin Valley, where my children live, does not need another torture-inducing factory farm.

This state has far too many of these hell-holes, and it is hoped that by this time we would have learned the solid lessons inherent in producing nutrionless eggs from abused birds.

Please do not repeat the mindless mistakes of the past, and do not even think of building more chicken concentration camps.


Gail Camhi
San Francisco

Dispute over ownership of ‘US Ethanol’ name

Submitted by Allan Fulsher
2/20/07 To the Editor:

With reference to your recent article "Wasco ethanol plant depends on funding, air permits," I wish to ensure that your readers are not confused by the origin of the statements and promises being made by Mr. Khalilzad and others on his behalf.

My company, US Ethanol, LLC, of Vancouver, Wash. is the owner of the trademark "US ETHANOL" as applied to ethanol in the United States.

We have no affiliation with Mr. Khalilzad or his company which is using our mark without authorization.

We disavow and disclaim any representations or promises made by Mr. Khalilzad or anyone else purporting to be acting on behalf of his company concerning the Wasco plant that he is touting in the media or any other business endeavor that his company claims to be involved with.

We regret any confusion that Mr. Khalilzad is causing by his unauthorized use of our name and mark.

Allan Fulsher
Vice President
US Ethanol, LLC
Vancouver, Wash.

Huge oil supply close by but gasoline prices still high. Reader wonders why

Submitted by Bill Charron
2/9/07 Editor:

My name is Bill Charron and I am from the province of Alberta in Canada. We are the province that is like your great state of Texas -- oil country.

The pump price here is at 84.9 cents per litre. That works out to $3.396 American per gallon and our exchange rate is over .85 cents American.

We are paying more for regular unleaded gas than Canadians down east.

I really cannot figure that one out. Many Albertans feel the same way.

We have the oil tar sands and still we pay high prices. Oil that is in our back yard, transportation is close by, and still high prices for fuel.

Try figuring that one out.

Bill Charron

Stony Plain
Alberta
Canada

Solar, not nuclear

Submitted by Gerry Wolff
12/14/06 Dear Editor:

It is astonishing to read that anyone should be considering building a new nuclear power plant in California when there is a simple mature technology available that can deliver huge amounts of clean energy without any of the headaches of nuclear power.

I refer to “concentrating solar power” (CSP), the technique of concentrating sunlight using mirrors to create heat, and then using the heat to raise steam and drive turbines and generators, just like a conventional power station.

It is possible to store solar heat in melted salt or other substance so that electricity generation may continue through the night or on cloudy days.

This technology has been generating electricity successfully in California since 1985 and half a million Californians currently get their electricity from this source.

CSP plants are now being planned or built in many parts of the world. CSP works best in hot deserts, like the Mojave desert, but it is feasible and economic to transmit solar electricity over very long distances using highly efficient “HVDC” transmission lines.

In the recent “TRANS-CSP” report commissioned by the German government, it is estimated that CSP electricity, imported from North Africa and the Middle East, could become one of the cheapest sources of electricity in Europe, including the cost of transmission.

A large-scale HVDC transmission grid has also been proposed by Airtricity as a means of optimising the use of wind power throughout Europe. If such a scheme is valid for Europe, it certainly makes sense in California!

Further information about CSP may be found at www.trec-uk.org.uk.

The many problems associated with nuclear power are summarised at www.mng.org.uk/green_house/no_nukes.htm.

Sincerely,

Dr. Gerry Wolff
Anglesey
United Kingdom

National parks need adequate funding

Submitted by Laura L. Whitehouse
12/6/06 To the editor:

New economic analysis from the National Parks Conservation Association underscores the importance of preserving national parks such as Sequoia and Kings Canyon, which represent and preserve the best of our natural, cultural, and historical heritage ("Report: National parks are where money grows on trees," Dec. 5).

Many members of the Central Valley business community, who know the value of parks in helping to strengthen our economy, are already strong, vocal advocates for these places.

Working together, we can restore the faded glory of our national parks. We just need adequate funding to do so.

Laura L. Whitehouse
Central Valley Program Manager
National Parks Conservation Association
Fresno

Regarding the CVBT story “Poll: Americans support guest worker program”

Submitted by Tom Shuford
11/27/06
Dear Editor:

Whatever polls might seem to say about the popularity of guest-worker programs with voters, politicians who press that response to business' perceived labor needs run some risk of losing their jobs.

Economist Robert J. Samuelson, who writes for the Washington Post and Newsweek, provides reasons:

"What we have now — and would with guest workers — is a conscious policy of creating poverty in the United States while relieving it in Mexico. By and large, this is a bad bargain for the United States. It stresses local schools, hospitals and housing; it feeds social tensions..."

"President Bush says his guest worker program would ‘match willing foreign workers with willing American employers, when no Americans can be found to fill the jobs.' But at some higher wage, there would be willing Americans. The number of native high school dropouts with jobs declined by 1.3 million from 2000 to 2005 ... Some lost jobs to immigrants. Unemployment remains high for some groups (9.3 percent for African Americans, 12.7 percent for white teenagers)."*

"Business organizations understandably support guest worker programs. They like cheap labor and ignore the social consequences. What's more perplexing is why liberals ... support a program that worsens poverty and inequality."

Tom Shuford
Lenoir, N.C.

Casino-operating tribes must follow the law, not hide behind sovereign immunity

Submitted by Clark Curtin
10/4/06
To the editor:

If tribal governments want to be treated as sovereign nations, fine. Treat them like any other foreign nation; however, when those same governments enter into for-profit enterprises that conduct commerce with off-reservation entities, including non-Indian individuals, they should be required to adhere to the same rules and regulations as every other for-profit enterprise.

There should be no sovereign immunity for for-profit tribal enterprises.

The practice as it exists today gives Indians free rein to negotiate in bad faith with the unwary with total immunity from prosecution.

If they refuse to be held to the same degree of accountability and responsibility as their non-Indian counterparts, then all of us should stop doing business with them (including gambling) until the playing field is leveled.

Clark Curtin
Santa Teresa, N.M.

Concerned over state’s fruit fly eradication program

Submitted by Caroline Bennet
9/21/06

Dear Editor:

I read your article on the oriental fruit fly pesticide treatments that will begin in Northridge on September 20.

I talked to Peter Kurtz, the toxicologist with the CDFA and he informed me that the male fruit fly does not ingest the pesticide. Instead, the pesticide is released into the air surrounding the tree.

Before it is applied to the trees, it is mixed with a substance that allows it to be a timed release, so that it is released continuously over a two week period. The fruit fly simply flies near the tree and is killed by the potent Category 1 highest hazard pesticide, Naled.

This pesticide has been linked to brain cancer in children and leukemia, and it is scheduled to be released into the air where children may live or play or go to school.

This treatment was recently carried out in Santa Barbara, also in a nine square mile area, where I live.

My son became so ill with irritated lungs and breathing difficulty that I had to leave the area and am staying in Northern California until two weeks after the treatments are over.

Residents of Northridge who want to know more about this substance that will be released in their neighborhood may go to:www.bessems.biz/naled.

I am very concerned with the CDFA's apparent disregard for the health of California residents.

Caroline Bennet
Santa Barbara

University of Phoenix rises to clarify its position

Submitted by Terri Bishop
9/21/06

To the Editor:

On behalf of University of Phoenix, I would like to clarify a couple of important points made in your September 5, 2006 story about the recent Federal Court of Appeals decision titled, “Court flunks University of Phoenix.”

The University of Phoenix recruiter compensation plan is in full compliance with Department of Education (Ed) regulations. With regard to your mention of our 2004 dispute with the Department of Education, University of Phoenix was not required to change our compensation plan in the settlement due to our full compliance within the law. We continue to uphold that level of integrity.

University of Phoenix enjoys completion rates (from enrollment to graduation) that are higher than the industry average. These statistics support the fact that students are being properly enrolled and are making satisfactory progress.

We are the largest private university in the nation because we provide access and opportunity to a college education and we are fully accountable to the academic outcomes of our students. We are proud that our recruitment staff is among the best in the industry in providing students with information and encouragement to continue their education. At a time when our nation struggles to produce an educated workforce in order to compete in the world, what could be more important than encouraging more education at all of our accredited colleges and universities (both public and private)?

Terri Bishop
Senior Vice President for Public Affairs & Chief Communication Officer

UPS franchisee disputes use of word 'griping'

Submitted by Name withheld
9/15/06 "Franchisee griping is also seen on the Internet at sites maintained the Brown Shield Association Inc. and the Brown Board Owners Association, both groups of franchisees." FROM THE WEBINTERVIEW OF 9/15/2006

I take exception to the word "griping."

The issues with TUPSS problems with profitability has impacted small business owners who have bought these franchises.

The fact that 2 1/2 years down the road they are still not turning a profit is a serious problem and the use of these boards to bring it to the attention of the public so that other "small business people" do not get into the same situation that your interviewee is in is worth it.

I, for one do not call it GRIPING.

(This letter was sent by a franchisee in the Midwest who asked that their name not be made public.)

Can more be done to protect dairy cows from weather extremes?

Submitted by Connie Davis
8/1/06 To the Editor:

I read the article on the death of thousands upon thousands of dairy cattle during the recent heat wave.

Not being an expert in dairy farming but having a lot of appreciation for the industry and those that produce the milk, I'm wondering if there is not more that can be done to protect herds from disaster when heat or cold is severe.

Perhaps, as we humans can turn to shelters if we don't have air conditioning or can drink enough liquids and protect ourselves to some extent, why can't we respect the livestock in a similar manner as in the case of the dairy industry, the livestock is their true moneymaker?

I'm in the manufacturing industry, and we provide protection from the sun and the elements for the majority of the products we sell, and of course, these are just materials, although costly and critical.

So, perhaps, not just because of the fact that they are a valuable commodity but are also live creatures, we should have enough respect to provide additional shelters or misting, and perhaps other affordable remedies that may allow more of them to survive during difficult times.

I'm sure that many dairy farmers care deeply and try their best to protect their herds, but I've been around dairies a great deal and haven't seen that much protection from the elements available.

I know that remedies can't prevent all the deaths and financial losses, but at least they may prevent some and also, may save some government funds (the taxpayers) from having to assist as much, during these difficult situations.

Connie Davis
Chino

Appreciates Brent Gill -- wherever he is

Submitted by Lurdes Montiel
7/26/06
To the Editor:

I truly enjoy the lighter side articles by Brent Gill.

I enjoyed reading his "few" lines on “Where in the world is Brent.”

I hope he will write several stories of his adventures in China. I love his style of relating his stories and giving us, the readers, the opportunity to experience his adventures.

Lurdes Montiel
Sacramento

Remember Hetch Hetchy's history

Submitted by David Andrews
7/20/06
To the Editor:

Regarding Hetch Hetchy cost of restoration: As someone whose descendents held possession of Hetch Hetchy Valley prior to first contact, we Yosemite-Mono Lake Paiutes were always interested in the process of restoration and cost.

We Paiutes were once the stewards of Hetch Hetchy and Yosemite and had always wondered what Hetch Hetchy would’ve looked like today.

We would like to thank all those who were involved in the study into the feasibility of restoration of Hetch Hetchy Valley.

To all those in the Bay Area, we would like them to know that they are drinking the water that comes from the Tuolumne from Piute Creek and through Piute Mountain.

Always remember the first people of Hetch Hetchy were my ancestors, the Yosemite-Mono Lake Paiutes.

David Andrews
Yosemite-Mono Lake Paiute Indian Community
Sacramento

Caution needed regarding detectable levels of pesticide residues

Submitted by Dr. S. Banerji
6/16/06
Editor:

Thresholds levels for pesticides are set based on animal studies. Results from the latter are discounted by a subjective factor before arriving at MRLs.

Therefore, we should be cautious about detectable levels of pesticide residues.

Please also bear in mind that children and women of child bearing age are more vulnerable than other demographic groups.

Dr. S. Banerji
Mumbai
India

A solution to workers' comp fraud

Submitted by Ray Ebersole
5/31/06
Editor:

Workers comp insurance is based on per hundred dollars of payroll. Requiring roofers to purchase comp insurance will do nothing to solve the payroll fraud by paying cash to avoid reporting payroll therefore avoiding comp premium.

All types of small contractors in California are defrauding the comp system in California. The practice is widespread and becoming common.

The simple cure which for some reason no one is interested in, would be to list employees’ names on comp policies before their coverage begins.

This would make it impossible to pay cash and then list an employee as a new hire the day of an injury.

Ray Ebersole
Owner
Van Go Painting
Pacifica

Civil debate needed now to solve immigration issue

Submitted by Ruth A. Wooden
4/6/06
Editor:

Let's talk about what it really means to have "civility" in political discourse. And let's come to agreement on this quickly before things get really ugly on immigration.

We've heard calls from leadership many times to have "civil" discussions on all kinds of issues, and no one ever seems to be against it. President Bush has said, "When we discuss this debate, it must be done in a civil way. ... It must be done in a way that brings dignity to the process. It must be done in a way that doesn't pit people against each other."

And yet, we always seem to end up with the same political discussion that everyone agrees is not civil. But we can dispense with the political posturing and instead engage in public deliberation that actually produces good results - if we agree to some real ground rules.

First, let's recognize that civil dialogue doesn't mean having only nice things to say. Politics ought to be filled with passion and opposing views. So when there is a strong statement to be made, critical points that are based on provable facts and well-articulated arguments should not be labeled "uncivil."

Second, we need to start with a forthright and full accounting of all the legitimate options for addressing the challenges posed by illegal immigration. Too often, politicians say they want a civil discussion, but they really only want to keep their opponents from landing blows to their proposals. Political leaders have to have the courage to allow their own ideas to compete with all the other options available and let consensus build on the best set of solutions.

To be specific on immigration, there are two basic approaches that are getting the most attention at the moment, but there are others that should also be laid out on the table. "Get tough on immigration" supporters are strongly asserting various forms of border control and immigration enforcement as the primary strategy. Business interests and others are touting "guest worker" legislation that would still allow low wage workers into the country, but with a process that is designed to bring more accurate documentation and less criminalization.

But these are not the only possibilities for addressing the challenge of immigration. From the more aggressively anti-immigration side, there are calls for the creation of a fence along our southern border, building of more detention centers to coincide with stepped-up apprehension of undocumented individuals and many other proposals. From the more aggressively pro-immigration side, there are calls to allow all immigrants currently living in the country to become legal and apply for green cards, to lower the income standards necessary to allow U.S. citizens to bring family members to America with family immigration visas, and several other efforts to ease the process toward legal status for workers. Others are pushing to hold businesses more accountable for employment practices that reward workers who enter the country illegally.

Our nation would be the greatest beneficiary if even one courageous leader simply took the time to lay out clearly for the American people what all the various proposed strategies are - in a voice that is as unbiased as possible - and ask the people to consider the pros and cons of each. The public can look past their own fears and wishful thinking, but only if all the options are set out before them and they have sufficient opportunities to consider them.

Third, let's be honest about who's backing which proposals and why. Part of being clear about the merits of each proposal is being candid about who benefits and who might be hurt. To leave out the human implications is to obscure and confuse the process. The American people deserve to better understand how various proposals might affect consumer prices, taxes, local services and their neighbors.

Leaders should be forthright about their basic approach on these matters. It is legitimate for a leader to say, "I really believe that we have little to fear from the vast majority of immigrants who come to our country to work hard. We should do what we can to give workers legal status so that business can continue to operate at peak efficiency." It is also legitimate to say, "I believe that people who break the law to come to the United States are inherently a risk to our security and the fact that it's so easy for them to do so is a threat to our nation. We should do all that we can to control our borders and remove those people from our country." Leaders should have the nerve to state publicly the philosophy that will guide their work on this issue.

Fourth, don't confuse back-room wheeling-and-dealing with legitimate, principled compromise. This is not an either/or, one-solution-fix issue. There will be multiple strategies employed and choices made about how best to direct our limited resources. And so, compromises should and must take place. But let those compromises occur in the light of day and hold them up to the scrutiny of the American public.

We don't need niceness in our politics as much as we need a process that has integrity. Tough and critical commentary should not be out of bounds if it conveys a truth about the implications of proposed legislation. But just launching attacks without laying out a thoughtful assessment of the best options for addressing the immigration challenge does not constitute real leadership.

Is the immigration debate I've outlined the one we're currently having? Clearly not. But it could be. For this issue and all of the complex challenges our nation faces, let's hold our leaders accountable to a real standard of civility that is based on honesty, open deliberation and principled compromise.



About the author:

Ruth A. Wooden is president of Public Agenda, a non-partisan public opinion research organization that publishes an online issue guide on immigration.

Before joining Public Agenda, Ms. Wooden was executive vice president and senior counselor at the international public relations firm of Porter Novelli. Before joining Porter Novelli in 2001, she served as volunteer president of the National Parenting Association. From 1987 to 1999, she was president of The Advertising Council, the nation’s leading producer of public service announcements. During Ms. Wooden’s tenure, the Ad Council collaborated with Public Agenda on the ground-breaking study “Kids These Days: What Americans Really Think About the Next Generation,” which was named by Congressional Quarterly as one of the 50 most important documents of 1995.

Milk's new ad campaign poses questions

Submitted by Lindsay Pollard-Post
3/15/06

Dear Editor:

The latest “Got Milk?” campaign, in which aliens abduct cows for their milk, is just another scheme to convince Earthlings to drink a substance that is completely alien to our bodies—a suggestion that is harder than ever to swallow in light of recent research (CVBT, March 13, “Milk marketers turn to aliens to push product").

For example, a study published in the June 2005 Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine soured the National Dairy Council’s $200 million-dollar advertising claims that milk helps you lose weight. It found that teens who drank more than three glasses of milk a day gained weight, rather than losing it.

Also crippled is the Dairy Council’s widely-publicized claim that milk can prevent osteoporosis. Walter Willett, co-author of “The Nurses’ Health Studies” and chairman of the department of nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health, found that women who consumed the most dairy products had substantially more fractures than women who drank less milk.

To learn more about the dairy industry’s deceptive advertising, visit DumpDairy.com.

Sincerely,

Lindsay Pollard-Post
Staff Writer
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA)

Homes affordable to just 14 percent of Californians

Submitted by Chris Harami
2/10/06

The percentage of Californians who can afford a home will keep going down unless businesses start paying their workers more.

Wages have been stagnant for years, and when adjusted for inflation, for which housing is never included for some strange reason, our wages have actually gone down.

In the bay area, workers are paid more because of the high cost of housing, but now it seems Central Valley home prices are catching up to bay area prices.

When will Central Valley businesses start paying us poor workers more?

Chris Harami
Modesto

South Delta Improvements Program: A crucial step in meeting California’s water needs

Submitted by Dennis Cardoza
2/9/06



California is facing a critical challenge: Our state needs a safe and reliable water supply for our farms, cities and businesses that will keep pace with our surging population and trillion-dollar economy. We need a vision for our state’s future, and must expand our water storage capacity by building and expanding reservoirs and investing in innovative groundwater storage projects. However, because of regulatory hurdles, we must recognize that it will take years for these projects to come to fruition.

Therefore, we must have an effective strategy for the near-term. As we pursue these critical new water projects, we must also look at ways to better utilize our existing water resources and infrastructure. Two-thirds of California receives its water from the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Given its importance, we need better ways to manage the Delta’s water delivery system, as well as the water itself. In essence, we need to make every drop count. That’s why the South Delta Improvements Program (SDIP), a major component of the CALFED program authorized by the Congress in 2004, is so important.

The California Department of Water Resource’s South Delta Improvements Program is a responsible and balanced approach to integrating our existing water management infrastructure in the Delta. It will improve our state’s water supply reliability and quality. It will also improve the overall health of the Bay-Delta ecosystem, and benefit the Westside. The program will construct seasonal tidal gates to protect fish and improve water circulation and quality in the Delta, dredge select Delta channels to improve water deliveries for local farmers, and allow modest increases to the State Water Project deliveries.

Currently, the state is constrained in its ability to use surplus water supplies. We have the infrastructure to move the water, but until SDIP is approved, the state’s water managers cannot fully or responsibly use the existing system. Significantly, SDIP will provide the flexibility to shift the timing of water deliveries when surplus is available and when it is environmentally safe. SDIP will help protect important Delta environmental resources. Specifically, it will help protect fish species in the Delta channels. At the same time, by providing the state greater flexibility in how and when SDIP operates its system of pumps, fish are granted greater protections.

SDIP is supported by a statewide, broad coalition of water, agriculture, business, planning organizations, and local government officials, including the San Luis-Delta Mentoda Water Authority, Agricultural Council of California, Association of California Water Agencies, California Chamber of Commerce and Western Growers Association.

Water is the lifeblood of California – critical to our families, farms, and businesses. It is our responsibility to use this precious resource as wisely as possible through all possible best management practices such as water conservation, recycling and storage. We must take a responsible, balanced approach to addressing our water resource needs that considers all of California’s diverse, often competing, interests. SDIP is a key element in such a balanced approach.

Written by U.S. Rep. Dennis Cardoza (CA-18)

High fructose corn syrup can be part of a balanced diet

Submitted by Audrae Erickson
2/2/06

We read the February 1 article, “Commodities may not be the right farm products to subsidize,” with interest, particularly the quote from Josh Miner regarding government subsidies and high fructose corn syrup (HFCS). We agree that obesity and diabetes are serious health concerns and think it is important for consumers to have the appropriate information to make educated choices.

The U.S. government provides support to a number of farm commodities in order to ensure a stable farm economy and a reliable food supply during periods of market volatility and adverse weather. These payments are paid directly to farmers as a ‘safety net.’ Manufacturers of HFCS and other food ingredients do not receive such payments.

HFCS has gained a prominent position in the U.S. food industry for many reasons: it inhibits microbial spoilage by reducing water activity and extends shelf life through superior moisture control; it helps canned foods taste fresher; and it is easy to transport and incorporate into recipes.

HFCS is a natural, nutritive sweetener and does add calories to the U.S. food supply. Sugar and HFCS have the same caloric density as most carbohydrates; both contribute 4 calories per gram. However, it is important to note that no single food or ingredient is the sole cause of obesity, but rather too many calories and too little exercise is a primary cause.

HFCS can be enjoyed as part of a balanced diet. In 1983, the Food and Drug Administration listed HFCS as “Generally Recognized as Safe” (known as GRAS status) for use in food, and the FDA reaffirmed that ruling in 1996. According to the American Dietetic Association, “Consumers can safely enjoy a range of nutritive and nonnutritive sweeteners when consumed in a diet that is guided by current federal nutrition recommendations ... as well as individual health goals.”

Audrae Erickson
President
Corn Refiners Association
1701 Pennsylvania Avenue, Suite 950
Washington, DC 20006
(202) 331-1634

Suggests a source of farm labor

Submitted by Withheld
1/26/06

Dear Editor:

Re Central Valley Orange Growers (See “Central Valley orange growers look to Thailand for labor” CVBT 012406) ...

Rather than encourage more illegal labor to this country, why not use labor that is already available?

I'm speaking of the people who are incarcerated.

I don't mean hard core criminals, but those who are in minimum security prisons.

This would be free labor, or the low wages now paid to illegal workers.

Most taxpayers are weary of paying the upkeep of illegal aliens, and are fighting for a secure border and against the employers who illegally hire these lawbreakers.

So the above suggestion would take care of the problems. The barriers of language would be removed, and the employer would not be breaking the law.

These people would be supervised by law personnel and be given the opportunity to do something to occupy their time.

You are now employing criminals, why not give American criminals a chance? Beside, you'll still have a large mix of illegal aliens in the prison population.

(Name withheld by request of the writer)

Mr. Bush’s Gulf Opportunity Zone

10/26/05

When President Bush, standing in front of New Orleans’s Jackson Square on September 15th, described his vision of a "Gulf Opportunity Zone" to rebuild the Katrina-ravished tri-State area, he sounded much like his father who said in the 1980s that he was "haunted" by the despair of the ill-housed. At that time, the elder Bush had called upon his own housing secretary, the effusive and intellectually-rigorous Jack Kemp, to come up with new solutions to create housing and inspire economic growth in what were then the nation’s poorest urban centers.

One of their pet solutions was the enterprise zone, an idea which reappeared in the Clinton years as empowerment zones, and has now provided a model for President Bush’s blueprint to jump start the Gulf Coast economy and enlist the private sector in helping to complete this task.

Since 1981, 43 states have created more than 3600 enterprise zones, bringing billions of dollars in private investment in the nation's older urban centers and creating or saving hundreds of thousands of jobs.

The key to the enterprise-zone concept is that it attempts to solve the problems of inner-city unemployment and poverty without direct, substantial government expenditure. It also uses a number of incentives—investment and employment tax credits, regulatory relief, capital gains exclusions, employee training, business incubators, low-interest loans, and other tools—to draw investment into areas that, absent the incentives, would be unlikely to have materialized.

If President Bush’s latest turn on the enterprise zone concept is to work for the Gulf Coast, he has many approaches that have succeeded before, along with some he should enhance, among them:

• Customize zone requirements and benefits, and have on-site offices for fast-track permitting, regulatory relief, loan applications, program supervision, and technical assistance.

Given the catastrophic and wide reach of Katrina’s destruction, and the differing economic needs of, say, New Orleans and Biloxi, distinct enterprise zones will need to be set up to accommodate the specific economic, housing, labor, and social needs of each locale.

A particular bundle of incentives—whether to encourage housing creation or attract capital—can be determined for each geographic area, as needed. Just as important is the on-site presence of state and local officials, bankers, and other experts to expedite applications, lend technical expertise, and generally facilitate the often cumbersome and tortuous process of qualifying for government-conceived programs.

• Ease the use of low-income housing tax credits and create a targeted version for the Gulf Coast initiative.

Housing is often a key component of enterprise zones; here the task of creating new housing, or replacing battered housing, is made even more critical by the widespread losses caused by Katrina—much of it to low-income residents. Tax credits currently leverage some $6 billion of private investment and have inspired the creation of some130,000 affordable units.

Developers can take yearly tax credits over a ten year period, eventually amounting to up to 70 percent of construction costs; additionally, and more important for drawing investor capital into low-income housing markets, the credits can be "sold" to corporate investors as a way of reducing taxes with higher marginal rates.

The tax credits have been allotted on a state-by-state basis, often through a cumbersome application process in which credits frequently go unused. A separate program of ‘GO Zone’ tax credits should be set up specifically for this project.

• Encourage innovative lending programs, in which private investors, banks, or community development corporations create first-time ownership opportunities and sometimes share in the tax benefits and future appreciation of the properties.

President Bush has proposed an Urban Homesteading Act through which government-owned units and land would be given to homeowners in the Gulf area who pledge to rehabilitate or improve the properties. That notion is a good one, except that the poor frequently lack the resources and experience to make home ownership—particularly of distressed properties—a reality.

Instead, some of this housing would be suitable for re-use as shared-equity property, in which investors assume, with the new homeowners, some of the risk and costs of making new homes habitable. Banks who make loans in the zones could receive tax concessions. The upside? Housing experts such as Howard Husock have argued that too often planners overlook the reality that neighborhoods of owners rather than renters—even poor owners—are more likely to flourish than those comprised of demoralizing tracts of projects and government-subsidized housing in which residents have no stake or possibility for growing equity and creating personal wealth.

• Create jobs relevant to the region.

Critics of the enterprise zone concept have noted that the zones are designed more to attract capital than labor. But that view overlooks the obvious benefit to job creation inherent in the expansion and founding of thriving businesses in the zones. In zones sited in inner cities, often the intention was to give preference to jobseekers who lived locally.

For the GO Zone, given the varying urban settings and economic needs of the three states, incentives for job creation should be tailored for the employment needs of the specific locations, so that, for instance, research centers are not created in neighborhoods where the employee pool lacks the skills and training opportunities to avail itself of those types of jobs.

Employers who hire local residents frequently receive higher per-employee tax credits than would be available for employees living outside the zone. Extra incentives should also be offered when employees are trained for roles in businesses new to the region; this approach has the double benefit of encouraging new types of businesses to relocate to the zones and for helping to evolve a new, better-trained workforce.

• Utilize the intellectual and financial resources of a university to incubate small and emerging businesses.

As a logical outgrowth of its teaching and research assets, Tulane or another major university could help create satellite incubators for creating new businesses and assisting newly-founded, entrepreneurial ones, particularly those owned by neighborhood residents.

Louisiana, for instance, currently has 16 incubators, and, like others nationwide, they provide small businesses and entrepreneurs with management, marketing, and financing assistance, as well as shared office space, job training, and reduced-cost employee benefits. Were university-associated research centers or biotech labs to locate in the zones as major magnets, smaller collateral businesses—such as printers and copy shops, restaurants, day care centers, and other service businesses—can flourish and help provide additional employment opportunities for local residents and a more livable overall neighborhood.

• Reduce the capital-gains tax rate and modify "passive loss" rules.

The former cut could apply only on the sale of newly built or substantially rehabbed low-income property inside the zones, provided that the affordability is preserved after the sale through deed restrictions. After 1986, "pas¬sive" real-estate losses against ordinary income were eliminated from use for indi¬viduals with adjusted gross incomes of over $150,000 yearly, excluding the most likely group of investors from involving them¬selves with rental housing at all. Long-term property tax abatements, on both rental housing and single family homes built in the zones, has historically served to attract investment.
• Loosen codes and encourage housing creation. Local government can help ease, rather than constrict, affordable housing creation by the private sector by being flexible in interpreting zoning, safety, and building requirements.

A compelling example of this approach was the story of the Baltic, a single room occupancy project in San Diego, in which developers negotiated concessions from the city to create 120 square-foot “living units” in a 207-room building with a density equivalent to more than 700 units an acre—well beyond what existing regulations would have permitted. Other concessions from the building and zoning departments enabled the developer to build much-needed, affordably-priced units that existing codes would have normally disallowed.

While opponents of the enterprise-zone model point out that a loss of tax revenues through incentives is still an expense for taxpayers, many would agree that such lost revenues are more than compensated for through the creation of much needed jobs; new and upgraded housing for low-income residents; fresh streams of property, corporate and income taxes; and immeasurable social benefits to three states trying to recover from the destruction of a calamitous natural disaster.

Richard L. Cravatts
Weston, Mass.

Mr. Cravatts is a lecturer at Boston University, Tufts University, Emerson College, Suffolk University, and Simmons College, and writes regularly on real estate development, higher educations, law, and politics.

Ethics in business

10/19/05 To the Editor:

Edward Morler is absolutely correct when he brings up the hidden costs of ethics violations; we need only look at the collapse of Arthur Andersen. ("Do business ethics preclude business success?," Oct. 18).

But there's an equally important point: Businesses with high ethics standards are actually more profitable. This is borne out not only by own research for my award-winning sixth book, Principled Profit: Marketing That Puts People First, but also in studies by Business Ethics magazine and others, showing that socially responsible companies consistently outperform others in the market.

In fact, I've started an international Ethics Pledge campaign located at http://www.principledprofits.com, in part to help businesses gain the marketing advantages they can get if the public knows they are ethical. Please visit if you'd like to know more.
_________________________________________________
Shel Horowitz

A letter to our readers

7/4/05 Thank you for taking time to visit our new site. We hope you find it useful and bookmark it for future visits.

Our goal is to provide you with timely news useful to businesses operating in the Great Central Valley.

Please let me know how we can better serve you. Call me anytime with your thoughts, criticisms and story suggestions.

Doug Caldwell
Editor

(209) 470-3400