Month of February, 2008

Cardo the Bagman cometh

Submitted: Feb 01, 2008

Dennis Cardoza, Shrimp Slayer-Merced, has morphed once again from destroyer of natural habitat to beggar for subsidies to California specialty crops and now to big-time party bagman, the same trail his mentor Tony "Honest Graft" Coelho took. The Democrats need to shake all those agriculture money trees this year and "Cardo" is the man for that job, as Coelho once was before the unfortunate loan from Milken.

How long with Cardo the Bagman last in this fast company? Whatever the answer is to this fascinating question, it will have nothing to do with the welfare of the CA-18 congressional district. Cardo the Bagman has now officially ascended into the meta world of rich political donors, far, far away from his district, sporting the highest mortgage foreclosure rate in the nation. Some call it leadership.

Bill Hatch
--------------
Cardoza tapped for DCCC slot...Hank Shaw's blog...1-30-08
http://blogs.recordnet.com/n/blogs/blog.aspx?nav=main&webtag=sr-hshaw&entry=512
Rep. Dennis Cardoza, D-Merced, has been chosen as a leader of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's "Frontline" campaign, which focuses the party's buck-raking and organization efforts in 29 key races across the country.
"Congressman Cardoza is a great addition to our outstanding Frontline leadership team of Congresswoman (Debbie) Wasserman Schultz and Congressman (Rahm) Emanuel. He is a well-respected leader within the Blue Dog Coalition and will be able to bring their expertise on fiscal issues and rural districts to our campaigns across the country. No one knows better than Congressman Cardoza how to win in tough districts." said DCCC Chair Chris Van Hollen.
Yep, Cardo's neighbor Jerry McNerney, D-Pleasanton, is in that list, as is Charlie Brown in retiring Rep. John Doolittle's 4th District.

| »

Public minutes of East Merced Resource Conservation District meetings, December 13, 2007 and January 16, 2008

Submitted: Feb 06, 2008

December 13, 2007 meeting

RCD staff Karen Whipp announced that the agenda for the meeting was legally posted outside the RCD meeting room in the USDA building on Wardrobe Ave. She also said that staff doesn’t not send out staff reports on agenda items to either board members of members of the public because of time constraints. She said county and city boards do the same.

In fact, it is possible to get staff reports for all items on county Board of Supervisor agendas Friday afternoon before the meeting on the following Tuesday.

Lydia Miller said she requested the November staff reports in a timely manner (11:05 a.m. on the day of the board meeting). In attendance at the meeting, she got a copy of all staff reports at the meeting.

Whipp said she had the original copy of the resignation letter of Bernie Wade, former RCD president, who resigned both his position and his board membership at the November meeting.

The board approved the minutes.

Whipp said she had emailed the Nov. 21 minutes (to Miller??)

Whipp led the board through the latest spreadsheets on various RCD grants.

Wade’s letter was not in the minutes of the November meeting. It was explained that he gave the letter to them after adjournment of that meeting. However, Wade read his letter before adjournment. Yet his resignation was not on the November agenda.

Board member Karen Barstow wondered where to put Wade’s letter. Whipp informed her it would go in the minutes for the December meeting because it came in late.

Board member Glenn Anderson asked if Wade’s resignation would be the cause for an action item. Whipp said Wade’s resignation was to the county Board of Supervisors, not the RCD, so no.

Malia Hildebrandt gave her monthly report for the Natural Resources Conservation Service, beginning by saying that NRCS doesn’t yet have its new budget, so is working on another extension of the federal budget, therefore some local contracts will be lost if funding doesn’t come before the end of 2007.

The US Senate has passed the 2007 Farm Bill and it is now in conference committee. The old Farm Bill is extended until February 2008. Meanwhile, some funding has been sent to the local NRCS.

Regarding funds from state initiatives, NRCS has funded two replacements of diesel engines on farm sites, and funded windbreaks around dairies for dust reduction (PM10) and projects for spray reduction, wood chipping and tillage changes.

Anderson asked if there was an environmental issue when orchards heavily sprayed with pesticides have been chipped.

Hildebrandt said some at least were removed, chips from pruning were left in the orchard and that removal might be to a cogeneration plant.

Barstow remarked that prunings on almond orchards could run to one ton/acre.

Board member Bob Bliss said the ground was already sprayed and the prunings had been exposed to weather.

Board member Tony Azevedo, chairing the meeting, moved the subject to Animal Facility Operations issue: slabs, waste storage, pipelines, flow meters, gate valves, etc. lagoons, “anything to keep waste water on the dairy property. This is part of the whole Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan, (which calls for) new standards.”

Board member Cathy Weber asked if most dairies were up to the standards.

Hildebrandt replied, “No.” However, she noted that the process was opening the eyes of dairy managers. The new standard is to spread manure equal to 1.6 times the nitrogen needed for the fodder crops. It used to be 2 times the amount needed. Today, dairies cannot have more cows than they had in 2005 – the gist of the new regulation (1.6 times to nitrogen need) means either less cows or more acreage. The intent is to get a better mix of clean and lagoon water. “We could use $5 million to help folks (dairies) out,” she said.

Anderson asked if community pipelines could be developed.

Hildebrandt replied that this involves negotiations with irrigation districts to make sure the flows stay separated.

Azevedo said dairymen (at least in his distinct, Stevinson) have to give written notice to the irrigation districts when they are going to pipe lagoon water off-site, and it takes place during restricted hours.

Hildebrandt said the NRCS is telling dairy managers to protect themselves about when and how wastewater goes off their property. She added that water conservation funds sunsetted this year but a new fund is being created, and that in the new Farm Bill perhaps there will be funds to support new applications.

Bliss suggested spreading the funds out at a lower percentage to reach more people.

Hildebrandt replied that that was tried to make special deals for dairies with limited resources and for new dairies, because the way the fund is structured its hurts those who cannot afford to make the upgrades.

Azevedo asked about wildlife.

Hildebrandt said there were funds for riparian habitat restoration along the Merced River, removing replacing rock and dirt and planting trees.

Weber (who lives in Snelling, full of dredge-tailing cobble) asked about projects for Snelling.

Hildebrandt said there was a project near the Kelsey property (Diedre Kelsey is a county supervisor and the family mines dredge tailings for aggregate). Hildebrandt said the project involved layering rock and dirt for better drainage.

Whipp said that the new grant proposal for a watershed coordinator would help coordinate local and state agencies for such projects.

Members of the public at this point wondered if a lack of funding wasn’t a worse problem than a lack of staff. The NRCS reports monthly to RCD, their reports appear to be up-to-date and organized and realistic.

Whipp informed the board that “we” held a watershed workshop meeting on December 12 for over 20 people who want to meet quarterly. RCD board member, RCD/Merced River Alliance staff, and Merced County Planning Commissioner Cindy Lashbrook and Whipp prepared the agenda for the meeting. They are also working on a grant proposal.

The public wondered if the December 12 meeting was a public meeting. Public funds were used to organize it but not all members of the public were invited, even members of the public with well-known, long-term interests in the watersheds of eastern Merced County.

But MID, Department of Fish and Game, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Cramer Sciences, Supervisor Kelsey, state Parks and Recreation, county Public Works and UC Merced were invited and the meeting was duly posted on the bulletin board at the UC Cooperative Extension office (where UCCOP staff were sure to see it).

Whipp and Commissioner Lashbrook said Ezio Sansone and Lynn Sullivan, two members of the Merced River Stakeholders, were very excited about the meeting because this new group, the Watershed Workshop, “will get projects done. It is a project-oriented work group.”

The public attending the RCD meeting – two members of the MRS – viewed this new workshop as simply the latest way RCD staff has devised to destroy the MRS, some of whose members wrote letters opposing that last RCD-staff grant to fund RCD staff.

Commissioner Lashbrook then said something incomprehensible about the Merced Area Groundwater Pool Interests. We would report this public official’s comments more fully if she would speak more clearly. She did add something about Stillwater Sciences and Merced River Alliance coordinator Nancy McConnell working on how to format a final report due in May. This report may be going to MAGPI. The commissioner also announced the upcoming California Women for Agriculture tour of the river, to be led by RCD staff, including the commissioner.

Commissioner Lashbrook continued, saying that the watershed kits (created by another MRA staffer, Terry McLoughlin) are now available for teachers and that a new one is now being assembled at the NRCS office. McLoughlin is now developing a new monitoring kit for groundwater.

The board moved on to nomination of the new president. Azevedo nominated Bliss. Bliss refused. Azevedo said, “We need experience. I haven’t been on the board that long – only three years.” (And he missed some meetings during that period.)

Anderson asked if it were the Year of the Woman.

Again, Commissioner Lashbrook makes a vague comment about “Johnny” Pedrozo having only been on the board of supervisors for two years and already he’s chairman.

Azevedo pleads a “full plate” and reluctance to doing a “half-assed job.”

Commissioner Lashbrook counseled Azevedo: “If you get your board right, it’s not so bad.” Whipp prepares the agendas, she added.

Azevedo said that the president has to make public appearances from time to time.

Commissioner Lashbrook asked Whipp if digital agendas weren’t available for the president. Whipp replied that some presidents have asked, others haven’t.

Bliss philosophized, telling a story about old tires, meant to illuminate the issue.

Commissioner Lashbrook said the trick was “to develop trust and hire the right people.”

Bliss said that Whipp was the best staffer RCD had ever had.

Whipp replied that she had been doing agendas “for controversial agencies for years.”

Commissioner Lashbrook qualified that remark, saying RCD is “only temporarily controversial.”

Anderson nominated Karen Barstow for president.

Bliss seconded, asking if Azevedo would serve as vice president and Weber as treasurer.

Weber declined, citing lack of experience with numbers and money.

Bliss commented: “You walk up the chain to become president, then you become a rabble rouser.”

Commissioner Lashbrook said Weber would not have to be the financial officer. She added that she would follow through with the grants although not being a state-RCD approved officer.

Whipp noted that nobody had ever been a secretary treasurer.

Azevedo said to leave it open until there are more members on the board.

Anderson said he came back on the board with no idea of becoming an officer. “I feel myself transitional,” he said.

Barstow said she was used to running meetings and philosophized that “everyone has to serve.” She asked Weber to be the secretary treasurer.

Weber said she had no business experience.

Azevedo said she was a housewife, wasn’t she?

Weber said she was a physical therapist but not into the business side of it.

The board voted Barstow president, Azevedo vice president.

The next agenda item called for the creation of a personnel committee.

Weber said she was concerned that the RCD was running out of funds. “How does the RCD function without funds?” she asked. She said McConnell told her Mariposa RCD had a personnel committee, therefore a couple of board members could form such a committee and look at the options, anticipate different funding scenarios. “We’ve never come to grips …” with the possibility the RCD will run out of funds in August 2008. “And if we get the DOCIII grant, how will we allocate it?” (What staff will the RCD pay?)

Barstow said the RCD doesn’t have “personnel.”

Weber said Whipp and Commissioner Lashbrook are “contractors.”

Whipp said it would be a good idea to have this committee to develop the scope of work for the upcoming contracts.

Anderson asked, “You mean job descriptions?”

Weber replied that would be part of it but that she didn’t know the full breadth of personnel committees, but one question she had was how to allocate the few funds the RCD may end up with. “We will run out of the bulk of our funds by August,” she said.

Azevedo asked if the personnel committee would look for funds.

Weber said: not for the board.

Whipp said she’d just written that job into the description of the personnel committee, adding that every group she has worked for had a personnel committee.

Azevedo said the board needed more members, otherwise it is the same people.

Commissioner Lashbrook said the DOCIII grant proposal is a personnel grant and that this new proposed personnel committee should come up with some options.

Weber said it would be an advisory committee.

Azevedo and Bliss moved and seconded for the personnel committee.

As far as the public could tell, the motion passed (RCD board voting is sort of a vague process.) But the public was unable to determine what members of the board would serve on the new committee.

Commissioner Lashbrook said it would be nice to have board members involved and bringing reports back to the board.

The public hoped for the sake of the board that these reports would be clearer than board member Commissioner Lashbrook’s reports to the board.

Azevedo asked Hildebrandt where farmers go to find a place on the river to dump riprap.

Hildebrandt referred Azevedo to an agency staff person “to look at it.”

Commissioner Lashbrook asked if concrete was “permittable” on the river.

Hildebrandt said “in some places.”

Azevedo said Stevinson farmers always kept it for floods.

Hildebrandt said “it needed a permit.”

Anderson said, “Suppose we know somebody is doing it?”

Hildebrandt said to contact the Army Corps.

Bliss said to Anderson, “So, you’re the little birdy.”

Whipp informed the board that staff has prepared a draft “work plan” or possibly a “draft narrative” or both for the DOCIII watershed coordinator grant proposal. However, somehow she failed to bring a copy. But Barstow, who had a copies, ran off some more. It is only eight pages of narrative. There was no attached list of what the grant is proposing to fund. The grant will cover all watersheds in the RCD sphere of influence (not just the Merced River). There is money to fund facilitation of only one meeting a year of the Merced River Stakeholders.

Commissioner Lashbrook commented, “…to kind of keep it going.”

The public in attendance wondered what the grant proponents are going to do for stakeholders, but presumably they feel that their new work group will be sufficient to bamboozle state officials deciding on grants.

Whipp said that most of the grant is “project oriented,” for the landowners.

Which landowners, the public present wondered.

Commissioner Lashbrook continued in a low mumble, “…assuming the MRS still wants us hosting one meeting a year.”

Whipp said staff is already “building an amended work plan.” It will be “project oriented, not meeting oriented,” she said, and staff is looking for five projects for collaboration with RCD. She mentioned the Sullivan Ranch restoration, educational programs with MID and county Public Works. However, Whipp added, staff doesn’t need to name the projects at this point. All they need to do is indicate it is a “project-focused proposal” in the preliminary stage.

Staff is thinking of a traveling watershed fair. “What it is will be decided by the RCD,” she said. There is also a brochure developed by the former RCD watershed coordinator, Gwen Huff.

Commissioner Lashbrook said something about adding permitting agencies.

Whipp added that people at the work group really wanted the information on permitting. “They are very much more focused on doing” … than RCD staff and board members would like the world to believe the Merced River Stakeholders are.. In fact, six months earlier a coalition of MRS members successfully stopped a grant to RCD, which has threatened the income flow of RCD staff, because the MRS coalition could find nothing in the grant that had anything to do with anything but income flow to RCD staff.

The public was bemused by seeing that Supervisor Kelsey had taken sides with RCD staff against the Merced River Stakeholders by attending the watershed workshop meeting in December. Like Commissioner Lashbrook, as a public official, some feel it is dumb politics for Kelsey to have attended invitation-only meeting (verging on the secret but with public funds) about the Merced River that do not involve notifying all the MRS members, which has the clear intent, if only for another staff-funding grant, to replace the MRS. But Ms. Kelsey has her own aggregate interests on the river. Nevertheless, her support for one side in a controversy over the lower river at large demonstrates once again that Kelsey doesn’t represent the river, only a handful of landowners in Snelling and staffers like Commissioner Lashbrook.

Whipp said the watershed-group newsletter would be called, “Watersheds Newsletter,” which would list the projects RCD is doing.

Anderson asked what the scope of the projects would be?

Commissioner Lashbrook replied that for homecoming festivals etc. “we would be there with our little dog-and-pony show.”

Whipp clarified: “But on the watersheds,” by which she meant: not only the Merced River.

Public members attending the meeting were not immediately aware of festivals along Deadman Creek, Dutchman Creek, Mariposa Creek and others – homecoming or otherwise – by the public is notoriously ignorant of such events, events like the December watershed workshop. Some thought a Homecoming Festival for recidivists could be held on the bank of Deadman Creek, near the county jail.

Anderson asked: with a local focus?

Commissioner Lashbrook replied: “We would have to get partnership with those communities.” It wouldn’t be like the Merced River Alliance with all its staff.

Whipp clarified again: the intent is to give citizens watershed monitoring experience and establishing protocols. They need good training.

The public wondered at the dimensions of the conflicts involved: staff is “creating” the equipment for this monitoring; state and federal agencies do monitoring; MRS members, which includes most of the landowners and aggregate mines on the lower river do not relish the thought of “citizens” – mainly middle schoolers – doing water monitoring on the river.

Anderson said that after this training, the RCD needs to keep the citizens involved. “You are looking for a particular kind of activist.”

Commissioner Lashbrook expanded, saying the object was “to train the trainer types to take it to the grassroots.”

Weber said the object was to coordinate all the testing and the agencies to determine who is doing what where. The program shouldn’t be duplicative. She asked if oxygen studies had been done everywhere.

Commissioner Lashbrook noted that storm water drainage was one of the least monitored in all the small communities. She said that the idea was for citizens to adopt a park, either upstream or downstream from human activity and track the e. coli impacts on the river. The farmers are already being monitored. But are “urban” areas. There are gaps in the monitoring, apparently.

The public wondered if, now that citizen water-monitoring kits of some kind have been created, at public expense, now a market must be found for them, regardless of need or local desire for more water monitoring.

Anderson said it would be necessary to work out some sort of monitoring protocol.

Commissioner Lashbrook said it had been hard to get the San Joaquin Monitoring Partnership going, but that UC Merced and Merced College were willing to help on this proposal. It would work well in a fourth through eighth-grade curriculum.

Whipp informed the board that only two staffers would be allowed to share in this grant. The grant is only a draft at this stage and that there would be many rewrites in the process. Remaining funding, however, is low and there are only about 36 hours of funding left for grant preparation. So, would the broad approve $3,200 for Whipp and Commissioner Lashbrook to finish preparing the proposal and provide one or two board members to review to 44-page final draft before submission? The draft would probably be done by December 31. It could be reviewed on New Years Eve.

Weber said she could review it on January 2.

Commissioner Lashbrook said staff was getting letters of support and partnership collaboration from groups like Grasslands RCD, Chowchilla River RCD and others.

The board voted unanimously to approve the $3,200.

The board moved on to discuss its five-year plan.

Anderson asked if the RCD mission statement was unique to this RCD or parallel to the state association of RCDs.

Commissioner Lashbrook said it was “from the CARCD template and is in alignment with most RCDs.”

Bliss asked if it needed tinkering.

Azevedo focused on #5: “to actively pursue funding.”

Commissioner Lashbrook said that RCD staff had been doing NRCS outreach to farmers on the EQIP program funding. But that funding really meant getting this grant.

Anderson suggested taking the list of goals home to prioritize them.

Azevedo said he got an opportunity to see the mission statement.

A member of the public pointed out that the RCD mission statement is on the agenda page for the meeting.

Anderson moved to take the items home for individual prioritization. The motion passed.

The board said it would attempt to track down the RCD seeder and Azevedo would inspect it and report.

Anderson said RCD having equipment is a thing of the past.

Bliss said an RCD land plane had gone from Merced to Fresno in a year.

Anderson said that’s been privatized.

Azevedo said let’s see what the seeder looks like.

Barstow brought up the issue of the annexation (an addition to the RCD special district).

Commissioner Lashbrook said she thought the RCD missed the LAFCO deadline “for the money thing – we need to try to get some earmarks. About $2,700 is at stake and there might be further expenses.”

“Earmarks” from whom or what was unclear. A little provision in the county Mental Health budget perhaps? Or will it take an act of Congress to do “the money thing”?

Bliss said that the district excludes the city of Merced but “we get everything from the Grasslands to the mountains. If you take money from the USDA you’re in, whether you are signed up or not.”

Next the board turned to the issue of the Hilmar Cheese deep injection pumps. Azevedo said the company made a presentation. It is doing deep injection and the community had no input into the decision.

Commissioner Lashbrook said the EPA gave them a test permit. Azevedo said he’d learned that once it’s below 1,000 feet it is out of state jurisdiction and into federal (EPA). Anderson said the wells are below 3,000. Azevedo said it is injecting milk processing wastes under pressure. It might work in Texas, he said, but one California earthquake could make a mess. He repeated that nobody local had any input.

Commissioner Lashbrook said there was a little meeting in Modesto she went to, but she didn’t report on what was said at the little meeting.

The next item concerned RCD board participation in the county general plan update. Anderson sits on the agriculture focus group, Weber on the open space group. They invited board to provide input for them to carry back to their focus groups. (The general plan update process involves citizen input in focus groups. The oldest, most active environmental groups in the county, including the one that sued the county to force it to do its original general plan, are excluded from these focus groups because they have sued local governments for violations of the California Environmental Quality Act. Worst of all, they have sued on UC Merced, which stimulated a real estate boom resulting in the county’s top national position for rate of foreclosure.)

Weber said the open space and habitat group was “a really good group and had state agencies in it.” It covers a lot of issues. She said if she’d known she’d have brought the text, which involves smart growth, oak woodlands and a grading ordinance. She said there was no ordinance involving agriculture-to-agriculture conversions (seasonal pasture to orchard deep-ripping).

Azevedo noted that if there is any change to the flow of water that will affect vernal pools, you have to have a permit. Bliss said a former RCD board member had man-made vernal pools.

Weber said assistant planning director Bill Nicholson was at the focus group, that everybody likes the idea of riparian habitat and that it is a “very good group.”

The next item was board recruitment. Anderson asked if they could recruit Hmongs and Hispanics.

The next item was about RCD relations with the MRS. Azevedo asked how well the two mission statements gelled. Bliss said that the RCD controls the lower half of the river. He said to leave the issue alone, see how it works out.

Commissioner Lashbrook said they needed to go beyond the mission statement to how the group is formed. She said RCD needed to revisit the issue if MRS goes ahead with its planned meeting at Washington School on January 23. Do they need Whipp to do email invitations and agendas. She said the RCD agreed to that.

Whipp questioned that, saying there is no money to do that work and that the board would have to pay her to do the notification. Weber asked how much. Bliss said to just give the MRS the list of addressed.

Lydia Miller, a member of the public in attendance and also a member of the MRS, said the MRS also wanted the archived MRS binders (of MRS business).

Whipp said the RCD needed to keep them.

Miller said, just for the meeting. “We’ll commit to bringing them back or give them to an RCD member attending the MRS meeting,” she said.

Bliss said, “We can’t turn loose of that stuff.”

Miller said that MRS archives belong to the MRS.

Then they returned to the Hilmar injection-well situation. It was suggested the board write a letter, but Azevedo was concerned about RCD liability – if it wanted to get involved. Barstow said she’d ask some of the Hilmar Cheese people at her Bible Study group.

The RCD December board meeting adjourned shortly after.

January 16, 2008 East Merced Resource District board meeting

Karen Barstow presides. Four members present. Tony Azevedo is absent.

Karen Whipp, RCD staff, announces that staff reports will not be available to the public before the meeting. Barstow said that board members receive their reports at the meeting. Whipp said she doesn’t get them ready before the meeting.

Board Member and county Planning Commissioner Cindy Lashbrook said: “That’s the way we do it.”

Members of the public present noted that up until two months ago, Whipp had made reports available before meetings. They also noted that without reports being available before the meeting, the public was not able to make public comments on them and that board members we not competent to decide on them, either.

Whipp said RCD staff was going to submit a final proposal for the DOCIII grant (third round of state Department of Conservation grants) and a $6,000 bill at the end of January. Then she discussed the various budget spreadsheets (staff reports) and talked about “recoupments” and “invoice cycles.”

Cherchant dans La Larouse Elementaire (1956) il est decouvert:

Recoupment: n.m. Verification d’un fait au moyen de renseignements provenant de sources diverses. Procede particulier de leve des plans.

Board members and the public were not clear about what she was talking about because they had had no time in advance to study the spreadsheets. Whipp’s report, so to speak, was French aux vaches espanoles.

The next item was Bernard Wade’s resignation as president and from the board in November. Board member Bob Bliss asked if the board had to accept it. Whipp said it was properly submitted to the chairman of the county Board of Supervisors and that the RCD should write a letter to the supervisors requesting them to announce the vacancies on the RCD board.

Barstow asked if there were two vacancies.

Commissioner Lashbrook confirmed. Whipp said the supervisors had already advertised the vacancy for the other position. She added that the RCD could recommend board members to the supervisors. Weber said that if there is more than one candidate, it has to go to one of the election days this year.

Bliss and board member Glenn Anderson discussed adding American Indians or Hispanics because there were already women on the board. Weber said there was a notice board in Snelling where the announcement should be posted. Anderson said there were several notice boards in Hilmar. Weber said there should be more effort at outreach beyond a public notice in the Merced Sun-Star. Anderson suggested a press release.

Commissioner Lashbrook said the board should write to each supervisor for suggestions, noting that almost all of the board members are from Supervisor Diedre Kelsey’s district now. The board decided it was weakest in the Planada/Le Grand area.

Natural Resource Conservation District director Malia Hildebrandt was absent but sent a written report.

Commissioner Lashbrook, RCD and Merced River Alliance staff, said she had not written her report but had spent a lot of time grant writing in the last month and had conducted a watershed tour for the California Women for Agriculture. She added that they should know about the watershed grant by early March.

Anderson noted that the watershed tour was the final forum required by the last grant and that at least 30 of the 80 attendees were local, which was good, he thought.

Commissioner Lashbrook said that UC Merced showcased its local research into dairy groundwater monitoring, global warming and Blue oaks and the Sierra snow pack … “They got to do their commercial,” she said.

The tour went to the dam and the Kelsey aggregate mining project and observed vernal pools on graze land.

Weber said that Supervisor Kelsey had said during the tour that “you can’t deep rip without a permit,” but that we don’t have a grading ordinance that covers agriculture-to-agriculture conversions (which often involve deep ripping).

Commissioner Lashbrook wondered if something could be done with that in the general plan update.

Lydia Miller, a member of the public in attendance, said the county won’t report to the federal agencies on agriculture-to-agriculture conversions, whether deep-ripped or disked. The federal agencies require a permit but there is a question about how much or often they will enforce a violation. The county won’t agree to a grading ordinance on ag-to-ag conversion, she said.

Barstow asked the board if it wanted someone to address this issue at a later meeting.

Anderson said something about “the local culture.”

Commissioner Lashbrook said the CARCD has workshops on this issue and that Mariposa and Solano counties have grading ordinances.

Miller said the county was on notice about ag-to-ag conversions. She added that conversion from non-irrigation to irrigation agriculture should trigger an environmental impact report.

Merced River Alliance staff director, Nancy McConnell’s written report took another angle on the watershed tour, mainly pointed at burying the Merced River Stakeholders.

Whipp announced that the Feb. 11 Alliance dinner at Cathey’s Valley now had an expanded number of (new) participants and would be called, “Vision to Action.” She added that MRA staffer Terry McLoughlin was developing a new water monitoring kit for groundwater.

Anderson noted that groundwater changes through the season and depends to some extent on the irrigation techniques used.

Commissioner Lashbrook said that was why the RCD had to support the $5-million grant proposal of the Merced Area Groundwater Pool Interests to model how groundwater moves, where recharge is viable and where it isn’t.

Barstow canvassed the group to see where groundwater studies were being done. In her area, there were studies, she said. Bliss said he had been preaching groundwater recharge in his area for years but farmers don’t listen, they just want water. Barstow said recharge was another topic for a later meeting.

Staff announced there would be a water-monitoring training in Mariposa for the lower watershed volunteers on February 9. Anderson asked who it would be best to have there. Bliss said teachers. Anderson asked, agriculture or science teachers? Whipp said science teachers. Commissioner Lashbrook though ag teachers would be good, too. Anderson said UC Merced people and what about Merced College.

The next topic was the board’s ethics review, which involves board members watching a DVD and reading a book. Weber and Barstow decided how to break up the chapters so that individual members could make 30-minute reports on ethics in future meetings.

Commissioner Lashbrook said the state association of RCDs has a nice power point presentation on the state law of public meetings or Brown Act.

Commissioner Lashbrook asked about the Riverside Motorsports Park. Weber said the RCD had not taken a position on that project. Barstow said she thought it was going to go through.

Miller said the key was the foreign trade zone at the former Castle Air Force Base, which the base developers cannot get without the RMP project on adjacent land. But, if it doesn’t make it as a racetrack, it would become some other development project. The best thing would be for the supervisors to put it in an easement, she said.

Next, the board briefly discussed its five-year plan and the Hilmar Cheese deep injection wells, noting the wastewater is processed before it is injected but salinity is an issue. It was reported that the company planned to add three more injection pumps and the present one is down to 4,100 feet.

Staff reported that on January 25, the San Joaquin Regional Water Quality Control Board will have a 90-minute public presentation on the injection wells.

Anderson said there were 273 deep injection wells in Florida and that they are leaking into the Gulf. Those are also processed wastewater wells. Someone asked what relation the Hilmar wells have to groundwater studies. The RCD policy seems to be to study deep injection without mentioning Hilmar Cheese.

To recap the Hilmar Cheese wastewater situation for the casual reader of these public minutes, the Sacramento Bee did an expose on the amount of wastewater the company, which bills itself as the largest cheese factory in the world, was dumping into the groundwater around Hilmar, a small farming community in north Merced County, in the northern San Joaquin Valley. Note that neither of the local McClatchy Chain outlets dare to speak of Hilmar Cheese except in the most flattering terms. The Sac Bee articles resulted in the region water board finally fining the company several million dollars, which the company got reduced after the heat was off. But, either stung by this terrible call to accountability or according to a business plan already worked out, the company announced it was building its new plant in the Panhandle of Texas (“more friendly to business than California,” etc.) Meanwhile, the plant is pumping millions of gallons of treated cheese-plant wastewater are being deep injected into the ground.

Moving on to fund-raising, Anderson volunteered Tony Azevedo (absent) to hold professional fund-raising events at his ranch, which has facilities for it.

Next they moved to the subject of educating youth on endangered species. Weber said it was not realistic and that the way to go was with MRA staffer McLoughlin’s water monitoring kits. Commissioner Lashbrook asked if there should be outreach. Weber said the kits are the things. Barstow said RCD should help disseminate the kits and educate the community on them.

Anderson wondered if the grant should “feed Stillwater Science into the community.”

Weber said the grant had a component for that. Commissioner Lashbrook said it would be easy with the grant. Then she mentioned teachers and kits again before her cell phone rang.

Anderson said that confined livestock fits into this, too, and that “we all need enlightenment on this.

Weber said she is starting to work with landowners on riparian vegetation.

Commissioner Lashbrook said the RCD needs library cataloging. “We aren’t sure where things are.”

Then they discussed information it would be necessary to present new board members. The meeting broke down briefly into a multitude of contending themes: Anderson’s New Age library; Bliss’ belief there would be an east side canal; getting county planning staff to RCD workshops; suburban sprawl needs autos, no services in walking distance; and argument between Commissioner Lashbrook and Weber on the utility of the general plan focus groups.

Miller suggested the RCD should consider the field agricultural and conservation easements because it used to be a leader in conservation. She said biologist John Vollmar did good work with RCD, but it got turned around during the property rights hoopla and the incredible misunderstanding fomented by elected officials about the Williamson Act being mitigation for UC Merced. There is lots of funding for easements, she said, suggesting that the RCD should ask UC Merced or the state Department of Fish and Game about the strategic plan for easements to mitigate for UC Merced. Numerous mitigation banks are entering the market, she added. There is a distinction between agricultural and conservation easements and traditional land trusts favor agriculture and are adverse to species-habitat conservation easements, Miller explained.

Anderson said the RCD should be at the center of this “cultural transition, creating hybrids of agriculture and conservation.”

Commissioner Lashbrook interrupted this line of thought to say that the riparian initiative deadline is January 31 and the fund has $1.5 million for landowner incentives – full costs of restoration and $400/acre for 10 years to maintain. She added that (although her land is on the river) she doesn’t have any land “I can back off on” but she’d like to get her neighbors involved in the program.

Anderson said the board needed more maps to visualize their space. He mentioned an upcoming CEQA workshop organized by the WalMart Action Team. Commissioner Lashbrook referred to it as “for grassroots activists.” (County officials will also hold a CEQA workshop the same day.)

Miller said that last CEQA workshop her group organized was mainly attended by attorneys and land-use officials. So attendance varies.

Weber brought up a new Santa Fe Aggregate project to take 400 acres of dredge tailings down to grade level and assume nature will do the reclamation. She couldn’t define what “grade level” meant.

Merced County Planning Commissioner Lashbrook said the RCD is not set up to comment on land-use issues. It needs a steering committee.

Anderson wondered if the board couldn’t have a staffer do comments. (Certainly not a board member.) Weber and Whipp describe the runaround the planning department is giving them on getting project staff reports mailed to the RCD. Nobody checks the RCD post office box, evidently. Barstow said that as long as Planning Commissioner Lashbrook is already there, couldn’t she highlight the items for the RCD? Whipp said the RCD isn’t getting any environmental impact reports. Commissioner Lashbrook said the planning department doesn’t post any staff reports but offers to fax Weber staff reports.

Commissioner Lashbrook said the county had just hired a new lawyer to clean up the planning situation and make the county less “sue-able.”

Bliss and Anderson lurch off into a conversation that ends with Bliss saying a barracuda was caught off San Francisco two weeks ago.

Commissioner Lashbrook said how the grant proposal is expanded to the entire watershed in the RCD district, not just the river.

Miller said that the Merced River Stakeholders need the archive binder of MRS business for its January 28 meeting. (Advance: the RCD did not provide the binder.)

The rest of the meeting was about developing local food systems, a “buy fresh, buy local” campaign, a grant for obesity, enhancing the value of farms, and nostalgia about Korean vegetable gardens grown in human and animal wastes observed by one board member during the Korean War.

The meeting adjourned.

| »

Public minutes of the Merced River Stakeholders meeting, January 28, 2008

Submitted: Feb 08, 2008

Washington School, Winton CA

Attending:

Merced Irrigation District, 2
Granite Construction, 2
Santa Fe Aggregate, 1
East Merced Resource Conservation District, 2
San Joaquin Raptor Rescue Center, 1
Merced County Planning Commission, 1
Landowners, 8
Stillwater Sciences, 1
Merced Sun-Star, 1
San Joaquin Valley Conservancy, 1
Members of the public, 2-3
Facilitator

Ted Selb reported for MID: Pray for rain, the reservoir is down. The snow pack is at 100- percent normal for this time of year, MID hoping for another storm a little on the warm side to melt some low snow into the reservoir. Selb introduces Dan Pope, MID hydrological manager for Exchequer Dan, who will be in charge of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission relicensing of the dam.

Teri Murrison, the facilitator explains that CALFED is being dismantled and the watershed program is now being administered by the state Department of Conservation, which has expanded the watershed program to the entire state, from Modoc to Imperial counties.Murrison and John Brody are chairing the San Joaquin regional meetings for the statewide watershed program, which will be held in Modesto on Feb. 11 and in Los Banos on Feb. 15.

Murrison, an experienced facilitator and former watershed coordinator for the RCD and MRS facilitator, volunteered to facilitate the meeting for no fee. She focused the meeting “options for Merced River Stakeholders:”

1. Stop MRS?
Glenn Anderson, board member of the East Merced RCD, said that the feeling was unanimous to continue MRS.
The representative for Santa Fe Aggregate said MRS functions best as an information-sharing organization within the disparate interests representing all aspects of the river.
Commissioner Lashbrook said that if decisions are to be made, more defined governance is necessary. Anderson said MRS should continue the Merced River Restoration Project.

In fact, despite the controversy with Commissioner Lashbrook and the RCD, which has been going on for nearly a year, MRS has continued to meet on schedule, bi-monthly and no members, who are not also members of the board of directors of the RCD have called for stopping the MRS. Therefore, for some, there is a sense of redundancy about this topic.

Murrison read the 2003 MRS Mission Statement and Goals:

MERCED RIVER STAKEHOLDERS

MISSION STATEMENT
Provide a collaborative forum for coordination, and gathering and sharing of information about the Merced River watershed. Protect and enhance the lower Merced River Watershed such that the natural processes, ecosystems, and its unique characteristics are conserved and restored. Foster voluntary stewardship in advance of habitat degradation and regulatory action.
Strive for a balanced level of human interaction within the watershed.

GOALS
Educate the public about the Merced River watershed and its importance.
Foster and improve communication among affected private individuals, interested citizens, commercial interests, educational institutes, and representatives of local, state and federal agencies.

Murrison recapitulated the history of MRS. Although now a Tuolumne County supervisor; she was the MRS facilitator for several years until 2006.

From 1999 to 2001, federal and state agencies and a grant from the Central Valley Project Improvement Act funded MRS and the MRRP, the science done by Stillwater Sciences. A technical advisory board was established including agencies, industry, the county, MID, MRS members and Stillwater.

The first phase (1999-2000) workshops were held, the TAC was established, private access was arranged, and goals and objectives for the MRRP were developed.

Phase II, EDAW consultants did baseline studies and various reports were released for public dissemination.

2001-2002: field studies and modeling was developed, design guidelines were establishing, geomorphic functions identified, specific strategies worked out for each of the five reaches of the lower river, the Wild on the Watershed tour was held, and the MRRP was released January 2002.

Murrison noted that the MRRP plan did not address water quality, land-use, education or water supply issues.

In 2001, East Merced Resource Conservation District received a watershed coordinator grant that allowed Murrison to become the MRS facilitator. The function of the EMRCD was to provide help facilitating for MRS. Murrison wrote the last Prop. 13 grant and the DOC watershed grants from 2001-2007.

Phase IV: CalFed grant for dredge-tailing reach baseline studies on fish and mercury, etc., 2005.

Lydia Miller noted that the MRS did other work as well: elimination of Water Hyacinth, and past restoration projects, for example the Robinson and Ratzlaff restoration projects, and had a lengthy set of meetings on the governance committee.

Joe Mitchell said restoration was too narrow a focus for MRS and was only looking at salmon and invasive species.

Commissioner Lashbrook said that recreational uses “always brought angst.”

Miller added that so did aggregate mining.

A representative from Granite Construction (aggregate miners) said that MRS was a good “sounding board.”

Murrison asked if this should be broadened to policy.

Participants agreed.

The Santa Fe Aggregate representative said that MRS was good for networking and for listening to the “range of considerations.”

Mitchell said that there were conflicts within the agencies, for example between salmon and stripped bass, and between and within agencies, for example conflicts between state Department of Fish and Game and US Fish and Wildlife Service. Taxpayers are asked to reclaim post-mining disasters, which irritated the recreationists, plus they didn’t get the option of access to the riverbank through private property, he said.

MRRP is a working document, not a “policy” statement. Several participants agreed that the agencies tried to assume MRRP was policy for purposes of their own projects.

Anderson brought up the topic of property rights v. public access.

Murrison brought up the topic of whether MRS was an advocacy or an information-sharing organization.

Miller said that MRS had advocated on the water Hyacinth issue when they met with the agencies to advocate; MRS developed a proposal for a town-hall meetings in each of the reaches and also a proposal for a river tender.

Mitchell said MRS needed to know when and how much 2-4-D the agencies were spraying on the hyacinth.

Murrison said there seemed to be some contention about the role of MRS.

Commissioner Lashbrook mumbled something about a “continuum” that Murrison interpreted as the phrase “a continuum from information-sharing to action.” Since becoming a planning commissioner, Lashbrook has patented a form of utterance that often escapes meaning unless one is “in the know” on the latest workshop phraseology.

Anderson asked if MRS could not conduct a formal way of “visioning.” (Anderson attends different workshops than the Commissioner does.) But, neither one of them, both members of the RCD board of directors, is pleased with the MRS as it is, as it functions now, and particularly as it functioned last year when MRS members voiced opposition to an RCD grant, of direct financial benefit to the commissioner, that claimed MRS support when it did not have it or any governance means for getting it.

Pat Bettencourt said she didn’t understand what Anderson meant by “visioning.”

Anderson replied that some people “envision” a parkway on the river. Others don’t. That’s two extremes. He proposed a set of meetings that got into each individual MRS member’s “wildest dreams for the river.”

Murrison returned the attention of the group to its mission and goals.

The Granite representative said they too had a vision.

Mitchell said that MRS had “knockdowns meetings on this,” and MRS found information was neutral; but nobody was to speak for the whole group.

Murrison noted that the group went through its mission and goals, word-by-word, defining each as they went along.

Anderson said he wanted a “revisitation” of the mission and goals.

The Santa Fe Aggregate representative said that the goal of MRS was sharing information: members have projects and it is unlikely that the whole group would approve any project.

Murrison described this as “the dog on the carpet – the long-term sticking point.

Mitchell said MRS has always recognized that nobody agreed with each other.

Miller said that the WOW tour was agreed on and carried out and that the governance committee agreed to meet for a year to conclude that there couldn’t be a voting structure in MRS because of disagreement.

Commissioner Lashbrook stated that three people on the governance committee were not happy “how that turned out.”

Miller said: “Then they should have challenged the conclusion. We speak up and have dialogue.”

Murrison noted that there was a difference “in communication styles.”

Mitchell noted that the “interests would pursue their interests no matter what.”

Murrison, who was facilitator at the time the governance committee met, said: “We agreed to pursue our own interests, knowing there were other forums to air those views.”

She then concluded that no one in the group wanted to disband MRS.

Commissioner Lashbrook said, “A lot of people don’t attend.”

Mitchell replied that there are no projects at the moment to draw them in or a grant.

Murrison said MRS members come to protect their interests.

Anderson said, “If there is something like an emergency on the river, it brings them in.”

Pat Bettencourt said that MRS changed its focus when the Black Diamond aggregate project (Wendell Reid, Modesto) went ahead without coming to the MRS. “There was a sense of loss of focus because we didn’t have a chance to look at it or the requirements for a permit. (Bettencourts and their partners, Santa Fe Aggregates, do bring projects to MRS for discussion.) “MRS functions best when everyone comes with their own interests, informs the group. MRS has had the credibility and influence to attract people to come to vet their projects.”

Commissioner Lashbrook said that Merced County and most agencies have “backed out.”

We noted that county Planning Commissioner Lashbrook was present, along with two officials from MID and that a representative from the county Planning Department has been providing regular updates on river projects until this meeting, and that last year, as usual, state and federal agency representatives were usually in attendance.

Maia Singer, representing Stillwater Sciences, endorsed MRS input, saying that it was very important to Stillwater’s studies.

Murrison said there is no perceived threat that fewer landowners and agencies were dropping out.

Mitchell said that agency funding sources are also drying up (making it difficult to travel to Merced).

Commissioner Lashbrook started a sentence with, “If the group …” but became incoherent.

Murrison interpreted the commissioner’s utterance to have something to do with staff.

Anderson said that the salmon count was not good, after millions of dollars spent on restoring the run.

Selb of MID said the salmon runs are diminishing all along the coast and maybe the problem on the Merced River is not local.

Jill Ratzlaff said that state Department of Fish and Game badly botched the restoration project on her family project.

Mitchell said that stakeholders do try to pressure agencies to do the right thing.

Ratzlaff added that the agencies do not have enough follow-through on their restoration projects. She and Mitchell agreed that the agencies do not correct their mistakes.

Commissioner Lashbrook attempted to interject with a comment beginning, “We can’t …”

Mitchell said the lead agencies in restoration projects didn’t follow its own policies and didn’t follow through. Ratzlaff agreed that continuity was a big problem. Mitchell said, “When a project fails, there is no mechanism to make it right. There are X amount of dollars for reclamation (of old mining projects) and then they walk away.” He mentioned the Carson project, on which the created ponds would not hold water – “the designer should have been accountable to do it right.”

Murrison and Commissioner Lashbrook seemed to express a common frustration that the group couldn’t come together (return to the governance problem).

Mitchell asked why there was no enforcement on reclamation projects.

Murrison said that the other side of that question is that the MRS doesn’t make recommendations.

Pat Bettencourt said that the Ratzlaff problem was that the agency was telling her what to do. But how would the MRS members vote: by acre? Investment? Mines?
She disagreed that people did not attend MRS meetings because they could not vote. She said there was “spirited discussion” on the Bettencourt/Santa Fe Aggregate project. “This forum died because nothing was on the agenda.”

(What Bettencourt did not add was the reason that there was nothing on the agenda, which had to do with RCD facilitation of the meetings after Murrison left, and RCD began to plan to eliminate MRS.)

Murrison asked: “Do you want to continue?”

Anderson joked: “Let’s vote on it!”

Miller listed some upcoming projects: the MAGPI grant for studying area groundwater; a bird study with Natural Resource Conservation Service; FERC relicensing of the Exchequer Dam; a landowner mining project; another Black Diamond mining project; Bernie Wade’s mining project; a new Santa Fe Aggregate project; and the Schmitt mining project. She pointed out that the planning department is changing staff at the moment, perhaps explaining why someone from the planning department was not at this meeting. Jeff Wilson (planner) has come but a lot has been left off the table. She listed other projects ongoing: Fish and Game, Stillwater, the ag waiver on water quality.

Miller said that controversy around a project brings in the stakeholders and that ahead are: the county General Plan update; general plan updates for Ballico, Stevinson, Cressey and Snelling.

Singer said that when grants are written, they ought to include money for information sharing with MRS.

Pat Bettencourt said that the MRS process worked “very well in the latest debacle,” in which a coalition of stakeholders successfully opposed the last RCD grant.

Commissioner Lashbrook (whose personal income was affected by the rejection of that grant) stated: “If we had had a vote on May 19, we would have gone forward with that grant. I will not come to another meeting …” if stakeholders address a funder using MRS letterhead.

It is always foolish to predict the outcome of a vote and particularly foolish to predict the outcome of a vote of the group with know governance mechanism to vote, and even more foolish to predict that outcome when very, very few of the stakeholders present on March 19 had been provided a copy of the grant by Commissioner Lashbrook and her associate pork barrel-ettes.

Miller, who had written one of the letters under MRS letterhead, said she would not agree with Commissioner Lashbrook dictum, saying that the first sentence of the letter explained that it was written from members of the group.

Murrison showed us why she is a great facilitator at this moment, by suggesting, “Let’s do ‘parking lot.’” “Parking lot” is facilitator jargon for parking a hot issue on the sidelines for a while.

Miller said “parking lot” was what was done with MID use of aquatic pesticides and the Santa Fe Aggregate issue with the Williamson Act.

Mitchell said he didn’t agree with anyone using MRS – “only members.”

Commissioner Lashbrook said that Gwen Huff (former RCD facilitator for MRS) thought she had an active, open agenda.

Murrison said that the MRS no longer has funding for a facilitator so “now it will be a stakeholder-driven process.”

Miller said that the MRS had been “disengaged” by the RCD staff, so this will be an improvement.

Murrison asked if MRS still wanted to meet bi-monthly. Stakeholders agreed.

Mitchell said that individual groups within MRS that have non-profit status could take grants forward … as long as they were for an information-sharing group.

Murrison mentioned an old grant proposal for holding town-hall meetings on each reach of the lower river, saying she thought it was within the scope of what everyone agreed on.

Pat Bettencourt asked where was the repository for the information. Murrison did an index and Stillwater has information.

Miller said MRS asked the RCD to make the binder of MRS information available – and it was not made available. She added that the MRS website got buried by RCD.

Commissioner Lashbrook said there was no money for it.

There was enough money for RCD to post the wrong date for the meeting now being held.

Anderson said, of the missing stakeholders, “Maybe they’ll be absent and they’ll ask us to change before they’ll be here.”

Commissioner Lashbrook said that “the action people” are elsewhere.

Maureen McCorry said that there are now two groups but that the MRS here has a special place and that self-interest was the best reason to get people here. She added that she has seen that there are social and political repercussions to not attending the “right” MRS meeting. “There is a perception of an incorrect move …” she explained.

Miller added that there are political pressures surrounding the situation between MRS and RCD. “The public has to be cautious, but we’ve had good debate here.

The group decided would meet again at the Washington School from 6-8 p.m. on March 24.

Mitchell asked what happened “to the other website.” (There have been two MRS websites. The RCD announced the domain of one of them was for sale and have not been particularly diligent about keeping the other one up-to-date, although they have, at least until recently, been paid to do so.

Miller mentioned that the RCD has refused to release the binder, which serves as the repository for records of MRS proceedings.

Murrison said that grants require that the RCD hold that data. “But, now, you’ll have to facilitate yourselves,” she added.

Miller asked how much Murrison would charge to facilitate more MRS meetings.

Murrison said she would have to think about it. Miller suggested two more meetings.

At least two future agenda items were mentioned: an MID presentation of the FERC relicensing and a county planning department update on aggregate projects on the river.

The meeting adjourned.

Holly Bettencourt remarked later: “Rather than all this politics stuff, I think it would be good to talk about the river.

| »

Local groups defeat Merced County/Black Diamond Aggregates Mining Project in court

Submitted: Feb 12, 2008

Merced CA (February 12, 2008) – A Merced County Superior Court ruled on February 7 against respondents Merced County Board of Supervisors approval of the Black Diamond Aggregates project. Petitioners in the California Environmental Quality Act lawsuit were Merced-based San Joaquin Raptor Rescue Center and Modesto-based Protect Our Water.

Judge John D. Kirihara ruled that a writ of mandate would be issued to "vacate and set aside the approval of ...the project."

Judge Kirihara agreed with petitioners that the County had abused its discretion in its failure to consider the "fair argument test" in the California Environmental Quality Act that the project may have significant environmental impacts. He noted that the supervisors ignored two letters from resource agencies (state Department of Fish and Game and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) and numerous expressions of public concern about potential damage the project might do to the Merced River and adjacent irrigation. There was "substantial evidence in the record" to support the fair argument that the project might have significant environmental impact, he wrote.

San Joaquin Raptor Rescue Center and Protect Our Water challenged the Merced County Board of Supervisors’ approval on Dec. 19, 2006 of a mitigated negative for Black Diamond Aggregates, Inc., a mine close to the Merced River near Snelling owned by Reed Family Vineyards, LLC, and The Reed Leasing Group, LLC of Modesto.

The writ of mandate challenged the supervisors’ Dec. 19, 2006 adoption of the mitigated negative declaration, the General Plan amendment, rezoning, modifications to the mine reclamation plan, and major modifications to the existing mine’s conditional use permit.

Essentially, the County permitted Black Diamond to mine up to 25 feet below the surface of a mine in the Snelling dredge tailings, originally permitted to mine only to grade level and reclaim the site as grazing land. Under Black Diamond and the County’s reclamation scheme, 25-foot deep mining pits would have filled with water to create "open space" and “wildlife habitat” (at least until the next big flood).

The County ignored letters from two state and one federal resource agency that the Black Diamond project would have a significant impact on the hydrology and water supply of this area, rezoned out of the Snelling Rural Residential Center (RRC) No. 1 Residential and Agricultural zone. The project is two miles from downtown Snelling and about a half a mile from the Merced River.

The County adopted no mitigation measures on hydrology and water supply before the supervisors approved the project.

At the time of filing in January 2007, petitioners San Joaquin Raptor Rescue Center and Protect Our Water said: “Respondents violated their duty to prepare a legally adequate environmental impact report as required by CEQA.”

“This aggregate company, deeply involved with the destruction of the Tuolumne River, has now come to the Merced River and proposed a strip mine in the dredge tailings,” said Lydia Miller, president of the San Joaquin Raptor Rescue Center. “The planning department, project proponents and the supervisors tried to sneak the multiple violations of CEQA in this project through on a very crowded agenda at the end of the year despite a petition signed by 60 Snelling residents against it. This county government is encouraging outside special interests to run roughshod over its citizens and its natural resources.

“We were represented by the skilled, experienced environmental law firm of Don Mooney and Marsha Burch,” Miller added.

For further information contact:

Lydia Miller
San Joaquin Raptor Rescue Center
Merced
(209) 723-9283

Law Offices of Donald B. Mooney
MARSHA A. BURCH
Davis, California
(530) 758-2377

| »

Sonny Star, the Gigolo Press, still claiming it got it right on RMP

Submitted: Feb 16, 2008

The Merced Sun-Star missed, mangled and mutilated the Riverside Motorsparts Pork story so badly in alliance with its advertisers bent on stupefying its readers that it still doesn't get it after all this time: Condren and the County changed the zoning on the land to give the planning department and whoever ends up with it almost unlimited powers to develop it as they please. Without that chunk of private property adjacent to the former Castle Air Force Base, now under County control, the base project cannot get foreign trade zone status. And without that status, many local rice bowls will be broken. Condren has a thousand acres to sell under the most permissible zoning available, regardless of the outcome of the CEQA case.

But, for Sonny Star, a new ensemble for another spring makes all last year's bad go away.

The Merced Sun-Star got exactly one story right throughout the approval process for Riverside Motorsports Park: a relatively small one about how approval for the track project hinged on the Merced County Board of Supervisors overriding the Castle Airport Land Commission's refusal to shrink the safety zone on the airport sufficiently so that on paper it would be "safe" to send planes into the Castle strip over the race track. This story evidently caused so much consternation in the chambers of commerce among those "decent" investors that the actual hearing on the override, Sonny Star showed up in force -- two reporters plus the managing editor. The result was a story that added to public confusion.

All the while, RMP was buying those inserts, the greatest campaign to bribe Sonny Star since UC Merced.

Sonny Star, Cameron does not say, endorsed the RMP project.

However, after the approval and Condren stiffed his local investors, Sonny Star printed all kinds of nasty rumors about him in a hit job rivalling the one they did on former DA Gordon Spenser. In both cases Sonny got all the news except any actual indictment, and in Condren's case, all the news came mysteriously after the supervisors had approved the project. In this regard, Sonny's coverage had as much political impact as Supervisor Diedre Kelsey's ex post facto "town hall meetings," which she conducted as if they had the force of public hearings on the project, when they did not.

Also, during the build-up to the project approval, Sonny steadily ignored or bashed opponents of the track, adopting an attitude toward the project as critical and illuminated as that of Carl Pollard, a Merced City councilman at the time, who mumbled things about "jobs" before the supervisors and planning commissioners from time to time.

"Trusting gang of county supervisors"? Badlands published a memo from Condren written over a year before project approval bragging about having four of the five in his pocket already.

"Decent bunch of racing enthusiasts"? While one of those blameless civic leaders, Kenny Shepherd, was managing RMP's Altamont Speedway, a local resident who opposed the reopening of that track was buzzed by helicopters while the project CUP was violated so many times that even the lords of Alameda County government, who frequently forget that that county's line extend over Altamont Pass, were moved to punitive action as residents sued.

The only mistake Condren seems to have made in his long con on Merced County and local investors was in his choice of lawyers, the bloviating Tim Taylor in the lead, whose reply brief in superior court boiled down to a lecture to the San Joaquin Superior Court judge appointed to hear the case: "Now dear," he seemed to say, "we all know that CEQA exists, but you and I know it doesn't really matter, don't we." Taylor and his associate on the RMP case left the firm now suing Condren, and left them holding a $150,000 bill. Presumably his lawyers are holding a million or two of shares in RMP. We have not heard yet from the managing partners in Taylor's new law firm.

Condren and Sonny Star both allege that the credit crisis is making it difficult to impossible for him to raise the necessary funds to build the track. This raises the question of the congressional district in which the project is located, represented by Dennis Cardoza, Shrimp Slayer-Merced, which remains very close to having the highest mortgage foreclosure rate in the nation (second only to Detroit at the moment, according to the lastest reports). Cardoza's political philosophy boils down to: "This office does not get involved in local affairs (although his office is located on the third floor of the County Administration building) except when it comes to making three attempts to gut the Endangered Species Act on behalf of my friends in finance, insurance and real estate." It is a very dubious proposition that Condren didn't see something like the credit crisis coming. The financial press was full of warnings as early as 2006 and Condren's intelligence is not as corrupted as either Cardoza's or Sonny Star's.

Badlands Journal editorial board
------------------

2-16-08
Merced Sun-Star
Condren caught sitting on his last limb...Steve Cameron

http://www.mercedsunstar.com/196/story/145051.html
...A member of Condren's original investment group -- a decent bunch of racing enthusiasts who lost every penny and then were dumped from RMP entirely -- recalled something Condren confided in them quite early in this miserable affair.
"Merced County is the perfect place for the project," Condren told them, "because it's poor, they're hungry for any big new idea and they're dumb enough to approve anything."
Sadly, Condren's cruel analysis was correct, at least in part.
RMP did sail past a trusting gang of county supervisors who should have done a whole lot more homework.
He also found a lot of honest, hopeful Merced County business folk to rally around him -- promising the moon but later failing even to pay his bills.
It's ironic that Condren, who has masked so much of his business in a blizzard of confusing documents and legal mumbo-jumbo, now finds his ultimate exit speeded up by a group of angry attorneys.
Talk about justice with a smirk. This is it.
One of the first rules of the free-market jungle is never forgetting to pay your lawyers.
But our boy John did it, signing a promissory note for $147,000 to clear up his bills with the firm of Somach, Simmons & Dunn.
When he couldn't or didn't come up with the money, they sued...

| »

Regarding sheds

Submitted: Feb 18, 2008

A number of years ago a state forester was interviewed concerning changes in the culture of his agency following the passage of the Endangered Species Act, the California Environmental Quality Act, and kindred legislation regarding the forests. He said, "I knew I was in a different world when bureaucrats started talking about 'viewsheds.'"

The term 'viewshed' indicated that the public had made the aesthetic pleasure of looking at a stretch of forest unblemished by clearcuts a value in the resource bureaucracy by the late 1970's, not just a conservationist howl to the moon. The term, 'watershed,' is older:

"line separating waters flowing into different rivers," 1803, from water + shed. A loan-translation of Ger. Wasser-scheide. Fig. sense is attested from 1878. Meaning "ground of a river system" is from 1878.
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=watershed

Yesterday, in a meeting in Los Banos concerning funding for local management efforts in the state's many watersheds, an interesting conversation broke out regarding the state of San Joaquin Valley agriculture and its future. The vision put forth by a Merced County planning commissioner favored organic agriculture (the commissioner owns an organic farm) and local food system (the commissioner is also a boardmember of organizations advancing this vision).

A member of the group without vision put forth the view that the Valley could probably feed itself on about a third of the farmland now in cultivation but that the problem a planning commissioner ought to be "envisioning" is what will happen to the remaining two-thirds of the farm and ranch land, the economy of which -- as is certainly the case with the county's almond industry -- is based on large-scale exportation. Export-led growth, to eastern US markets and expanding to international markets has been the basis for the Valley's agricultural economy since the early years of the last century and the cropping pattern remains largely the same, although the populations of county seats and some of the other hamlets of that period have swollen enormously. The visionless viewpoint was also advanced that if the same amount of acreage in production today in the same crops, in the same concentration, attracting the same swarms of pests specific to those crops, were converted to organic orchards and rowcrops, it would do very little but destroy the organic market and many of the growers engaged in it. One also wondered silently how long it would be before "organic" pesticide regulations were relaxed to include pesticides perhaps not quite as organic as they were purported by their manufacturers to be.

The vision quest for consensus-based environmental reform through analyses that change from year to year, mirroring environmental disintegration, seems to some to be not a very serious enterprise.

At this point, the planning commissioner, demonstrating leadership skills, put a new term on the table, 'foodshed.' The purpose of this bit of jargon du moment seemed to be to return the conversation to watersheds, and grants for watershed coordinators, another of which the commissioner is writing to fund her valuable political work of going to more meetings where she will learn yet more vital analytical tools like the term, foodshed.

Fleeing the mindless Jargon Monster, another participant tried to address the problem of how to treat the land retired from farming so that the Valley will only grow enough food to feed itself -- and organically! Will it all go to housing?

Or should much of the retired land be preserved as open space, restored to wildlife habitat, provide better and cleaner groundwater recharge? it was asked. Later, it was recalled that on the west side at least, there are hundreds of thousands of acres of land that should be retired because they are full of toxic heavy metals as the result of totally reckless, resource-destroying irrigation, and that it would be hard to restore it to livable wildlife habitat. Facilitators returned the meeting to the topic of watersheds and whether the state should reinvest in watershed coordinator programs on the Merced River watershed.

Some in the room advanced the idea that the state agencies ought to spend the money on their own staffs to inventory and map the amount of land already in state easements through the State Lands Commission among other agencies and enforce existing laws and regulations rather than fund watershed coordinators who broker rather than share information concerning the Merced River watershed for their own financial gain. In other words, the evidence is in that these Reaganesque localizing, privatizing programs merely induce an annual grant-writing feeding frenzy inherently corrupting in local publics because the regulation of natural resources is properly and adequately only as a state function. Local publics ought to be monitoring state and federal governments to do their job in their areas. If it is necessary to go around elected officials in the pockets of finance, insurance and real estate special interests who pressure resource agencies, then it should be done. That is a function the public can do better than it can manage watersheds under the legal jurisdiction of state and federal resource agencies and the mandate of the Public Trust Doctrine.

Driving home from the meeting, through field after field in early preparation for another crop of cotton, participants realized they were driving through a 'fibershed,'interrupted occasionally by various 'cowsheds,' 'poultrysheds' and possibly one 'goatshed.'

Returning the next day to the problem -- What would happen to all the farm and ranch land retired if the Valley should swing away from export-led growth to a local food supply? -- another idea occurred to participants of the stimulating meeting in Los Banos: Why not speciessheds?

What about a vernalpoolshed? A San Joaquinkitfoxshed? A Californiatigersalamandershed? Why not a mangycoyoteshed? Despite a great deal of government policy to the contrary, empirical evidence suggests that wildlife species require wildlife habitat, in fact a good description of a speciesshed would be the natural habitat required by that species in order to live, have a home in the world.

So, now when one looks at a field of seasonal pasture containing vernal pools, cows, coyotes and other wildlife species, one knows he is actually looking at a multi-speciesshed, not a cattle ranch. And as the urban resident gazes across the street from his door, he realizes that he is observing an 'alleycatshed.' Downtown, one realizes he is looking at a 'decayingurbancentershed.' When observing the many half-finished new subdivisions that ring this town, one realizes he is looking at 'foreclosuresheds.'

Leaders like the planning commissioner, superbly trained by the Great Valley Center/UC Merced leadership programs, are constantly bringing us valuable new analytical tools like this, language that will permit our vision to soar and transcend reality, the present, the past and the future. so that we, too, may glide far above this 'littlebluemarbleshed' in a beautiful "Bullship."

| »

Sonny Star, the verbsmith

Submitted: Feb 20, 2008

2-20-08
Merced Sun-Star
City Council decides to peer review Wal-Mart impact report
A second consulting firm will examine the first firm's study for $18,800....LESLIE ALBRECHT
http://www.mercedsunstar.com/167/story/149721.html

Ah, come on, Sonny, say what you really mean: peerreview Wal-Mart.

How long can it be before Sonny will be medschooling UC Merced?

Badlands Journal editors

| »

The Age of Traumatic Neurosis

Submitted: Feb 20, 2008

Many of us wondered, when John Edwards quit his campaign for the Democratic Party nomination for president, if the subject of poverty might not disappear along with his campaign. The middle two passages in this posting are recent columns indicating that at least some journalists have managed to remember poverty remains, despite the disappearance of its champion in this campaign year. The columns are framed by passages from two books of prophetic social science, written 30 years ago. The first passage, sent yesterday by Badlands reader and friend, Paul deMarco, is from a 1975 book by a professor he knew in college on what poverty and disaster did to people in W. Virginia when a dam broke, wiping out their communities, and what poverty looks like -- then and now -- up close. The last passage is one we selected from a book from about the same period, Christopher Lasch's The Culture of Narcissism.

DeMarco wrote, in a note titled "chronic conditions inducing trauma": "...Some of our conversation last night about the Central Valley reminded me of this passage I had read yesterday (emphasis is mine):

... now that we are working with new rules for identifying disasters, we have to note that we are edging toward the notion that chronic conditions as well as acute events can induce trauma, and this, too, belongs in our calculations. A chronic disaster is one that gathers forces slowly and insidiously, creeping around one's defenses rather than smashing through them. The person is unable to mobilize his normal defenses against the threat, sometimes because he had been misinformed about it, and sometimes because he cannot do anything to avoid it in any case. In has long been recognized, for example, that living in conditions of chronic poverty is often traumatizing, and if one looks carefully at the faces as well as the clinic records of people who live in institutions or hang out in the vacant corners of skid row or enlist in the migrant labor force or eke out a living in the urban slums, once can scarcely avoid seeing the familiar symptoms of trauma--a numbness of spirit, a susceptibility to anxiety and rage and depression, a sense of helplessness, an inability to concentrate, a loss of various motor skills, a heightened apprehension about the physical and social environment, a preoccupation with death, a retreat into dependency, and a general loss of ego functions. One can find those symptoms wherever people feel left out of things, abandoned, separated from the life around them. From that point of view, being too poor to participate in the promise of the culture or too old to take a meaningful place in the structure of the community can be counted as a kind of disaster.

"Erikson gives sociology a good name," deMarco continued, "for once, with his comprehensive view of history, psychology and culture, and his bell-clear writing. He continues later in his conclusions: "

I have suggested that human reactions to the age we are entering are likely to include a sense of cultural disorientation, a feeling of powerlessness. a dulled apathy, and a generalized fear about the condition of the universe. These, of course, are among the classic symptoms of trauma, and it may well be that historians of the future will look back on this period and conclude that the traumatic neuroses were its true clinical signature." --Kai T. Erikson, "Everything in Its Path: Destruction of Community in the Buffalo Creek Flood" pp. 255-256. 1976

2-18-08
New York Times
Op-Ed Columnist
Poverty Is Poison...PAUL KRUGMAN

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/18/opinion/18krugman.html?ex=1204002000&en=6ebb3bdbc9b81a52&ei=5070&emc=eta1

“Poverty in early childhood poisons the brain.” That was the opening of an article in Saturday’s Financial Times, summarizing research presented last week at the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Reactions From Around the Web As the article explained, neuroscientists have found that “many children growing up in very poor families with low social status experience unhealthy levels of stress hormones, which impair their neural development.” The effect is to impair language development and memory — and hence the ability to escape poverty — for the rest of the child’s life.

So now we have another, even more compelling reason to be ashamed about America’s record of failing to fight poverty.

L. B. J. declared his “War on Poverty” 44 years ago. Contrary to cynical legend, there actually was a large reduction in poverty over the next few years, especially among children, who saw their poverty rate fall from 23 percent in 1963 to 14 percent in 1969.
But progress stalled thereafter: American politics shifted to the right, attention shifted from the suffering of the poor to the alleged abuses of welfare queens driving Cadillacs, and the fight against poverty was largely abandoned.

In 2006, 17.4 percent of children in America lived below the poverty line, substantially more than in 1969. And even this measure probably understates the true depth of many children’s misery.

Living in or near poverty has always been a form of exile, of being cut off from the larger society. But the distance between the poor and the rest of us is much greater than it was 40 years ago, because most American incomes have risen in real terms while the official poverty line has not. To be poor in America today, even more than in the past, is to be an outcast in your own country. And that, the neuroscientists tell us, is what poisons a child’s brain.

America’s failure to make progress in reducing poverty, especially among children, should provoke a lot of soul-searching. Unfortunately, what it often seems to provoke instead is great creativity in making excuses.

Some of these excuses take the form of assertions that America’s poor really aren’t all that poor — a claim that always has me wondering whether those making it watched any TV during Hurricane Katrina, or for that matter have ever looked around them while visiting a major American city.

Mainly, however, excuses for poverty involve the assertion that the United States is a land of opportunity, a place where people can start out poor, work hard and become rich.
But the fact of the matter is that Horatio Alger stories are rare, and stories of people trapped by their parents’ poverty are all too common. According to one recent estimate, American children born to parents in the bottom fourth of the income distribution have almost a 50 percent chance of staying there — and almost a two-thirds chance of remaining stuck if they’re black.

That’s not surprising. Growing up in poverty puts you at a disadvantage at every step.
I’d bracket those new studies on brain development in early childhood with a study from the National Center for Education Statistics, which tracked a group of students who were in eighth grade in 1988. The study found, roughly speaking, that in modern America parental status trumps ability: students who did very well on a standardized test but came from low-status families were slightly less likely to get through college than students who tested poorly but had well-off parents.

None of this is inevitable.

Poverty rates are much lower in most European countries than in the United States, mainly because of government programs that help the poor and unlucky.

And governments that set their minds to it can reduce poverty. In Britain, the Labor government that came into office in 1997 made reducing poverty a priority — and despite some setbacks, its program of income subsidies and other aid has achieved a great deal. Child poverty, in particular, has been cut in half by the measure that corresponds most closely to the U.S. definition.

At the moment it’s hard to imagine anything comparable happening in this country. To their credit — and to the credit of John Edwards, who goaded them into it — both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are proposing new initiatives against poverty. But their proposals are modest in scope and far from central to their campaigns.

I’m not blaming them for that; if a progressive wins this election, it will be by promising to ease the anxiety of the middle class rather than aiding the poor. And for a variety of reasons, health care, not poverty, should be the first priority of a Democratic administration.

But ultimately, let’s hope that the nation turns back to the task it abandoned — that of ending the poverty that still poisons so many American lives.

2-10-08
Washington Post
King's Dream Deferred, One More Victim of the Subprime Mortgage Crisis... Michelle Singletary

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/09/AR2008020900044_2.html?hpid=sec-business
As we spend this month celebrating the achievements of African Americans, I'm saddened by a report that concludes that the subprime mortgage crisis has caused the largest loss of wealth for black and Latino homeowners in modern U.S. history.

The erosion of wealth is staggering.

Subprime borrowers of color will lose between $164 billion and $213 billion for loans taken in the past eight years, according to United for a Fair Economy, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization. For the past five years, the group has examined the racial wealth divide in this country.

UFE is the latest organization to try to put a dollar figure on the losses resulting from the proliferation of subprime loans. And while some might want to dismiss the findings in the group's report as alarmist, one fact is clearly troubling: Minorities have been hit hardest.

Black borrowers will lose between $72 billion and $93 billion, and Latino borrowers will lose between $76 billion and $98 billion, UFE reports.

"The dream of economic stability and opportunity for everyone living in the U.S., so eloquently described by Martin Luther King Jr., is bound up with homeownership, the most significant source of wealth for most people," said Dedrick Muhammad, senior organizer and research associate at the Institute for Policy Studies and co-author of the UFE report.

Of late, much has been made of blacks' buying power. A study by the University of Georgia's Selig Center for Economic Growth put black spending at about $845 billion last year. That spending is projected to top $1.1 trillion by 2012. The center describes this buying power, or disposable income, as the total personal income available for spending on goods and services after taxes.

However, it's not enough to consider what people will spend. Wealth is created by what you keep and invest or save. It's also created when people own appreciable assets, such as a home.

"As income comes and goes like a flowing river, wealth -- what you own minus what you owe -- is a reservoir to handle hard economic times, make large purchases, help secure the future of new generations, and protect individuals and families as they age," the report said.

As UFE points out, homeownership is key to achieving economic security. Nearly 60 percent of the total wealth held by middle-class families exists in their home equity. Although home values are declining, owning a home is still the biggest wealth equalizer.

The housing crisis has affected many communities regardless of race or income, but it has disproportionately affected minorities. That's because people of color are more than three times as likely to have subprime loans, the UFE found.

High-cost subprime loans account for 55 percent of loans to blacks but only 17 percent of loans to whites, the UFE report said.

And before any of you fix your lips to place all the blame on the homeowners, just remember that this loss of wealth comes largely as a result of lenders and others in the mortgage industry who took advantage of people trying to achieve the American dream of homeownership.

I've seen some loan documents with crazy-high prepayment penalties that people didn't even realize they had. I've interviewed and counseled hardworking folks who -- yes, foolishly -- were so focused on getting a home that they believed whatever they were told, including that the value of their home would continue to rise, making it easy for them to refinance out of the exotic mortgages with tricky teaser rates.

"On the surface, subprime loan products can sound relatively simple and attractive, and some people have benefited from their use," the report said. "Yet, as more details of the industry's activities began to surface, the predatory practices of many subprime loan brokers came to the forefront. Unless inexperienced borrowers asked complex questions about loan terms covered only in the fine print, they received loans that they had little to no chance of repaying."

UFE is right in concluding that one of the biggest challenges facing our nation is not the lack of wealth but the "destructive distribution of wealth."

When King delivered his historic "I Have a Dream" speech in 1963, he said this about the economic state of blacks: "The Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity" ...

From The Culture of Narcissism, Christopher Lasch, 1979:

In a study of 250 managers from twelve major companies, Michael Maccoby describes the new corporate leader, not altogether unsympathetically, as a person who works with people rather than with materials and who seeks not to build an empire or accumulate wealth but to experience "the exhilaration of running his team and of gaining victoires." He wasn to "be known as a winner, and his deepest fear is to be labeled a loser." Instead of pitting himself against a merial task or a problem demanding solution, he pits himself against others, out of a "need to be in control." As a recent textbook for managers puts it, success today means "not simply getting ahead" but "getting ahead of others."
The new executive, boyish, playful, and "seductive," wants in Maccoby's words "to maintain an illusion of limitless options."
He has little capacity for "personal intimacy and social commitment." He feels little loyalty even to the company for which he works. One executive says he experiences power "as not being pushed around by the company." In his upward climb, this man cultivates powerful customers and attempts to use them against his own company. "You need a very big customer," according to his calculations, "who is always in trouble and demands changes from the company. That way you automatically have power in the company, and with the customer too. I like to keep my options open." A professor of management endorses this strategy.
"Overidentification" with a company, in his view, "produces a corporation with enormous power over the careers and destinies of its true believers." The bigger the company, the more important he thinks it is for executives "to manage their careers in terms of their own ...free choices" and to "maintain the widest set of options possible."
According to Maccoby, the gamesman "is open to new ideas, but he lacks conviction." He will do business with any regime, even if he disapproves of its principles. More independent and resourceful than the company man, he tries to use the company for his own ends, fearing that otherwise he will be "totally emasculated by the corporation." He avoids intimacy as a trap, preferring the "exciting sexy atmosphere" with which the modern executive surrounds himself at work, "where adoring, mini-skirted secretaries constantly flirt with him." In all his personal relations, the gamseman depends on the admiration or fear he inspires in others to certify his credentials as a "winner." As he gets older, he finds it more and more difficult to command the kind of attention on which he thrives. He reaches a plateau beyond which he does not advance in his job, perhaps because the very highest positions, as Maccoby notes, still go to "those able to renounce adolescent rebelliousness and become at least to some extent believers in the organization." The job begins to lose its savor. having little interest in craftsmanship, the new-style executive takes no pleasure in his achievements once he begins to lose the adolescent charm on which they rest. Middle age hits him with the force of a disaster...Jennings treats the substance of executive life as if it were just as arbitrary and irrelevant to success as the task of kicking a ball through a net or of moving pieces over a chessboard. He never mentions the social and economic repercussions of managerial decisions or the power that managers exercise over society as a whole. For the corporate manager on the make, power consists not of money and influence but of "momentum," a "winning image," a reputation as a winner. Power lies in the eye of the beholder and thus has no objective reference at all.
The manager's view of the world, as described by Jennings, Maccoby, and by the mangers themsevles, is that of the narcissist, who sees the world as a mirror of himself and has no interest in external events except as they throw back a reflection of his own image. The dense interpersonal environment of modern bureaucry, in which work assumes an abstract quality almost wholly divorced from performance, by its very nature elicits and often rewards a narcissistic response. Bureaucracy, however, is only one of a number of social influences that are bringing a narcissitic type of personality organization into greater and greater prominence. Another such influence is the mechanical reproduction of culture, the proliferation of visual and audial images in the "society of the spectacle"...Modern life is so thoroughly mediated by electronic images that we cannot help responding to others as if their actions--and our own--were being recorded and simultaneously transmitted to an unseen audience or stored up for close scrutiny at some later time...We need no reminder to smile. A smile is permanently graven on our features, and we already know from which of several angles it photographs to best advantage... The new ideal of success has no content. "Performance means to arrive," says Jennings. Success equals success. Note the convergence between success in business and celebrity in politics or the world of entertainment, which also depends on "visibility" and "charisma" and can only be defined as itself. The only important attribute of celebrity is that it is celebrated; no one can say why. pp. 46-47

| »

Raptor, POW and Citizens group defeat RMP in court

Submitted: Feb 26, 2008

MERCED CA (February 26, 2008) – Petitioners San Joaquin Raptor Rescue Center, Protect Our Water (POW) and Citizens for the Protection of Merced County Resources defeated Merced County and the Riverside Motorsports Park (RMP) in Merced County Superior Court.

In her decision on the suit against the Merced County Board of Supervisors’ approval of the RMP environmental impact report (EIR) in December 2006, San Joaquin County Superior Court Judge Elizabeth Humphreys ruled that, “Judgment be entered in favor” of the petitioners , Merced County certification of the EIR be “vacated,” and a peremptory writ of mandate be issues “under seal of this court ordering the County and RMP:

“a.Immediately on receipt of the Writ set aside and void its approvals of RMP and refrain from further approvals unless and until it undertakes further environmental review to correct the deficiencies in the EIR …

“b. Make and file a return to Court upon taking a final action to certify the EIR and reconsider the Project setting further what the County has done to comply with the Writ.”

Judge Humphreys ruled that in the absence of a development agreement and a community benefits agreement “that have not been drafted,” the project EIR was deficient “as an informational document,” therefore neither the public nor the county Board of Supervisors had adequate knowledge of the project to make a decision on the EIR.

Attorney Gregory Maxim, speaking on behalf of himself and co-counsel Julia Garcia, both of the Roseville law firm Sproul Trost, said: "This ruling is a great victory for both the citizenry of Merced County, and in support of the CEQA process. The Court's ultimate remedy in this ruling has made clear that the County failed in its mandates under law, and that the public was denied the opportunity to consider the full potential of environmental impacts of this project."

Lydia Miller, president of San Joaquin Raptor Rescue Center, said: “We are extremely grateful for the excellent representation Raptor, POW and the Citizens group received from Gregory Maxim, Julia Garcia, Sproul and Trost and Marsh Burch, Law Offices of Donald B. Mooney on this case. This decision revokes the EIR and associated approvals and forces the County and RMP back to the drawing board.”

For further information contact:

Lydia Miller GREGORY L. MAXIM
San Joaquin Raptor Rescue Center Attorney at Law
(209) 723-9283, ph. & fax Sproul Trost LLP
(916) 783-6262 tel

San Joaquin Raptor Rescue Center

Protect Our Water

Citizens for the Protection of Merced County Resources

| »

To medschool, the verb defined

Submitted: Feb 29, 2008

American Dictionary of Flak

medschool, v.i. (see porkbarrel, v.i.): Possible origins Merced CA, first decade of 21st century. 1. To use a new university campus as an anchor tenant for a real estate boom impacting worst air quality basin in the nation, creating an involuntary laboratory for respiratory disease as a base for medical research in respiratory disease. 2. Promise first-rate medical care and abundant numbers of physicians by promoting a scheme for a medical school in one of the poorest areas in the US. 3. (pol) To distract the attention of popular discontent with the highest mortgage foreclosure rate in the nation by promising universal economic and health benefits of establishing a medical school in the midst of an economic and environmental disaster. 4. (edu) To present a real estate boondoggle pretending to be a university campus as a potential medical school. 5. To create a public health and safety disaster to use as a basis for grant proposals to research its effects. 6. (US Congress) To wrap oneself in Hippocratic robes while doing harm. 7. To bury present problems in future fantasies. 8. (civic) To lie while fomenting a future project to avoid telling the truth about the present. 9. To claim that medical students will come to a university campus unable to recruit faculty and an adequate number of students and, despite an increasingly hostile natural, political and economic environment, doctors will stay in that environment, i.e. to evoke the peculiar mystical tradition of University of California administration that "Proximity is Destiny," when in fact proximity to UC Merced means higher density of traffic, air, water and politics.

Newsletter of Rep. Dennis Cardoza, Shrimp Slayer-Merced
A Medical School at UC Merced‏
From: Dennis Cardoza (dennis.cardoza@congressnewsletter.net)
Sent: Thu 2/28/08 2:15 PM
http://by135w.bay135.mail.live.com/mail/ReadMessageLight.aspx?Aux=4%7c0%7c8CA486E8B838230%7c&FolderID=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000001&InboxSortAscending=False&InboxSortBy=Date&ReadMessageId=64149d73-2503-4ede-aa14-693646385e85&n=1626137675

Dear Friends,
The entire Central Valley region suffers from a physician shortage and a lack of adequate healthcare resources. Recent reports tell us that the problem is worse than initially thought and likely to get far worse in the future. The best way to address this healthcare emergency is to promptly establish a medical education program at the University of California – Merced.

Though UC Merced is only five years old, it is critical that we begin to establish the medical education program now. The entire state of California is expected to face a shortage of up to 17,000 physicians by 2015, but in the Valley we are already facing a shortage. Valley residents are medically underserved with 87 primary care physicians per 100,000 people versus the statewide rate of 126 primary care physicians per 100,000. The number of medical specialists per capita is even lower when compared with other parts of the state.

These statistics highlight the seriousness of the problem and we are already in the process of building support for a medical education program at UC Merced. The University of California’s Health Sciences Advisory Council has recommended a 34 percent increase in medical student enrollments by 2020 to meet increasing demand for doctors. The Council also recognized that medical education programs need to be developed in the SJ Valley and the Inland Empire, where projected population growth rates are twice that of the rest of the state. There is strong evidence that new physicians choose to settle into full-time practice near where they train, so establishment of a medical school in the Valley would produce benefits for the health of the region.

The UC system understands the challenge of meeting our future healthcare needs and the community is coalescing around the plan to bring a medical school to UC Merced. The medical school will be founded on a community-based distributed model of medical education, utilizing current medical facilities in the Valley, as well as the resources of UC San Francisco and UC Davis. The first two years of medical education will be on the UC Merced campus, and the second two years of medical education will be in a clinical setting, with the first clinical campus slated to be at the UCSF Fresno Medical Education Center. More than twenty of the largest community hospitals and community health centers in the Valley are eager to collaborate with UC Merced to focus teaching and research on the community health needs of the region.

I am urging the UC Board of Regents to approve continued planning, provide a reasonable timeframe for initiation, and appoint a taskforce to devise a financing strategy for the development of the medical school at UC Merced. We must work collaboratively to establish the medical school and to address our region’s looming healthcare crisis.

Sincerely,

Dennis Cardoza
Member of Congress

| »