Comment Archives: stories: News
Re: “Jerry Brown's Assault on Transparency”
Requiring the local govts to pay for their own PRAs is not "gutting the CPRA." It's fair to require the locals to pay for their own costs.
Re: “Quickly Reshaping Oakland Politics”
I commend Mr Allen-Taylor for bringing attention to the issue of redistricting. As equal representation is the cornerstone of government, it's essential that council members represent similar numbers of residents. A few points of clarification on this story:
-Ms Santana's July memo stating that no council districts required redistricting was a product of faulty math. When calculating the difference between the largest (D3) and smallest (D2) council districts, her office divided the result by the population of the entire city, rendering a difference of 4% - under the 10% requirement. When dividing this difference by the average council district size, as her office should have, the difference was in fact 20%. Under the faulty math, one council district would have needed at least 20,000 more residents than the average council district size to qualify for redistricting. This should have been an immediate red flag to anyone reading the memo with a critical eye.
-Ms Santana's office worked off of this faulty assumption until late in 2012, when it was pointed out to them by multiple source. This placed the City well behind a typical timetable to do redistricting according to best practices. Berkeley, on a similar deadline, has been doing redistricting outreach since early 2012. This may partially explain the rush to approve a contract.
-Only 3 of the council districts (2, 3 & 5) met the threshold of a 10% population difference (+/- 5%), when compared to the average council district size. While such limited redistricting is hardly normal, it could technically satisfy the requirements of the City Charter. It's my understanding that the original decision to limit the redistricting to only these 3 council districts was an effort to spare the expense of a full redistricting - cost cutting also being a rationale in the July 2012 memo for not doing redistricting at all. But once the ball was rolling on redistricting, it doesn't surprise me that enough political pressure built up to expand to a citywide process.
I attribute this debacle to faulty math in the Administrator's office that wasn't questioned because it told them that they didn't have to spend money. As for council "not having input", they received the faulty memo in July of 2012. All it would have taken was some basic math and critical thought over the summer to ensure enough time for a standard council oversight process. They have only themselves to blame.
Re: “Tunnel Vision Part One: Delta in Peril”
Humans have done so much damage in the past 200 yrs to our California landscape. People can't see it, don't even know the damage we continue to inflict on our environment and on other living things. Industry has the money, the political influence to do what's best for themselves and what is harmful to our future and our children's. Our health is directly linked to the health of the bay and the ecosystem services provided by the Bay. SF Bay & Estuaries were named a Wetland of International Importance in April 2013. It's high time we stood up to monied and political interests--for the environment and our own well-being.
Re: “Is UC Berkeley's Plan to Cut Down 54,000 Trees Necessary?”
Had the author exercised a modicum of due diligence, she could have saved the East Bay Express a lot of paper and ink.
The letter cited by the " respected environmental engineering company" is over four years old. A trip to the Claremont Canyon or a visit to my blog, where I have shared hundreds of recent photos, prove the " respected environmental engineering company" was dead wrong!
http://ccfirestorm.blogspot.com/2013/06/ar…
The biologist was right, the contractor was wrong. The stunted riparian woodland recovers quite rapidly once the oppressive eucalypti are eradicated.
The alternative to eradication, Thin, limp, and scrape, is not best practice for the developed sections of the park.
http://ccfirestorm.blogspot.com/2013/06/eu…
It is totally unworkable in the steep, rugged, undeveloped forest.
http://ccfirestorm.blogspot.com/2013/06/he…
I don't know if Kathleen Richards has an agenda or not. Deliberately misleading, or just grossly misinformed, either way, this article is waster of paper and ink.
Re: “Is UC Berkeley's Plan to Cut Down 54,000 Trees Necessary?”
Oh oh - que the filthy hippie freakout!!!! Where is Dumpster Muffin?!? Get her on the scene, stat!!! I anticipate an incredibly drawn out and unnecessary 'argument.'
Hey Berkeley....this time, don't feed them!!!
Re: “Yelp and the Business of Extortion 2.0”
Beware of Yelp and their extortionist tactics to push you into advertising with them. After complaining that two of my reviews were being "filtered" and hidden from viewers, I called them out on Twitter. Within the hour, a Yelp salesman called and urged me to advertise with them ($300) and suggested that it would help my reviews from being filtered. (These reviews are from legitimately satisfied customers that happen to really like us.) After rejecting Yelp and calling the tactics "bullying to small startups", I've discovered that ALL my legit reviews are now concealed, giving my business a disadvantage to the other businesses when being searched locally. I apologize to those of you who gave us great feedback.
Re: “Tunnel Vision Part One: Delta in Peril”
Hot doggy ! Mike Wade says we should have concerns with the BDCP.
Hey Mike, some of those concerns ARE accurate and based in facts not emotions.
How about we concentrate on the one fact and glaring omission that is not in dispute.
1. The BDCP has cancelled their Benefit/Cost analysis,
http://valleyecon.blogspot.com/2013/04/bdc…
and is instead feeding us misleading piecemeal propaganda.
http://valleyecon.blogspot.com/2013/06/cha…
Who should we trust Mike, a paid propagandist for Central Valley Big Ag or Jeffrey Michaels, the Director of the Business Forecasting Center at the University of the Pacific.
It's an easy call for me.
Re: “Rich, Black, Flunking”
It's important to remember that Ogbu's research was referring to black failure at this particular privileged high school. He never said it was the reason for all black failure, and I doubt the parents would have called him in if he always found blacks responsible for their own failures. Black organizations that condemn him for these findings only discredit themselves. A true scientist will honestly report all findings, whether those findings support an agenda or not, and Ogbu wants people to trust his research, so he's willing to admit when he didn't find racism. If all you ever find is racism, people stop listening to you, because you are the boy who cries wolf. People will now be more likely to listen when Ogbu does find racism, because he has demonstrated he won't call it where it doesn't exist. I'm aware racism exists, but that's in spite of people like Al Sharpton and Kanye West, not because of them. What I've seen of Shaker Heights speaks volumes, and the school aims to enroll black students and has very enthusiastic, idealistic (and often young) teachers who try hard to make learning fun. They should be rewarded with equally enthusiastic students.
I have taught 1st and 2nd grade in Oakland, and I was surprised at how many kids, even at this young age, would skip school! When I was a child, only the worst kids would skip a class, and that was in middle and high school. NOBODY skipped class in elementary school! If they had, the teacher would have reported this to the parents, who would spank the child. There was also no bribing with toys in my elementary school, which I saw many Oakland teachers doing. The teachers would control classroom behavior by dropping marbles into a jar and, when the jar was full, they'd let the class watch a movie. This technique was sufficient to control the behavior of the entire class, because our parents handled discipline problems at home. It seems some Oakland parents don't understand what's normal.
Watching Sesame Street, and other educational childhood shows, is normal. Playing educational games with your children is normal. Reading your children bedtime stories every night, until they are old enough to read, is normal. YOU are expected to teach your child to read. If you rely solely on the school, his reading skills will be poor. When I learned about plate tectonic theory, as a child, I asked my father why Pangea was not in the Bible. He told me "Because it's a lie. There never was any Pangea, and plate tectonic theory is a lie." I got a D in science that year. The problem is, there is no point in learning a lie, so I just didn't. Your attitude towards your child's education will become their attitude towards it.
Re: “Privatizing UC Instruction”
UCB was incredible in 1990 for me simply because of the serendipity of who I met in which classes. The heated debate following us to Cafe Strada. Meeting in person and going to real time office hours of faculty who I then sought out later as advisors. Relationships matter...having paid canned instruction just doesn't replace that. My daughter at CSUEB took online remedial math and easily passed. But she had to drop the next class in math...she wasn't adequately prepared. Public and when online, online with UC faculty to supplement, not replace real in class debate!
Re: “Is UC Berkeley's Plan to Cut Down 54,000 Trees Necessary?”
I don’t think any trees should be cut, not even for thinning. It’s not necessary, especially if dry litter is removed periodically. Besides being unnecessary, tree cutting is harmful because it is being followed up by herbicide on the stumps and on “unwanted foliage.” No herbicides should be used, ever. All living organisms, including us humans, are already poisoned through and through. This means enormous suffering in the form of illness, disability and death. It makes no sense to continue poisoning ourselves and all life around us.
The proposed plan would create a definite ecological and health disaster lasting for generations while actually increasing the risk of wildfire—all on the pretext of preventing a fire disaster that might never happen. There are real fire prevention measures, like creating and enforcing better building codes and better landscape maintenance by homeowners, some of which have already been done.
A life-sustaining plan would be to hire unemployed people to clear dry forest litter whenever needed and maybe remove low-hanging branches. Don’t give more money to Monsanto and Dow or to logging companies.
For some great national and international perspectives on this profit-driven plan, see http://www.care2.com/causes/fema-to-replac…
The comments include one from a Katrina survivor who warns against trusting FEMA. And this pithy comment from Gloria p., “What about filling up the oceans with cement so we don’t have hurricanes?”
Re: “Is UC Berkeley's Plan to Cut Down 54,000 Trees Necessary?”
I don’t think any trees should be cut, not even for thinning. It’s not necessary, especially if dry litter is removed periodically. Besides being unnecessary, tree cutting is harmful because it's being followed up by herbicide on the stumps and on “unwanted foliage.” No herbicides should be used, ever. All living organisms, including us humans, are already poisoned through and through. This means enormous suffering in the form of illness, disability and death. It makes no sense to continue poisoning ourselves and all life around us.
The proposed plan would definitely create a ecological and health disaster lasting for generations while actually increasing the risk of wildfire—all on the pretext of preventing a fire disaster that might never happen. There are real fire prevention measures, like creating and enforcing better building codes and better landscape maintenance by homeowners, some of which have already been done.
A life-sustaining plan would be to hire unemployed people to clear dry forest litter whenever needed and maybe remove low-hanging branches. Don’t give more money to Monsanto and Dow or to logging companies.
For some great national and international perspectives on this profit-driven plan, see http://www.care2.com/causes/fema-to-replac…
The comments include one from a Katrina survivor who warns against trusting FEMA. And this pithy comment from Gloria p., “What about filling up the oceans with cement so we don’t have hurricanes?”
Re: “Tunnel Vision Part One: Delta in Peril”
What a well-researched, clear and detailed article. I am so grateful that you've covered this important topic so well!
Re: “Tunnel Vision Part One: Delta in Peril”
The author says that BDCP is more likely than the Portfolios plan to win approval in the state legislature. In fact, the legislature does not have to approve BDCP or the peripheral tunnels. The Department of Water Resources claims it is authorized to proceed under the Burns-Porter Act that authorized the State Water Project in 1960. Beneficiaries will pay for only part of this massive project, with taxpayers covering environmental mitigation and long-term bond interest. This is an extraordinary long-term commitment for something California's voters approved 50 years ago, and the legislature SHOULD be involved in evaluating costs and benefits to the entire state.
Re: “Loopholes in ADA Law Make "No Pets" Clauses Nearly Impossible to Enforce”
I have a friend whose wife is severely allergic to dogs. He said he often has to take her to the ER because of it. Presumably she has allergic asthma and she encounters a surprise dog.
People can die because of asthma.
I have an extreme dog allergy. I get sick for 5 days if I'm exposed to a dog for more than 5 seconds. If I'm in a building where a dog is, and it isn't huge, I get very sick.
The well-intentioned ADA law is horrible for people with allergies. It gives them no refuge, because someone with a service dog can't be refused. Never mind that there are many places that allow dogs in general these days - you still can't legally exclude service dogs, in the name of not discriminating against people with disabilities.
Re: “Yelp and the Business of Extortion 2.0”
June 2013 and Yelp is still up to the same scam. We had 18 positive reviews gathered over three years removed and the first negative we got a few days ago shows and the negative review has no community rating, picture and its their only review. After reading the scam reports on Yelp I'm sure the pushy phone call for $300 a month is next.
Re: “Tunnel Vision Part One: Delta in Peril”
Hmmm...kinda of a weak, .on-definitive wishy-washy sub-title, dontcha think: "How Jerry Brown's plan to build two giant water tunnels **could** devastate..." Will it? Will it not? Maybe
....? but then maybe not?
Re: “It's Now Safe to Ride the Medusa”
It was ALWAYS safe to ride Medusa and the other rides. Chains like Six Flags have similar, if not identical attractions at their other parks. Comparing it to a "Ford v. Chevy" is inaccurate.
Six Flags has several "floorless" Bolliger and Mabillard (B&M) coasters that any mechanic working at other parks could easily repair and inspect.
Considering the condition that Roar! (wooden coaster) is currently in, the mechanics haven't been doing a good job to begin with for over 18 months.
Re: “Is UC Berkeley's Plan to Cut Down 54,000 Trees Necessary?”
Thank you for this article--the information from URS Corporation is crucial and revealing. It supports the common-sense response most people have that the proposed plan is a bad idea and a shameful waste of taxpayer money that is badly needed elsewhere.
There is additional expert testimony, by a former Chief of Fire Prevention for the Oakland Army Base, at http://sutroforest.com/2009/08/08/no-tree-….
David Maloney was part of the Oakland-Berkeley Mayors’ Firestorm Task Force after the 1991 hills fire. His letter states:
“The Task Force Report concluded that the spread of the fire was mostly due to the radiant heat generated by burning houses. A burning house has a sustained radiant heat transmission of 2,500-3,000 degrees. The spread of the fire was not due primarily to burning trees — eucalyptus or any other species.
The Hills Conservation Network is correct in its support of thinning out the East Bay Hills wooded areas. It would be a waste of taxpayers’ money to clear-cut the East Bay Hills of trees that are highly fire-resistant, and it could lead to another devastating fire. Because of our conclusions, new fire prevention codes relative to housing construction were promulgated by the State of California and various cities throughout California. There were no new fire codes promulgated relative to the species of trees that would populate the East Bay hills.”
As for the herbicides they want to use, Roundup is bad enough, but Garlon is even worse,(and others are mentioned as well). Dow AgroSciences’ MSDS sheets for Garlon 4 Ultra and Garlon 3A show that the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act lists both as “immediate (acute) health hazard” and “delayed (chronic) health hazard”.
From the Garlon 4 Ultra MSDS: “…highly toxic to aquatic organisms…; “Prevent from entering soil…waterways and/or groundwater”; “decomposition products can include…: hydrogen chloride, nitrogen oxide, phosgene.” (All toxic)
How are these poisons not going to harm anyone? How are they not going to be washed into creeks and eventually into the Bay? How are residues in dry soil not going to be carried by wind for miles around?
Re: “Jerry Brown's Assault on Transparency”
Jim,
This proposed law does not "require" local governments to pay or do anything. Instead, it allows them to ignore key aspects of the public records law without fear of penalty. As a result, this law would, in effect, gut aspects of the records act in jurisdictions in which public officials decide to not make public records public.