.Letters for June 17

Readers sound off on EBMUD's proposed dam and scavenging.

“The Scavenger’s Manifesto,” Feature, 5/20

Frugal, but Not Criminal

As a lifelong frugalista, daughter of survivors of the Great
Depression (this one is only so-so?), I love the idea of
scavenging. My favorite is the forgotten stuff in the back of my
own closet. It’s back in style! It fits!

However, I have mixed feelings about the picture showing the stolen
shopping cart. The poor guy has no other way to carry his stuff,
and yet I can’t help wondering how much they cost and how much they add
to my grocery bill, whether or not I choose to contribute. A rich
country like this one should be able to find a better way to help the
poor.

Ruth Bird, Berkeley

If You Love Something …

Coming across some “free” item that I can actually use while going
through my normal daily routine has always been a happy event, but it
doesn’t happen very often. Usually the freebies that I come across are
of no use to me, and I decided a while ago not to keep things that I
use less frequently than once every 10 years. The questions this
article opens up, are such as these: How much of your time will you
spend to save $5 or $10? Is an item more valuable or useful just
because it comes at free or low cost? If you can’t pass up taking
things from free piles, will you eventually find all the rooms in your
house turning into storerooms for unused goods, featuring narrow 14
inch pathways through each room and mounds on all sides threatening to
collapse on and bury you alive? On the surface, scouting for freebies
sounds like a good idea, but unless you live in a warehouse and have
lots of free time during which to fill it, you’ll soon hit limits when
scavenging. You’ll run out of space to store all the wonderful
bargains. Three hours will turn to four in searching to save $15 on a
blouse and if you value your time at your normal hourly wage rate you
could have saved $80 or $100 by buying a brand new one 4 hours ago. I
know a man whose weekends are dedicated to hitting one garage sale
after another. The tub in the second bathroom of his house is
nonfunctional due to being piled three feet high with an odd assortment
of never used items, and he was unable to have repairs done on the
furnace in his house because there was no way to get within 10 feet of
it, due to the enormous pile of goods stored in his basement. His life
mantra is “A vacuum will be filled,” whereas the mantra I’d prefer to
hear him try out is, “If you love something, let it go.”

Deborah Cloudwalker, Oakland

The Problem with Consumer Culture

While I am a proponent of scavenging and admittedly partake, Anneli
Rufus’ manifesto of scavenging misses the greater problem with the
so-called “consumer culture.” It’s a problem having to do with forming
one’s identity out of things that are bought, found, stolen, scavenged
or won. The point is that an identity formed around what one owns can
lead to some unfortunate consequences. When Rufus describes scavenging
for some as being “spiritual,” I cannot help but ponder what this
means.

This sort of deep connection to a means of acquiring things, while
portending to exist within a counter-culture (i.e., opposing a consumer
culture) is concerning because it is an example of how we’re being
trained to believe that what we buy (or scavenge) is a primary
signifier of who we are. What’s concerning about this is that it is yet
another example of how as individuals in a society, we acquire products
not first and foremost for their use value, but for an ideology. The
theme of the article seems to be an us (counter-consumer culture) vs.
them (consumer culture). That’s exactly the kind of antagonism this
superficial kind of identity creates. Creating a social identity around
scavenging breeds a sort of righteousness that can construct and
facilitate differences that hold little weight outside an individual’s
self-inflated ego.

I agree with the practical reasons of scavenging (saving money,
reducing waste), I have to take issue with the author’s assertion that
a scavenger is, for better or worse, acting beyond the horizon of a
consumer culture that is so condemned in the article.

Brian Kennedy, Oakland

“Sierra Water Grab,” Feature, 4/29

EBMUD Responds

An April 29, 2009 East Bay Express article was subtitled,
“East Bay MUD wants to build a new dam and ruin a scenic stretch of the
Mokelumne River because it is not willing to make its suburban
customers conserve water.” That statement draws conclusions about
EBMUD’s current and future water supply management programs that are
not supported by the facts.

First, it’s a fact that EBMUD has a long history of encouraging
water conservation. EBMUD’s three-tier rate structure uses inclining
blocks and was adopted long before it became a California best
management practice. Customers who use more water pay more. In
addition, EBMUD invests millions of dollars annually helping all
customers conserve by providing technical assistance and rebates.
EBMUD’s overall water demand is at approximately the same level as
1975, even though the population in the area EBMUD serves has grown by
more than 30 percent.

Second, it’s a fact that EBMUD has enough water during wet and
normal years to serve existing and future customer demands but EBMUD
customers need more water in drought years even with the comprehensive,
progressive demand management programs that EBMUD has pioneered and/or
adopted. EBMUD’s new Water Supply Management Program 2040 (WSMP 2040)
pushes conservation and recycling goals to the limits of
cost-effectiveness. Because our service area is bordered by other water
agency service areas, in the future EBMUD’s service area will not be
growing “out” so much as growing “up” through increased density of
development. The additional dry year demands in WSMP 2040 were
estimated by consulting with local land use planning agencies about
their plans for the future. Over the next 30 years demand will rise
about 0.8 percent per year or 60 million gallons per day (MGD) total.
EBMUD will meet this entire increased demand through increased
recycling and conservation and drought rationing.

The remaining need for water by customers totals 43 MGD over the
next 30 years to offset increased water use by other Mokelumne River
senior water rights holders and to allow the maximum future customer
rationing level to be reduced from 25 percent to 10 percent. Reducing
the planned rationing level makes sense when one looks at the level of
conservation already built into EBMUD’s long-range water supply
programs. It also provides flexibility in the event of future water
supply uncertainty due to climate change effects.

EBMUD has published a draft program-level environmental impact
report announcing plans to study a “preferred portfolio” of water
supply projects. These include water transfers, groundwater
banking/conjunctive use, regional desalination, and Sierra foothill
storage. The Sacramento River water pumping facilities being built at
Freeport offer a new way to move water, not only to EBMUD but also to
Sacramento County agencies. Since those facilities are now in
construction, the next step is for EBMUD to explore water transfer and
exchange possibilities throughout Northern California.

One of the Sierra foothill storage projects being considered is to
enlarge Pardee Reservoir. It is part of an inter-regional water supply
project that would only advance if it provided regional benefits and
was supported by other stakeholders in Amador, Calaveras and San
Joaquin Counties. A program level environmental document is a road map
to identify which projects will be studied further in the future.
Before any decisions are made on an enlarge Pardee Reservoir project,
years of study, its own public input process and its own project level
Environmental Impact Report would be required. The enlarge Pardee
component described in the Draft EIR is just an example.

In the article, it said, “some environmentalists point out that
wherever the new dam is built, it will take up to 50 million gallons of
water a day from the Mokelumne, thereby further starving the Delta of
much-needed water.” That is not true. The Draft EIR-described example
would allow 50 million gallons per day to be available to District
customers during dry years, and would result in an average of 17 MGD
being collected in all years. EBMUD has an excellent track record of
working with resource agencies to manage the Mokelumne River fishery
and of ensuring appropriate flow contributions to the Delta. EBMUD is
required to release specific amounts of flow each month, depending on
the amount of rainfall in a given year. These requirements would not
change if EBMUD were to pursue any of the water supply projects in the
WSMP2040. EBMUD will continue its efforts and commitments to protect
and enhance the Mokelumne River and the Delta.

EBMUD’s long-term water supply program includes a combination of
supplemental sources of supplies to meet our customers’ future need for
water that can not be met with conservation and recycling. The
“preferred portfolio” is a robust plan designed to deal with many
future uncertainties; the plan includes multiple parallel project
components; the overall strategy is diverse and flexible; and the plan
is environmentally sound. The final EIR, including responses to
comments, will be available later this summer.

John A. Coleman, EBMUD Board of Directors, Walnut
Creek

Miscellaneous Letters

Silence Equals Consent

I am voting no on the City of Berkeley’s proposed refuse
rate increase, on a mail-in ballot due by July 7, 2009, even
though the chance of defeating this measure is infinitesimal because of
the corrupt voting procedure. Following are my reasons for voting no:
Local taxes and fees are too high already and many Berkeley taxpayers
are suffering financially; A 20 percent refuse increase plus
annual inflator is out of bounds, and another 20 percent +
increase is already in the works for next year. We already had an
8 percent increase last year; Our General Fund should pay for essential
services like refuse instead of nice but nonessential services like
free YMCA memberships for city employees who don’t even use it; I
believe that since 1996, the city has been overcharging for refuse and
not using proper process under Prop 218; The current voting
process is corrupt — i.e. counting unsent ballots as yes, no
voter receipt for voting, no opposition arguments permitted on ballot,
not a secret ballot, and not a secure counting system by an independent
third party (the Berkeley City Clerk is holding and counting the
returned No votes) I am not particularly happy with many city policies,
particularly on high density development and disrespect for
Berkeley’s beautiful neighborhoods, and I do not want to support
the current regime with more dollars. There are about 30,000 parcels in
the city and 30,000 ballots mailed.  Many of these ballots will
never reach the parcel owners or they will be tossed as junk
mail. Not voting counts as a yes vote! 15,001 affirmatively
no votes are needed to defeat this measure! Because of the flawed
voting method, it is unlikely that this tax/fee increase will be
rejected.  However, if voters want to oppose they need be
sure to return the ballot with proper postage. Silence equals
consent to always-increasing local taxes and to current city policies
and budget mismanagement.

Barbara Gilbert, Berkeley

A Bum Rap

Governor Schwarzenegger’s plan for California is getting a bum
rap.

We’re told California’s large population renders it
“ungovernable.” By eliminating welfare and senior programs, old
and infirm people will die more quickly, thereby reducing surplus
population. Similarly by reducing the medical coverage for sickly
children, we will be “culling the herd.” Brilliant.

His proposal to close the parks will give us thousands of acres on
which to live. With our schools gutted, our public colleges closing
doors, our homes foreclosed, and so many of us “between jobs,” we will
have a golden opportunity to live off the land in the parks —
land which formerly was used only by sunbathers, surfers and other
elitists. Our states’ pioneer spirit will be revived as thousands
flock to the wide open spaces to apply the homesteading and vigilante
skills that made America great.

Inner city youth will thrive in this new environment since they have
already been well educated in the fine arts of firearm usage, militia
organizing and self defense. Boys in the ‘Hood will easily transform to
Boys in the Wood. Same for the thousands of people the governor
releases from prison — at long last, an environment that meets
their skill set.

Finally, the problem of illegal immigration will be solved too,
because no one will want to come here anymore.

Well done, governor, well done.

Larry Hendel, Berkeley 

Correction

Our June 10 “Culture Spy” listed the wrong date of Juneteenth. It
was Saturday, June 13.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

East Bay Express E-edition East Bay Express E-edition
19,045FansLike
14,598FollowersFollow
61,790FollowersFollow
spot_img