Well it certainly wasn’t boring

I took my board colleagues up on an invitation to place some budget items on yesterday’s agenda.  The only issue I campaigned for election on, Middle Fork Project revenues, was on the agenda; so I invited a few people who have previously expressed concerns to me.  Our item appeared toward the end of the agenda, so the folks who came to watch waited 2 ½ hours before it was taken up.

 I admit to having had more optimism than a reasonable person would normally allow himself to venture in this situation.  I believe the majority of my board sincerely wants to do the right thing, for some reason I’ve just been unable to engage them in considering a different point of view.  I sincerely thought there was a chance the board might support a slight course correction on how Middle Fork Project revenues will be spent.  No such luck.  Plenty of ridicule, condescension, and disrespect shown toward members of the public, but little thoughtful discussion. 

 In addition to the Middle Fork revenues item, I asked the board to consider cutting four other expenses out of the 2010 budget.  There were no votes taken because not one of my four colleagues would offer a second to any of my motions. 

 Here’s the first item I presented:

 Middle Fork Project

In 1962 placer county voters overwhelmingly supported a bond measure to borrow $140 million to build a series of reservoirs, tunnels, and power stations called the Middle Fork Project.  In addition to water storage, this project generates electricity.  Currently PG&E is realizing all of the profit from electrical sales in exchange for operating the project and paying off our debt.  This will change in 2013 when the contract with PG&E expires.  If you’ve been hunting or camping by Hell Hole, or French Meadows you’ve seen part of the project.  If you’ve rafted the Middle Fork of the American River you’ve probably seen the Oxbow power station. 

In 1962 voters were promised that if they would borrow the money to build the project, when the debt was paid off, they would be entitled to the Millions of Dollars of revenue from power sales! The bond passed with 96% of the vote, that’s a ratio of 25:1!

Do you suppose voters would have supported the bond measure in such an overwhelming fashion if at all, if they were promised that county administrators could have bigger salaries, new taj-majal administrative buildings, glorious welfare programs, and pet projects for politicians.  Of course not; what voters were promised was an infrastructure project that would reduce our out-of pocket cost of government.

Even though PCWA owns the MFP, state law dictates that none of the power sale revenues can be spent without “APPROVAL” from the county board of supervisors.  The interpretation of this word “Approval” is what concerns me. The County and this board have cut a deal to divide the money in half, each one spending it however they want.  If we allow this to happen, revenues are going to be wasted on administrative salaries, administrative buildings, welfare programs, and the pet projects of politicians.

I’ve heard a couple of bureaucrats hiding behind the disingenuous claim that this deal cut between this agency and the county is, “the law” which is poppycock.  The law is very clear, I quote it here, “No contract for the sale of electrical energy shall be executed, nor shall any revenues received pursuant to any contract for the sale of electrical energy into after January 1, 1975, be spent, unless previously approved by the board of supervisors of the county.”   The law clearly and simply says that the county and PCWA must agree on how to spend MFP revenues. 

We all understand that expecting this agency and the county to find consensus on the priority of specific projects is a recipe for disaster. But dividing the money in half with no restrictions on its use casts a shadow of suspicion on the intentions of the politicians and bureaucrats involved in this deal.  We can do better than this.  The slogan that appears under the PCWA logo on our strategic plan says, Water – Energy – Stewardship.  We’re stewards of the Middle Fork Project and its revenues, and we need to exercise that stewardship on behalf of those we represent.

There is only one way to protect these revenues from being squandered by government, that is to secure the revenues to only be used on infrastructure projects to benefit Placer County.   All of us know enough about the nature of government that we insist specific fees and taxes be restricted to their intended use.  If we don’t want the revenues from the MFP wasted we should insist on the same for them. 

I can give example after example about why I am so concerned about these revenues being wasted and abused.  We all know the story of the gas tax.  We were promised new roads if we would agree to tax ourselves, it makes sense.  But where did the taxes go?  Not to roads, they went to the general fund of the state where the taxes were spent on everything but roads. 

The only way to restrict the use of the Middle Fork Revenues is for the voters to decide.  Otherwise, future boards will be free to squander, waste, and give away the benefits of this county treasure. 

Our agency counsel says that this agency has the authority to put this item on a county-wide ballot if the board so chooses.  I’m asking this board to exercise that authority and place a simple yes or no question on next year’s general election ballot.  Something to the effect of, “Shall power sale revenues from the Placer County Water Agency Middle Fork Hydroelectric project only be used for water and energy infrastructure projects in Placer County?”

I believe voters deserve to have the chance to protect these revenues.

I then offered a motion that the board amend our 2010 budget to include the cost of placing this question before the voters on the 2010 general election ballot. 

More to come…

Walmart is evil

I’ve been a fan of Google since they launched while I was in college.  I like their motto, “don’t be evil.” 

I used to love Walmart, “the low price leader.”  They are a case study in operations management courses in business schools across the globe.  Through constant and ingenious process improvements, Walmart is able to create efficiencies that allow them to have the lowest prices on a wide variety of products. 

Because of their success and non-union status, the store has been vilified by big-government types, still our capitalist system has allowed them to thrive.  Our patronage has rewarded their efforts and supported them through political battles, and how do they reward us?  A knife in the back.  Walmart jumped onto the Obama bandwagon calling for a massive government mandate for universal healthcare.  In exchange for their support, they’re getting an exemption from the new government program:

The companies say they need flexibility to continue covering workers, and provisions included in other drafts of the health overhaul that would eventually subject them to some of the same rules as insurance companies – like requiring them to offer specific benefits – would crush their ability to do so.

(AP) In this Feb. 16, 2009, file photo Wal-Mart employee Sean Blais moves shopping carts in the… Full Image

“The more the administrative burdens are, the more costly it becomes. These things tend to snowball and grow with time,” said Martin Reiser, a lobbyist with Xerox who heads the coalition. “Our message is that the employment-based system is working, so don’t try and fix us.”

Wal-Mart is part of the group. So is Caterpillar, which is a member of the steering committee along with such other Fortune 100 firms as AT&T, Dow Chemical and Verizon Communications.

I was supportive of Walmart when they crushed competition through superior business practices.  Seeking a competitive advantage by heaping HUGE regulatory costs on smaller competitors is shameful.  Walmart is evil.

Worst people in the world?

A leader of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints has been called one of the “worst people in the world”  by MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann.  Elder Dallin H. Oaks had given an excellent address on religious freedom.  Oaks, a retired Utah Supreme Court Justice, compared the attacks on supporters of Proposition 8 in California to voter intimidation of blacks in the post-war South.  You can read the address here.

Along with many others, we were disappointed with what we experienced in the aftermath of California’s adoption of Proposition 8, including vandalism of church facilities and harassment of church members by firings and boycotts of member businesses and by retaliation against donors. Mormons were the targets of most of this, but it also hit other churches in the pro-8 coalition and other persons who could be identified as supporters. Fortunately, some recognized such retaliation for what it was. A full-page ad in the New York Times branded this “violence and intimidation” against religious organizations and individual believers “simply because they supported Proposition 8 [as] an outrage that must stop.” [xv] The fact that this ad was signed by some leaders who had no history of friendship for our faith only added to its force.

It is important to note that while this aggressive intimidation in connection with the Proposition 8 election was primarily directed at religious persons and symbols, it was not anti-religious as such. These incidents were expressions of outrage against those who disagreed with the gay-rights position and had prevailed in a public contest. As such, these incidents of “violence and intimidation” are not so much anti-religious as anti-democratic. In their effect they are like the well-known and widely condemned voter-intimidation of blacks in the South that produced corrective federal civil-rights legislation.

I couldn’t figure out how to embed the video, but you can watch Olbermann make an ass of himself here: Olbermann puts church leader on list of, “worst people in the world” 

Should Elder Oak’s speech really qualify him for a list of the worst people in the world?

What’s the difference between PCWA and the California legislature?

Last year the Placer County Water Agency board of directors was curious about the agency’s impact on the environment, so they spent nearly a quarter million dollars on a study to find out what the agency’s carbon footprint is.  For those not familiar with the term, carbon footprint is a measurement of your total carbon emissions.  In addition to this expenditure the board is now insisting that we pay the environmentalist group, California Climate Action Registry, so we can register our carbon footprint information with them.  I wanted to amend the budget to end these payments.  I don’t understand the expenditure, or why we can’t just post our footprint information online for anyone who really wants to know.  This concern didn’t get to be heard before a vote was demanded on the budget.

Our 2010 budget was passed on a three to one vote yesterday, with me opposing (one board member was absent).  I don’t know if I could have voted for the budget as it was written, but the process kept me from even considering voting yes.  The board refused to discuss making any changes to the budget.  When I asked that we amend the budget I was told, “It’s a living document, we can change it later.”  When I persisted again I was scolded, “Now is not the time.”  I specifically wanted to remove expenses I believe are not within the mission of the agency–delivering water.  The board refused to consider the first amendment I proposed, or allow me to suggest any others, and rushed through a vote on the budget over my protests.  It was my first budget hearing and the lesson I learned about government is that first you must pass a budget before discussing or worrying about what’s in it.

Immediately after the budget vote we heard from our legal council.  Our able attorney updated us on the battle going on in the legislature over our water.  Apparently, Democrat legislative leaders aren’t willing to hear both sides of the debate prior to crafting new water legislation.  If you want to ask questions or make suggestions you’ll find talking to a wall more fruitful.  The irony of my board colleagues complaining about this “undemocratic process” was my evening’s entertainment.

So what’s the difference between PCWA and the California legislature?  Apparently not much, and it disturbs me.

PCWA budget

Next year’s budget is the last item on today’s agenda for the the Placer County Water Agency’s 2:00 meeting.  You can see the agenda here, the budget is at the end of the document: PCWA Oct 15 2009 Agenda Packet

Health Care Townhall in Sacramento

This Saturday, October 10th

I hope you can make it. If it’s anything like past townhall events, it’s a party you won’t soon forget. 

Dear Friend,

The state of our health insurance system impacts all Americans, insured and uninsured alike. Throughout the national debate over health insurance reform, I have listened to and visited with many Sacramentans including community members, families, seniors, doctors, nurses and small business owners. As the debate over health insurance reform continues, I would like to continue hearing from you about your thoughts, recommendations and concerns on this important topic.

This Saturday, October 10 th , I will be hosting a public forum to discuss the health insurance reform legislation that is currently pending in Congress. This forum will be held at Sutter Middle School in Sacramento , and will begin promptly at 11:00 AM. Your input will play an important role as I consider the provisions of the proposed legislation.

Health Insurance Reform Forum hosted by Congresswoman Doris O. Matsui
11:00 AM – 12:30 PM
Saturday, October 10 th
Sutter Middle School Multipurpose Room
3150 I Street, Sacramento
Public transit is available via bus lines 30 and 34 . On-site parking is also available.

Inflation and my pocketbook

Economists have a few different definitions of inflation.  All involve your money losing purchasing power.  Inflation is a thief. It destroys wealth and causes misery.  President Ronald Reagan said, “Inflation is as violent as a mugger, as frightening as an armed robber and as deadly as a hit man.”

There’s lots of talk about inflation rearing its ugly head again, and little doubt that we will eventually be hit with the cost of the current economic recovery effort.  Wouldn’t it be nice to be able to predict inflation?  If it’s going to cost you $150 tomorrow to buy groceries that would cost only $100 today, doing your shopping today would be no-brainer.   Unless of course, you don’t get paid ’till tomorrow. 

Where inflation science gets interesting is in how it relates to international trade.  We know that China has been manipulating its currency for years, consistently tying the value of its renminbi below the United States dollar so that Chinese goods would be cheaper than ours.  It’s worked well for them and us, in that they sell lost of goods and we buy them on the cheap.

This guy from MIT thinks Obama might be adopting the Chinese economic stimulus model (continuing a Bush tradition) to inflate our own currency.  By making our dollar worth less, other countries will find that it’s cheaper to buy American made goods.  So even though the cost of living will increase domestically, we should at least have a plentiful supply of assembly-line manufacturing jobs available.

For good measure here’s an interesting take on the chances of hyperinflation hitting the US:  The Pragmatic Capitalist

I bet you’ve always wanted to work on an assembly line…

Not yours to give

I’ve mentioned before my subscription to the free internet publication, “The Patriot Post.”  Mark Alexander, the editor, has an excellent column out today.  I hope you’ll take a minute to read it:  Not Yours to Give  It’s probably nothing any of us haven’t heard before, but Mark does an excellent job pulling the thoughts together.

The essay in simple terms expounds on the James Madison quote, “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents…”

That piece of paper

My degree came from a state school in California.  If I had it to do over again I wouldn’t waste my time.  This guy sums up my experience:

Lost Bones

The President calls detractors of his big-government health care plan liars and fear-mongers.  John Boehner over the weekend responded to the criticism from our doctor-in-chief.  Speaking of the health care debate Boehner’s explanation hit the nail on the head, “because it affects every American in a very personal way, more Americans have been engaged in this debate than any issue in decades.”

I predict one good thing that will come from big-government health care will be cheaper access to pharmaceuticals.  A couple of years ago, after breaking my collar-bone, I came down with some sort of bronchial infection.  Coughing hurt so badly, I cowardly let stuff accumulate in my lungs.  When I could finally cough without pain the stuff was in there so good I couldn’t get it out.  The obvious remedy is taking an antibiotic.  However this formerly free Country restricts access to obtaining care.  Even if you know the cure for your disease, you will not (under penalty of fines and imprisonment) obtain said cure outside of the laws and methods prescribed by law.  In my case, before I could buy a $12 antibiotic I first had to get a government approved physician to write me a prescription.  To get a government approved physician to write a prescription, I first had to pay him $150 (after coughing on all of his patients in the petri-dish he calls a waiting room). 

I’ve heard in other countries your local pharmacist is allowed to sell antibiotics and other medicines without prescriptions.  I predict this will be one of the cost-saving measures our government takes once it is in control of our health care.  You may not be able to get a kidney transplant or a cast on your arm, but it will be much easier to buy drugs.  Of course there’s always the chance that you won’t be allowed to buy drugs yourself, in which case you’ll have to wait a year for the paperwork to be processed before funds are released for your prescription.  In which case I predict aesthetically appealing pill bottles that match most patterns and colors of granite.  That way your family won’t complain how the bottles look on your grave marker.

The plain spoken economist Thomas Sowell made a great point last week:

Many years ago, as a small child, I was told one of those old-fashioned fables for children. It was about a dog with a bone in his mouth, who was walking on a log across a stream. The dog looked down into the water and saw his reflection. He thought it was another dog with a bone in his mouth — and it seemed to him that the other dog’s bone was bigger than his. He decided that he was going to take the other dog’s bone away and opened his mouth to attack. The result was that his own bone fell into the water and was lost. At the time, I didn’t like that story and wished they hadn’t told it to me. But the passing years and decades have made me realize how important that story was, because it was not really about dogs but about people. Today we are living in a time when the President of the United States is telling us that he is going to help us take that other dog’s bone away — and the end result is likely to be very much like what it was in that children’s fable. Whether we are supposed to take that bone away from the doctors, the hospitals, the pharmaceutical companies or the insurance companies, the net result is likely to be the same — most of us will end up with worse medical care than we have available today. We will have opened our mouth and dropped a very big bone into the water.

Our current health care situation is frustrating, but it could be much worse.