No holds barred - noholdsbarred's Blog - Bakersfield.com

Planting a seed for animal welfare worthwhile

Sat, 27 Jun 2009 12:50:01 PDT

A potential solution to our depressing animal overpopulation problem has been staring the Board of Supervisors in the face for months now and they’ve done nothing.

I’m not talking about a theoretical solution (and no, not mandatory spay/neuter, either).
This is tried and true and not just in far-away places like Calgary, Canada. This technique has worked right here in Kern County and Bakersfield.

Getting it done takes political courage, however, and so far Supervisors have only been willing to talk, talk, talk, about animal control problems. Time to walk the walk, fellas.
It’s all about licensing.

We need to ramp up our public outreach to let people know A) they need to get their dogs licensed B) how to get them licensed and C) what will happen if they don’t get them licensed. Then follow up.

In Calgary, which has a very aggressive and successful licensing program, they’ve shown that once you can get people and their pets into the system, you can work with them to get their animals fixed, return lost animals and deal with problem owners. Licensing also brings in the money to pay for it all.

We actually had survey crews years ago that did this, but foolishly got rid of them to save costs. We’ve watched our unwanted pet population, and costs, skyrocket ever since.

The program sounds simple, even a bit tedious. But it works.

The city did a four-month trial starting last September, sending a team of two people door-to-door 40 hours a week in randomly selected neighborhoods. They used one city-owned vehicle.

Costs for salaries, benefits and the truck were $24,649 during that trial period, September to December last year.

License and rabies vaccination revenue jumped — substantially — each of those months.

Overall license revenue increased 81 percent over 2007 for that four month time period and rabies vaccination revenue (at the low-cost clinics) jumped by 107 percent.

The program not only paid for itself, the city made a net profit of $14,836.

The county, meanwhile, knew all about this program and Animal Control officials were trying to get Supervisors to cut loose with some money so they could try it as well.

They aimed way too high, though, asking for more than $400,000 last summer to pay for three outreach teams and fund a low-cost spay/neuter program.

After much delay, Supervisors wouldn’t give up the money and said to do it with existing staff.

At the time I rolled my eyes (I do that a lot). But their shortsighted, invertebrate-edness, so to speak, ultimately underscored how well this approach works.

County Animal Control officers fit their outreach duties in as best they could, maybe canvassing neighborhoods one or two days a week. A county report lists only 106 hours spent in field work between January and April.

And STILL the program made money.

After all the costs were subtracted (including volunteer time, which struck me as odd) the county made more than $4,000.

When I spoke with Guy Shaw, director of Animal Control, he was somewhat timid about the program. He agreed, that, yes, it had made money but, “it’s just not feasible using existing staff without hurting our customer service.”

And he’s about to cut five positions, including Animal Control Chief Denise Haynes, who had coordinated the outreach program — the only program ever to make money for the department — one other person and the department’s extra help.

He said he was hoping to wait until after all the budget dust had settled before going back to Supervisors about the outreach program.

“The problem is you have to pay up front so you have to really sell it to the board so they’re sure this $300,000 will work,” Shaw told me.

There’s that $300,000 again, which I think is overshooting.

Tammy Davis with Bakersfield Animal Control told me her department just got the OK from the City Council to spend $40,000 on another six-month trial that will again use their team of two plus a blitz of advertising.

When I spoke with Supervisors Ray Watson and Don Maben, both supported the idea of bumping up outreach. But $300,000 wasn’t going to fly.

A $20,000 or $40,000 program, now that’s different.

“We could invest a little, get one team going full-time and then look at it from there,” Maben said. “Hopefully, if we gave it some seed money, it should grow and fund itself.

He wasn’t sure about the other Supes, though.

“I’ve heard comments about ‘people before animals,’ so it could create some conflict.”

We’ve been “working” on this problem for nearly five years, however, without much progress and this is the first real glimmer of hope. It’s worth the seed money.
Maben agreed.

“I don’t want, 20 years from now, my grandkids seeing barrels of dead puppies and kittens on the front page of The Californian again.”

Believe me, we don’t either.

Opinions expressed in this column are those of Lois Henry, not The Bakersfield Californian. Her column appears Wednesdays and Sundays. Comment at people.bakersfield.com/home/Blog/noholdsbarred, call her at 395-7373 or e-mail lhenry@bakersfield.com

Idiots blowing it on 4th of July

Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:37:49 PDT

Last summer I called for a ban on personal fireworks.

Hoo boy! The reaction was swift and furious.

I was called a Nazi, hysterical, told I should move out of Kern County and likened to a “sheeple.”

You’d think I would have learned from that experience, but no. I’m hard-headed that way.

We absolutely must BAN ALL PERSONAL FIREWORKS.

Perhaps you feel that would impinge on your freedom.

Yes, it would.

And that’s too bad.

But we’ve gone well past the tipping point where “safe and sane” fireworks are used responsibly versus morons endangering large swaths of the community so they can make things go boom.

In other words: Your freedom to explode stuff shouldn’t trump my freedom NOT to have my house burn down.

Other communities have banned personal fireworks and their worlds did not collapse. The charities that relied on proceeds from fireworks sales found other ways to make money, people found other ways to celebrate, enforcement against illegal fireworks became easier and so on.

Rest assured, however, the political landscape on this issue hasn’t changed over the last year.

The only local politician who supports a ban is Councilwoman Sue Benham (her main issue is air quality).

Councilman Harold Hanson continues to support the use of personal fireworks on the grounds of tradition.

“It’s a patriotic deal for me,” Hanson said.

Even if the city did ban personal fireworks, it wouldn’t work without the county joining in, Councilman David Couch reminded me.

Nope, I got no takers over at the county either.

“I’m for fireworks,” Kern County Supervisor Mike Rubio told me. “It’s one of the greatest celebrations we have as a nation.”

Supervisor Mike Maggard said the focus should be on curbing illegal fireworks and Supervisor Don Maben said he would only support a ban if the Fire Chief told him it was absolutely necessary for the sake of safety.

Fire Chief Nick Dunn wasn’t ready to go there.

“If they’re used as intended, I don’t think fireworks are a hazard,” he said.

That’s the problem (well, that and the unbelievable number of illegal fireworks brought in for the “festivities).

Bakersfield City Fire Chief Ron Fraze has unapologetically led the crusade to ban personal fireworks here.

“Yup, I’ve been singing the same song for about 11 years now,” he said. Fraze and I both believe the professionally run shows should continue. Perhaps we could even have more and make them more cost-friendly for families.

But we have to get incendiary devices out of the hands of the masses, who might be the nicest folks you’ll ever meet in broad daylight but whose “brains fly out their backsides,” as Bakersfield Fire Capt. Ed Watts cogently noted, when the sun goes down and they get ahold of a little cardboard and gunpowder.

Last year, 30 teams of firefighters and law enforcement spent the 4th of July racing around metro Bakersfield responding to hundreds of calls and scanning the skies for tell-tale streaks from bottle rockets and Roman candles.

Watts expects this year will be much like last, when the following happened:

• More than 60 citations were written (that doesn’t include those issued by regular engine crews).

• Six people were arrested.

• More than 1,000 pounds of illegal fireworks were seized .

• There were five fireworks-related fires (including two houses).

• At least one person suffered a severe eye injury.

• And there was one armed robbery of a fireworks stand.

Happy Birthday, America!

Fireworks basics
Anything that explodes or leaves the ground is illegal (that includes throwing or launching otherwise legal fireworks)

Buy fireworks only from licensed booths

Only “safe and sane” style fireworks are legal to buy and use in Kern County

Children shouldn’t be allowed to light fireworks without adult supervision

Make sure a water source is nearby

If you’re caught possessing or using illegal fireworks in the city you will be issued a misdemeanor ticket.

In the county, you will be issued a $1,500 fine.

Smart growth talk is cheap

Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:53:04 PDT

As usual, when it comes to sprawl, the Board of Supervisors is talking out of both sides of its mouth.

It happened again last week when supervisors denied one mega, leapfrog project making all the appropriate “smart growthiness” noise about stretching services too far, traffic impacts, yadda, yadda, yadda.

Then they turned around in the very same meeting and approved a different mega, leapfrog development and tabled yet another, which will likely be approved in August.

Good work, Sybil.

This all comes right on the heels of a what should be considered an ominous visit by a representative of the state Attorney General’s office earlier this month.

The deputy AG came to Kern to discuss how we’re planning to meet tough new state mandates on sustainable growth and greenhouse gas reductions.

Given the AG’s recent spate of successful lawsuits over other cities’ general plan updates that haven’t met those standards and our tradition of sprawl-to-the-wall, you’d think supervisors would sit up and take notice.

But no.

Instead, they happily approved the Bakersfield Land Investment project on 238 acres — 1,110 houses, no commercial, no industrial — waaaaaay out west at Greeley Road just north of Rosedale Highway.

I say they did it happily because as part of the approval, they required the developer to reduce the project’s greenhouse gas emissions by 29 percent.

Planners told me the greenhouse gas reduction requirement is unprecedented in Kern County and most other cities and counties.

Oh, psh! I can’t even muster a golf clap for such a backward baby step, nor for the other requirements of narrow streets and more open space.

This is sprawl, pure and simple.

It will tax our already overtaxed law enforcement and fire services, increase traffic and likely get us in dutch with the AG’s office.

As for the greenhouse gas requirement, may I just say “DUH!”

If they had denied the project there wouldn’t be a need to reduce emissions because there wouldn’t be any in the first place.

I know a lot of you are rolling your eyes about the greenhouse gas issue.

Regardless of whether you buy that humans are causing or hastening global warming, the laws on greenhouse gases are being vigorously enforced and we can ill afford our tax dollars being squandered in defense of dumb planning decisions.

I spoke with the deputy AG, Harrison Pollak, about his visit here and he said it was just a meet and greet.

“There was no threat at all,” he said.

Uh, yeah and when a Mafia wise guy comes over for coffee, there’s no message there at all.

Pollak said the AG’s office just wanted to know more about planning efforts in the Central Valley so they made a stop here, in Fresno and Madera.

He was very encouraged that Kern County planners will be using a $250,000 grant to create a climate action plan as part of the city/county general plan update. The city, on the other hand, doesn’t believe it has to account for greenhouse gas emissions in environmental documents.

“We would strongly disagree with that position,” Pollak told me.

Uh oh.

“One of the other concerns we have is that it looks like projects are being approved that aren’t consistent with the general plan update so far as it’s been done.”

He’s referring to growth boundaries roughly mapped out by planners that show a currently developable area called the “urban core,” which is more than 200 square miles by the way, then an outer ring that’s not supposed to be developed until after 2035 and a further ring where development should start after 2050.

Guess where the Bakersfield Land Investment project is? Smack in the 2035 ring.

It’s all the more galling when you consider that we already have more than 50,000 yet-to-be built, approved housing lots on the books (and, no, I’m not including the ones in developments that have gone belly up).

“I guess our question would be, why not wait?” Pollak asked.

Good question.

Too bad the only answer I have is double talking politicians.

Another fun caller

Fri, 19 Jun 2009 16:29:23 PDT

I stuck it on my other blog. Check it out!

http://www.bakoview.blogspot.com

Air regs fry restaurant owners

Tue, 16 Jun 2009 17:41:19 PDT

Creep, creep, creep.

Here they come again — the government.

Specifically, this time, it’s the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District circling restaurant charbroilers.

On Thursday, the board will consider amending an existing rule to bring more restaurants into its regulatory fold.

Right now, the rule affects only restaurants using “chain-driven” charbroilers, which, essentially, move meat through a tunnel of flame and are used by larger fast-food joints.

The amendment being looked at would include “under-fire” charbroilers.

These are used by smaller restaurants and, according to the San Joaquin air district staff report, make up 72 percent of all commercial cooking emissions in the district.

Wow, that must be a really big problem.

Hard to say, actually. Staff doesn’t know how many restaurants are cooking this way and so has no way to form a baseline emission inventory.

Well, these charbroil emissions must be some toxic stuff then, right?

Nah, not really. At least not as far as the district knows as there’s never been any toxic studies done on this type of exhaust.

But the emissions do contain particulate matter, tiny bits of dust and soot, and as that’s the current boogey man being chased to heck and gone by federal and state agencies, by all means, get out the regulatory noose and find a tree, boys!

Here’s my oft-repeated rap on particulate matter: some studies have shown particulate matter, specifically PM 2.5, is associated with premature deaths. The authors of those studies, however, have never allowed their data to be independently examined and their results have never been replicated.

Other studies have found little to no relationship between premature death and exposure to PM 2.5, particularly here in California.

To me, the scientific jury is out on the deadly effects of PM 2.5.

Even if you believe PM 2.5 is knocking us all off in droves, however, this pending charbroiler rule is ludicrous and being pushed with unnecessary haste.

At this point, it would only affect restaurants that cook 800 pounds of meat a week or more. That’s a lot of meat. So, the truly small guys are exempt, as long as they register their charbroilers and keep extensive records to prove they’re under the limit.

Believe me, though, it’s only a matter of time before that limit drops to 600 pounds, then 400 and so on. (Deep fryers, beware, you could be next!) And anyone building a new restaurant with a charbroiler, regardless of how much meat you’re planning to cook, will be under the new rule.

In doing its reports, the district estimated it could cost between $30,000 and $100,000 for under-fire charbroil operations to retrofit using any number of devices from filters to scrubbers to more sophisticated systems. Over time, the district concluded, that would work out to just a few thousand dollars a year.

Wrong, Skip Slayton, owner of Jake’s Tex Mex told me.

First of all, he said the lowest cost option recommended by the district, a HEPA filter that clears out anything down to six microns, can’t be used without a front-end system to extract grease otherwise it’d be plugged up and useless within a day.

Any one of the systems would require customization, which adds to the cost, upkeep and cleaning, another cost, repairs, more costs, and potential upgrades, cha ching, cha ching.

Perhaps most importantly, no one knows what the standard is they’re supposed to be shooting for, Slayton said. As in, how much PM 2.5 comes out of your chimney now and how much should come out after you retrofit?

“The district says it has a test, but nothing’s concrete as to what it is or how it’s applied,” he said. “They don’t have it down anywhere about how you pass or fail.”

Yup, that’s regulation California style, all right.

The district’s report says the rule amendment will remove between .26 and 2.6 tons of particulate matter per day from the air once all affected restaurants come into compliance by the 2014 deadline.

Doesn’t sound like a lot to me, especially when you consider the upheaval it will cause small businesses.

It also seems like another rush to regulation when the marketplace is already headed toward lower emissions on its own. The one good thing about Slayton’s involvement so far, he said, is he’s discovered a lot of really interesting hood/emissions/grease systems being made that weren’t even discussed by the air board.

“I don’t disagree with the need for clean air,” he said. “I just want more empirical studies so we can make intelligent choices.”

That’s crazy talk.

ATTENDING THE MEETING

Thursday, 9 a.m.
The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District board meeting in Fresno will be broadcast live over the Internet and interested persons can participate by showing up in person at the Bakersfield office, 34946 Flyover Court, Bakersfield, CA 93308.
Full agendas can be downloaded at www.valleyair.org.

You can call the local office at (661) 392-5500.

Directions:
Heading north on CA-99 N:
Take exit 30 for State Highway 65 (Porterville Highway).
Merge onto State Highway 65 (Porterville Highway).
Turn left at Imperial.
Turn left at Flightpath.
Turn left at Flyover Court. Building will be on the left.

Heading south on CA-99 N:
Take exit 31 for 7th Standard Road/Merle Haggard Drive.
Turn left over Freeway 99.
Turn left at State Highway 65 (Porterville Highway).
Turn left at Imperial.
Turn left at Flightpath.
Turn left at Flyover Court. Building will be on the left.

Anything's worth a try to curb Kern's pet overpopulation

Sat, 13 Jun 2009 16:18:42 PDT

Bill Bruce (not the West High principal) looks nothing like a rock star.
Far from it. The bureaucrat from Calgary looks a lot like our own homegrown bureaucrats, middle-aged and somewhat, er, rumpled.

Given the awed reaction to his methodically delivered PowerPoint Wednesday evening, though, he could have been wearing leather pants, strutting across the Kern County Board of Supervisors chambers bare-chested, belting out a sweaty encore of “Emotional Rescue.”

The audience — mostly women — was riveted.

It was a long presentation so I’ll cut to the heart of Bruce’s Jagger-esque magnetism: Calgary, population 1.1 million, euthanized a total of 419 dogs and cats in 2008.

Here in Kern County, population 827,000, we killed 19,742 dogs and cats last year.

That’s beyond crazy. It’s warped, sick, horrifying and it has to stop.

Wednesday’s audience — and many in the community who care for animals or just hate waste — are desperate to know, what does Calgary have that we don’t? And how can we get our hands on some of that mojo?

You’ll be happy to know it’s all there for the taking.

Clear communication, partnerships, accessibility, accountability and education.

Gad! That sounds like work.

And it was. According to Bruce, 20 years’ worth. That’s how long it took for him to get Calgary out of the depths of animal control woes to become the shining light of success it now is.

But, he told the audience Wednesday, that time frame includes all his mistakes. Knowing what he knows now, he said, he could help a community do it much faster.

There were a lot of unique aspects to Calgary’s program — state of the art equipment and information technology — but I was most impressed by how they handle two basic concepts: licensing and education.

In Calgary, 91 percent of owners have their dogs licensed. Bakersfield’s dog licensing rate hovers near 10 percent, according to city animal control staffers.

Bruce achieved those numbers by bombarding citizens with the message that a license was their dog’s ticket home. And he made getting a license ridiculously easy and fairly cheap ($31 fixed, $52 non-fixed).

You can get a license online, at the bank, the corner store and any number of other places. They don’t even require proof of a rabies vaccination. They go on your word.

Not sure if that would work in California without Legislative intervention as state law and local ordinance require a rabies vaccination to get a license. But I’ll bet there’s a Kern County Senator running for Lt. Gov. (Dean Florez, hint hint) who might tackle the issue if the headline count is right.

Giving away licenses like gumballs actually increases compliance with rabies laws as well as spay/neuter goals, Bruce told the Wednesday crowd. Calgary doesn’t have a mandatory spay/neuter law nor an animal limit, by the way.

Once you get a license, your dog is in the system and can be monitored, which makes it easier for the city to get you to pay for the license year after year. Calgary’s animal control budget is about $5 million all fee produced, no general fund monies. Kern’s budget is $4.6 million, most from the general fund.

Calgary uses its money to fund myriad animal control programs, including an in-depth educational component.

I was very intrigued by this.

They don’t just have animal control officers take a dog to a few assemblies a year. They have a certificated teacher who has created grade-appropriate curriculum.
Animal control officers provide all the materials and teach kids about pet ownership, the safe way to deal with strange dogs, what the city’s laws are, etc.

Brilliant!

Not only does it instill responsible pet ownership values in children, those kids go home and shame their parents into doing the right thing. Hey, it worked with recycling.

Guy Shaw, director of Kern County Animal Control, has shown since taking over the department that he’s willing to try new things, including a small but growing foster program, opening the door to more rescue groups and transferring Kern’s animals to shelters that don’t have many animals.

As for Bruce’s ideas, he said he’s eager to look at what might fit here.

Maybe we can’t give licenses without proof of rabies shots, but Shaw has considered an “amnesty” day so fines or problems could be swept away for a current license. And he’s going to start offering online licensing in the next few months.

“I’m willing to listen to anything that anyone has tried that works,” he told me. “The least that can happen is it doesn’t work and we’re no worse off than we were before.

“But we won’t know unless we try.”

LOW-COST SPAY/NEUTER OPTIONS

HOPE, a low-cost spay/neuter service, runs a twice-monthly transport to Fresno through the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals on Gibson Street.

Costs for cats are: $55 for females and $45 for males.

For dogs, the costs vary depending on size, from $75 for a female and $65 for a male weighing up to 64 pounds and $115 for a female and $105 for a male weighing more than 100 pounds. All appointments must be made through the SPCA at 323-8353 and must be paid in advance.

The animal must be brought to the SPCA before the appointment to be weighed and medically checked. On transport day, the animal must be at the SPCA on Gibson Street off Rosedale Highway by 6 a.m.

Owners must pick up the animal the following day between 11 a.m. and noon.
All animals are required to have a rabies vaccination. If proof cannot be provided at the time of registration, owners will be charged $12 for a vaccination before boarding the transport.

Angel Dogs is a mobile spay/neuter service that comes to the Kern County Animal Shelter, 201 S. Mount Vernon, the first Wednesday of each month.

Cost is $90 for cats and $110 for dogs. You can obtain a $20 voucher from the Kern Humane Society toward that cost.

Contact the shelter for more information at 868-7125.

Kern Humane Society has vouchers toward the cost of animal alterations. Contact them at 325-2589.

KERN'S SAD NUMBERS

Last year, Kern County Animal Control was forced to euthanize 19,742 unwanted animals. Here’s how the numbers compare from last year to this year for January 1 to June 12.

Intake (animals coming to the shelter)
2008
Total: 12,824
Cats: 5,478
Dogs: 7,221
(Remainder is livestock, birds, etc.)
2009
Total: 14,237
Cats: 6,126
Dogs: 7,990

Euthanized
2008
Total: 7,655 (64 percent killed)
Cats: 3,811 (75 percent)
Dogs: 3,752 (58 percent)

2009
Total: 7,790 (56 percent)
Cats: 4,389 (76 percent)
Dogs 3,356 (44 percent)

Adopted
2008
Total: 1,594
Cats: 349
Dogs: 1,229 dogs
2009
Total: 1,812
Cats: 388
Dogs: 1,413

Sent to rescue groups
2008: 1,748
2009: 2,012

Tranferred to other shelters
2008: 42
2009: 645

Toothless watchdog not much help

Tue, 09 Jun 2009 18:05:35 PDT

If the Governor and Legislature are still taking ideas for which parts of state government to lop off, I have one!

Can the Regional Water Quality Control Board. (You thought I was going to say cut former Assemblywoman Nicole Parra and her do-nothing-$128,000-a-year salary, didn’t you? Come on now, you know it.)

OK, maybe the board shouldn’t be eliminated all together, but I think it’s ripe for some drastic changes.

Just looking at the section of the board that affects us most directly, Region 5, here are the stats:

It stretches from Modoc County in Northern California to the valley portion of Kern County.

It has three branches, in Redding, Sacramento and Fresno, employs about 260 people with a budget of $38 million a year and has a wide range of duties including inspecting everything from corner gas stations to major waste water treatment plants as well as jumping on major leaks and spills.

That last part is where I think we can do much better given the board’s recent actions — or inactions.

In three high-profile cases of water contamination, board regulators have sat on their hands, saying they weren’t staffed well enough, didn’t think there was reason to do more, or just haven’t responded.

This is the safety of our groundwater we’re talking about. The stuff we put in our bodies on a daily basis. Kind of important.

In the most highly publicized incident, the board didn’t even know the effort to clean up 20 years’ worth of spills and leaks at Big West Refinery had stopped until The Californian broke the story in the summer of 2007.

Regulators had been sending Shell Oil letters asking the former refinery owner to please, really PLEASE! clean up its mess — but nothing else until our story ran. The board finally sent Shell and new owner Flying J an abatement order telling both entities to get busy — or else.

Lonnie Wass, a supervising engineer with the water board, told me Tuesday that even through Flying J’s bankruptcy, the work continues.

Then there’s Hondo Chemical. Matt Constantine, director of Kern’s Environmental Health Department, tells me he’s begged the water board to look into whether Hondo has been dumping “leachate,” (the scum that leaks out from the bottom of landfills) on property right over the Kern River Water Bank, but can’t even get a response.

Wass acknowledged he didn’t know much about Hondo but thought Kern was handling it.

And just last week, the owners of Starrh and Starrh Cotton Growers in Lost Hills again won a lawsuit accusing Aera Energy of letting toxic waste water from their Belridge Oil Field seep into groundwater used for irrigation on the Starrh land. The oil waste water had been dumped into unlined sumps for years until farmer Larry Starrh sued after discovering it was tainting his aquifer. He also tried to get the water board to intervene, to no avail.

Wass said it was his understanding that Aera was now injecting that waste water deep underground where it wouldn’t affect the groundwater. An Aera spokesperson confirmed the waste water is now being recycled as steam and used in waterflood operations or is being injected, all of which was done by Aera with no urging from the water board.
Aera wouldn’t comment much further; Starrh may appeal to the 5th District seeking higher damages.

Starrh’s attorney, Ralph Wegis, contends the bigger issue is that Aera dumped so much polluted water over the years, the ground is saturated and still leaking into Starrh’s groundwater supply.

“Aera’s own testimony was that it would continue to drain into the water basin at the same rate for the next 30 to 40 years,” Wegis said. Right now, it’s only affecting Starrh, but Wegis says in time the plume will destroy far more than the water below one grower’s land.

And the water board stood by and let it happen, he said.

“They react by drawing 1,000 lines in the sand...and then drawing another line.”

Hmm. Sounds familiar.

In previous stories, water board officials told us they were doing as much as they can with severe understaffing. And I was told that again by Assistant Executive Officer Richard Loncarovich of the board’s Sacramento office.

“There was a report to the Legislature a few years back that looked at what we regulate and our resources and showed we’re understaffed by 30 percent,” he said.
It’s probably true. I mean, how many times has the state mandated programs at the local level and not paid for them?

But maybe the answer isn’t to throw more money at the board.

Why not look at the programs it runs and see A) if they’re all absolutely needed and B) which could be taken over by another agency that does the same stuff anyway, like perhaps county environmental health agencies?

I asked Constantine if he thought his 50 employees could handle that. He’d need more resources, but the short answer was “yes.”

His people have the expertise, knowledge and contacts to make it work. Besides, they’re no strangers to taking over state work. The state used to inspect above-ground storage facilities, but gave that function to the counties. Constantine said it was the same story:They took the fees, but didn’t do much else.

Constantine’s people keep up with all the inspections necessary to manage 12,000 permits. They take complaints on a wide array of topics, which they post on the web so the public can see their response times. And Constantine is directly accountable to the Board of Supervisors, which is accountable to us.

Beyond all that, I like the idea he’s here drinking the same water as the rest of us.

Being old in California just got tougher

Sat, 06 Jun 2009 16:23:53 PDT

They say getting old ain’t for sissies. Boy, they’re not kidding.

Especially in a state that has essentially abandoned its task of protecting old people in the very facilities and hospitals where they need the greatest care.

Last October, Gov. Schwarzenegger “saved” taxpayers $3.8 million a year by cutting all the state’s funding to the Ombudsman program, which exists in every county using mostly volunteers to visit nursing home patients and check out abuse and neglect complaints.

The idea was that since the Health Department already does yearly inspections, that’s good enough.

Yeah, right.

Aside from the fact that all state departments are strapped for people and money making even minimal inspections a tall order, yearly inspections just don’t cut it.

It wasn’t a routine state inspection that uncovered a nursing home in the Kern River Valley where patients were being drugged to “keep them quiet.” Three people — someone’s mom, or grandmother or grandad! — died from the overdrugging, according to charges filed by the Attorney General’s office.

No, it was the Kern County Long-Term Care Ombudsman’s office that blew the whistle on that horror show.

“Because of our presence, the fact that people know who we are and about the program and they trust us, people who were directly affected contacted us,” said Nona Tolentino, director of the Ombudsman office.

That’s the whole idea behind the program, which was created in the 1970s by federal law and later enhanced by state law.

“It brings the community into the facility,” Tolentino told me. “We’re not a regulatory agency or law enforcement. We’re there to talk to the residents, take a look, listen and speak up for the resident.”

The other thing the Ombudsman’s office does is maintain public files where you or I can check a nursing home’s record. You can read reports written by real people from our own community who have walked the halls, talked to patients, seen what kind of food was served and know if the place is clean or not.

That kind of information is invaluable, even more so than the online resources provided by the California Advocates for Nursing Home Reform and Medicare, both of which rate facilities at the local level.

The Ombudsman is a simple, low-cost program that is highly effective.

Even so, it does require some money and, more important, people — which I’ll get back to in a second.

Tolentino, who’s spent her career helping children and the elderly in Kern, has a very non-adversarial philosophy about the job.

She and the volunteers she trains don’t want to shut down homes and hospitals. They work with management and staff to resolve problems, improve practices and make life better for residents.

Up until last October, Tolentino had a budget of about $100,000 a year that paid her, another staffer and all the administrative stuff needed to recruit, train and manage a host of volunteers. The state’s cut has dropped her budget to about $50,000 a year, from a mix of federal and county monies. As of June 30, she will have to let her lone staffer go.

After that, it will be just Tolentino and about 16 volunteers to make visits to 19 nursing homes and 107 residential care facilities (that’s about 4,000 patient beds combined).

Ideally, she said, she would like to have 68 volunteers not only to make visits and handle complaints but to help staff the phones, make copies, go to recruiting seminars and help with training.

There’s a bill in the Legislature right now that will attempt to restore about half of the $3.8 million from the state. But considering the condition of the alleged budget and all the other hands already out there, I’m not too hopeful.

Some people have asked Tolentino about creating a new non-profit to fund the Ombudsman office.

But, she said, there are already a lot of non-profits out there, many competing for the same resources. She doesn’t want to add to that stew.

Instead, she’s hoping an existing organization might want to “adopt” the Ombudsman’s office and raise money, awareness and hopefully even some volunteers.

Kern County is a generous place. I have no doubt there are several organizations that could whip up a golf tournament, charity run or Harley ride to keep the Ombudsman in paper clip money.

Even more important are the volunteers.

This is no easy task. You have to submit to a background and fingerprint test and successfully complete a 36-hour course. Tolentino asks for a one-year commitment, serving a minimum four hours a week.

Once you get past all that, the real work begins, visiting patients and building relationships that will certainly enrich your life even as they may break your heart.

Creating a strong, caring, locally based program independent of fickle state fortunes is, however, an investment in our own futures.

Because the other thing they say about getting old is also true: We’re all gonna be there someday (if we’re lucky).

The Ombudsman’s office is administered by Greater Bakersfield Legal Assistance and shares office space with them at 615 California Ave.
To volunteer, donate money or help out in anyway, please call 323-7884 or 888-292-4252.
Or visit their site online at:
www.gbla.org/ez.php?Page=3242
There is also a state crisis line available after-hours, weekends and holidays: 800-231-4024

To check out how nursing homes rate you can go to the California Advocates for Nursing Home Reform website at:
http://www.canhr.org/
NH_Data/
Or you can go to the Medicare site at:
http://www.medicare.
gov/default.asp
And scroll down to “Compare Nursing Homes in Your Area.”
This site also gives a lot of information about what nursing home dosts Medicare does and does not cover.

Ok, maybe Blunder Boy was a little over the top...

Wed, 03 Jun 2009 10:38:02 PDT

I got a call this morning on my Zack Scrivner column.

She thinks I'm full of hatred. No WAY! I wouldn't hate on politicians like Zack, what would I write about withOUT them?

Step aside, Tandy. Scrivner's in charge here

Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:30:55 PDT

So, Alexander Haig is alive and well, and apparently serving on the Bakersfield City Council in the guise of Zack Scrivner.

Lest there was any question, Scrivner answered it last Wednesday with a Haig-esque “I am in control here,” op-ed piece about just who’s pulling the strings on negotiations with the police union (fire too, I presume, but he didn’t mention them).

“Let’s be clear — the city manager is an agent of the City Council; he follows the council’s direction,” Scrivner wrote in reference to a recent ad campaign by the Bakersfield Police Officers Association lambasting City Manager Alan Tandy for holding up negotiations over the 3-at-50 retirement benefit in which an officer retiring at 50 gets 3 percent of his salary for every year worked.

Okaaay, Mr. Vice Mayor, you want credit for this mess, you got it.

The police union leadership has publicly stated that they’d be willing to negotiate ways to help save the city money on 3-at-50, a program that so rankles a certain faction of the Council (Scrivner and Ken Weir), if only the city would talk to them. And the fire union even made formal offers to save the city money including giving a percentage of any pay raises to help defray costs and having new employees pay the city-funded portion of their pensions to CalPERS.

At every turn the city’s response — I guess that’d be Scrivner’s response — has been a resounding “POUND SAND!”

Police have been without a contract for two years and are now at impasse.

Firefighters have been without a contract for over a year, but are still in negotiations.

Wow, excellent work, Scrivner!

While he was asserting his authority on this matter, Scrivner also included a little IED in his editorial.

In earlier negotiations, the city had been demanding that new hires for both unions begin with a 3-at-55 retirement benefit.

But in his op-ed column, Scrivner said: “Other plans are available, such as returning to the formula of 2 percent at 50, which was the rule until December 2003; that guaranteed a 30-year employee 60 percent of his salary. This was a generous benefit; returning to it would save the city millions.”

Union presidents told me that a day or so after his editorial, they both received notice from the city that a letter to withdraw all previous offers would be on its way.

Hmmmmm. Lets review the timing:

• May 20, the City Council met in closed session and voted to give their negotiator new directions.

• May 27, Scrivner’s column appears, casually mentioning a 2-at-50 retirement benefit.

• May 28 or 29, both unions get notice that 3-at-55 is off the table.

“We’re still waiting to see if they’re going to pull the trigger on that,” police union representative Bill Ware told me. “If they do, we’ll be looking at the legality of these kinds of shenanigans.”

It could be considered regressive bargaining, or bad faith, agreed fire union president Derek Tisinger. His union’s lawyer is taking a close read of the editorial as well, which Tisinger characterized as a “huge blunder.”

I called Blunder Boy for a comment, actually called all three of his phone numbers and left messages as well as an email, but received no communication back.

I’ve said numerous times, I think 3-at-50 is overly generous.

But changing it to 55 or even 2-at-50 isn’t going to save us money now, during the current fiscal crisis, which Scrivner alludes to as the reason for wanting to change the benefit.

If the city accepted the union’s offers to increase employee contributions or possibly give back a percentage of their raises to defray retirement costs, that would save the city big dollars right now when we need it most. As we go forward, the city could continue to negotiate more savings, which the unions have said they’re willing to do.

But having a healthy dialogue that saves the city money now and in the long run isn’t a part of Scrivner’s real agenda.

He wants to be the guy who broke the 3-at-50 benefit, which would be a first in the state and would virtually guarantee Scrivner ascent to higher office.

And that, shudder, has always been Scrivner’s true goal.

This land is your land, for a fee

Tue, 26 May 2009 17:18:18 PDT

Lame ideas have more lives than cats, I swear.

Glancing at the Sequoia National Forest’s website, it appears the “ring around the lake” fee proposal is baaaack. Along with new proposed fee sites along the Kern River up to and including Lloyd Meadow.

Heck, why not just put a gate at the top of Highway 178 and charge an entrance fee? Oh, wait, since this is the PUBLIC’S land, that would be illegal, wouldn’t it?

I’m not sure how making every square inch of useable space a fee site is any different, but then I don’t work for the federal government.

Right now visitors must pay $10 per vehicle for day or overnight use at three so-called HIRAs (High Impact Recreation Areas) — Auxiliary Dam, Old Isabella Road and South Fork. This is all under the new year-round Southern Sierra Adventure Pass program.

Those are actual camping sites that are supposed to have certain amenities, such as garbage service, bathrooms and picnic tables, so the Forest Service can charge a fee.

Those things cost money and it makes sense to charge a little extra. Whether the forest service is actually providing the required amenities , however, is debatable.

Either way, if the “2009 Proposed” map (which you can find online at http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/sequoia/maps/maps/2009-proposed8x11.pdf) comes to pass, it could mean you’d have to pay $10 to stop and dip your toes in the water for a few minutes.

Last summer, Kern River Valley residents hit the roof when they first heard about a similar proposal.

They blasted the Forest Service for wanting more fee sites when conditions at current sites were awful with garbage strewn everywhere, filthy bathrooms (if there were any at all) without any significant Forest Service presence.

On top of all that, the Forest Service couldn’t account for how it’s been spending fees it had already been charging the public.

When I say officials couldn’t account for those fees, I mean the numbers on the charts they gave the public didn’t add up and they mixed up calendar and fiscal year monies.

There was NO accountability.

The Forest Service quickly pulled back its ring-around-the-lake proposal and Forest Supervisor Tina Terrell told me several months ago she had no intention of bringing it back up until the money issues were sorted out.

To that end, she told me and the public, Sequoia National Forest had spent $24,000 (yes, using public fees) on a software program called CASH, which she said would follow the income and outgo of those fees.

Nope.

Turns out the CASH system, in use for the last decade on Southern California forests, will only track sales of Southern Sierra Adventure Passes, not how the Forest Service spends that money.

“That isn’t really an accounting system that the Sequoia bought, it’s the CASH system, which is a web-based system that tracks collections,” Tamara Wilton, of the Forest Service’s regional office in Vallejo, told a meeting of the Recreation Resource Advisory Committee on May 13. This is the same committee that OK’d doubling the HIRA fees and making them year-round at its meeting last fall.

Wilton also said during the meeting, according to audio tapes, that her staff spent 50 hours creating a method to track how fees on the Sequoia were spent in the first quarter of 2009.

And still there were problems.

Wilton didn’t include the “real” total collections amounts because a percentage goes to administration. That percent is just left off the spreadsheets.

She also didn’t calculate expenses associated with some rental incomes and itemized incomes and expenses for two campsites separately, except for the cost to collect fees for each site. She lumped that together so it’s impossible to see which area made or lost money.

Sigh!

I wanted to ask Terrell, or anyone at the Sequoia National Forest, why the public was misled about the CASH system and also whether the the ring-around-the-lake HIRA proposal is something they’ll be pursuing.

No one called me back.

I don’t disagree that people should be charged for using some areas around the lake and river. They’re pretty much loving it to death up there.

Lets face it, people are pigs. Cleaning up after them costs money.

But unless the Forest Service can A) show that it’s doing that job and B) plainly tell us how it’s using the public’s money, allowing the service to conjure up more fee sites is absolutely out of the question.

BILL AIMS TO CURB FEES

I’ve been bugging Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Bakersfield, ever since I found out that Sen. Max Baucus, D-Montana, had a bill up to repeal fees charged by the Forest Service for the public to use its own lands.

McCarthy told me Tuesday he’s been working with the House Resources Committee on a similar bill to match Baucus’ effort.

“I’m working with other offices to bring in greater accountability to any fees charged by the Forest Service.”

He hasn’t seen the final wording yet as Congress is out on break.

That would dovetail nicely with Baucus’ S868, which would repeal the 2004 Federal Lands Recreational Enhancement Act.

It would bring the Forest Service back to the 1965 policy which limited what the agency could charge the public.

The Baucus bill, similar to one he and Republican Sen. Mike Crapo of Idaho, wrote in 2007, is awaiting a hearing in the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

The Forest Service contends that budget cuts have made it impossible to keep up with trash, toilet needs, vandalism and enforcement. The fees, it has said, are necessary, though still inadequate, for basic upkeep.

I would be fine with the fees, except they don’t seem to have improved service dramatically at heavily used areas and the Forest Service has been incapable of accounting for how it’s spent the money. My suspicion is that’s not exactly unintended.

If the Baucus bill or its House cousin passes, I have a feeling the Forest Service will find some way to use the tax dollars we already give them to keep our lands open, safe and trash free.

— Lois Henry

Your tax dollars at work, sort of

Sun, 24 May 2009 12:23:47 PDT

I have a noggin full of rants rattling around in my head and it’s time to dump ’em out. Lucky you! You’re the dumpees.

The theme this week: Your Government In Action.

Big, ugly pile
More than a few readers have asked about that huge pile of dirt (which I’m affectionately deeming “Mount Tandy”) at 24th and Oak streets.

The dirt is from a storm drain project completed several months ago. The city says it has nowhere else to put the dirt. Besides, the dirt may be needed when they remake that intersection. They don’t want to move it only to have to move it back again all at taxpayer expense.

Understood, but the problem is, construction won’t likely start until 2011 at the earliest.

So, ol’ Mount Tandy will be with us for a while.

I had to wonder, could you or I get away with that?

Not no, but HECK NO!

According to code compliance rules, that much dirt can’t just be lumped any which way. It has to be engineered and requires a grading permit.

There has to be a plan as to how long the dirt will sit and regular inspections to make sure it doesn’t shift or erode, as loose piles of dirt like to do, onto neighboring properties or public streets.

I called over to the city to see about that permit and whaddaya know, no permit.

“We had a permit when we did the grading for the sump,” Public Works Director Raul Rojas told me. “But a specific permit for the pile? No, that we do not have.”

As many complaints as the paper has received, he said, the city has likely gotten more and he understands it’s an eyesore. The city will be cleaning Mount Tandy’s crop of weeds over Memorial Day Weekend and will look at fencing it off.

And he assured me the city does have funding to complete that intersection, so Mount Tandy won’t be there forever.

As for a permit, OK, he said, they would look at the need for a permit.

“I really don’t think that pile of dirt is that dangerous, though,” he said.

Is he kidding? Where does he think it got its name!?

Keep it short
By the by, if you were to climb Mount Tandy and peer across Oak to Beach Park you would notice that the grass is dead. Brown and dead. But very nicely mowed.

Recreation and Parks Director Dianne Hoover told me the well used to irrigate Beach Park went down about two weeks ago and they only got it up again on Friday.

So the grass died. But the mowing continued.

“That’s not a bad thing,” Hoover said. “Even when the grass is brown it still needs to be clipped.”

Call me cheap, or lazy, or both, but I always figured one of the benefits of a dead lawn was no need to mow it.

That may come to pass, Hoover said. Budget constraints mean they’ll be watering less throughout the park system and they may have to cut back mowing if they have to cut people. Oh, er...that’s not good.

Double scoop

During our latest special election (are they really all that “special” when we have them every couple months?) 1,147 poll workers helped direct voters and collect ballots.

A little more than 100 of those people were county employees who not only got the $110 to $150 state stipend but were also paid regular wages for “volunteering” their time.

Now, I know that’s only about $10,000 and I don’t begrudge them the stipend; that’s what all poll workers get. But if I were to work the polls, my employer would require that I take a vacation day.

Not so for county workers.

It’s been that way for several years, ever since the Auditor/Controller told Supervisors they were having trouble mustering up enough people to adequately staff the polls.

Supervisor Michael Rubio said elections are so important he’s willing to err on the side of overpaying in order to make sure polls are adequately staffed and there’s never even the hint of discouraging someone from voting due to lack of workers.

I agree with him in principal, but I’m pretty sure the county would get the people it needs through a little creative advertising (maybe someone might even write a column about it?) or working with the local colleges (something Rubio also suggested).

But double-paying county workers when our unemployment rate is hovering around 15 percent and we’re looking down the barrel of even more budget cuts doesn’t set right.

Supervisors Don Maben and Ray Watson agreed. Maben said he intends to bring the issue up in the next few weeks.

What’s in a name?
When Kern County Superintendent of Schools Larry Reider steps down and his second in command, Associate Superintendent Christine Frazier, is appointed in his place by the Board of Education (as I and everyone else expect will happen at their June 9 meeting), a whole lot of letterhead, envelopes, business cards, forms, signs and more will suddenly be wrong.

How much will taxpayers spend to replace all that stock?

Nada.

“We’ll probably just X out his name,” growled the lovably gruff Jim Varley, director of communications for the superintendent’s office. “That’s the way we did it when Kelly (Blanton) left and that’s the way we’ll do it this time.”

It would be an irresponsible use of taxpayer dollars to throw out what they have, so they’ll find a way to make do, he said.

“There’s no other way to do business. And since I’m in charge of printing and graphics, I guess I’ll make that call.”

Too bad Varley’s call, or even just his attitude, doesn’t extend a little further.

Aloha, start your engines!

Wed, 20 May 2009 10:53:26 PDT

So, you want to open an off-road track in Kern County?

You must be stubborn or crazy. Best if you’re both.

Oh, and a good, strong pair of legs is essential for all the hoop jumping you’ll be doing.

Since the state has failed miserably at building new off-road parks (despite an $86 million annual budget and $90 million generated by fuel taxes and green sticker fees paid by off-roaders for, um, new parks), it’s basically up to regular Joes to take up the slack.

That’s no easy feat when you consider the byzantine world of CEQA, the California Environmental Quality Act.

Even so, Darrell Melton, Darin Layton and Charlie Comfort were crazy enough to wade into that world more than four years ago to open Honolulu Hills Raceway east of Taft.

And they’ve been stubborn enough to stick with it over four years of stutter-stepping through paperwork, meetings, reports, studies and countless phone calls.

They’ve been operating under a temporary use permit from the county that allows for some races and practice days, but haven’t been able to go full-time without a Fish and Game permit.

They should have that golden permit in about three months, I was assured by Fish and Game’s senior environmental specialist, Julie Vance.

I was all set to slam Fish and Game for dragging its feet. After all, a safe, legal riding park can only help cut down on illegal riding and actually protect more critters than it harms, I thought.

But Vance, curse her common sense ways, agreed that Honolulu Hills is a good project that desperately needed.

“One of the reasons we were interested in seeing this happen is that trespassing by OHVs is a big problem, and we recognize that,” she said. “You need a place to relieve the pressure. Our lands are hit with that, too. It’s a constant enforcement issue.”

Part of the delay was inexperience on the owners’ parts, she said. And they also weren’t sure whether to apply for a permit for the immediate race track (which is already built and involves 160 acres) or the ultimate vision (640 acres of trails, camping and concessions).

Yeah, in hindsight, Melton said, it would probably have been better to hire a Roger McIntosh-type development consultant who can work through permits in his sleep.

“I think even he would have had a difficult time with this one though because it was so unique,” Melton said.

No one seemed to know what to do with the Honolulu guys and their raceway.

Even the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District wasn’t sure what to ask for.

Melton said they had a friend who works with oil companies on air mitigation do a report and the district was so pleased with it, they asked if they could use it as a model.

Melton, a substitute teacher with a psychology degree, agreed he may have made some missteps along the way.

“I’m no dummy, but I’m no genius, either,” he said. “It should really be up to the state to put in more riding parks. They have all the money, they know all the hoops with Fish and Game and all the other agencies. It’s a lot easier for them than a private person.”

Actually, Melton and his partners could probably teach the state a few lessons, considering how a state riding park east of Bakersfield proposed a few years ago fell through at the last minute.

Vance said that if Melton and his partners talked to Fish and Game first, the permitting probably would have taken much less time.

Vance will have the chance to prove that possibly in the near future if all goes as planned for Ron Pierce, who’s scouting for land east of Bakersfield to open a similar off-road race track.

He had a permit to hold a handful of events on his own ranch at Breckenridge and Comanche roads, and they were so well received, he’s decided to jump into the pond with the Honolulu guys.

Having spent a career as a builder, however, he’s a bit more prepared for the process.

“If you’re not stubborn as a mule, you’re not going to get anywhere,” he said.

Crazy helps, too.

‘Heir apparent’ system robs taxpayers of voice

Sat, 16 May 2009 22:09:09 PDT

If all goes as I expect it will — and I expect it will — the first female Kern County Superintendent of Schools in the 143-year history of that office will be appointed on June 8 as soon-to-retire Superintendent Larry Reider nods his approval.
Looking at more recent history, Christine Lizardi Frazier will remain in that elected office until she decides to retire, at which time she likely will choose
our next Superintendent of Schools — who will be in office until he or she picks a successor and retires. And so on and so on.
That’s how it worked for Reider, who was appointed by the County Board of Education in 1999 when former Superintendent Kelly Blanton retired mid-term.
I’m not complaining about the job any of these people have done or will do.
Reider has been an exceptional public servant — smart, experienced, honest, plain-spoken and hard-working.
Frazier, now the associate superintendent (as Reider was before her and Blanton was before him), is all of the above. Plus, I can’t lie, I’m ecstatic to see a highly qualified woman breaking that 143-year-old glass ceiling.
But I can’t help wondering at the fairness factor.
Shouldn’t we, the voters, pick our own Superintendent?
More important, shouldn’t anyone seeking public office have to prove themselves to voters before they’ve held the office (in Reider’s case for nearly three years and, if she’s appointed, in Frazier’s case nearly a year)?
Some political insiders e-mailed me as soon as they heard of Reider’s impending retirement asking the same questions, even calling the mid-term retirement an “affront to voters.”
That’s because it would give Frazier instant incumbency in the 2010 election.
When it comes to this little-understood office, name recognition is often all voters have to go on. Incumbency virtually locks in a win, and that’s only IF someone else runs, which hasn’t happened since Blanton’s second election in 1994.
“I understand why some people feel that’s not fair,” Frazier told me. Reider said the same thing.
But, they both said, the best person for the job is someone who knows the job.
Despite its under-the-radar profile, the Superintendent of Schools office in Kern County is massive.
It provides various school districts with, among other things, legal services, insurance, financial services, transportation, special education services and technology. It even has its own television studio and broadcasts its own shows.
It owns and operates the Kern County Museum, California Living Museum and Community Connection for Child Care.
And the little old Superintendent of Schools office also runs the state’s fiscal crisis team, which parachutes in to troubled districts after the state takes them over to restructure and help get them going again. In fact, Frazier was the point person on the Kern team that helped revamp the Compton Unified School District in half the time it was estimated to take.
Kern’s Superintendent of Schools’ general fund budget is $254 million and it employs 1,920 people.
Overseeing all that is the superintendent, whose salary can range from $190,624 to $210,939 a year (Reider makes the max, by the way).
Taxpayers have a clear interest in who’s in that seat.
Absolutely, agree both Frazier and Reider.
But (there’s that “but” again)... “This office can’t be left up to chance,” Frazier told me. “I know that sounds tough and I do believe in local control and the people having a voice. But I also believe voters should have a choice of someone who has the experience and knowledge to do the job and then they should make the choice.”
She likened the superintendent appointment — and yes, she’s hoping to get the job — to a “test run.”
“Then the public can say yes or no.”
True, that might weed out undesirables such as the pay-for-play poster boy Rod Blagojevich or closer to home, Mack “we’ll kick your ass” Wimbish. Even so, that’s not how our system works, and this “heir apparent” way of doing things goes against the grain for me.
Reider told me anyone interested in running for Superintendent is required to have a teaching credential and an administrative services credential.
Beyond that, he said the right person also needs a deep understanding of the byzantine world of educational finance and strong relationships with the many districts that dot Kern County. All of which, he said, Frazier has in buckets.
He said he doesn’t make a recommendation to the Board of Education about who to appoint, but strongly supports Frazier.
Frankly, I’d probably vote for her, too.
But I’d prefer to make that choice on my own.
The opinions expressed in this column are those of Lois Henry, not The Bakersfield Californian. Her column appears Wednesdays and Sundays. Comment at people.bakersfield.com/home/
Blog/noholdsbarred, or call Lois at 395-7373 or send e-mail to lhenry@bakersfield.com

Lessons in democracy are never clean and efficient

Tue, 12 May 2009 16:40:58 PDT

Trying to make democracy more “efficient” is never a good idea.

Besides, there are far worse sins — such as cutting people out of the process.

That’s exactly what the Bakersfield College Student Government Association did in its election April 29 and 30 when it decided to reduce the number of voting days from four to two, prohibit online voting, provide only one polling place on the main campus and require students to present not just any photo ID card, but a new, specific student card that many didn’t yet have.

Add to that the lack of any real pre-election information, such as sample ballots or even a list of election dates and voting requirements and this was close to a stealth election as you can get.

Apparently, operating that kind of “controlled environment” was nothing new for the administration. They’d already cut off any meaningful communication with the campus newspaper, the Renegade Rip, and nearly ignored to death a movement by students of the Delano satellite campus to form their own governmental body.

Perhaps you think I’m too harsh. This is, after all, a learning environment. And how much harm could a handful of student officers do being in charge of homecoming and spring fling?

Well, like any government entity, these “kids” are in charge of public dollars, public business and public policy. This small group makes decisions on behalf of 18,600 students. One of those decisions recently was to put two propositions on the ballot that would ban smoking on BC (passed) and increase health fees by $4 per semester up from $13 (failed).

So what they do — and how they do it — has real life implications for many of those 18,600, students.

Oh yeah, and they get paid, by the by, minimum wage for a maximum 19 hours a week.

Not a lot, but that’s still money students (or their parents) had to fork over, whether they wanted to or not.

Yes, a community college campus IS a learning environment and I think these student officials should have been taught by their advisor, interim Dean of Students Angela Guadian-Mendez, that this was not the right way to do things.

I called her several times over the course of two days, but got no return.

BC’s President Greg Chamberlain did call me back, however, and agreed this election was a learning experience.

“Really, there are three key areas that need to be improved,” he said. A better election process, making sure everyone is truly represented and — the biggie — communication.

“Should we have had a polling place on the Delano campus? Of course and next year, we absolutely will,” he said. He’ll be meeting with the new student officers over the summer so they understand his priorities.

Outgoing student president Lyne Mugema told me the student government wanted to make sure the election ran smoothly, voter turnout was good and that they avoided the kinds of fraud accusations that cropped up last year. None of the accusations were ever proved and it was unclear if the main concern was over online voting or fraudulent paper ballots.

“We didn’t have a single complaint (about fraud) this year, not one,” said Mugema.

As for voter turnout, she said last year was the highest ever on campus, at 800.

Only 700 students voted this year, but with the number of days cut in half, she said, that’s actually a higher percentage. (Voting students also got free t-shirts, food coupons and other goodies, which probably helped.)

When I mentioned complaints from Delano students who felt cut out of the process because they got no pre-election information and had to drive to the main campus to vote, Mugema said none of the satellite campuses, or centers, have everything a student needs. At some point, they have to come to the Bakersfield campus.

Funny, that’s exactly what outgoing Vice President Justin Salters told me. Politicians and their talking points know no age limits.

It was Salters who also instituted the new “media relations,” or non-relations, policy under which government officers refused to speak to the press. Instead, they issued releases through the campus public information officer.

According to Mugema that was an effort to be more professional and avoid inaccuracies.

“Unfortunately, they (the Rip) didn’t like that very much,” she said.

No kidding.

Salters and Mugema both also told me the election was conducted according to their bylaws as far as the number of days and the “convenient location” of the polling place.

Yeah, I read the bylaws and, yeah, they didn’t have to do more than they did. But that’s one of those spirit/letter-of-the-law kind of things. I tend to favor bending in the direction of public access.

The bright spot here is that Delano students who were all but shut out of the election and who had waited in vain all year for the BC students to meet with them about their own government are steaming ahead.

They’ve written their own constitution and are drawing up bylaws that they’ll present to the Kern Community College District board of trustees in hopes of creating their own associated student government, according to Loy Salarda, who ran unsuccessfully for president in the BC election.

The Delano campus now has more than 1,000 students, Chamberlain said, acknowledging that it has definitely grown beyond satellite status.

“We pay the same fees as the BC students and we deserve representation too,” Salarda said. “We just got tired of waiting.”

Interesting how democracy always seems to have that effect.

Tax money is well-spent on education conferences

Sat, 09 May 2009 18:05:48 PDT

A couple of local school districts are spending hundreds of thousands of
taxpayer dollars to send people to conferences in Las Vegas and Hollywood
after they just laid off teachers, cut programs and reduced class sizes.

I think that's a good thing.

Sure, on the surface, it looks bad. But the surface is never where the real
story lies, as you know.

Most of the money they're spending on these "Professional Learning
Communities" conferences -- $250,000 by Panama-Buena Vista Unified and
$180,000 by Kern High School District -- is from federal and state pots and
can only be spent on training. As with anything in the wacky world of
education some of it is from sources that can be spent on training, or could
be spent elsewhere.

That whole "restricted money" argument is a cop-out anyway. It's all tax
dollars and right now none of us is in the mood to see it wasted whether
it's local, state or federal.

What I really wanted to know is whether it's money well spent.

Yes, it is. And I wish more districts would jump on the Professional
Learning Communities bandwagon.

PLC (I think educators might actually shrivel up and blow away without their
daily quota of acronyms) was created by a husband and wife, Richard and
Rebecca DuFour, who spent their careers turning around bad schools, even
entire school districts.

And they've done it by focusing on - wait for it - children learning.
While that seems intuitive, it's not nearly as simple as it sounds.

We stick teachers and kids in a factory setting and expect standardized
results forgetting that they¹re all a bunch of squirrely human beings, just
like the rest of us.

PLC puts the focus on whether kids are learning what we want them to learn
and, if not, why not. It gives teachers ways to figure out why Suzie gets
long division and Johnny doesn't and how to get Johnny on board.

No, it doesn't involve magic beans or special origami hats.

It's real work, restructuring the school day so teachers can focus
relentlessly day-by-day, week-by-week, month-by-month on how each kid
learns.

PLC really starts after the conference, when employees start putting what
they learned to work.

* Teachers get together in teams on their campuses and trade ideas about
better ways of teaching.

* They create tests so they can figure out what each kid has and hasn't
learned.

* If even one kid isn't getting something, they brainstorm together with
that kid and his or her parents to find the right button.

* The teams find ways to motivate students who¹re coasting to make them
shoot for the high notes.

*Finally, they find ways to measure results, and the only result that
counts is whether kids are learning.

By the by, I had to read through reams of information with sentences like:
"Powerful collaborative teams are the fundamental building block of a
professional learning community and a critical component in building a
collaborative culture..." to figure out the above bullet points.

The horror of edu-speak! These people need to add a course on how to write
like a cowboy (or cowGIRL). OK, end of self-pity pit stop.

This summer will be KHSD's first large foray into PLC, though they've had
some smaller training sessions in the concept over the last few years.

Trustee Joel Heinrichs said the district has high hopes for this training,
which is sweeping the country.

"The bottom line is, whether we have 1,700 teachers or 1,600, we have to
invest in them if we want to improve student achievement," he said,
referring to the layoffs KHSD has undergone. "Just preserving bodies isn't
the way to go, they have to have the right training."

PLC isn't, or shouldn't be, an ongoing money-sucker program. Once a district
gets the majority of its people involved in the new way of doing business,
then it¹s up to the district to keep it going.

That's already happening at Panama-Buena Vista, which has sent groups to PLC
training over the last three years.

"We've already implemented considerable structural changes," said Pam
Bianchi, Panama-Buena Vista¹s assistant Superintendent of Curriculum and
Instruction. They've created the teams and carved out time in teachers'
schedules to work with those teams and evaluate students.

They have seen results, she said, on a daily, weekly and monthly level.

Whether that's due to this new program or a host of factors is hard to say.

But it's certainly not hurting.

"We used to focus on teachers teaching," she told me. "Now we focus on
students learning and we¹re being very proscriptive when they don¹t learn
and asking, 'What are we going to do to ensure that they do learn?¹'"

Hopefully, this will help them find the answer.

Opinions expressed in this column are those of Lois Henry, not The
Bakersfield Californian. Her column appears Wednesdays and Sundays. Comment
at people.bakersfield.com/home/Blog/noholdsbarred, call her at 395-7373 or
e-mail lhenry@bakersfield.com

Fees, regulations and my new summer footwear

Tue, 05 May 2009 17:43:59 PDT

Here are some odds and ends for your entertainment, placed in totally random order so you have to read all the way to the end — because you never know what gems are hidden here.

Our fees are slipping. Well, here’s hoping.

I did a column in March about the Sequoia National Forest Service’s inability to account for how it’s been spending fees it charges the public for alleged maintenance and upkeep on camping areas around Isabella Lake.

The double-talk was bad enough, but it really turned my stomach after residents sent me photos showing disgusting, broken porta-toilets and overflowing garbage that were supposed to be cleaned up by the Forest Service.

My conclusion was the Forest Service has done a terrible job not only caring for the sites, but communicating with the public about how they’re spending our money.

Well, Sen. Max Baucus, D-Montana, apparently doesn’t like the situation any better than I do and has introduced S868 to repeal the law under which the fees have been charged.

I called Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Bakersfield, to see what he thought of the bill. There is no house version, so he called the Western Caucus to see if they’re going to create one and, if so, asked how he can help.

McCarthy represents the Kern River Valley area where residents have fretted over the fees and lack of service for some time.

“I think this will open the debate so we can discuss whether it’s reasonable for the Forest Service to have these fees,” McCarthy told me. “If so, we can talk about that, but there absolutely has to be better accountability.”

Watch these!

I’ve been writing about how the Califronia Air Resources Board irresponsibly, I believe, adopted new diesel rules that will all but kill independent trucking and the heavy construction industry in this state.

The rules are based on flawed science cobbled together in a report authored by a man who lied about his credentials. I’ve been advocating the whole mess should get a do over.

Alas, no one listens to me.

But a couple of bills have been written that at least try to inject some fairness into the regulatory process.

• SB 356, by State Sen. Rod Wright, D-Los Angeles, would require agencies to determine the impact of new regulations on small businesses before they’re adopted.

This one made it through the Business, Professions and and Economic Development Committee — where our own State Sen. Dean Florez was one of only two votes against it — and is now scheduled for a hearing in Appropriations on May 11.

I thought it was a sound, straightforward bill.

But Florez told me he voted against it because we already have rules that require agencies to get public input and analyze the impact of new regulations.

And he also felt it could lead to endless litigation over regulations already established.

“Under the bill, if a small business (the number of which would multiply under the new definition in this bill) sought an exemption to one of these important protections, the responsible agency would not only have to consider it — the onus would be on them to justify NOT granting the exemption.”

Despite Florez’s concerns, I think it actually might have a snowball’s chance in the Legislature.

The other two bills were introduced by Assembly Democrats, Tony Mendoza, Buena Park and Majority Leader Alberto Torrico, San Jose.

• AB 1085 and AB 1395, respectively, would require the Air Resources Board to show and tell, so to speak, by making public the methodologies and other input supporting regulations, as well as all changes to draft regulations.

Both have yet to be heard.

Gay is good (well, for now anyway)

A few weeks ago I went to a fundraiser for a new group called “Gay is good.” (The local gay community wants to raise money to put up billboards and find other ways of communicating that it’s not a bad thing to be gay.)

I don’t normally go to fundraisers, but I’d heard through Facebook that State Sen. Dean Florez might show up and I really wanted to be there if it happened. It didn’t.

For background, I was hammering Florez in mid-April after he signed on as a co-author to a bill that would declare a Harvey Milk Day. Earlier, he was the swing vote to approve a Senate resolution that took issue with the small percentage of signatures needed to get Proposition 8 on the ballot.

Florez had, up until then, spent his entire legislative career voting against gay rights issues.

My working theory is he needs to drum up support for his run for lieutenant governor from the much more politically powerful and left-leaning Bay Area and Los Angeles.

Florez told me that creating a “recognized” day isn’t a gay rights issue and there’s a recognized day for just about everyone and anyone so no biggie. He did NOT say he’d changed his stance on gay rights nor gay marriage.

That was mid-April.

The very next week another reporter, E.J. Schultz with the Fresno Bee, ran into Florez at the state Democratic convention and “the gay thing” came up.

Here’s Florez’s quote:

“People change and it’s OK to change,” he said. “My position right now is the same as [President Obama’s] and I think it’s a civil rights issue and I don’t think that people should in essence stand in the way of people who want to get married.”

That reminds me — it’s almost summer and I need buy some new flip flops!

Fire contract nears!

Mon, 04 May 2009 14:56:56 PDT

http://www.bakoview.blogspot.com

Swine flu: CHILL. You're not dying...

Sat, 02 May 2009 17:28:02 PDT

May 3, 2009

People, people, please. Calm dowwwwn! If you’re reading this from anywhere within the borders of Kern County, I can tell you with near certainty that you are far, far, FAR more likely to die from being overweight and out of shape than any kind of flu, swine or otherwise.

So stop crowding into emergency rooms and quit bugging your doctors to get swine flu tests or prescriptions so you can stockpile flu drugs. All you’re doing is running down supplies and clogging up an intricate testing system.

Oh, and you might want to turn your television dials to something other than hyped-to-the-max-24-hour cable news shows. Get out and go for a walk instead. That would have the two-fold benefit of maintaining your sanity and helping you avoid Kern’s real health menace — heart disease.

If that doesn’t help, here are some common sense things to remember about swine flu: 1)

As of Friday afternoon, there was not one single documented case in Kern County and B) even if the swino virus does eventually affect a few people here, it’s a mild flu. Repeat: MILD flu.

Since this whole thing started I’ve been appalled by the breathless reaction to an illness that’s not life-threatening, particularly here in the United States.

Maybe the hysteria is amplified because Mexico, the epicenter, is in our backyard as opposed to China where avian flu and SARS originated. Or maybe we’re so freaked out because of the 1976 swine flu episode, which resulted in a vaccine that turned out to be more dangerous than the actual virus.

Either way, this outbreak has really brought alarmists to full shrill.

State Sen. Dean Florez even started calling it a pandemic before health agencies used the P-word, which unnecessarily scares the jeepers out of people.

Please note that “pandemic” doesn’t mean “we’re all going to DIE!!!!”

Pandemic means widespread. Cases of skin cancer among people who spend too much time in the sun without protection are pandemic.

Even the word “epidemic” doesn’t mean “we’re all going to DIE!!!”

It means rapidly spreading. Twittering has become epidemic, particularly among people who like to pass on bad information about swine flu.

So, to recap, a mild flu that is widespread could spread even further.

“This is a time for awareness, not alarm,” Kern County Public Health Director John Nilon told me.

If you wake up tomorrow with the sniffles and a headache, stay home from work. (Even in run-of-the-mill flu outbreaks, it really chaps my hide when people come to work sick. Like I want their crud!)

If the sniffles progress to a high fever with other flu-like symptoms, call your doctor and discuss it first before you rush in for a nose swab.

Doctor Raj Patel told me his office has received a lot of phone calls from concerned patients, but neither he nor his partner have found any whose symptoms qualified for testing. He’s also received calls from people wanting prescriptions for tamiflu or relenza “just in case.”

“Those need to be reserved for patients who really need it,” he said.

Besides, they’re expensive, have short shelf lives and if not administered at the right time and in the right manner can make you even sicker than the flu.

“Don’t stockpile,” Patel sternly warned.

For those of you getting tested “just because,” here’s the fallout you’re causing:

There’s a checklist that needs to be filled out. If not fully completed, the lab has to backtrack through your doctor, then the lab screens the list to see if you’re a priority case.

To be a priority case, first off, you have to have flu symptoms. Sniffles don’t cut it. Then they want to know if you’ve returned from Mexico in the last seven days and become ill. And so on.

If you meet those criteria, they send it on the Kern County Public Health, which does a further priority screening. Then it’s sent up to Tulare County, which screens the list again.

If it makes it through all those cuts, the sample gets tested in Tulare and if it turns up as a “probable” case (meaning it’s some kind of influenza), they send it on to the Centers for Disease Control to confirm whether the virus is genetically the “swine” strain.

Results from Tulare come back fairly quickly, but the final verdict from CDC can take several days.

Up to Friday afternoon, Public Health had received about 250 samples over the course of the week and sent a little more than 60 up to Tulare. None were even probable cases.
Clearly, the more frivolous samples submitted, the more time, money and effort is wasted.

“We’re trying to get through this early period of high volume, which is really pushing our search capacity,” said Michael Lancaster, the lab director for Public Health.

Once swine flu is found here, he said, testing will slow down.

“Once it’s established in the county there’s no advantage to finding it more often,” he said.
Besides, the treatment is pretty much the same for regular old flu — bed rest, liquids and time.

Prevention is pretty old school too: wash your hands, cover your mouth...and if you’re sick, STAY HOME.

Rally a family reunion for victims of Kern "justice"

Tue, 28 Apr 2009 19:42:18 PDT

As press conferences go, Tuesday’s “Witch Hunt” rally was one of the odder and more interesting ones I’ve ever covered.

Setting aside the outright bizarreness — such as the tall, thin man in the crowd with the parrot on his shoulder — it felt like part press conference, part tent revival and part celebrity stalking.

Mostly, though, I felt like an interloper at a family reunion.

There they all were in front of the courthouse — the Pitts family, the Kniffens, the Modahls, the Nokeses, the Cummings family and John Stoll. They hugged and chatted as if they’d all known each other all their lives even though for some it was a first meeting.

They share a history I wouldn’t wish on anyone, and that makes them family.

Older now, their faces are a bit more weathered than when The Californian took their photos 25 years ago as they appeared in court accused of some of the most heinous crimes imaginable: passing their own and other children around in sexual molestation rings.

Nearly all those convicted have been released now, their convictions overturned one by one.

As they got out of prison, each family went its own way, trying to forge a new life despite the notoriety and years (in Stoll’s case 20 years) lost in prison. They didn’t want attention, they just wanted to live normal lives, without fear.

But, they told me, they came back Tuesday despite their fears to draw attention to their cases in hopes it would never happen again.

As Scott Kniffen, a tall reserved man of few words, said, “the people of Kern County need to wake up and make some changes with the people they elect.”

He was referring to District Attorney Ed Jagels, whom they all blame for what happened in the 1980s.

“I’d like the state of California to wake up and change the laws,” Kniffen told the applauding crowd. “Prosecutors shouldn’t have total immunity to avoid responsibility when they put innocent people in prison.”

Jagels, who didn’t return my phone calls last week about the rally, has told The Californian in the past that the convictions being overturned doesn’t prove the people are innocent.

Well, as someone else pointed out to me, by that logic, then being convicted doesn’t prove a person is guilty of a crime.

The crowd at the Liberty Bell wasn’t in the mood for debates on logic, they were there to talk about justice. Judging from the hoots and applause, that would have to include Jagels doing time behind bars.

“What happened to these families is incomprehensible,” said Jack Cummings, who with his wife Jackie spent a year on the run with their three boys. They went on the lam when they realized they were being implicated simply because Jackie had baby sat for Cheryl Gonzales, who was arrested with her husband and several others in 1984.

Authorities caught up with the Cummings family and their three boys were taken away, spending a year in foster homes even though Jack and Jackie were never formally charged.

Incomprehensible is a good word to describe what went on during that time.

I met Carol and Lisa Pitts, daughters of Rick Pitts, who spent six years in prison along with his wife Marcella Pitts, her sister Colleen Bennett, friend Gina Miller and three others.

Carol was 11 at the time and Lisa was 7. They were with Rick and Marcella, their step-mother, in court on a custody hearing over Marcella’s sons from a previous marriage the day the Pittses were arrested. The girls went straight into protective custody.

Their mother, Linda Cardoso, Rick’s ex-wife, was able to get them home after a month.

She moved them across town and instructed their school not to allow anyone other than herself to pick them up or speak with them without her present.

“That’s what would happen to a lot of these kids,” Cardoso recalled. “They’d just come take them from school.”

When Carol talks about those days, her body becomes rigid and her words are clipped.

“They tried to get me to say these things happened and I said, ‘No! I’m not saying that!

Because it’s not true!’” Carol, now 36 said. “I’m pissed off that it happened and it’s awesome this is all coming out now.” Both girls testified for the defense but it didn’t save their father.

It’s important for people to see “Witch Hunt,” they said, to understand what happened.

I’ve seen the film. I’ve read the news accounts and I’ve interviewed the people involved.

Frankly, I still don’t understand how it happened.