Press "Enter" to skip to content

Letters (May 25, 2024)

By AVA News Service on May 25, 2024

* * *

PG&E’S LACK OF WILDFIRE CONCERN

Editor,

You've probably seen PG&E's tv commercials saying how they're reducing wildfire risk with their maintenance, burying lines, etc. and how concerned they are about the public and mitigating the wildfire risk.

These photos are of PG&E's sub-station in Redwood Valley. This grass is five feet high. Every year they do not mow it.

Their subcontractor’s yard that is adjacent to the station never mows it either. My family has been paying to have it mowed for years, as it is directly across the street.

We've called and have even left a bill for the mowing, in the past, with no response.

PG&E is not concerned about the public, only their bottom line and their shareholders. Otherwise they would be maintaining their land and caring about their neighbors.

This area is where they intend to add 180 freight (sea) containers filled with batteries for power storage in the near future.

Our electric rates keep going up and their executive salaries increase substantially year after year.

This is why utility companies should be public utilities and not be privately owned. And so much for the Public Utility Commission doing their job and regulating the industry.

Carrie Shattuck

Ukiah

* * *

IMAGINE MY NON-SURPRISE WHEN…

Editor:

I received my PG&E statement and there was a California Climate Credit, which was a pleasant surprise. Additionally, there were five inserts — one of which was another “Notice of Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s Request to Increase Rates …” I have a rhetorical question: Is there ever going to be a time when our PG&E statements will not include a flyer about a rate increase? Just wondering.

Audrey J. Chapman

Sonoma

* * *

A STUPID SMELL

Editor,

I was contacted by three public Health employees who said they felt coerced into signing that letter [in support of Jenine Miller as Director of Health Services — i.e., public health and behavioral health], and I suspect there are probably more who also felt that way. This was so egregious the union got involved. People speak to me because they know I will speak up for them. There are many people at Public Health who feel they will be retaliated against should they disagree with Jenine et al. I have no vendetta against anyone, but I do have a vendetta against bad decisions. And if you were there going around asking people to sign a letter saying our boss should get a promotion and a raise, one has to wonder about your level of intelligence. THAT little stunt was completely inappropriate and I hope the County takes steps to ensure it never happens again. Disgruntled? Not me. I was never happier when I retired from that dumpster fire at Public Health, but I have always, and will continue to tell the truth and support my peeps. And speak up when I smell stupidity.

Julie Beardsley

Ukiah

* * *

ANOTHER FAILED CONSOLIDATION

Editor,

As I stated in both my initial letter that was printed in the AVA and in my letter to all 5 supervisors, the CEO and HR what happened at the board meeting surrounding item 4i was appalling.

Bringing back the item after it had been voted on was just sour grapes. The meeting was minutes from ending when it was brought back. It was obviously brought back so some disgruntled employees in management could present their petition.

The employees who drafted and gathered signatures for the petition grossly abused their position. First off, did these employees do this on the clock while they should have been working? They were also doing this on County property. Both of these are likely against County policy. Staff is paid to do their job, they are not paid to use their position to influence policy except through the proper channels. Hopefully, they will not be paid for the time they circulated the petition or the time be retroactively deducted from their paychecks.

Secondly, asking employees to support a pay raise for the person that has the power to terminate them is also an abuse of power. It’s a form of forced coercion plain and simple. This is common sense. If someone is asked to sign such a petition, they don’t really have the power to say no. Anyone that can’t see this, doesn’t have the ethics or management skills to do their job and shouldn’t hold a management position in the first place.

On December 19, 2023 the BOS passed resolution 23-198 in the consent calendar under item 3v which created the position of director of health services with a base salary of $179,652.20. If Dr. Miller was not appointed to the position, the fault lies upon the CEO’s office for failing to follow through by bringing the item to the board during closed session which they had already been empowered to do. So the fault for Dr Miller not receiving a raise lies with the CEO, not the BOS.

Item 4i was not administrative clean up. It was an attempt to officially consolidate Public Health and Behavioral Health and Recovery Services without public notification and to deny the public the opportunity to give input. Devising and adopting policy in secret is a disservice to the public. This lack of transparency is unacceptable.

Consolidating these departments has been attempted in the past and failed. Where is the plan to succeed this time? How will it differ from past efforts? Why hasn’t a plan been presented to the board and the public?

Adam Gaska

Redwood Valley

* * *

SOLAR FARMING

Editor:

Columnist Dan Walters wrote about issues we are facing trying to protect valuable but limited groundwater. I agree this is a critical problem that needs addressing. He says some farmers will have to convert their land to solar farms, a benefit for climate problems.

I have no doubt that there is some ground that would be better served farming solar than traditional crops. But I am concerned about another side to this complicated issue. Walters mentions “the state’s declared intent to reduce the share of water devoted to agriculture.” Historically, half of this nation’s fresh fruit and vegetables have come from California. Food grows where water flows, and I am concerned about becoming a country dependent on imports for our food supply. Consider not only the security issue and economic impact, but also the climate impacts of, for example, shipping avocados from Mexico and grapes from Chile.

Water issues are as old as this state. Trying to tackle one part of it (such as groundwater) without looking at it comprehensively (including surface water) and considering all impacts is foolish.

Mary Tupa

Petaluma

* * *

UKIAH’S NON-DISCLOSURE AGENDA

Editor,

Why in the world did the Ukiah City Council decide NOT to include discussion of the Palace on the agenda? Do they think that public interest in the Palace, or even the Palace itself will go away if they do not talk about it? Maybe they forgot that they had drawn a line in the sand?

Maybe they have an agenda that they are not disclosing to the public.

PS. OPEN UP ABOUT THE PALACE, UKIAH

To the City Council/To the Editor:

Dear Ms. Duenas;

I am writing to ask that the Ukiah City Council include a free and open discussion regarding the fate of the Palace Hotel on the Agenda of the Council’s June 5 meeting.

Some want to demolish the Palace and others want to rebuild and improve it. I am frankly astonished that the Council has taken no public position; after all, the Palace is at the City’s downtown core — an area that the City is trying mightily to improve — and it is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

Do you really not care what happens to this historic structure? My position is no secret. I would like to see it restored.

Why not give the people who think that can be done a chance at it?

I don’t live in Ukiah, but Ukiah has been my County Seat since 1973. The City owns a conference table that I made. I bank in Ukiah, get health care in Ukiah, shop in Ukiah, eat in Ukiah and come there for entertainment. I want to have a say in this.

Thanks for your consideration.

Tom McFadden

Boonville

* * *

TWO KINDS OF HEALTH

Editor,

The Board of Supervisors is debating once again whether to combine Public Health and Behavioral Health into one department. Having a “Health Department” may make sense in our small community and could save money. But as things stand now, Behavioral Health staff are running Public Health, despite the fact that they have no expertise or knowledge of how a Public Health department should function.

Let’s examine what each department does.

Behavioral Health and Recovery Services (BHRS) in Mendocino County mainly acts as a pass-through for dollars that are given to local contractors, such as Redwood Community Services. These contractors are the entity that provides services for mental health treatment. BHRS monitors some grant funding such as Measure B, and it does Medi-Cal audits. BHRS does do some court-ordered substance abuse treatment, but the program is very small. BHRS took over the Safe Rx program that was formerly in Public Health where it originated, and the funding that went with it. The Safe Rx program passes out and encourages the use of Narcan for overdoses and encourages people to lock up prescription narcotics. BHRS is focused on treatment for mental health and substance abuse issues. Treatment, and not prevention.

Public Health has a completely different focus. Public Health encompasses the entirety of human health – including the social determinants of health, such as poverty, adequate housing, access to health care, safe schools, a healthy environment, in short everything a human being needs to be healthy. The job of a good Public Health department is to go “upstream,” improve the lives of people and put BHRS and Social Services out of business! This umbrella includes mental health. The implementation of Public Health functions are guided by scientific principles that are taught to students of Public Health.

Functions of Public Health include:

  • Systematically collecting data about the population, monitoring their health and making information available about the community’s health;
  • Identifying and addressing major risk factors and their causes, and addressing health inequities;
  • Occupational safety;
  • Strong engagement with the political process to stimulate policy development, agenda setting, decision making, implementation and evaluation;
  • Mobilizing and leveraging community partnerships to promote public health;
  • Making sure sustained funding is available to ensure public health services are available for the next health threat;
  • Improving and innovating public health functions through ongoing evaluation, research and continuous quality improvement;
  • Communicating effectively, Informing and educating the public about the health needs;
  • Enabling equitable access to health services.

Our Mendocino County Public Health does not run hospitals like some larger counties do. Public Health does provide some treatment modalities, for example, treating tuberculous patients. They run vaccine clinics at times. Public Health Nursing provides home visiting for families at risk for child abuse or neglect. It provides education and information about oral health, tobacco use, and nutrition. The Women’s Infant’s and Children’s (WIC) program and Environmental Health are also a part of Public Health. Public Health also monitors children in foster care and children with special needs.

The decision to create a “Health Department” is fine and may be appropriate for our county. But to have BHRS overseeing Public Health is not appropriate. BHRS staff are not trained in the science of Public Health modalities or its functions. Trying to force BHRS policies and procedures on Public Health department functioning is not appropriate and is counter-productive to the functioning of the Public Health department. Combining the two departments may be an okay idea, but the tail should not wag the dog. BHRS should be under Public Health, and not the other way around. There may be someone who could manage both departments, but honestly, it is not Jenine Miller and her staff. They lack the training and knowledge necessary to fulfill the core functions of a Public Health department.

I urge the Supervisors to look for someone who has the qualifications to oversee both departments, OR to resist the temptation to act suddenly without a real plan.

I have served in government for over 30 years, and was the Mendocino County Senior Public Health Analyst (acting as the Epidemiologist) for 8 years. I know what I’m talking about.

Julie Beardsley, MPH

Ukiah

* * *

A SOCIAL SECURITY FIX

Editor:

One of the foundations of the postwar, middle-class American dream is a financially secure retirement. For most of us, this foundation is Social Security.

For some reason, the press pretty much parrots “the sky is falling, the sky is falling” Chicken Little screeches that Social Security will run out of money, or benefits will be cut to 83% in 2035. Fear creators claim Social Security is adding to the national debt. By law, it cannot do this.

Beginning in 1984, Social Security ran large surpluses that it loaned to the federal government and in return received interest-bearing treasury securities. In times of short-term deficits, Social Security redeemed these securities for cash, with the federal general fund paying back what it borrowed.

Current legislators don’t want to pay back this debt. Rather than high income earners paying their share of both income taxes and Social Security payroll taxes, wage earners fund lower taxes for the wealthy.

The simplest fix that wouldn’t hurt current or future Social Security recipients would be to raise the payroll tax cap from $168,600 to $400,000, as President Joe Biden has suggested.

We are idiots if we continue to let legislators get away with proposing policy that hurts, or will hurt, most Americans. The sky is not falling.

Jeffrey J. Olson

Clearlake Oaks

* * *

MEASURE P MONEY NOT HELD UP IN ANTICIPATION OF ANTI-TAX PROPOSITION

Editor,

The May 14 AVA post “Mendo’s Latest Excuse For Not Delivering Measure P Money To Fire Departments,” and follow up article on May 15, are incorrect in some key respects.

Although it got off to a very slow start, the County has established a process for making Measure P payments and is making those payments in exactly the manner and amounts promised. To be clear the county has made available the funds to the fire depts and to the FSC. It is essentially up to date with those payments given unavoidable delays in the process (e.g., businesses submit their taxes to the State a month after the close of the quarter, the State needs to process them before the County knows what it will receive, etc). The County also appears to intend to continue to make Measure P payments as they are included in the budget for next year.

The initiative that may appear on the November ballot would severely impede the ability to fund emergency and other local services and would potentially stop the flow of Measure P funds in the future, However, there does not seem to be anything in it that would call for the rebate of previously collected funds. It is hard to imagine how that would even be possible. Instead, the relevant section reads “(q) Any tax or exempt charge adopted after January 1, 2022, but prior to the effective date of this act, that was not adopted in compliance with the requirements of this section is void 12 months after the effective date of this act unless the tax or exempt charge is reenacted in compliance with the requirements of this section.” So, the collection and distribution of Measure P funds could stop at some point 12 months after the new statewide measure, should it pass. That suggests that Fire Districts might justifiably be reluctant to commit to using their Measure P funds for purposes that require a long-term commitment, such as hiring staff. But, it does not mean that they are not getting and cannot use the funds that have been collected.

Nancy Armstrong-Frost

Board President, MCFSC

Yorkville

MARK SCARAMELLA REPLIES: That certainly sounds better than what was initially reported. I hope you are right. It’s still taking way too long for the money to be distributed. How much has the Fire Safe Council received so far? It should be more than a year’s worth since the Measure was passed in November of 2022 and kicked in the month after the Measure B money reverted to 1/8 cent. As far as I know the Anderson Valley Community Services District has only received one quarter’s worth, a year past due, and the other quarterly payments are still waiting for the County Counsel’s office to sign off on them.

NORM THURSTON: The Measure P sales tax was collected on sales in the County, for the benefit of the County. I do not think the State has any right to that money – it was acting as an agent to receive, and then disburse those taxes to the County. Another concern is, if this new measure is passed this year, can it be applied to a tax that was legally collected prior to passage? Even if it could be applied retroactively, how would you return it to the taxpayers? (Large purchases like a vehicle could feasibly be refunded). One would hope that County Counsel is already researching answers to these question. And do not forget that this is not a special purpose tax – it may legally be used for ANY purpose the County deems necessary.

ADAM GASKA: Exactly. The County has every right to fund fire departments. The County’s number one responsibility outlined in the state constitution is to provide for public safety. Generally that is interpreted as supporting law enforcement by having a sheriff’s department but can easily encompass fire protection services. Many counties, including Sonoma, financially support fire protection efforts.

* * *

NO SURPRISE

Editor:

Well, of course the California Public Utilities Commission approved a flat-free rate structure for electricity. No one is surprised. But, once again, just to make the decision particularly galling, one of the yammering class, speaking to the policy, is quoted as saying “and wealthy people with rooftop solar hate it.”

That is baloney. In our 1975-built neighborhood, at least one-third of the homes have installed rooftop solar over the past 20 years. These homeowners are schoolteachers, firefighters, office workers, carpenters, retail store employees and others who under no circumstances could be identified as wealthy.

We stood up and long-term financed these systems ourselves with the prospect of affordable electric energy, locally and cleanly produced, long into the future. We are a source of clean, cheap electricity that reduces the need for expensive, dirty fossil-fuel-produced electricity, making electricity cheaper for everyone. But only if the CPUC had kept their fists out of the piggy bank.

The CPUC continues to carry the bucket for PG&E and Southern California Edison with apparently no regard whatsoever for California’s long-term energy future. Utility shareholders’ profit continues to be the only controlling metric. Everything else is just window dressing.

Rod Williams

Petaluma

* * *

THANKS FOR NOTHING, BOB

Editor:

California Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas threw 4 million households under the proverbial bus when he killed a bill to protect ratepayers like you and me. Now those 4 million households will see a $24 hike in their monthly utility bills (“Power bills to change next year,” May 10). And that hike has no cap, which means very likely more to come. Shut off all your lights, unplug all your appliances, etc. None of that will make a difference because this hike isn’t about how much electricity you and I use. This hike — a monthly flat fee — is about corporate greed, in our case PG&E.

Jane Bender

Santa Rosa

Be First to Comment

Leave a Reply

-