| Coming Soon... |
| Friday, Sep 3 |
| 10:30 AM | Story Time At Angels Camp Library |
| 05:00 PM | Farmers Market, Murphys |
| 05:00 PM | Farmers Market, Angels Camp |
| 05:30 PM | 1st Fridays in rhe Park |
| 06:00 PM | Family Karaoke, Angels Camp |
| 07:00 PM | Newsome Harlowe Wine, Entertainment & Movie Night |
| 08:00 PM | "Into the Woods" - Musical, Stevenot Winery, Murphys |
| Saturday, Sep 4 |
| All Day | Sierra Nevada Logging Jamboree |
| All Day | 38th Annual Cedar Center Arts and Crafts Festival |
| 08:30 AM | Valley Springs Farmers Market |
| 10:00 AM | White Elephant Sale and Bake Sale |
| 10:00 AM | Bear Vaalley Soap Box Derby |
| 10:00 AM | Family Fun Day at Black Creek Park |
| 10:00 AM | Lift-Accessed Mountain Biking, Bear Valley |
| 01:00 PM | Live Music, Copperopolis Town Square |
| 03:00 PM | Railtown 1897 Labor Day |
| 05:00 PM | Reception for Linda Taylor |
| 07:00 PM | Groovy Judy at Brice Station Vineyard |
| 07:00 PM | Campground Program, New Melones Lake |
| 07:30 PM | Bingo |
| Sunday, Sep 5 |
| 08:30 AM | Bear Valley Triathlon |
| 09:00 AM | Ranger Guided Hike, Natural Bridges |
| 01:00 PM | Arts of Bear Valley at Big Trees State Park |
| 03:00 PM | Railtown 1897 Labor Day |
| 10:00 PM | Reggae Night at Tallahan's |
| Monday, Sep 6 |
| 06:30 PM | Memorial Day Concert |
| Tuesday, Sep 7 |
| 12:30 AM | MEDI-CARE MADE CLEAR - FREE INFORMATIONAL SEMINAR |
| 09:00 AM | Calaveras County Board of Supervisors Meeting |
|
|
Posted by: thepinetree on 06/05/2010 01:12 PM
Updated by: thepinetree on 06/14/2010 11:10 AM
Expires: 01/01/2015 12:00 AM
Letter to the Editor – by Shaelyn Strattan
"NO on Prop 16...By now, I’m sure you’ve received enough “Vote Yes on Prop 16” mailers to paper your garage. Catchy slogans like “The Taxpayers Right to Vote Act”, “If’ you’re tired of feeling powerless over how government spends your money” and “You should have a say before local governments spend your tax dollars to get into the electricity business” are obviously intended to appeal to everyone who is concerned about how our tax money is spent. But, as Paul Harvey would have said…Now – the REST of the story....
Prop 16 would amend the California Constitution, placing many new restrictions on local public power agencies and protecting PG&E from public power rivals. The Prop 16 ads don’t explain that local agencies already can’t “spend unlimited public funds” to provide electricity…that all of California’s local public power agencies, such as SMUD, only came into being because voters approved them…or that publicly elected officials run those utilities. Prop 16 would make it nearly impossible for municipal agencies, like SMUD, to expand or come into existence in the first place, because even expansion would require an expensive public ballot measure. This would include all the costs of defending the action against attacks by PG&E, who doesn’t want to compete with the lower rates of most municipal electric companies. As intended, these excessive costs (PG&E has spent over $15 million to pass Prop 16) would effectively negate any potential savings to the ratepayers. John Geesman, former Executive Director of the California Energy Commission stated: “It’s an outrage. The measure is really just PG&E’s attempt to write its own business advantage into the state constitution.”
For example, if Prop 16 passes, any local government that wants to start up a public power agency would have to get two-thirds voter approval in any new service area. An existing public power agency that wants to expand, such as SMUD (which currently charges up to one-third less than PG&E), would also have to win a two-thirds approval on any new service area and in its existing territory, regardless of whether the utility had the funding available for the expansion or was making a profit for the city or county. This could include requiring a vote to provide electricity to a new development project or even to a single rural customer on the edge of the utility’s service territory. And cities or counties that want to employ California’s “community choice aggregation” rules to buy wholesale electricity and provide citizens with cheaper power, or a choice of power from renewable sources, would also need a two-thirds voter approval. Because of the vague language contained in the ballot measure, the two-thirds voter approval requirement might even apply to establishing charging stations for electric and hybrid cars or the development of certain kinds of solar power generating projects. The California Realtors Association has indicated they oppose Prop 16 because they fear the law could be used as a club to prevent development outside existing service areas.
While PG&E’s Initiative campaign spokesman, Andrew Souval, publicly states that Prop 16 is necessary because “[I[t gives our customers more control over how public funds are being spent,” that is not what PG&E’s CEO Peter Darbee told stockholders. He told investors that the measure was intended to keep PG&E from having to defend its territory against repeated public power expansion, citing the recent $11 million PG&E spent to defeat SMUD’s proposal to expand its service into Yolo County in 2006. Darbee indicated “[I]t is really a decision about could we greatly diminish this kind of activity for all going forward, rather than spending $10 million to $15 million a year of your (shareholders) money…”. No public utility could afford to spend that kind of money on repeated ballot measures every time it tried to upgrade or expand. It would bankrupt them and undercut the intent of a public utility, which is to save the rate payer, the taxpayer, money. It appears PG&E’s motives have less to do with democracy and more to do with shareholder profits.
There is also some question as to why the California Taxpayers’ Association (CTA) and California Chamber of Commerce (CCC) would support this proposition. Neither David Kline, VP of Communications and Research for CTA , nor Marc Burgat, VP of Government Affairs with the CCC, could cite a single case where current law was abused during the creation of a public utility in California or where a local public power agency was formed or expanded without a vote. Mr. Burgat indicated that the Chamber supports Prop 16 because “[B]usiness doesn’t want to compete with things that are subsidized by the taxpayer.” But, in fact, public utilities don’t use taxes to provide electricity; they use funds generated by the electricity rates, paid by their customers, just like PG&E (their rates are just a lot lower). Officials at the Northern California Power Agency indicate that public utilities in this region are better operated, more efficient, and have rates about 20 to 25 percent lower than PG&E’s. Where public utilities can only raise rates with a vote by their voter-elected boards, PG&E’s rate increases are approved by the Governor-appointed California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), using formulas that guarantee a certain rate of return on the utility’s investment. The CEOs of the public utilities also don’t make seven-figure salaries. According to the Associated Press, Darbee made $9.4 million in salary and bonuses last year, 120 times the amount paid to SMUD’s general manager. Michael Boccadoro, lobbyist with the Agricultural Energy Consumers Association, suggested that “[I]f PG&E really feels strongly that people should be given a vote, maybe ratepayers should get to vote on PG&E’s rate increases.”
And the deception continues…recent mailers state that “[A]t a time of tight budgets and layoffs of police and firefighters, voters should have the right to vote on anything that affects our pocketbook.” But public power agencies are not supported by a city or county’s general fund, which provides law enforcement, fire protection, and emergency services. Every time a PG&E customer sees one of the “Yes on Prop 16” ads or receives a flyer in the mail, they should remind themselves that they are paying for that flyer or commercial. Geesman noted that “…every nickel that comes through PG&E’s books comes from its customers. When a regulated utility decides it has tens of millions of dollars to spend on a ballot campaign, it suggests something is seriously wrong with the way rates are set.” Local governments and public power agencies, on the other hand, are forbidden by law from spending taxpayer money on political campaigns. Meanwhile, as PG&E is spending over $15 million to pass Prop 16, the company has a $1 billion rate increase package for 2011 pending before the CPUC.
Don’t be fooled by the label of “Taxpayers Right to Vote Act”. This is only PG&E’s label, designed to illicit a knee-jerk “Yes” vote and appeal to our concerns about how our tax dollars are being spent. The Secretary of State refused to allow the proponents to use that name as the official title of the proposition, as it was considered to be misleading to the voting public. We have no reason to trust the motives or actions of PG&E, the architect and major funding source for Prop 16, or assume the company has our best interests at heart. Their recent installation of “Smart Meters” that raised many of our electric bills by 100-300% show PG&E’s concern for its ratepayers. Prop 16 is a scam, designed to protect PG&E’s monopoly and its territory from annexation by public power utilities with lower rates, better service, and publicly elected Boards.
Local utilities can’t afford and, in most cases, are not allowed to spend the money to fight this proposition. Therefore, it falls to us, as citizens, to make the truth of this measure known. VOTE NO ON PROP 16."
|
| Comments |
| The comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for its content.
No Subject
Posted on: 2010-06-05 14:17:35
By: Anonymous
|
|
It is obvious why the California Taxpayers Association is backing Prop. 16. They must be getting a piece of the $50 million of their customers money that PG&E is spending to maintain their monoploy on the power. The PUC should revoke $50 of any increased charges due to be imposed by PG&E later this year. PG&E SHOULD be broken up just as AIG should be broken up. Pass the pieces of PG&E out to the municipal Power authorities.
|
Re:
Posted on: 2010-06-05 14:31:48
By: Anonymous
|
|
Anytime I see PG&E attached to a political issue, I get big eyes.
|
Re: PG&E stockholder relief act
Posted on: 2010-06-05 18:49:24
By: Anonymous
|
|
Public Utilities have a long record of efficient service, at consistently lower rates than PG&E. In fact, the most expensive power you around is almost always that which PG&E sells to public utilities in times of peak usage.
This so-called initiative is a sham and a lie, and is an indication of how a greedy corporation can use a well-intended law to try and buy its way to more profits.
More profits, in case you miss the point, mean higher rates for rate payers.
It is a tragedy that any voter would think this has anything to do with a two-third rule being initiated. This is already law. By that sort of thinking, it should take two-thirds to change it.
|
Re: PG&E stockholder relief act
Posted on: 2010-06-07 23:10:53
By: Anonymous
|
|
I agree Shaelyn with your arguments. PG&E wants to ensure
a monoply and we shouldn't do their dirty work for them.
The ploy that tries to get voters on board that they should
have a say-so in this is just that--a ploy. Voters, don't
get hooked on this deception. No on 16! No on 14 also.
|
Re:
Posted on: 2010-06-05 15:22:06
By: Anonymous
|
|
I like the idea of breaking it up but look what happened to AT&T, 'Ma Bell' is back.
|
Re:
Posted on: 2010-06-06 15:35:12
By: Anonymous
|
|
http://www.gametrailers.com/user-movie/cingular-at-t-merger-explained/35939
|
Re:
Posted on: 2010-06-09 02:49:16
By: Anonymous
|
Edited By: thepinetree
On: 2010-06-14 11:01:56
|
spam
|
two thirds vote
Posted on: 2010-06-05 17:00:45
By: Anonymous
|
|
I agree with some of the concerns but voted yes because I believe that all legislation and initiatives should require a two thirds vote to pass. That would greatly reduce the number of goofy laws in California.
To paraphrase a famous president: YOU CAN'T FOOL ALL OF THE PEOPLE ALL OF THE TIME, BUT YOU CAN FOOL ENOUGH OF THE PEOPLE ENOUGH OF THE TIME
|
Re: two thirds vote
Posted on: 2010-06-05 17:35:10
By: Anonymous
|
|
That might be the silliest reason I've ever heard to support this INSANE ballot initiative. You fail.
|
No Subject
Posted on: 2010-06-05 18:07:43
By: Anonymous
|
|
The number I heard (that PG&E is spending to pass prop 16) was $35 million. The barrage of radio and TV ads is beyond annoying! I sure hope it fails. Vote NO on 16!
|
Re:
Posted on: 2010-06-06 14:14:14
By: Anonymous
|
|
Now it is up to $47 million!
|
No Brainer: Vote NO on 16
Posted on: 2010-06-06 06:58:51
By: Anonymous
|
|
Lodi Municipal and Sacto Municipal are all runnimg in the BLACK and have lower kilowatt prices, according to an article in last week's Sacto Bee.
Search on www.sacbee.com and check out the article. VERY informative about the pros and cons. Their reporters studied municipalities up and down California and an overwhelming majority had faster response times, fewer blackouts and cheaper prices.
This is a no-brainer!
|
Re: No Brainer: Vote NO on 16
Posted on: 2010-06-06 10:18:34
By: Anonymous
|
|
Anyone remember those rolling blackouts throughout CA a few years back? Fortunately, as a resident of the city of Lodi, and a long-time customer of the city's municipal power district, I must admit that I don't...they NEVER happened here! (oh and our rates are consistently 30% lower than PG&E's cash grab scam rates.
I LOVE OUR CITY'S MUNICIPAL POWER!
Prop 16 is the essence of slimy, self-serving politics in this cesspool of a state. There is no honor in tricking voters into subsidizing corporate greed!
- A very satisfied customer from Lodi
|
Re: No Brainer: Vote NO on 16
Posted on: 2010-06-07 07:06:02
By: Anonymous
|
|
I believe I read in The Record a few weeks ago that Lodi Muni has more than $1 million in reserve right now. Sitting strong and healthy for future endeavors, and still giving ratepayers a cheap price with good service.
Yup, I voted NO on 16.
|
Re: No Brainer: Vote NO on 16
Posted on: 2010-06-06 18:29:57
By: Anonymous
|
|
Newcomers to the county don't know about the proposal to create a municipal utility district here for electricity. As in other areas where this was tried, PG&E pulled out the big guns and shot it down. They spent money like you wouldn't believe. They put the fear of god into thier employees and retirees. Life and civilization as we know it would come to an end if they weren't around to provide electricity. They plastered DONT GET STUCK IN THE MUD signs everywhere. Bought a few one page ads in the Enterprise and got them behind them and fooled enough of the public to win the election by a small margin. Mostly the election was won by linking any future MUD to the reviled CCWD.
There were a number of FERC licenses up for grabs, the county would have been in a position, not only to take over the system but also to sell the excess power to others. We would have been sitting pretty when all the power outages hit. We would not have had to pay into PG&E's antiquated transmission system. Like AT&T all their profits that dont go to fat salaries for their execs. goes to the shareholders and none of it goes back into the system. For that they go to the PUC and get them to let them raise rates.
I think TURN has a list of ways PG&E and the PUC has screwed us over over the years and we are still getting reemed by them.
Go to 2/3 and PG&E wont have to work or spend very much to keep their monopoly. It is already very difficult to get anyone to change. Calaveras had a once in a lifetime opportunity to have the standard of service they get at TID, MID and Lodi. We blew it. We blew the economic develoment that comes with relatively cheap rates. Don't let PG&E fool you again.
|
Re:
Posted on: 2010-06-06 08:34:03
By: Anonymous
|
|
Thats interesting...the post I was replying to disappeared!
John M.
|
Re:
Posted on: 2010-06-06 11:37:42
By: Anonymous
|
|
I'll put it back.
Linking PG & E to our supervisors isn't hard. Merita Callaway was an employee there.
Now PG &E wants to cut out our ability to move towards more affordable utility rates and keep their monopoly here in Calaveras, a county with really high rates compared to other cites and counties with their own utilities.
And now we have Merita appearing on a slate mailer with a recommended "yes" vote for prop 16, which if passed will put a lock on pg&e's power over this county.
Merita = yes on prop 16.
Vote Mary Boblet for Supervisor District 3. She has the skills and experience to ensure we get good rates in these changing times.
|
Re:
Posted on: 2010-06-06 11:52:13
By: Anonymous
|
|
Naw, that's not it. Why would I want to comment on something as goofy as that?
John M.
|
Re:
Posted on: 2010-06-06 17:43:06
By: Anonymous
|
|
it seems you are not the real John M. then.
|
No Subject
Posted on: 2010-06-06 18:27:41
By: Anonymous
|
|
kinda makes you wonder who is worse: the government or big, bad, greedy corporations?
That's the real question being asked of us in this proposition.
Thankfully, we have a certain 240 year legacy of a federal government working for us. No one can say it works great now, but heck, what did you think you'd get after the Republicans took the budget for a ride?
In other news, the federal government steps in at a critical moment with the right resources: Acting within 24 hours of receiving a request from researchers, the National Science Foundation late last week made an emergency allocation of 1 million compute hours on a supercomputer at the Texas Advanced Computing Center at the University of Texas to study how the oil spreading from BP's gusher will affect coastlines.
The goal is to produce models that can forecast how the oil may spread in environmentally sensitive areas by showing in detail what happens when oil interacts with marshes, vegetation and currents.
What may be just as important are models that simulate what could happen if a hurricane carried the oil miles inland, said researchers in interviews.
Computerworld
|
Re:
Posted on: 2010-06-06 18:33:12
By: Anonymous
|
|
the size "D" crowd would have something to say. They would want natural law to dictate whether a business succeeds or fails. Tonja, isn't it right that libertarians believe human rights end where private property begins according to libertarians?
|
Re:
Posted on: 2010-06-06 18:42:25
By: Anonymous
|
|
yes, I believe you are correct.
Tonja's natural law empowers her to enslave another person, and without government intervention even.
|
Re:
Posted on: 2010-06-07 13:59:08
By: Tonja
|
Edited By: Tonja
On: 2010-06-07 14:06:10
|
Anonymous wrote:
“Tonja's natural law empowers her to enslave another person, and without government intervention even.”
Wow. Somewhere along the line you’ve gotten a grossly distorted view of where I’m coming from.
Those genuinely interested in understanding my perspective on human rights and Natural Law may want to read the book, The Law, by Fredric Bastiat, http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html
Tonja
|
Re:
Posted on: 2010-06-06 18:35:15
By: Anonymous
|
|
Well, here's a little more size "D" thinking to consider since you got us thinking about it:
legalized slavery is completely consistent with libertarianism, no?
Property rights trump human rights, in which case ... slavery shouldn't be a problem. Slavery isn't articulated as part of the mainstream of libertarianism because it's exceedingly unpopular; however, it's still logically consistent with libertarianism.
You've got to love the mental gymnastics some so-called libertarians must go through to sound like they are not sociopaths. It's almost like an ala carte menu of rampant de-regulation and corporate fetishism.
|
Re:
Posted on: 2010-06-06 19:10:38
By: Anonymous
|
|
The issue is not really whether someone can be sold into "slavery" as it used to exist.
It is whether it is legally possible for there to be a class of persons who are forbidden things like access to medical care and hospitals, travel, owning their own means of transportation, buying fuel, owning property, and even clean water, because it is not only considered a right to be able to discriminate against them, but a right of business owners that the government should defend.
Natural law libertarians do not believe that the government should have agencies providing any of these services. Therefore, business owners who own bus lines and gas station chains could certainly decide they aren't going to sell to anyone who is currently a protected class.
So if you are forbidden to own property or travel, and you can't buy what you need and can't travel to get it, what sort of "freedom" is that?
|
Re:
Posted on: 2010-06-07 16:42:10
By: Tonja
|
|
Anonymous wrote:
“Natural law libertarians do not believe that the government should have agencies providing any of these services.”
The government can’t give anything to anyone without first taking it from someone else.
Tonja
|
Re: http://www.px90beach.com/
Posted on: 2010-06-06 19:00:42
By: Anonymous
|
Edited By: kaa
On: 2010-07-07 17:56:07
|
Don't doubt the influence of a famous brand, a brand closer to its consumers more likely to succeed.Christian louboutin shoes are best known for being dressy and suitable for evening gown,because women became very much anxious regarding found out the proper shoes in which they look beautiful and very sophisticated wedding dresses online as well. Ladies became very much conscious and they prefer to look different always. For this they opt for designer shoes because of the uniqueness when she stood in front of everyone.
His shoe products incorporates bows, feathers, patent leather, bejeweled straps,christian louboutins, pony hair, satin, suede,nike shoes sale, and other decorative touches. His line of shoes has led the Luxury Institute's Luxury Brand Status Index (christian pumps) for the past 3 years, being declared the Most Prestigious Women's Shoes in 2007, 2008, and 2009.
Due to its extreme quality and uniqueness the brand is very popular and accepted among the modern ladies. GHD Hair Straighteners give a special kind of elegance and Herve Leger and mbt sale latest fashion statement along with classic and original designs for women in modern days. From mules to stilettos, from sandals and sneakers, Gucci provides excellent beauty and comfort among the various products the three-inch high-heels is the most popular as it brings elegance and style.
Christian louboutin also makes calf-hugging flat boots and platform-soled shoes. Some of the famous Christian Louboutin Shoes are high-heeled jewelled flip-flops, multi metallic leather sling backs and feather T-strap sandals. wholesale nfl Jerseys are worn by some of the most glamorous women of the world like Carmen Electra, Naomi Campbell and Ashley Olsen. Christian Louboutin wedding shoes are also very popular in the European market.
|
http://www.4blurayripper.com
Posted on: 2010-08-17 00:34:06
By: yanhan22
|
|
thank you for sharing the post.
Blu ray Ripper is currently the best Blu-ray DVD Ripping software, that can easily rip Blu ray (*.m2ts) and DVDs (*.vob), even the protected DVD disc to HD/SD videos like AVI, 3GP, MP4, MKV, MOV, MPEG, VOB, FLV, SWF, M4V, WMV, MKV HD, MOV HD, etc. with super fast ripping speed and excellent image and sound quality. And the converted files from Blu ray or DVD are high compatible with iPod, iPhone, Apple TV, PSP, Wii, Xbox, BlackBerry, Zune, Adobe Premiere, Sony Vegas, etc for playback and edit. If you want to rip Blu ray, this Blu-ray Ripper is your best choice.
blu ray ripper
blu ray copy
blu ray DVD burner
blu ray Video Converter Ultimate you can have a try
|
|
| What's Related |
| These might interest you as well
Local News
Calendar
Super Simple Classifieds
|
|
|
