As environmental protection becomes a bigger concern, more businesses are looking for ways to turn waste into a resource, or making expired products useful in different forms.
 
Recycling anchored the environmental awareness movement in the 1960s and ‘70s, and companies climbed on board, repurposing materials as a way to showcase environmentally-friendly practices. For example, the shoe company Nike, using recycled polyester, says it has preserved 3 billion plastic bottles since 2010. European furniture producer Pentatonic makes chairs by recycling its own products into new ones.
 
With “sustainability” and “going green” the modern environmental buzzwords, newer technology is bringing innovations for more disposal/reusable options. Companies, therefore, are better able to meet increased governmental regulations, help the community and perhaps boost their bottom line.
 
“Engaging with sustainability has become unavoidable for most companies,” says Barry Breede (www.koppersuip.com), author of Transforming the Utility Pole and chief innovation officer at Koppers Utility & Industrial Products.
 
“Some are looking at more aggressive approaches because government regulations start to take effect. Others are driven by their own internal goals to manage their waste stream in a more environmentally-friendly and cost-effective manner.”
 
Throw in the fact that landfills are quickly filling up across America, Breede says, and disposing of company waste in a responsible and forward-thinking way has never been more important.
 
At Walt Disney World, for example, food waste is turned into energy. In a nearby anaerobic digestion facility, the organic waste is converted into renewable biogas to generate electricity – enough to help power central Florida, including Disney’s hotels and theme parks. The remaining solid material is processed into fertilizer.
 
Breede says today’s primary disposal options that are environmental-friendly include:  

• Landfill-to-gas. As landfill operators have less space to offer, many have converted their landfills into energy-producing plants. As the material decomposes, it produces methane, which powers turbines. Over 400 such facilities are in operation in the U.S. and more are in development. “The Environmental Protection Agency has thrown its weight behind this option, since it turns already-existing landfill into a source of at least some value and reduces the greenhouse gas emissions,” Breede says. “It’s attractive to some utilities that are trying to comply with alternative energy mandates.”

• Waste-to-energy. This type of facility takes raw material waste and converts it to energy by incinerating it at a high temperature. Most of the raw material comes in garbage collections. “A facility will contract with a municipality to collect its garbage to fuel the plant,” Breede says. “This process either generates heat or electricity or provides boiler fuel to generate steam or gas energy.”

• Biomass. “This way is more desirable to a utility, such as one getting rid of wooden poles,” Breede says. “Biomass facilities are reliant on this type of feedstock as a fuel source, thus they’ll pay for the material. A cement company may use this waste stream as its primary energy source.”
• Circular model. “Rather than just treat the remaining raw material as waste to be gotten rid of, companies can innovate by turning that material into input for a new product,” Breede says. “The circular economy has emerged as a value generator from both the business and environmental point of view.”

“Most options involve a trade-off between affordability and a level of environmental stewardship,” Breede says. “But thanks to innovation and collaboration, these are ways for companies to be much kinder to the environment.”
About Barry Breede
Barry Breede (barrybreede.com), author of Transforming the Utility Pole, is the chief innovation and marketing officer at Koppers Utility & Industrial Products―a national leader in the sale of wood utility poles. He leads the company’s efforts in commercializing new business ventures, products, and services. Breede also assists Cox Recovery, a Koppers subsidiary providing utilities with environmentally-friendly methods of disposing of wood waste. A graduate of the University of Oregon, Barry has also worked extensively in the innovation area with several global companies including Electrolux AB, Umbro International, and Specialized Bicycles. Barry currently resides in Greenville, South Carolina.


 


Wednesday, November 14, 2018

Over 9,300 firefighters covering 1,179 fire engines, 121 dozers, 161 hand crews, 123 water tenders, 45 helicopters and numerous firefighting air tankers from throughout the state, along with numerous out-of-state resources, are battling three large wildfires in California. These wind-driven fires have burned more than 237,151 acres and destroyed thousands of structures.

In the Northern Region, other than occasional breezy conditions, winds should be lighter through the rest of this week; however, conditions will remain very dry with above normal temperatures, so elevated fire weather conditions will persist through the week. Widespread poor air quality due to smoke will likely continue. In the Southern Region, strong Santa Ana winds will continue today with sustained winds at 20-35 mph with gusts 45-55 mph expected. Higher gusts are possible in the mountains and other prone locations. Relative humidity will remain low with extremely dry conditions ranging from 3-10 percent, with poor overnight recoveries. Critical fire weather conditions will persist today. After winds decrease later today, elevated fire weather will linger throughout the week.

With these current extreme fire conditions throughout the state, don’t wait to evacuate! You should already be PREPARED and GO! early. If you see fire approaching, don’t wait to be told to leave. To learn more on preparing to evacuate, click here. En Español, clic aqui. 

Fires of Interest:

Camp Fire, Butte County (more info…)
Paradise, Pulga, Concow and Magalia
• 135,000 acres, 35% contained
• Evacuations and road closures remain in effect
• Estimated 6,867 structures destroyed. Most destructive and deadliest fire in California recorded history
• CAL FIRE Incident Management Team 4 (Derum) assigned

Hill Fire, Ventura County (more info…)
Santa Rosa Valley
• 4,531 acres, 94% contained
• CAL FIRE Incident Management Team 5 (Parkes) assigned. IMT#5 managing both Hill 
 and Woolsey fires
 
Woolsey Fire, Ventura County (more info…)
South of Simi Valley
• 97,620 acres, 47% contained
• Evacuations and road closures remain in effect
• CAL FIRE Incident Management Team 5 (Parkes) assigned. IMT#5 managing both Hill 
  and Woolsey fires
​

 
WASHINGTON, DC — For millions of people, Thanksgiving starts in the kitchen. Unfortunately, so do many safety risks, such as cooking fires. Emergency physicians offer a few health and safety tips to help you avoid a trip to the ER this holiday season.   
 
Research from the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) reveals that in 2017, on average, U.S. fire departments responded to a home fire every 88 seconds. And, Thanksgiving is the busiest day of the year for cooking fires.
 
“A few simple steps can ensure that you spend Thanksgiving with your family and loved ones, not in the emergency department,” said Vidor Friedman, MD, FACEP, president of ACEP. “Try to avoid doing too many things at once; burns, fires or lacerations happen when you lose concentration, get careless with hot liquids or oils, or try to slice things too quickly.” 
 
DO:

• Make sure you have smoke alarms installed near the kitchen, bedrooms and on each level of the home. Test batteries and make sure that the devices are fully operational.
• Keep a fire extinguisher in your kitchen. Contact your local EMS department for tips on proper training and storage.
• Avoid loose clothing or wearing anything that dangles while cooking.
• Keep an eye on simmering pots as well as items baking in the oven.
• Keep kids and pets away from cooking areas.
• Clean cooking areas regularly. Grease build up is a health and safety hazard.
• Double check when you are done cooking that you have turned off the stove, oven or any appliances.

DO NOT

• Do not throw water on a grease fire. The safest and fastest way to extinguish a grease fire is to remove oxygen from the flame. The best ways to do that are to smother it with a lid, another pot or a blanket. If the fire is not severe, you can cover it with baking soda.
• Do not put a frozen turkey in the oven. Thaw and dry it first.
• Never deep fry a frozen turkey, it should be completely thawed out first. And, frying a turkey should be done outside on a flat, non-flammable structure.

Other steps you can take to ensure a safe Thanksgiving feast include:

• Wash your hands thoroughly when handling uncooked meat and keep it separate from other foods.
• Sanitize any surface that touches raw food. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends that oven temperatures should be no lower than 325 degrees.
• If you have allergies and you did not cook the meal yourself, remember to ask about the ingredients and how food was prepared. Refrigerate all leftovers within 2 hours. 
• Pace yourself when a big meal is involved, whether you are preparing, eating or cleaning up afterward. Chew slowly and carefully to avoid choking. Cut food into small pieces and make sure children are sitting calmly while eating.
• If food gets stuck, don’t panic. Relax and take a drink of water. If you can’t breathe, bang on something, or do anything you can to get attention and get help. Have somebody call 911 while somebody else, preferably a person who is trained in emergency first aid such as the Heimlich maneuver, tries to dislodge the food. 
• If your gathering includes alcoholic beverages, drink in moderation. And of course, do not drink and drive.

More health and safety tips can be found at www.emergencycareforyou.org.
 
ACEP is the national medical specialty society representing emergency medicine. ACEP is committed to advancing emergency care through continuing education, research and public education. Headquartered in Dallas, Texas, ACEP has 53 chapters representing each state, as well as Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia. A Government Services Chapter represents emergency physicians employed by military branches and other government agencies.
 
 
 

By Harold Pease, Ph. D

The pilgrims realized that some kind of governing document was needed for the new colony, “as human nature is prone to disunity and differences that could be disruptive of peace.”  Governor William Bradford thus described the circumstances under which the agreement came about.
“This day,[November 11, 1620] before we came to harbour, observing some not well affected to unity and concord, but gave some appearance of faction, it was thought good there should be an association and agreement, that we should combine together in one body, and to submit to such government and governors as we should by common consent agree to make and choose, and set our hands to this that follows, word for word…”  
In other words, we agree to remain one body and to abide to common consent in deciding what is best for our community--even “word for word.”  A democracy, if you will.  That was a giant step for the time and a prelude for what would follow—eventually a republic.  The idea that the peoples’ vote even mattered was revolutionary.  
The Mayflower Compact contained just three sentences, the middle sentence is the heart of the document.  It established a pure democracy.  All have a common voice.  All must obey the will of the majority.  None can go their separate way if disaffected.  
It read: “We whose names are underwritten, the loyal subjects of our dread sovereign Lord, King James, by the grace of God, of Great Britain, France and Ireland king, defender of the faith, etc., having undertaken, for the glory of God, and advancement of the Christian faith, and honor of our king and country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the Northern parts of Virginia, do by these presents solemnly and mutually in the presence of God, and one of another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil body politic, for our better ordering and preservation and furtherance of the ends aforesaid: and by virtue hereof to enact, constitute, and frame such just and equal laws, ordinances, acts, constitutions, and offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general good of the colony, unto which we promise all due submission and obedience.”  
The actual landing of the Pilgrims occurred December 21 and work began on building houses two days before Christmas in the harsh New England winter.  Women, children and the infirm remained on the Mayflower for another two weeks.  Starvation, scurvy and lack of adequate shelter took 45 of the 102 emigrants the first winter.  Of the 18 adult women 13 died the first winter, another the following May leaving only four alive for the 1st Thanksgiving the following Fall.  Moreover the starving times lasted two additional years. Why?
What is not said, but resulted none the less, was the end of private property, and the free market system.  No reason to excel if excellence is disincentivized.  All were forced to accept the collective will with no opportunity, if disaffected, to take themselves out of it.  The result, the colony almost starved to death.  The Compact might well have said “Each will produce according to his ability and each will receive according to his need,” which phrase is the heart of socialism.  Pure democracy (the collective will) tends to degenerated into socialism, which reduces or destroys incentive to produce or excel, which leads to shortages, which leads to the masses demanding an equal share of the less that is produced, which leads to an impoverished society. 
This Thanksgiving Day we think of the Pilgrims enjoying abundant food, but this was not their real reality.  Few focus on the starving times the first year in 1620 when nearly half died.  Harvests were not bountiful in that year and the next two.  Plymouth was beset by laziness and thievery.  Governor William Bradford, in his History of Plymouth Plantation, reported that “much was stolen both by night and day” to alleviate the prevailing condition of hunger.  The mythical “feast” of the first Thanksgiving did fill their bellies briefly, he reported, and they were grateful, but abundance was anything but common.  Why did this happen?  Because they had fallen victim to collective will and the socialistic philosophy of mandated “share the wealth.”  This dis-incentivized the productive base of society.  
Then suddenly, as though night changed to day, the crop of 1623 was bounteous, and those thereafter as well, and it had nothing to do with the weather.  Bradford wrote, “Instead of famine now God gave them plenty and the face of things was changed, to the rejoicing of the hearts of many, for which they blessed God.”  He concluded later, “any general want or famine hath not been amongst them since to this day.”  
One variable alone made the difference and ended the three-year famine.  They abandoned the notion of government (or corporation) owning the means of production and distribution in favor of the individual having property and being responsible to take care of himself.  Before, no one benefited by working because he received the same compensation as those who did not.  After the change everyone kept the benefits of his labor.  Those who chose not to work basically chose also to be poor and the government (corporation) no longer confiscated from those who produced to give to those who did not.  No government food stamps here.




 
Dr. Harold Pe

 
Sacramento – The California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) reported increased revenue numbers today for cannabis sales for the 3rd quarter of 2018. Tax revenue reported by the cannabis industry totaled $93.1 million for 3rd quarter returns received through October 31, 2018, which includes state cultivation, excise and sales taxes. It does not include tax revenue collected by each jurisdiction.
 
California’s cannabis excise tax generated $52.4 million in revenue reported on 3rd quarter returns received through October 31, 2018. The cultivation tax generated $12 million, and the sales tax generated $28.7 million in reported revenue. Retail sales of medicinal cannabis and medicinal cannabis products are exempt from sales and use taxes if the purchaser provides a valid Medical Marijuana Identification card and valid government-issued identification card.
 
Previously reported revenue for 2nd quarter returns was revised to $80.2 million, which included $42.3 million in excise tax, $4.7 million in cultivation tax, and $33.2 million in sales tax. Revisions to quarterly data in prior periods are the result of amended and late returns, and other tax return adjustments.
 
In November 2016, California voters approved Proposition 64, the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act. Beginning on January 1, 2018, two new cannabis taxes went into effect: a cultivation tax on all harvested cannabis that enters the commercial market and a 15 percent excise tax upon purchasers of cannabis and cannabis products. In addition, retail sales of cannabis and cannabis products are subject to state and local sales tax.

Susanville – This morning, the Lassen-Modoc Unit sent firefighting resources to the CALFIRE Butte Unit to aid in the fight against the “Camp” Fire currently burning near Paradise. Due to this commitment of resources and the lack of rain in our own area, it has become necessary to suspend all burn permits. “We appreciate the desire to burn yard debris in the short window of time we have between late autumn and snowfall,” said Scott Packwood, CALFIRE Lassen-Modoc Unit Chief. “However, the commitment of local resources, lack of precipitation, critical fire weather, and acute dryness of vegetation throughout the state, makes it necessary to suspend all burning on state responsibility area lands within the counties of Lassen, Modoc and Plumas. We will lift the suspension when it is safe to do so.”

This suspension takes effect November 8, 2018 at midnight and prohibits all residential outdoor burning of landscape debris such as branches and leaves until the suspension is formally rescinded. To keep informed about burn permits and other important fire information, please like us on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, or signup at Constant Contact to receive emails.
## # 

​

​Because of the loss of our main transmission feed due to the Camp Fire in the Feather River Canyon, PSREC is on backup power and we need members to conserve as much energy as possible until we are able to return to our normal power feed. We do not yet know when we will be able to return the system to normal, and conservation will help us avoid rolling blackouts when loads increase in the evenings and early mornings when our load is the highest. Thank you for your cooperation in keeping everyone’s power on. If you have any questions, please call us at 800-555-2207 or visit our website at www.psrec.coop, you can also follow us on Facebook and Twitter.
 

• ISSUES
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  • 
    
    
    
    
  
  
  
  
  

October 31, 2018/by Edward RingThere are obvious reasons the median home price in California is $544,900, whereas in the United States it is only $220,100. In California, demand exceeds supply. And supply is constrained because of unwarranted environmental laws such as SB 375 that have made it nearly impossible to build housing outside the “urban service boundary.” These laws have made the value of land inside existing urban areas artificially expensive. Very expensive. Other overreaching environmentalist laws such as CEQA have made it nearly impossible to build housing anywhere.
Then there are the government fees attendant to construction, along with the ubiquitous and lengthy permitting delays caused by myriad, indifferent bureaucracies with overlapping and often conflicting requirements. There is a separate fee and a separate permit seemingly for everything: planning, building, impact, schools, parks, transportation, capital improvement, housing, etc. Government fees per home in California often are well over $100,000; in the City of Fremont in 2017, they totaled nearly $160,000 on the $850,000 median value of a single family home.
This is a shakedown. It has caused a politically engineered housing shortage in California that enriches billionaire property developers that have the financial strength to withstand decades of delays and millions in fees, because they reap the extreme profits when they sell these homes at inflated prices. Also enriched are the public servants whose pay and pensions depend on all taxes – definitely including property taxes – and all fees being as stratospheric as humanly possible. Public employee pension funds also benefit from housing scarcity, as their real estate investment valuations soar into bubbleland.
When litigious environmentalists, insatiable public sector unions, and an elitist handful of left-wing oligarchs control a state, artificial scarcity is the consequence. Welcome to California.
REJECTED POLICY – REAL SOLUTIONS TO THE HOUSING CRISIS
To decisively solve California’s housing shortage, some of California’s more than 25,000 square miles of rangeland, currently occupied by cattle, would have to be approved for suburban development. California is only 5 percent urbanized, although if you listen to environmentalists, you might get the impression it only had 5 percent remaining open space. You could fit ten million people onto half acre lots in four person households and you would only use up 2,000 square miles – that’s only 1.1 percent of California’s land area. Why aren’t massive new housing developments spreading out along California’s 101, I-5 and 99 corridors?
Real solutions to California’s housing crisis would also require increasing the capacity of California’s water infrastructure and transportation infrastructure. In both cases, investment would be cheaper if this expansion was done on raw land. Real solutions to California’s housing crisis would mean rescinding the mandatory rooftop solar requirement on new home construction, and instead recommissioning and expanding the nuclear power complexes at Diablo Canyon and San Onofre, and embracing development of additional nuclear power and natural gas power plants. In a less confiscatory regulatory environment, the private sector could fund all of this while lowering costs to consumers.
Reforming environmental restrictions and unleashing private sector development of homes and infrastructure is the fastest, easiest way for home prices in California to return to near the national average. In turn, that would solve nearly every problem associated with a shortage of housing. California’s families would be able to afford to buy homes, or pay affordable rent. California’s employers, most definitely including government agencies, would be able to attract workers at prices that would not break their profits or their budgets, which would benefit the economy. And far fewer people would be rendered homeless.
APPROVED POLICY – COMPLETELY USELESS “SOLUTIONS” TO THE HOUSING CRISIS
As long as environmentalist litigators, public sector unions, and left-wing oligarchs run California, none of these real solutions will ever happen. What are they proposing instead?
To summarize, all politically viable housing solutions in California involve densification, i.e., cramming ten million more people into existing urban areas, and, predictably, more taxes, bonds, fees, subsidies and government programs.
Rent Control, Government Subsidized “Affordable Housing” and Government Funded Homeless Shelters
California is the epicenter of America’s “progressive” power structure. In California, in addition to controlling the public bureaucracy through their unions, progressive ideologues control the press, social media, search media, K-12 public education, academia, most corporations, the entertainment industry, and virtually all serious political campaign spending. As a result, California’s progressives can use ballot initiatives to con a brainwashed populace into approving their latest housing policy agenda. The common thread? Government control; government funding. For example, on the ballot this November are propositions to permit cities and counties to enact rent control, issue state bonds totaling $4 billion to build “affordable housing,” and use state tax revenues to build more government-run homeless shelters. It is possible all three of these measures will pass.
Already in progress is the implementation of California state laws that took effect Jan. 1 – AB 2299 and SB 1069 – which amend existing state laws governing “accessory dwelling units.” These new laws force California’s counties to streamline the process whereby homeowners can construct additional homes in their backyards. Does that sound good? Not so fast.
Doubling Suburban Population Densities ala Government Subsidized “Accessory Dwelling Units”
There’s a reason people work hard for decades to pay off their mortgages so they can own homes in spacious suburbs. It’s because they value the leafy, semi-rural atmosphere of an uncrowded suburban neighborhood. AB 2299 and SB 1069 will effectively double the housing density in these neighborhoods, violating the expectations of everyone living there who relied on the zoning rules that were in effect when they bought their homes.
If zoning laws in existing suburbs were relaxed at the same time as zoning restrictions were lifted on the urban periphery, the impact of these new rules might be mitigated. But every policy California’s elite and enlightened geniuses come up with is designed to maintain “urban containment.” And to add to the disruption these laws will inflict on quiet neighborhoods, California’s cities – starting with Los Angeles – are providing subsidies to homeowners to build these homes, then encouraging them to rent the properties to low income families wherein the government will pay the rent via Section 8 vouchers.
This is an expensive, utopian scheme that oozes with compassion but is fraught with problems. Doubling the density of suburbs is already problematic. But doubling the density of suburbs by subsidizing the settlement of people on government assistance into every backyard, invites social friction. It is forcible integration of people who, for whatever reason, require government assistance to support themselves, into communities of taxpayers, who, by and large, are working extra hard to pay the mortgages on overpriced homes in order to provide their children with safe neighborhoods.
As usual, when it comes to enlightening the public, neither the media, nor the urban planning experts in academia, ever offer much beyond pro-densification propaganda. A glowing New York Times article, entitled “A Novel Solution for the Homeless: House Them in Backyards,” raves about this entire scheme, already being tried in Los Angeles, Portland and Seattle. The article includes a quote from Vinit Mukhija, a professor of urban planning at UCLA, who says: “The value [of subsidized accessory dwelling units] goes beyond that, though, because it is finally somewhat of a departure of the purity of single-family housing in the region. It’s a good step to change what people here really consider a dogma of private housing.”
The “dogma of private housing.” That epitomizes California’s elitist hostility towards ordinary families owning detached homes with spacious yards.
The incentives created by such a project are perverse. California’s elite has made homes unaffordable. Then, to the people who sacrificed so much to buy these homes despite their punitively high prices, the government offers them subsidies and Section 8 payments, if they are willing subdivide their lots and turn over half their property to people supported by the government. Inevitably, many financially struggling homeowners will be forced to accept this cruel bargain if they want to keep their homes.
Finally, just like in 2008, there will eventually be another economic downturn, when many distressed homeowners will be forced to sell their properties. And when that happens, just like in 2008, investment banking speculators will move in and buy homes by the thousands. This next time, however, these institutional investors will be salivating at the prospect of collecting government subsidies so they can operate two rental units on a single piece of property.
Demolishing Homes to Build High Rises Near Transit Stations
Another way California’s elites – many of whom live in gated communities with homeowner covenants prohibiting nasty things like accessory dwelling units in backyards – propose to solve California’s housing crisis is to force demolition of single family dwellings in the vicinity of mass transit stations. They support this mass destruction of vintage neighborhoods in order to make room for high density apartments and condominiums up to five stories in height. While an attempt in 2018 to enact this draconian solution was beaten back, California’s coercive utopian lawmakers will bring it back in 2019. Some form of this law is likely to pass.
There’s nothing wrong with gradually increasing the population density in the core of large cities. That is a natural and organic process. But it is the job of legislators and local officials to moderate that process, protecting established neighborhoods. Instead, again, the policy consensus in California is to cram ten million new residents into existing urban areas.
Government Subsidized Homeless Shelters on some of the Most Expensive Real Estate on Earth
Perhaps the most misguided housing policies coming out of California concern the homeless. Despite years of bloviating by the compassionate elite, almost no good data is available on homeless populations, much less any good policies. Press coverage of the homeless centers on the family unit; small children, parents forced out of their home by high rents. These are gut wrenching stories. But accompanying the legitimate cases of families or individuals coping with undeserved hardship, there are the willfully indigent, along with criminals, drug dealers, sexual predators and perverts. Again, the City of Los Angeles offers a striking example of bad policy.
In Venice Beach, which is within Los Angeles city limits, along one of the most expensive, touristy stretches of coastline in the world, there are now permanent homeless encampments. To address the challenge, Los Angeles city officials are fast-tracking the permit process to build a homeless shelter on 3.2 acres of vacant city-owned property less than 500 feet from the beach. This property, nestled in the heart of Venice’s upscale residential and retail neighborhoods, if commercially developed, would be worth well over $200 million. Imagine what could be done with that much money if the goal was to truly help the homeless. And by the way, the proposed shelter will be a so-called “wet” shelter, meaning that drugs and alcohol will not be permitted inside the shelter, but intoxicated homeless individuals will be allowed inside. Go in, get a bed, go out, shoot up, come back in.
That a solution so scandalously inefficient could even be considered by the do-gooders running City Hall in Los Angeles offers additional insights into the minds of California’s progressive elite. Solving the homeless crisis isn’t their goal here. Rather the intent is to create additional government-owned properties, hire additional government bureaucrats, while preening in front of television cameras and pretending to solve a problem. Should the Venice Beach property be developed as currently proposed, well connected construction contractors will rake in government funds, so eventually “up to 100” homeless people will find shelter. Meanwhile, thousands will remain outdoors.
California’s housing is unaffordable because of restrictive laws such as CEQA, AB 32, SB 375, and countless others at both the state and local level. At the same time, California’s political elites are are inviting in the world’s poor en masse to come and live here. An estimated 2.6 million illegal aliens currently live in California. But the rhetorically unassailable compassion expressed by these sanctuary policies does nothing to alleviate hardship in the nations where these refugees originate, because for every thousand who arrive, millions are left behind.
The result? While California’s visionary rulers engineer a shortage of housing supplies, their welcoming sanctuary policies engineer a burgeoning housing demand. This is the deeply flawed agenda they have implemented in California and are actively exporting to the rest of America.
The biggest lie of all is the compassionate facade that overlays every housing solution California’s elite promote. Because their solutions, however viable they may be politically, will not work. They defy basic economic sense. They create additional drain on public funds while doing nothing to alleviate the high prices that are caused by scarcity. They are sustained by an impossible assumption, that urban densification, and all the destruction that densification will bring, will in itself be sufficient to restore a supply and demand equilibrium for housing. And they reject the obvious solution, suburban expansion to complement higher densities in the urban cores, based on environmentalist objections that are overwrought. In practice, the solutions being implemented to resolve California’s housing crisis are not compassionate. They are cruel.
Eventually, enough Californians are going to realize they’ve been conned. They will recognize that government subsidized densification is financially unsustainable and ruinous to their way of life. They will support politicians who are willing to stand up to environmentalist litigators, government unions, and the left-wing oligarchy that profits from scarcity. Hopefully that will happen before it’s too late.
The California Policy Center is a 501c3 non-profit public charity. CA Corp. # 3295222. Federal EIN 27-2870463.
Copyright © California Policy Center 2017. All rights reserved. Developed by The Liberty Lab, Inc.

By Robert Baker, Aaron Foster, Austin Foster, Dylan Martinelli, Jacob Rust
  
 On Tuesday, October 30th DHS students went to the South part of the Yuba River  and saw the spawning of the Chinook during their life cycle.
            They learned about how and where they laid eggs and how they finally complete their life cycle. The students had a swell time rowing in rafts going down the river and seeing everyday life of the salmon, trout and other animals in the area. On the rafting trip that day they saw a total of 8 salmon and redds.
            During the trip down stream all of our groups had different guides who specialized in different careers, like biology and some of them had river rafting expertise, they were very well rounded with all subjects. While in our rafts going down slow streams they would tell us interesting facts about the wildlife, or where the salmon were in the water, they would also point out the redds which are white patches of rocks where the salmon would lay there eggs.
The life cycle of a salmon has five stages in their life. The students learned about all of them. The 5 stages are called the Egg stage, the Alevin stage, the Fry stage, the Parr stage, and finally the Adult stage. There were two types of salmon in the area where the students were. There were Chinook Salmon and Steelhead Salmon. The Chinook Salmon can reproduce once and the Steelhead Salmon three times.
The guides pulled over our river rafts, and had  a talk with us about specimen. For example, stonefly, mayfly, and caddisfly. They showed the group that most of them are under rocks when the water is running fast. That provides bubbles which equals oxygen for them. They gave us five minutes to find as many flies as we could.
            Before the end of the trip downstream, the guides pulled the groups onto land and the students a very wide view of the area and how far the river spans out and they explained how this should be kept clean and how their efforts to preserve this part of the river will help the surrounding environment.
 Here some quotes of the trip from the students that went on the trip.  Ezra Acuna said, “during the trip l learned how salmon lay their eggs and saw how the taggers record all the fishes.” “I came here a few years  ago and this year was a lot more fun.” Another quote from Ms Bolle, “We had a great time and really enjoyed it and hope we can do it again.”   A huge thank you to the Sierra Schools Foundation for funding this amazing trip, every student had a blast.