The Inside Opinion blog has moved to a new site and a new format. To find us, click here or just go to http://insider.blogs.pressdemocrat.com.   Be sure to bookmark this new site and/or look for how to create an RSS feed so you can get Inside Opinion updates as soon as they're posted.

Sorry for the inconvenience. But we think you'll appreciate the new look.

- Paul Gullixson, Editorial Director

If this job change goes through, Kolin will be taking over the helm of a city that just cut 46 positions and decided to close city libraries three nights a week to balance its budget.

But before you feel sorry for this community of 90210 fame, Beverly Hills has an annual budget of nearly $400 million serving a community of about 35,000 residents.

By comparison, Santa Rosa has a budget of about $300 million serving a community of 161,000 residents.

To see the flyer promoting the job that Kolin is on the verge of accepting, click here.

-  Paul Gullixson  

Well, so much for Republican tough-on-crime rhetoric.

At least as long as the offense in question is stealing water.

As state lawmakers wrapped up a gargantuan $11 billion water bond proposal in an all-night session Tuesday, they gutted provisions to step up enforcement of water rights and increase the penalty for illegal diversions to ... paying market rate for the water.

The opposition was led by GOP lawmakers representing agricultural regions, though credit also goes to lobbyists for East Bay MUD and the city of San Francisco. They objected to giving the state Water Resources Control Board such rudimentary tools as the authority to issue an interim cease-and-desist order while sorting out illegal diversion allegations. Also removed from the bill was authority for the board to initiate theft investigations rather than waiting for someone to complain.

Enforcement was one aspect of a legislative package that trades restoration of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and new conservation measures for additional storage and delivery systems sought by agribusiness interests and Southern California water districts. With major environmental groups split on the basic question of passing any water bill, the strictest enforcement rules were quietly jettisoned while the midnight debate focused on a questionable earmark for a Sacramento nonprofit group.

Don't farmers, who use 80 percent of the state's water, have the greatest interest in ensuring that water isn't being rustled?

California already is the only western state that doesn't regulate groundwater pumping. And the water package was, ahem, watered down to require measuring rather than monitoring (and certainly not regulating) to guard against overdraft. Also turning a blind eye to illegal diversions suggests lawmakers aren't very serious about oversight.

One laudable provision of the enforcement bill survived. It authorizes the water board to add 25 more people to investigate thefts. Currently, there are six.

Assemblyman Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael, who was at the bargaining table, said he'll pursue stronger enforcement rules when the regular legislative session resumes in January. For now, he concedes, "unless someone catches you stealing water, you're likely to succeed."

-- Jim Sweeney

So I was wondering ....

President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize for ... well, um ... 2009.

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger collects an award from a national parks foundation after trying to close hundreds of parks (and settling for slashing hours, raising fees and generally making them less attractive).

Do you suppose Caltrans has created enough havoc on the Bay Bridge this fall to win some national engineering award?

-- Jim Sweeney

Phillip Burton, the congressman and legendary San Francisco political boss, called it his contribution to modern art.

That would be the 1981 congressional reapportionment plan for California.

If you like want to try your hand at abstract art and your dance card is clear for, oh, 2011, the state will soon start accepting applications for appointments to an independent commission that will draw legislative boundaries after the 2010 census.

By passing Proposition 11 last year, voters took the job away from legislators, who used to have the power to pick their own voters. When they couldn't agree, the job fell to the Supreme Court.

Given increasingly sophisticated databases that can mine voter rolls, election returns and an array of demographic data, competitive legislative elections have all but disappeared, except for the occasional primary contest. That's a major reason that the Capitol is populated by hardcore conservatives and unwavering liberals, and cooperation and compromise are treated like cowardice and surrender.

The authors of Proposition 11 exempted congressional districts, in effect choosing self preservation (the state's House members were prepared to spend millions to defeat Proposition 11) over principle. A successful effort by the commission probably would create pressure to extend the system to Congress for the next round of reapportionment.

The state auditor (www.bsa.ca.gov/redistricting) will begin accepting applications for the 14 commission slots on Dec. 15. You're not eligible if you're a registered lobbyist, if you've changed party affiliation in the past five years or if you have made more than $2,000 in campaign contributions. You may be asked to write a 250-word essay. Perhaps an appreciation of Piccaso's work?

-- Jim Sweeney

Supervisor Carrillo says he doubts landfill will be reopened

In a major surprise, Supervisor Efren Carrillo joined Shirlee Zane today in rejecting the sale of the Sonoma County landfill to an Arizona firm. The board needed four votes to sell this public asset. It only received three.

Many applauded the outcome, but don't expect that this means the county will seek to reopen the landfill on its own. Sonoma County still lacks the financial resources to do that.

"I don't see us in a financial position to open it, frankly," Carrillo told me this afternoon. "We may have to look at (going out to bid) for outhaul contracts."

For that matter, the county also lacks the $11 million needed to formally close and seal the landfill. As I noted in an earlier blog, the state has ordered the county to either sell the landfill or close it immediately. That letter, sent Friday, is concerning to staff and the board.

When I talked to Carrillo this afternoon, he was in the process of writing letters to Assemblyman Wes Chesbro, a former member of the state Integrated Waste Management Board, and Assemblyman Jared Huffman seeking their help in getting an extension on this quick closure mandate. He said the cities in the county also "are really going to have to participate with us on this."

The outcome was a surprise because a straw vote taken Sept. 29 showed unanimous support for a sale. Zane later indicated that she was likely to oppose the deal although Carrillo didn't tip his cards until today.

So what was the difference?

"For me what it came down to was really trying to think of this in a long-term context and not handing down the issue to a private entity," he told me. "The time to resolve these problems is now  . . . The 20-year contract was just too long for me."

He said he thought the board was presenting "a new direction in how we look at trash."

He wants the county to set "the gold standard" of 100 percent diversion. But the sale to Republic came with a promise to ship the county's garbage to the landfill, once Republic got state permission to reopen it, for the next 20 years. The way the contract worked, if residents lowered their waste disposal, their rates went up. There also was no financial incentive for Republic to reduce the waste stream.

"I hope this is going to spark the debate to really look at diversion in a more serious way," Carrillo said. "We have momentum. The community is paying attention and, quite frankly, the people don't want us to take a back seat on this."

Is it possible that Republic could come back with an updated offer? Yes. "But as far as I'm concerned," he said, "we are looking at a new direction."

-  Paul Gullixson

The California water plan

For residents of the North Bay and North Coast regions, what's the impact of a grand compromise - if there is one - on water in Sacramento?

Most obvious is the bill.

Neither Sonoma nor Marin counties get any water from the state project. Neither do the counties farther up the coast. They would, however, have to help pay off $9.4 billion in state bond debt needed to buy the new plumbing.

So should the bonds be an automatic no vote for North Coast voters? Not necessarily.

There may not be much sympathy for Southern California swimming pools, and there's plenty of reasons to have mixed feelings about Central Valley farmers, some of whom use their subsidized water to grow surplus crops to be sold into federal commodity price support programs.

But a plan that also emphasizes restoration of the deteriorating Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta might be worth paying for. And it might pay dividends for sport and commercial fishermen, two North Coast mainstays, if a healthier delta can reverse the decline in Sacramento River salmon fisheries. Salmon are the real issue in the Delta, but it's easier for those only interested in shipping more water south to demonize smelt.

Does the plan unveiled in Sacramento this week pass that test? I'm want to hear more about it before I decide. What do you think?

-- Jim Sweeney

If county wants to reopen landfill, it would first have to close it. No kidding.

From what I hear, one Sonoma County supervisor, Shirlee Zane, may vote against selling the landfill on Mecham Road at today's meeting. But it's not clear there's a second vote out there to block this controversial sale. (The supervisors need at least four votes to sell this public asset. The vote is planned for sometime around noon.)

But here's one of the main reasons you can expect the board to go ahead with selling the dump to Arizona-based Republic Services: The county is out of time to do anything else.

State officials have made it clear that Sonoma County either needs to move forward "immediately" with the sale or begin closing the landfill this year. In a letter dated Oct. 23, the head of the state Integrated Waste Management Board made it clear that the state officials are tired of Sonoma County's "protracted process" (read: waffling) on whether to sell or reopen the landfill, which essentially stopped accepting waste four years ago but has not been formally closed.

"We further reiterate that any rejection of the divestiture (sale) premised on the future reopening of the facility by the county would in no way change the requirement that all closure activities must proceed forthwith, including the placement of final cover across the entire facility," wrote Scott Walker, a staff member who overseas landfill closures.

Translation: If the county opts not to sell, it will have to close the landfill (a very costly process) before reopening it (another very costly and bureaucratic process.)

And you thought government was trying to be more careful with its time and money.

This is not only crazy, it would force the county to continue trucking its garbage as far as Alameda County and Solano County.

So exactly how is this helping the environment - or serving taxpayer interests?

- Paul Gullixson

Curious things are happening in Rohnert Park, making one wonder whether there's maneuvering afoot to get former City Manger Carl Leivo, an outspoken critic of the City Council at one time, back in his old position.

At last week's meeting, Mayor Amie Breeze, who originally supported the idea of hiring a headhunter to conduct a broad search for a new city manger, suddenly reversed course. She wanted the search to be done by the council members themselves with a more local focus. In a memo to colleagues, she said in addition to saving the $20,000 to $30,000 cost of a consultant "the City Council and the community will retain greater control over the recruitment process." For example, she wanted the city to create a brochure and have an ad posted on the city's Web site.

Councilmember Joe Callinan joined her in opposing a nationwide search. But here's the odd thing. When their position did not prevail among their colleagues at the Oct. 13 meeting, both the mayor and Callinan refused to participate any further in the selection of an executive search firm. They essentially have left it to their City Council colleagues,  Gina Belforte, Jake Mackenzie and Pam Stafford, to pick the finalists to be interviewed for the search job.

One might expect to see that kind of reaction on a playground. But at a City Council meeting?

The speculation is that Breeze and Callinan are hoping to bring Carl Leivo back in as city manager, succeeding the much-respected Steve Donley who recently resigned to stay in the U.S. Coast Guard. Hence, the emphasis on a local search.

Leivo, who became city manager in 2003, was ousted in March of 2005, about three months after a new City Council majority took office. He signed a $250,000 separation agreement but continued to attend City Council meetings, sometimes chiding his formal bosses publicly. One time he called them "imperious know-it-alls."

Is this the kind of divisiveness that the city of Rohnert Park wants to bring back?

In any event, it doesn't appear the votes are there to go that route anyway. But it will be interesting to see what Breeze and Callinan decide to do at the next City Council meeting on Oct. 26. Will they vote on picking an executive search firm - or will they sit it out again because they didn't get their way?

-   Paul Gullixson

The Loma Prieta quake gave me a good shake in my third-floor office in Sacramento, more than 100 miles from the epicenter. I arrived in San Francisco a couple hours later, watching houses burn in the Marina from the Golden Gate Bridge.

But the quake story I remember best came two days later when I got a tip that 16 children who had suffered serious injuries in the catastrophic Armenian quake less a year earlier were in San Francisco for medical treatment, having arrived just in time for another quake. I met two of them at the old Shriner's hospital, where they talked about the quake at home that killed 25,000 people and the one they had just experienced.

They were sweet kids, it was a nice day and their stories of survival were a welcome change after a couple of days covering the worst of the damage in the Bay Area. Here's the top of my Oct. 20, 1989 story from the Los Angeles Daily News:

SAN FRANCISCO - Hermine Menjelikian and Mher Pekhlivania were sitting in their classrooms in Soviet Armenia 10 months ago when the walls collapsed on them in a massive earthquake that killed at least 25,000 people.

On Tuesday, they were in San Francisco when the earth again shook violently. They were at the Shriner's Children's Hospital being treated for bone and nerve damage suffered in the Armenian quake.

None of the 16 Armenian children who were brought to the Bay Area Oct. 1 for medical treatment was injured Tuesday, and only an 11-year-old boy was emotionally traumatized by going through a second disastrous quake.

"I told him not to worry," Mher, 13, said in Armenian through the interpreter. "These are very strong structures, not like the ones back home. But he said (about the house where he is staying) 'It's going to fall on us, it's going to fall on us.' "

"I thought earthquakes don't happen here," Mher added ...

A great laugh line from a 13-year-old kid who had seen some frightful tragedies.

 - Jim Sweeney

'I didn't think about that story again until 5:04 p.m. on Oct. 17, 1989 . . . '

Twenty years ago today at 5:04 p.m., three friends and I were seated in Section 2, Row 19 of the upper deck at Candlestick Park, right behind (albeit well above) home plate. This put us directly under a cement canopy around the rim of the ballpark.

I mention that because five years or so earlier, as a greenhorn reporter in San Francisco, I had written a story about a city-funded seismic report about that overhang. The report said that it wouldn't hold up in a strong earthquake. As I recall, the city didn't have the money to do the seismic upgrade, but then-Mayor Dianne Feinstein was determined to find it.

I didn't think about that story again until 5:04 p.m. Oct. 17, 1989 when that overhang began flapping like a bedsheet in the breeze - and the world suddenly felt like a porch swing. As my friends held on to the seats in front of them and studied what was happening out on the field, I was looking overhead. I remember thinking, calmly, "I should have updated that story."

As it turns out, Feinstein and the city had indeed found the money to seismically upgrade that overhang. It's one of those rare moments when I can say that a mundane municipal government budgetary decision probably saved my life - and those of many others.

Which is one of the things that often gets overlooked in coverage about the 1989 earthquake. Yes, the quake broke the Bay Bridge, made kindling of the Marina District, collapsed the Cypress Structure in Oakland and caused up to $10 billion damage.

But what's amazing is that only 67 people died. That is remarkable. (If you recall, first news reports claimed deaths would be in the "thousands.")

If it had been anywhere else, it might have been. A similar-sized quake hit a year earlier in Armenia claiming more than 25,000 lives. A magnitude 6.6 quake (smaller than the magnitude 6.9 of Oct. 17) hit in Iran 2003 claiming 30,000 lives.

The fact is that thousands of lives were probably saved in 1989 - and would be saved again today if the same thing happened -- because of tough seismic laws, design rules and hard-fought budgetary battles that someone probably at tought at the time was boring. Maybe even some reporter.

But at 5:04 p.m. that day, I appreciated those meetings and the decisions that came from them, or at least one. And that's a story that's probably worth updating.

- Paul Gullixson

Winter fell on a Tuesday this year, and it fell with a vengeance, exposing all those hidden places in life -- in Sonoma County -- where we're most vulnerable.
Trees. Roads. Power poles. They succumbed at their weakest joints, leaving blackouts, traffic jams and new lakes in their wake.

At one point today, this was the count: nine county roads flooded, 2,215 customers out of power, one sewing store at Coddingtown Mall severely damaged. Nearly 3 inches of rain fell in some areas.
Our rainy season has been like this in recent years. In like a lion, out like a damp lamb.
Will it be the same this year?
Construction crews had been preparing for days, rushing to put up tarps. Vineyard workers scrambled to bring in the last of the harvest. Police officers and road crews broke out the foul weather gear.
No matter the warnings, such abrupt shifts in seasons always seem to find many of us unprepared. Patio umbrellas, barbecues and the toys of summer, which should have been stored away suddenly become the playthings of weather -- objects to be chased down and secured in our slippers.
For some of us, our embarrassments were even more visible to the neighbors. We ran out to retrieve the newspaper, coats draped over our heads because we couldn't find a blasted umbrella anywhere, only to see the sprinklers hissing at us.
Moments later, grandma was on the phone gently reminding us that we had not cleaned out her gutters. But not to worry. She's sure it will be fine.
My 6-year-old was the first to notice at breakfast that a section of our back fence had come undone at one post. The fence section waved at me with every gust of wind.
This caused a commotion as, despite my assurances, Clara refused to finish her piano practice until she was certain that our Sheltie, Cody, was secure in our backyard.
So I was back outside in my Dearfoams, calling for the family dog only to discover that he had, indeed, escaped -- not through the broken fence but by a side gate blown open by the wind.
Bedlam ensued. Clara cried. Christopher ran for the scooter. Mom pleaded for calm. Fortunately, calm prevailed amid this storm among a storm.
With my wife's assurances, we left the front door open and stepped back. Sure enough, within minutes that wet mass of fur my children claim as a family member, and my wife seems to understand on some visceral level, strolled home on his own. A first.
He looked up at me with an expression that said, "Yes, I love a good chase. But let's be reasonable in a time like this."
Yes, we all must make sacrifices.
He was swiftly covered in towels and embraces and rewarded with a trip to school in the mini-van.

"I am sure it is a great mistake always to know enough to go in when it rains," wrote Adeline Knapp, a Bay Area journalist, more than 100 years ago. "One may keep snug and dry by such knowledge, but one misses a world of loveliness."
True enough. But there will be time enough to explore that world, that world of rain and the poetry it shakes loose, after we fix the fence -- and find that stupid umbrella.

-- Paul Gullixson

Apparently time has sweetened Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's view of a bill that tightens the definition of honey for the purpose of commercial sales in California.

At a news conference in July, he blasted AB 1216 by Assemblywoman Noreen Evans, D-Santa Rosa, as an example of wasted time and effort while hinting that perhaps it was time to return to a part-time Legislature.

"Well, it's obviously very sad that we are in the biggest financial crisis and we are way overdue to get the budget done and we face a $26 billion deficit," Schwarzenegger said at the time, "and I ask over and over and over the legislators upstairs to just focus on the budget and here they are, they're debating over the definition of honey."

Schwarzenegger also ripped bout measures to end the practice of tail docking (cutting the tails of dairy cattle) and to create a state commission to help blueberry farmers market their crop. But on Sunday, even as he vetoed dozens of bill, he signed all three.

For the record, Evans said the bill is intended to address concerns about deceptively labeled and mislabeled products and to ensure that products using other sweeteners and compounds aren't labeled as honey.

-- Jim Sweeney

Tedd Peterson of Cloverdale writes, "Parents who do not have their children immunized pose a major threat to the public at large, especially to those who have weak immune systems, those who are already ill, and those who are elderly. One wonders what they will do should their own children come down with communicable diseases. Rely on prayer?"

Mickey Cooke of Glen Ellen said, "As one who had every disease children got in the 1930's ... before good immunizations, I can tell you that sending an unprotected child to school endangers all others. Polio, whooping cough, measles and chickenpox were endemic in Marin County when I grew up. What's with these folks who are afraid of immunization?"

Dan Hayes of Petaluma wrote: "Yesterday morning, all three network morning shows were pushing the vaccination story, at the same time slot and that kind of in-sync reporting always makes me leary. Felt manufactured and over hyped."

Finally, someone who declined to leave a name wrote: "How can you trust a government that will turn you against your neighbor. Do they know best for you . . . or THEM?"

These are just four of the 80 comments left at the end of our most recent online survey, this one about vaccinations and the H1N1 strain, otherwise known as the swine flu.

As we noted in today's editorial, the survey found that just 45 percent of Press Democrat letter writers and other readers plan on getting an H1N1 flu shot. Thirty-five percent say they won't get the shot, while 20 percent are uncertain what they plan to do.

To take the survey yourself, see the results and/or read the comments click here. To be included in future surveys, just send an e-mail to me at paul.gullixson@pressdemocrat.com 

- Paul Gullixson

I was at an economic outlook breakfast meeting at the Vineyard Creek Hyatt in Santa Rosa this morning when I heard that President Obama had won the Nobel Peace Prize.

"For what?" I asked. "He hasn't done anything, yet."

"For diplomacy," a friend and office colleague said.

He then tried to explain the rationale as best he could: That Obama has energized the world and "strengthened international diplomacy."

I would argue that most of the international diplomacy that has occurred in his presidency has been, ironically enough, by his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her husband, he of North Korea handshake-for-prisoners fame.

But even so, if that was the criterion, "they should have given the Nobel to the voters who elected him," I said.

I hoped, for the president's sake and for the integrity of the prize itself, that Obama might find the fortitude to turn it down.

Of course, that wasn't going to happen. Who turns down a Nobel?

A couple of hours ago, Obama said he would fly to Norway at the end of the year to

accept the Nobel Peace Prize as a "call to action, a call for all nations to confront the challenges of the 21^st century."

Let me make clear that I like President Obama, for the most part. Our newspaper endorsed him, and, given the extraordinary circumstances of our time, he has done a respectable job in his first nine months in office in responding to our domestic economic concerns. But he has done little on the global stage. This has to be the first Nobel Peace Prize awarded for what someone is going to do. Certainly, setting out to solve the problems of the 21^st century is an ambitious agenda. But if objectives and dreams were prize-worthy, we would all be in Oslo come December.

I hate to say it, but this takes the luster off the Nobel. It also will make things more difficult for Obama, I predict.

Furthermore, what is left for this 48-year-old to achieve. The Heisman Trophy?