Santa Cruz Observer

Do you think the desalination debate is about water? For the opponents, it's not

By TOM HONIG

Those of us who think that Santa Cruz County has a water crisis are witnessing a frustrating political fight over a proposed desalination plant.

What's frustrating is that the two sides aren't fighting over the same thing. The pro-desal people see it this way: "We're worried that there won't be enough water and that when the next drought hits we'll be in a real fix."

But the anti-desal people would be happy not to have enough water. They won't say so, but it goes back to an old theory -- limit services and you limit growth.

All the things that a lack of water brings are growth limiting: things like building moratoriums, fewer water hookups, increased housing costs that limit an influx of new people. And that's what a number of people want. Take for example the huge cost of developing second units, unimproved lots or even the proposed Aptos Village development out in the Soquel Creek Water District.  If you don't want new people here, you say to yourself, "No new connections? Great!"

Anti-desal folks really don't want any new supply of water. Not that there's even one available -- except desal. Just try proposing a new reservoir. (In fact, doing so wouldn't even do much good; the problem Santa Cruz has is that most of its water comes from collected runoff -- and if and when there's a serious drought there won't be enoughwater no matter how many dams you build.)

Desal opponents have done nothing but attack an environmental impact report on the desal project since it came out. Wouldn't you think that at least one person might say something like: "Hmmm. Maybe the report makes sense."

It won't happen. Instead, they focus on more conservation (Santa Cruz already conserves more per capita than anywhere else around) -- and pit toilets, no lawns, fewer showers and -- yuck! -- recycling sewage runoff.

Meanwhile, Soquel Creek Water District, which unlike Santa Cruz utilizes groundwater, faces severe overdraft on its wells. Now. Today.

That's why the argument shouldn't be about growth. But that's where the anti-desal folks focus -- even though they're not saying so.

 

Why the Santa Cruz community owes so much to local law enforcement

By TOM HONIG

The tragedy of last week's shooting of two Santa Cruz police officers has resulted in an unprecedented level of community support, emotional outpouring and media coverage, but one aspect of the episode has gone unnoticed: the superior performance of local law enforcement that prevented the violence from escalating further.

The professionalism of the Santa Cruz Police Department and the other agencies involved -- the Sheriff's Office, the Highway Patrol, the Fire Department  and others -- kept the situation from degenerating into an even bigger tragedy.

The man responsible, Jeremy Goulet, shot officers Butch Baker and Elizabeth Butler, but he was intent upon taking out additional people -- other officers and innocent passersby. He had stolen not only some police weapons, but also one of the officers' protectivc vests. He wanted to make a last stand. He was a mass slayer in the making.

Local police officiers put a stop to it without more violence. They did it thanks to a tactical response by cooperating law enforcement agencies. They did it thanks to a high level of training, work that goes unnoticed by the general  public. They did it despite the emotion that must have been bubbling up inside them, knowing that two of their own had fallen. Mourning could come  later. They had a job to do --- and they did it.

Goulet was on the move after the shooting. He had driven around town and was perhaps headed back to a location where he could have made a stand -- taking aim at more people. The SCPD and SCSO stopped him. And they did so without any more casualties.

The community already knows this: our law enforcement officers do a great job -- day in and day out -- of serving those of us who live here. But most of us don't realize the level of professionalism that they can call on when the worst happens.

The wounds to the Santa Cruz community are real. The wounds to local law enforcement are severe and won't be overcome anytime soon. But the biggest tribute to the memory of Officers Baker and Butler is that they were part of a law enforcement community that responded with professionalism, bravery and competence. There is no greater tribute. 

Santa Cruz leaders encounter San Luis Obispo

By TOM HONIG

Take 69 Santa Cruz County folks from a variety of businesses, school districts, government bodies and non-profits, put them on a couple of buses and what do you do with them?

This week, the Santa Cruz Area Chamber of Commerce took them to San Luis Obispo, where this aggregation met with leaders from similar walks of life to learn more about how another community -- somewhat similar to Santa Cruz -- handles the kinds of issues that people here do every day.

The San Luis Obispo trip was an idea promoted by Cabrillo College President Brian King, who looked at the trip this way: 

"We have an opportunity to learn much from San Luis Obispo, a community that is in many ways like us. We will have an opportunity to evaluate how some of their initiatives might work in our counties and cities. We will be able to test and temper our notions and plans with their experiences. And, we will discuss mutual problems and complexities with  them to explore solutions neither of us have yet imagined.

"However ... I believe that the greatest benefit will be the 30-some hours we will spend together getting to know each other better."

So did it work? In a word -- yes. Our group met with San Luis business leaders, politicians, school officials and others who are trying to figure out solutions to the same problems that exist here. One particular issue that reared its head time and time again was the question of how to balance economic vitality with environmental protection.

I'll follow up on that issue in particular in future articles. Also, I'll be publishing reactions and thoughts from those on the trip.

And as for the most obvious question: was the junket fun? You're damn right it was. No, it wasn't a party like the Merry Pranksters, but it served to remind the participants that Santa Cruz is blessed with community folks who are not only bright but also simpatico. It's nice to be reminded of that.

Why we're fat and what to do about it

By TOM HONIG

CAPITOLA -- Science writer Gary Taubes questions the medical community’s conventional wisdom about why Americans get fat, and he’s bringing his message to Santa Cruz County.

The author of the best-selling book “Why We Get Fat,” Taubes takes aim at the role of refined sugars and carbohydrates – and says that dietitians and doctors are misreading “fairly obvious” data about why America has an obesity epidemic.

Taubes spoke Wednesday at New Brighton Middle School in Capitola at an event sponsored by the County Office of Education. County Superintendent of Schools Michael Watkins introduced him by saying that obesity and Type 2 Diabetes have reached epidemic proportions in Santa Cruz County.  According to the California Healthy Kids Survey, 38 percent  of  students in grades 7, 9 and 11  in Watsonville are overweight and 30 percent of teens in Santa Cruz are overweight or in danger of being

Taubes, in an interview, said, “It’s clear that refined carbohydrates and sugars lead to insulin resistance in the human body.  And that leads to a suite of the diseases well known in Western civilizations. It comes down to getting carb-rich foods out of our diets.”

Taubes studied applied physics at Harvard and aerospace engineering at Stanford before receiving a master’s degree in journalism from Columbia University in 1981. He’s the author of several books and is on the staff of Discover Magazine. He also is a fellow at UC Berkeley’s School of Public Health.

But it was a cover story for the New York Times Magazine in 2002 that brought him into prominence as an expert on diet and weight loss. The article, “What if it’s all been a big fat lie,” questioned whether the often-recommended low-fat diets popularized by the likes of Dean Ornish actually benefited Americans who have only been growing more obese each year.

Taubes, a college football defensive lineman and a man who himself was overweight, had lost weight on the controversial Atkins diet – which favors meat, other animal products and vegetables. It excludes most carbohydrate-rich food like rice, bread, potatos, cookies, pasta and, perhaps most of all, soda pop.

“The typical advice from the medical community is that people are fat because they eat too many calories and don’t exercise enough.”

Surprisingly, he said, the evidence doesn’t support that statement. “It’s sugar that does it.” And that’s not just sugar, but also the carbs that convert to sugar.

“If I’m right, they’ve got it wrong,” he continued. Fewer calories and more exercise is “a paradigm of energy balance.” Rather, he sees obesity as resulting from a “hormonal defect” – and that can be the result of taxing the insulin system.

And more exercise isn’t necessarily the answer to weight loss. In fact, he argues, that exercising won’t help if it leads to someone chowing down on unhealthy carbs.

“Look at it this way. A basset hound is chubby and is basically a couch potato. A greyhound is sleek and fast. You can withhold all the food you want from the basset  hound and put him on a treadmill for hours every day, but you won’t get a greyhound. You’ll just get an emaciated basset hound.”

Taubes asserted that doctors and the U.S. government have misinterpreted scientific data on dietary research. Counting calories and eating low-fat foods exclusively has been proved not to be true. His evidence? That Americans continue to get fatter.

He said that research essentially proves what American parents told their kids prior to  the 1960s --  go light on bread, pasta and sweets. “Those people were right all along.”

“It’s’ not about eating less and exercising more,” he repeated. “The issue is this. Is a bowl of oatmeal with skim milk better for you than eggs and bacon? The data say that eggs and bacon is the healthier way to eat.”

At the COE-sponsored event Taubes repeated an oft-sounded call to get sodas and fruit juices out of the schools. But substituting those items for sugar-rich carbohydrates isn’t the answer.

Taubes  is the second speaker in the field of obesity to be invited by the COE. Last year, Dr. Robert Lusting – who recently was featured on 60 Minutes – brought a similar message.

For a YouTube presentation by Taubes, go to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6vpFV6Wkl4 

 

Does anyone really understand what's happening with a proposed local rail line?

By TOM HONIG

Is anyone else confused about everything involved with the future of rail in Santa Cruz County?

The point of this blog is to explain things so that people can understand it. But I'm unable to do that when it comes to these issues: a rail trail, the purchase of 31 (or is it 32?) miles of track by the Regional Transportation Commission, what the RTC will do with it, whether the purpose is tourism or commuting and on and on.

The latest confusion is perfectly described in reporter Jason Hoppin's account in this week's Sentinel about the latest delay in the RTC's rail acquisition.

You have to sympathize with Jason. A clear and clever writer, he's trying to explain an unexplainable series of events that have been unfolding for years -- and he's only been covering the story for only a short time. Add to that the problem that the RTC board has had to meet in private to respond to funding questions asked by the federal government. No one is talking, so the reporter has had to put together the pieces of an already mixed-up situation.

OK, so read his story and see if you have some of the same questions I do. Like:

1. Why is the RTC so intent on buying the rail line? Is it to provide transportation, to continue freight service to Davenport or is it to buy the land for an eventual hiking/biking path? What actually is being proposed here?

2. Is there any freight service left now that Cemex in Davenport has shut down? What freight shipping is even happening?

3. Would any of this be pursued on its own merit -- or is it because the county qualified years ago for an $11 million federal grant for rail funding?

4. Are there funds available to establish the infrastructure -- stations and parking lots, primarily -- along the rail line?

5. What kind of rail service is envisioned? A commuter train? A tourist train? Something else?

6. Will opponents of train service on the tracks throw up roadblocks to any development of a rail line? After all, this is Santa Cruz, where nearly every major project faces neighborhood opposition.

7. What is the advantage of owning the rail line?

There are many more questions, but it would be great if just these seven were answered with any clarity. Maybe someone knows the answer. If you do -- I'd love to have it all cleared up.

Desalination opponents step up the fight

By TOM HONIG

Expect every meeting about water in the city of Santa Cruz to take on the look of a fight as opponents of desalination gear up to fight against any effort to plan for that extra source of water.

A meeting tonight (Monday) will be populated more than usual, especially by a group called Santa Cruz Desal Alternatives, which is pushing what it calls a "Plan B" for addressing water challenges. What that means is no desal.

The no desal group has been fighting against the city's strategy of looking into desalination as a future source of water. This comes long after other fights against the city developing new storage facilities. The focus here seemes to be on sharply limiting water supplies -- and therefore sharply limiting any new development.

That means a battle as old as modern-day Santa Cruz politics -- limiting growth by limiting services.

Opponents of desal have already made up their mind to oppose any desalination. They want to put a stop to even studying the issue.

Yet, in an op-ed piece in Sunday's Sentinel by Desal Alternatives leader Rick Longinotti, he quotes a J.M. Keynes saying "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"

Well, what I do is make sure all the facts are in. And if it's too soon to know whether desal is a good idea, it's also too soon to know if it's a bad one.

Wharf to Wharf videos spring up online

By TOM HONIG

 

Events like the popular Santa Cruz Wharf to Wharf Race are being changed dramatically by social media.

It used to be that people celebrated their running exploits with friends and family -- but now the Wharf to Wharf is becoming an online phenomenon as well.

First, online has changed the speed with which the Wharf race sells out every year. It used to take a couple of months for the 15,000-runner field to sell out. Now it takes just days.

And then there's online video of all aspects of the race -- the start, the finish, the stuff in between. Two videos are posted on the Wharf to Wharf Facebook page of marriage proposals. The Sentinel also has posted a video.

The Facebook page also has given runners a way to give vent to any frustrations. The main one: walkers. I'm not sure what you can do about that, because people who are walking -- or even running slow -- insist on getting up toward the front of the pack at the beginning of the race. It's probably getting worse thanks to an aging population -- there are more of us who can't run anymore but still want to be part of it.

Still the Wharf to Wharf Race remains perhaps the premier public event in Santa Cruz County each summer. Anything that popular now gets exposure on social media as well as conventional sites like the Sentinel, Patch, KSCO and on community television.

Definitely check out the Wharf to Wharf Facebook page. 

Desal battle heating up

The battle is heating up over a potential desalination plant that would be built cooperatively by the the City of Santa Cruz and Soquel Creek Water District.

An active group of opponents to the plan known as Santa Cruz Desal Alternatives are well organized and active. Most recently, they called on a task force set up by the city and Soquel Creek (the task force is known as SCWD2) to appoint a "Citizen Customer Advisory Committee," although it's unclear exactly what that committee would be doing. (You can bet it won't be to help get desal built).

Paul Gratz, an anti-desal activist, read this comment to the task force: "We are all in a new participatory water supply and management era. No longer are public water agencies impervious submarines operating in splendid isolation within water silos."

I think what he means by that is "We don't want no stinkin' desal."

Actually, that's going to be the problem with the upcoming public debate. The two water departments are looking for answers to what seems to be the threat of not enough water in Santa Cruz in the years to come. The opponents really don't care what the facts say. They don't want desalination. End of story.

I can't imagine that the water departments will ever come up a study that will convince the opponents to change their mind. 

Welcome to Santa Cruz politics.

A quiet encouragement of economic growth

Some quiet conversations are taking place around Santa Cruz in light of this area's struggling economy. At issue is this area's underperforming retail trade: a huge amount of dollars are being spent out of the area, with serious results. A national retail consultant, Robert Gibbs of Michigan, has been studying Santa Cruz in recent weeks, and although his report is far from complete, local officials already are looking at some of his preliminary conclusions.

The main one: leakage. For anyone not familiar with the term, it comes down to this: huge numbers of dollars are leaving the area. People are buying goods and services outside of Santa Cruz County. . That means that retails dollars, prospective salaries and even sales tax revenue are leaking out of the Santa Cruz Area. 

In a recent report, Chamber of Commerce Executive Director Bill Tysseling points out "there are a number of structural things we can do about this: (traffic) circulation patterns, signage, store recruitment, social issues downtown, seasonality in the Beach Area... ."

But there's a bigger piece: "What will it take for us to join together as a community to make things happen?"

He's talking about what it would take, politically, to attract new business. Economic growth makes some good things happen -- more jobs locally, better salaries and  increased sales-tax revenues for cash-strapped local governments. Specifically, it means attracting the kind of retail development that will entice local people to spend their money here instead of going out of town.

For years, many in Santa Cruz have been suspicious of economic growth -- especially if it means any new development. But quietly, that mood might be changing. Younger folks in Santa Cruz are in need of jobs and decent housing, and they're tired of having to look outside the county to make ends meet.

It's hardly a surprise that the Chamber of Commerce wants to promote economic growth. But in light of some tough times and a cratering economy locally, don't be surprised if you see some younger folks take up the cause.

No-growthers have long dominated the public debate. That could change. Younger folks want jobs, better salaries and opportunity. That doesn't mean they want runaway growth. But they do want a healthy economy and you won't have that if people keep spending their money elsewhere.

Wharf to Wharf sells out

Wow. Last year the annual Wharf to Wharf Race didn't sell out until June. Thursday at 1 p.m., Race Director Kirby Nicol announced that all 15,000 spots have been taken. Now in its 39th year, the race obviously is more popular than ever.

Of  course, social media boosted sales. This year, the Wharf to Wharf has its own Facebook page, and everytime a reminder got posted on the site another group of people signed up.

There will certainly be some disappointed folks who won't be given a bib number this year. The Wharf to Wharf Race -- slated for July 24 -- will also feature something new this year -- chip timing. So when a runner crosses the finish line, his or her race time will be recorded. Of course, with 15,000 runners, that official time still has to be adjusted, because sometimes it takes 10 minutes for runners in the back to even get up to the starting line -- and the timing begins with the gun.

But for most of the 15,000 runners, the official time is of secondary importance.