NVision... Fracking?

Over the course of the month, we've been seeking the truth behind the spin surrounding NV Energy and the bill (SB 123) it consumed. Fortunately, we haven't been alone. The Nevada Public Utilities Commission [PUC] also recently chimed in and questioned the numbers behind the estimated $494 million cost of NVision (aka the NV Energy possessed SB 123). They also questioned NV Energy's promise that NVision won't significantly increase electricity costs for consumers.

And funny enough, this nugget slipped out.

As [PUC Commissioner David] Noble said, ratepayers have helped build $3.5 billion in generating capacity in the past decade and gas prices have declined.

If NVision and its baked-in power plant construction regimen doesn’t pass, rates could decrease.

“Holding everything else constant, the next few rate cases may actually result in a rate decrease,” said Anne-Marie Cuneo, commission staff.

Yackira said this could also hold true if NVision becomes law. He said the commission is “really pointing to natural gas prices.”

“If those prices go down, our customers’ rates will go down,” he said.

Bottom line: Cheap natural gas is holding rates down now, coal is on its way out regardless of NVision, and the effect of the NVision plan won’t really be felt until new construction brings new costs to ratepayers several years down the road.

Aha! So NV Energy is basing its promises of lower (or at least not-significantly-higher) electric costs on "cheap natural gas". And come on, we all know what that means. Fracking is likely in the mix.

So what's the big deal here? Fracking has artificially held down the cost of natural gas extraction. And I say it's artificial because we see cheap natural gas, yet we're also increasingly seeing the high costs of decimated communities and ecosystems due to fracking.

This is why outrage has steadily been growing over the fossil fuel industry's sneaky ploy to frack across America. And this why we may soon see action to halt this next door.

"It's clear that we must heed the call from our concerned constituents and demand answers about the safety of fracking," said Assemblywoman Holly Mitchell, D-Los Angeles, author of Assembly Bill 1323.

A branch of the [California] Department of Conservation has released some draft regulations that would govern fracking, but lawmakers have criticized the proposed rules as too vague and lambasted the Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources for moving too slowly.

"The lack of regulations in an environment that should be regulated is a recurrent theme," said Assemblyman Richard Bloom, D-Santa Monica, author of Assembly Bill 1301. "Public and scientific concerns have increased exponentially yet regulatory oversight lags behind."

Bloom said a moratorium would offer a needed window for study and would "get everyone to the table" to craft a framework for fracking.

"We must identify the risks and assure the public that we are doing everything in our control to protect them," Bloom said, "but to date the state has failed to do that."

In recent days, the fossil fuel industry has kicked into high gear to try to spin away all the worries over fracking. It's even gone as far as trying to silence the filmmaker behind the Gasland documentaries! Apparently, California legislators may finally be wisening up to fossil fuel industry spin.

Will our legislators do the same here? SB 390 doesn't even go that far. It only sets new regulations on fracking to fill the void left by the feds. (Then President George W. Bush pushed to exempt fracking from federal environmental safeguards in 2005.) And right now, it's sitting in the Senate Finance Committee, just waiting for action.

Funny enough, NV Energy hasn't said a peep about SB 390. Why not? NV Energy claims that NVision is all about expanding renewable energy opportunities right here in Nevada while closing the door on coal fired power plants for good. And to be fair, NVision does include plans for new solar plants while guaranteeing the closing of the Reid-Gardner coal plant near Moapa.

However with that being said, NVision calls for even more generation of natural gas power. And NV Energy executives have recently admitted to the PUC that their forecasts for lower consumer costs depend on "cheap natural gas". And as mentioned above, fracking technology has been artificially keeping natural gas costs low... While wreaking havoc on communities where this kind of extraction is occurring.

So what's the deal? How does NV Energy plan to access all the natural gas that NVision calls for? Does NV Energy have any ties to Noble Energy's pursuit of a fracking license in Elko County? What price will consumers ultimately pay for NVision if/when natural gas prices are not so artificially low? And why can't we accelerate both our economy and our commitment to solving the climate crisis by focusing more on the renewable energy bonanza that's right under our noses here in Nevada?

These questions need to be answered. #NVLeg, you're now on notice.

From Brooks to Brown, a Sordid Tale of a Broken Mental Health Care System

We've known for some time that this is the case. Yet since the Steven Brooks scandal broke, his plight has shed light on the state of mental health care here in Nevada. So what's the state of mental health care here in Nevada? It can easily be described in one word: Awful.

The [Nevada Division of Mental Health & Developmental Services] suffered a 12.5 percent cut in its budget over the past two years and a 13.9 percent decrease in general fund revenue, resulting in a loss of 150 positions. The lost jobs included those in inpatient and outpatient treatment centers. Like other state agencies, those employees who kept their jobs also endured 2.5 percent salary reductions and mandatory unpaid furloughs.

From fiscal 2009 through fiscal 2012, Nevada saw its mental health budget decline by 28.1 percent, the nation's fifth highest drop during that time.

"The cuts have raised concerns regarding meeting client needs," the report stated. "Budget cuts and elimination of positions and services has been a trend since the last comprehensive Needs Assessment in 2008."

One hurdle facing the division is that Nevada already ranks poorly in mental health spending per resident in comparison to most other states. Nevada also was dead last in Medicaid spending per resident from fiscal 2004 through fiscal 2009 and was 49th in 2010. That year, Medicaid spending averaged $1,224 per U.S. resident but only $505 per Nevadan.

Any wonder why Governor Brian Sandoval (R) suddenly found an extra $25 million for mental health services?

Well, here's another reason. The Sacramento Bee has been investigating the story of James Flavy Coy Brown since March. And the Northern California paper has since uncovered the terrifying truth of the mental health system here in Nevada.

It was 6:30 a.m., 15 hours and 11 stops after a taxi had scooped him up in front of Rawson-Neal Psychiatric Hospital in Las Vegas, where he had spent the previous 72 hours, and deposited him at a bus station.

During the long ride to Northern California, Brown had rationed the peanut butter crackers and Ensure nutritional supplements that a staff member at the mental hospital had given him, along with his discharge papers and a bus ticket to Sacramento. His food was gone, and he was nearly out of the medication to treat his array of mood disorders, including schizophrenia, depression and anxiety.

As the bus door opened in Sacramento, Brown, 48, stepped out into the pre-dawn gloom. It was 30 degrees, and his windbreaker was no match for the chill.

Brown, a native of the American South with a distinct accent and a healthy head of salt-and-pepper hair, had arrived in the capital city with no concrete plan for survival. He had no friends or relatives in Sacramento. He had lost his ID, Social Security and insurance cards somewhere in Las Vegas. He had no idea how to fill the prescriptions that helped tame the voices and anxiety that clouded his mind.

Brown was discharged from Rawson-Neal... And thrown onto a Greyhound bus. And 15 hours later, he was in California. And he was clearly still suffering from severe mental illness. James Flavy Coy Brown needed more treatment, yet Nevada just decided to dump him into California.

Obviously, several officials in California are furious. And the Nevada Division of Mental Health & Developmental Services is now facing state and federal investigations. So far, it's already been discovered that Brown was not the only dumped out of state. Far from it, there were many more cases of patient dumping to California and other states.

In February alone, at least three other mental patients were discharged from Rawson-Neal Psychiatric Hospital in Las Vegas to far-flung destinations, including California, with a small supply of medications and a few cans of Ensure for nourishment, according to a report issued Monday by the Nevada State Health Division.

Those four represent just more than 10 percent of the 30 sample files reviewed by state investigators in response to concerns about Brown's care. [...]

Nevada recently has made a practice of busing mental patients out of state. The state sent 99 psychiatric patients to California between July 1, 2012, and the end of February, Nevada health officer Tracey Green told state lawmakers during last month's hearing. She said 81 percent were California residents who wanted to go home.

By contrast, an official with Arizona State Hospital told The Bee that facility has not sent a patient out of state by bus in recent memory. Oregon State Hospital discharged one patient to family in California between July 2012 and January, according to a hospital spokeswoman.

The federal Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services is working with Nevada authorities to investigate the state's treatment of mental health patients.

Some patients have been sent as far away as Oklahoma and Massachusetts (??!!). And of course, many were simply packed into Greyhounds and dumped into California. And they were done so despite needed further treatment. And they were only given a few cans of Ensure and a tiny supply of medicine.

So is this what Nevada considers to be "proper mental health treatment"? No wonder why Steven Brooks was allowed to wither on the vine for so long. And no wonder why Governor Sandoval suddenly found another $25 million for mental health care. (Yet that still doesn't completely erase the previous 4 years worth of budget cut, let alone help the state catch up with 2 decades worth of growing case loads.)

So what will it take for Nevada to fully fund the kind of mental health care that our state needs? How many more embarrassing scandals must emerge before the state fully funds mental health care?

Surprise! California Balks at Trashing Tahoe.

Who could have guessed that last year's "Trash Tahoe Bill" would get such an icy reception across state lines? Who could have guessed? Steve Sebelius noted it yesterday, and The LA Times posted more today on California's response to Nevada's SB 271.

Last year, Nevada state Sen. John Lee [D-North Las Vegas] sponsored a bill that would pave the way for development in the Tahoe basin. Specifically, the legislation calls for loosening the bi-state governing board's voting requirements, effectively making it easier to change environmental standards. Under the law, if the conditions aren't met by late 2015, Nevada will walk.

In a letter to Lee on Wednesday, [California State Senate Leader Darrell] Steinberg [D-Sacramento] called the legislation "both unnecessarily inflammatory and deeply counter-productive."

"One can only imagine how leaders in Nevada would react if California were to take similar action," he wrote. "It is both surprising and disappointing to see a national treasure as important as Lake Tahoe become a political hostage to the agenda of special interest groups who have little interest in the many values the region provides."

The letter comes as the states argue over the density and scale of redevelopment. The bi-state compact was established by federal legislation in 1969 to protect the lake after years of loosely regulated development had paved over parts of the basin and clouded its stunningly clear waters. [...]

In his letter, Steinberg said he had appointed a delegation of lawmakers to work with Nevada on Tahoe issues. "I want to express my openness to new, thoughtful, and creative approaches to addressing the challenges relating to Lake Tahoe," he wrote, "provided they are consistent with the priorities" of the compact.

And frankly, I don't blame Steinberg and his fellow California legislators who are appalled by our legislature sticking them with this reckless action. I guess just because a few well connected lobbyists, along with a certain legislator, own property on Tahoe and want to profit off more development there doesn't mean California's legislators are prepared to trash Tahoe. Thanks to the ridiculously shortsighted SB 271 that passed last year, the entire Lake Tahoe Compact is in danger of falling apart.

So now, Steinberg is offering to send a delegation of California State Senators to negotiate with our state on how to move forward on Tahoe. I hope our legislators take some time to rethink the huge mistake they made in passing SB 271 (especially the ones who held hostage last year's budget over it) as they prepare to meet with the California delegation. So far, California (rightly) wants nothing to do with disemboweling the environmental safeguards necessary to protect Lake Tahoe for future generations, so Nevada needs to drop the hissy fit pushed by big developers and agree to a path forward for Tahoe that will preserve the lake for all Nevadans and Californians.

CA to Make History with First Openly Gay Assembly Speaker

Well, good on my former home state. Finally, some good news from California for a change:

Assembly Democrats this afternoon tapped John A. Perez to be the chamber's next leader, a boost that would make him the first openly gay lawmaker to hold the powerful post.

Perez emerged from an afternoon meeting of the chamber's Democrats locking arms with his chief rival, Assemblyman Kevin De Leon (D-Los Angeles) and the current leader, Speaker Karen Bass (D-Los Angeles).

“It's obviously an incredibly moving experience to have the unanimous support of my colleagues,” Perez said of his fellow Democrats.]

Perez, a cousin of Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, has served just a single year in the Legislature. As a result, he will be eligible to serve as Assembly speaker for up to five years – one of the longest tenures in the influential position since term limits capped Assembly service at six years.

And not only is he gay, and not only is he Latino, but he also knows how to get the job done. I remember meeting him last year, and again early this year. I was blown away by his intelligence and his command of the issues. And since California has strict term limits (6 years for Assembly, 8 years for Senate) for its legislature, the next Assembly speaker will really need to hit the ground running to be effective.

Let's hope for our next door neighbors to the west that John Perez will be effective.

Nope, The Climate Crisis Isn't Going Away

(Also at OC Progressive)

Now I know the corporate media haven't been talking about it lately, but just because they're not talking about it doesn't mean it's not happening. Rather, it's quite dangerous that it's falling under the radar. Believe it or not, the climate crisis is getting worse.

Global warming has melted glaciers in the United States at a rapid and accelerating rate over the last half-century, increasing drought risks and contributing to rising sea levels, the federal government will report today based on data from a 50-year study of glaciers in Alaska and the Pacific Northwest.

Federal officials say the study includes the longest records of glacial melt recorded in North America.

The U.S. Geological Survey study focuses on three glaciers, the Wolverine and Gulkana in Alaska and the South Cascade Glacier in Washington, which are known as "benchmark glaciers" because their varying climates and elevations are representative of thousands of other glaciers across the continent.

The Gulkana and Wolverine glaciers have both lost about 15% of their mass since the mid-1950s, the data show. The South Cascade Glacier has lost nearly a quarter of its mass.

The shrinking glaciers clearly result from global warming, federal researchers say.

"There is no doubt that most mountain glaciers are shrinking worldwide in response to a warming climate," USGS scientist Edward Josberger said in a written statement. "Measuring changes in glacier mass provides direct insight to the link between glaciers and climate."

And if that isn't bad enough, there's worse news closer to home. As the San Joaquin Valley literally dries up and sinks lower, California's water crisis worsens.

How critical is this issue? Well, let's start with what we know:

• The Valley floor is sinking. Because we have taken too much water from the groundwater supply, the San Joaquin Valley has actually fallen several feet in some areas. The picture to the right is from Mendota back in 1977. It has gotten worse since. The USGS performed a study on subsidence back in 1999 showing some really bad side effects other than just the lowering valley floor. After the floor falls, the aquifer permanently loses storage capacity, making the provisioning of water to crops even more difficult.

• Crops are dying in the fields. In some places, farmers are simply leaving their feilds fallow as there is not enough water to bring them to maturity. However, where you have longstanding crops, like fruit trees, the consequences of a couple really bad water years last much longer.

• Endangered species are being slowly killed off in the Delta. The Delta was once home to a number of species found nowhere else. However, as we have increasingly relied on pumping, we have not only killed many of them as they went through our pumps, we have also changed the salinity of the Delta, creating a slight, but important, change in the environment.

• The decreasing water flows to our creeks and rivers threatens our fisheries.

• Climate change will bring increased flooding and droughts.

• Apparently people need water to survive in cities. [...]

But one thing that should be made clear to every Californian is that water is prescious [sic]. We should not waste a single drop. Despite the fact that consumer usage accounts for only around 20% of overall usage, we need to ensure that we aren't using more than we absolutely need. While water is a fundamental right of living, and should be kept cheap, we should understand just how much value it truly has. One of the bills in this package, AB 49 would require 20% conservation from all users. This is a laudable goal as we move forward into a changing climate.

Fortunately, we have some good people in Washington and at the state level proposing real climate solutions. Already in the California State Senate, Democrats are working on a package of legislation to take on the emerging water crisis. We've seen some progress here in Nevada, and hopefully we'll see more in the next two years. And of course, the US Senate will be taking on the Waxman-Markey climate bill this fall. It is quite critical that we take action at the local, state, and federal levels to address the climate crisis and how it is already affecting us.

Yes, believe it or not, we're already feeling it. Notice the more wild swings in temperature? The extremely hot days? The extremely cold nights? The continuing depletion of our water supply? The increasing frequency of major wildfires?

Yes, we're already seeing the climate crisis take hold. That's why it's crucial that we take action now to prevent the climate crisis from worsening much further. Hopefully, that's what we'll soon see.