Mind the Gap

 For over a hundred years, Ventura County leaders have sought a rail line exiting the county through the Heritage Valley. In the early 1900′s, a railroad to enhance the export of the area citrus crop was proposed through the Sespe Creek watershed north to Maricopa. The plan relied on the use of county roads for the route which was ultimately denied.

 

The Ventura County Transportation Commission now owns the existing railroad through the valley and an easement extending to the LA County line. Through a lease with the commission, the Fillmore and Western Railway operates popular sightseeing trains on the line from Santa Paula to Piru.  Ventura County Supervisor Long and Santa Clarita Mayor Weste recently discussed a plan that would extend that line to Santa Clarita.

Connect the dots to draw a regional rail system

As the map above shows, reasonably completing a regional rail network involves building a line through Santa Clarita. Local opposition to such a plan is so strong, the City will only consider extending the Heritage Valley line to the city limits. The Trojan Horse will not be allowed inside the gates.

A Santa Clarita to Santa Paula line is expected enhance area tourism, drawing visitors down into the Heritage Valley and augmenting Santa Clarita as a tourist destination.

However fully connecting the Heritage Valley line to the existing railroad network is vital to Ventura County’s economy.  The single existing rail connection through the county is strained, forcing passenger and freight trains on the same track.  The Metrolink 111 disaster is a constant reminder of the risks of a crowded rail system.

Completing the Heritage Valley line should be a economic priority for the next 20 years.  Port Hueneme will need better connections to increase exports.  Ventura County will require a rail connection to the High Speed Rail System.   The use of the railroad to haul freight will decrease truck traffic in the valley.   A passenger line could bring visitors into Ventura. 

Unfortunately the railroad extension is not only issue where Ventura County’s economic interests clash with Santa Clarita’s suburbia.   The salt content of the Santa Clara River downstream of Santa Clarita has elevated to a level deemed too high for agriculture use.   As part of a deal with Ventura County farmers, Santa Clarita water users are required to fund a $210 million treatment plant to remove chloride from water discharged into the river.    A battle over the necessity of the costly project has erupted  pitting Santa Clarita taxpayers against Ventura County farmers. 

Hopefully a suitable solution to the water issue is found.  Economic growth of Ventura County will depend on a favorable relationship with Santa Clarita residents.

In Search of a Green Middle Ground

The author of the book “The Skeptical Environmentalist” made headlines recently when he declared global warming “one of the chief concerns facing the world today.”   Bjorn Lomborg is often viewed as a global warming “denier” so his statement was considered a reversal of his position by some. 

Lomborg gained notoriety for his innovative approach to analyzing the costs and benefits of various investments in solving world problems.   His analysis showed that one dollar spent on fighting malnutrition yields $20 in benefits.  Every dollar spent cutting carbon produces much less than a dollar of reduction in global warming damage.   As a result, cutting carbon was near the bottom of the list of investments. 

Seeking alternatives, in 2009 he convened a group to analyze potential solutions to climate change beyond reducing carbon emissions.   The group found that R&D expenditures in green energy technologies and geo-engineering were the most economically feasible in reducing climate change damage. 

Lomborg explains the difficulty of this rational approach:

The fact that I’ve always asserted the reality of man-made climate change never seemed to make an impression on my critics. What mattered was that I had the temerity to question two key tenets of the received wisdom about global warming: …the idea that we were facing the apocalypse, and …that the only solution was to mandate drastic cuts in carbon emissions.

That’s the way it is with heresy—there is no middle ground. Either you believe global warming is the worst problem mankind has ever faced and that cutting carbon is the only solution, or you are an antiscientific ignoramus who probably thinks the Earth is flat. 

His advice to those seeking a middle ground on climate change: “make green energy so cheap everyone wants it.”

Fuel cell installation at the 100% energy self-sufficient Sierra Nevada Brewery in Chico.

One person who would agree is T.J. Rodgers, CEO of Cypress Semiconductor Corp. and chairman of SunPower Corp. in San Jose.  Using a combination of solar panels and fuel cells, his company is saving $75,000 a year in energy bills with the goal to be 100% energy self-sufficient by 2015.   Rodgers’ motivation is return on investment:

“I’m not into green for its own sake,” he explains. “I’m an engineer looking for solutions, and looking to do what’s best for shareholders. As an investor, I’m also an early adopter.”

 As an investor in green energy projects, Rodgers welcomes Federal subsidies but only for start up costs:

 ”They allow alternative energy enterprises to ramp up. But they have to go away. These companies have to be economically independent.” 

The problem with Uncle Sam’s take on venture capitalism is its unwillingness to cut funding of flawed energy business models.  (Think ethanol subsidies.)  It is much easier to laud successful green investments than to unwind poor ones.   This investment inefficiency drives up the cost of green energy.

Supporters of Proposition 23 who believe a carbon tax is an inefficient means to transition to clean energy are often treated like Bjorn Lomborg.   Passing 23 will allow California to adopt his goal to lower clean energy costs through disciplined R&D investments and a streamlined project approval process.

Hopefully California will lead the way by finding the green middle ground in the global warming debate.

Top 5 green job killers

Opponents of Proposition 23 tout the California carbon emission law’s ability to generate green energy jobs in the future while admitting it will cost jobs in the process.
 
Some of California’s labor unions have joined the concern about the loss of these traditional energy sector jobs.  They do not see the loss of their members’ jobs as being offset by the long term gains from the clean energy industry that may emerge. Union rep James Kellog explains:

While the new “green” industries that opponents tout might headquarter in California to take advantage of AB32′s subsidies and artificially created markets, they’ll mostly build their plants and create their manufacturing jobs in places where labor is cheaper, taxes are lower and environmental regulations more realistic.

Most Californians share the desire to leave the state a cleaner place for our children.  How we reach that cleaner place is subject to debate.  When assessing the potential effect of laws like AB 32, one must consider the business climate in California that green energy will operate within.

While it is easy to believe that clean energy projects will just blossom all over the state, the reality is that that they will be subject to the same environmental scrutiny that a new oil refinery would endure.  

These are the top 5 “Green Tape” threats to clean energy:   

5. Birds – Wind energy technology is a promising way to harvest energy from abundant wind sources.  
Problem: Unfortunately, birds like to fly around the same blustery areas.  Since it was discovered that about a bird an hour dies in the Altamont Pass wind farm in northern California, new wind projects must not kill birds. Instead, the financial feasibility of these projects are killed.

4. Safety Regulations – The Nissan Leaf is an all-electric car which requires 24 hours to recharge on a typical residential voltage.  In order to reduce the charging period to 8 hours, owners must install a high voltage charging system which most city building codes do not allow in residential neighborhoods.
Problem: City officials around the country must now be convinced that all that high voltage around homes is not that dangerous. The bigger problem for Nissan is projecting sales for the car. As one car writer describes the gamble:

If he wins, Renault-Nissan wins huge. If he loses, Mr. Ghosn will go down in history as the biggest CEO goat since Tony Hayward

3. Wireless transmissions – The “Smart Grid” is the future in micro managing reductions in energy usage.  An essential part of the grid are the smart meters which constantly transmit data to power companies.
Problem: Unfounded fears of health issues related to the devices have slowed their rollout in California.  One problem region is around environmentally conscious San Francisco. 4,169 people complained about smart meters in the Bay Area versus 78 in the greater San Diego area during the same period. 

2. Fragile Desert Habitats – California’s large uninhabited desert expanses are prime locations for solar farms.
Problem: Many of the best solar project sites are home to delicate ecosystems that will be impacted by the construction of solar panels. Environmental groups forced Washington lawmakers to designate only limited portions of Federal desert for solar development. The recently approved Beacon Solar project won environmentalist support because it was located on private property next to existing electrical infrastructure and will use municipal water supplies, qualities most desert solar projects do not possess.

1. NIMBYs – New infrastructure must be constructed to connect remote renewable energy sources to city users.
Problem: Many Californians are supporters of clean energy until the infrastructure is built in their backyard. The state is littered with clean energy projects stalled or killed due to objections from local residents. Some have objected to the installation of unsightly solar panels in residential neighborhoods.  A related threat comes from BANANA’s (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything).

Mr. Kellog frames the issue and his union’s support of Prop 23 in closing:

We need to do something about global warming. But we don’t need to kick California workers while they’re down to do it. With more than 2.2 million Californians out of work, we can’t afford AB32′s excessive costs, at least not now.

Part of those excessive costs is green energy’s questionable ability to generate enough long-term job growth in California to cover losses.

Are E-Paper Tax Bills in our Future?

Cost to deliver to taxpayer: $0. Mailing a paper tax bill runs around $2.

One of the most passionate issues of my campaign for Treasurer-Tax Collector was transitioning our county to a paperless based property tax collection system.   My new Kindle  shows the possibilities of delivering and reading property tax bills electronically.   The Kindle uses e-paper technology that produces images that look like real paper and require no power to display.   (The process reminds me of a computerized Etch-A-Sketch).

Of course this bill could be sent as an email pdf attachment and easily displayed on a computer screen.   The Kindle inspires new ways we will receive, review and store books and documents.   I’ve only had mine for a few days and it’s transformed how often, what and how I read.

Depends on the next Treasurer-Tax Collector

One of my last duties as a candidate was to consider endorsing one of the two remaining campaigns for Ventura County Treasurer-Tax Collector.     In evaluating the candidates, one of the factors I considered was the ability to efficiently transition our county to paperless system.   The next Treasurer-Tax Collector will be adapting to an evolving technology environment in the next four years.

Of the two candidates, I believe Steven Hintz has the better understanding of the technology issues affecting our transition to an e-paper world.    He is a tenacious candidate and will bring that energy as well as stability to the office.   I also see an entrepreneurial streak in him which I identify with.

More blog posts are definitely in my future.  Although the issues broadened to tax collecting during my campaign, Coastal Plain will continue to discuss my unvarnished views of the issues affecting the Ventura County economy.

Camarillo: City of Leaders

It seems natural that a well-run city would attract quality residents. If the June 8th ballot is any indication, Camarillo is a great city to live in. The following countywide candidates live in Camarillo:

• both Sheriff candidates
• the District Attorney
• the Auditor-Controller
• the Supt of Schools
• and 4 of the 7 Treasurer-Tax Collector candidates

That’s 9 of the 15 candidates for countywide office. Ventura, the county seat, is next on the list with 3 resident candidates. Assembly candidate Jeff Gorrell also lives in Camarillo.

No surprise considering Camarillo is the only city in the county with a Triple A debt rating, has the best balance of jobs, housing and open space and is home of the most visited attraction in the county, the outlet malls. 

That’s why I am proud to be the only Treasurer-Tax Collector candidate endorsed by members of the Camarillo City Council: Vice Mayor Mike Morgan and Mayor Emeritus Stan Daily.

Farmers Market Whistlestop Tour

Farmers markets have become community gathering places and thus a natural stop for political campaigns. Camarillo Trolley offered me the opportunity to design a tour that combines a city tour, farmers markets, a chef challenge, fine dining, wine tasting and campaigning. The Farmers Market Whistlestop Tour was born shortly thereafter.

Our trolley tour of Saturday farmers markets in Ventura County showcases the great geographic diversity our county. From the ocean to the coastal plain to the inland valleys, our trolley full of friends will travel mostly downtown streets and country byways.

I enjoy cooking shows where chefs are surprised with ingredients and must prepare a meal with them. We will take full advantage of the Farmers and Fishermans Market visits, selecting one ingredient for a two course meal prepared by renowned Chef Gael Lecolley, co-owner of Bella Victorian Tasting Room and Bistro in Camarillo Old Town. Chef Gael requests that the ingredients be all natural and grown, caught or produced in Ventura County. On our visit to the Ventura Fishermans Market we will select a protein for the entree. We plan to challenge Chef with interesting ingredients from the four farmers markets we will visit.

We will reveal the ingredients to Chef Gael at the end of the tour. He will have one hour to prepare the meal. We will enjoy the meal at the Bistro. Bella Victorian Vineyard is a small family owned Artisan Winery & Vineyard located in Camarillo, Ca. Beginning from the private vineyards, wines are carefully handcrafted, from the vine all the way to the bottle. They specialize in small releases of estate wines and luxury wines that are elegant, well balanced and cuisine compatible. Chef Gael will make pairing recommendations for those interested in trying some of these fine wines.

We will document the selection and reveal of the ingredients and the preparation of the meal on various social media outlets.

Ventura County Farmers Market Tour
Starts at Camarillo Farmers Market
2220 E. Ventura Blvd.
Leaves 9:00am
Returns 2:15pm
Chef Challenge
Bella Victorian Tasting Room and Bistro
2135 E. Ventura Blvd. Camarillo Old Town
Ingredients revealed 2:30pm
First course served 3:30pm
Our Route

View Larger Map

Arrival Times
Ventura Farmers Market 9:45am
Ventura Fishermans Market 10:30am
Camarillo Farmers Market 11:30am
Oak Park Farmers Market 12:30pm
Newbury Park Farmers Market 1:30pm
Bella Victorian Tasting Room and Bistro 2:30pm

Green Tax Collecting

On April 1st, San Bernardino County claimed to be the first county in the State to offer electronic delivery of property tax bills.  San Luis Obispo County had quietly launched their paperless property tax initiative two years ago and just announced its full roll out to taxpayers this week.  Although there’s some dispute who was first, these neighboring counties are setting the example.  Transitioning Ventura County to a paperless property tax system is an important priority in my plans for the Treasurer-Tax Collector office.

The savings to the environment of sending out fewer paper bills is obvious. The savings to the taxpayer can be around $2.00 per tax bill that doesn’t need to printed, stuffed in a envelope and mailed. Paperless systems also provide better service to taxpayers. Multiple tax bills can be managed and combined, email and text reminders can be established. Collection rates can be improved through the use of email to remind taxpayers.

The conversion to a paperless system involves generating tax bills using the current online tax database infrastructure.  The process would take at least a year to implement properly.   I would begin assessing financial feasibility and planning the transition immediately upon taking office.  Paperless tax collection is a great example of the ways I will apply technology to the Treasurer-Tax Collector office.

More Tangerines Per Gallon

When considering the environmental impact of our food choices, the distance the meal traveled to the plate is not the best metric.  A “life cycle” analysis of the food process is far more relevant.

At a 2007 press conference for John Edwards campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, his wife Elizabeth Edwards declared, “I live in North Carolina. I’ll probably never eat a tangerine again.”  While locavores were thrilled with this comment, economists were quick to point out tangerines the farmer trucked from 60 miles away consumed more energy than those sent by rail from California.   The issue is not the distance but how many tangerines traveled that distance.

I had a “tangerine” moment at the restaurant when a guest declared she wouldn’t eat our Kobe burger because it  had traveled more than 1,500 miles.   We use local suppliers and much of our food, especially our produce, is sourced locally.   However several of our menu items travel great distances to the plate and I personally drive to local breweries to pickup beer for the restaurant. 

The book Just Food by James McWilliams presents an economist’s view of the locavore movement and ways to eat responsibly.   His approach considers the entire life cycle of the food from harvesting to production to consumption.   The quick conclusion is that transportation has the smallest impact on the carbon footprint. 

In the case of our Kobe Burger, baking the bun and storing the meat consume far more energy than getting them here.   Since restaurants use energy more efficiently and waste less food than home kitchens, eating a Kobe Burger at JJ Brewsky’s could reduce that reluctant guest’s carbon footprint.

Life cycle analyses have revealed energy inefficiencies in the food production process.  A study on the Danish flatfish industry revealed that switching from trawls dragged along the ocean floor to seine nets would dramatically reduce energy consumption.   New energy-efficient cultivation methods and production techniques have a far greater impact on the overall carbon footprint of our food than how far it was shipped.

Using this approach, McWilliams posits that we should be more concerned with our food after we buy it.  Wasting less food, using energy-efficient kitchen appliances, composting all organic matter not eaten, eating less in general and developing menus that do not require extensive applications of heat are better tactics to lower one’s carbon footprint than insisting on locally sourced food.  He also realizes the problems with this approach:

But of course it’s hard to turn a variety of small, energy-saving domestic tactics into a token symbol of an eco-correct food philosophy. “Cook efficiently” just doesn’t have the same rousing ring as “eat local.”

As with Edwards press conference, the rousing ring is often followed with rants against globalism and capitalism.   This book makes a strong case that globalism and capitalism are reducing more fossil fuel usage in the food chain than locavores.