Recently in the print press:
This LA Times special feature with high praise for the Glendale Pops and Artistic Director Matt Catingub.

This Glendale News-Press letter to the editor from Matt Catingub urging support for the Alex Theatre and its excellent programming. “The arts are what make a great city a great city.”

Libraries provide free resources for young and old, rich and poor, employed and unemployed, insured and insured, Democrat and Republican – all of whom can use their learning to benefit themselves, develop skills and find jobs, create businesses, and contribute to civic life.

Why are we spending so much money on prison doctors who aren’t even working? News like this appears day after day (thanks, by the way, to the LA Times for making such revelations a priority). Why do state legislators insist the state needs to raise taxes, and why did they propose cutting state library funding almost to nothing, when there is so much inefficiency in the system?

While turmoil and short-term thinking continues at the state level, shouldn’t municipalities do everything they can to preserve libraries, which provide clear benefits to all segments of society?

Yesterday, at the end of a long day of civic meetings, Friends of the Glendale Library President John Steele, and Community Events Chair Leon Mayer both addressed Glendale City Council and asked them to reconsider surveying city residents to see if they would support a parcel tax for local library services (the city council voted 3-2 against a survey two weeks prior).

Steele said, “I think the electorate can be trusted to make a good decision in this matter…I recommend the council reconsider and approve a survey.” Mayer spoke later, urging, “Support the request by the Library Director to spend privately-donated money to conduct a survey to see if there is support for a parcel tax.”

Library Director Cindy Cleary submitted a Library Tax Assessment Survey Proposal to city council two weeks ago. The report shows that Glendale’s budget for its libraries is already lower than those of neighboring cities.

A weak attack launched in an LA Times Op-Ed by James Moore calling for completion of the tunnel was no match for the conviction of Michael Dieden, whose “Blowback: I-710 Tunnel such a 1950s idea” a week later cited the Gold Line and its advantages for the revitalized neighborhoods that have steadfastly opposed the 710:

If it were not for ordinary citizens, led by South Pasadena residents, the historic neighborhoods in Pasadena, South Pasadena and Alhambra would be wiped out today. Instead, these cities are now served by the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s Gold Line light rail. Their neighborhoods are not only intact, but have matured into some of the most desirable in Southern California. In addition, around the Gold Line’s stations, new transit-oriented neighborhoods have sprouted. Such developments offer housing opportunities in walkable neighborhoods to families that can forgo an automobile and save $10,000 annually for the cost of owning a car, allowing for a more productive use of hard-earned income for college accounts, family vacations and emergency family needs.

The example was a clear rebuke both to Moore’s arguments and to his longstanding opposition to light rail transportation alternatives.

Moore’s “points for moving ahead” are all desperate measures: Keep the federal government out of the project. (And shift the entire $10+ billion burden to California taxpayers, already facing a worsening budget crisis?) Accelerate environmental review (A six-mile freeway tunnel under urban Los Angeles with rushed environmental review???) Include a limited list of cities in a joint powers authority but exclude everyone not immediately adjacent (Isn’t this a major regional transportation initiative?) Invite a public private partnership to create a toll scheme (Nobody knows if this could be profitable or not, and many completed projects haven’t shown a good return. Moore starts by retreating here: “Costs cannot be carefully estimated until the tunnel is designed, but even rough calculations show that tolls would give private-sector partners a competitive return on investment.”) With these as starting points, the better part of valor would be to surrender and stop trying to build the freeway.

Building the I-710 tunnel under South Pasadena, Letters to the LA Times, August 2, 2011, also responded to Moore’s editorial. Excerpts:

California’s transportation planners need to start looking forward and design rail to transport trucks and goods and to develop a variety of public transit opportunities for commuters. Only then will we find relief.

Looking ahead, what does a healthy Los Angeles in 20 years look like? More freeways, congestion, pollution and disruption? Or more social interaction, recreation, working at home, parks and a richer quality of life?

Moore also published With the Carmageddon Fresh in Our Minds, Why We Must Finish Another Vital L.A. Artery, Engineering News-Record, July 25, 2011. Excerpts:

A small but highly organized, vocal group delayed the project by learning exactly where to insert monkey wrenches into the gears of public process. They made the project appear controversial; but the freeway system cannot function as it should with this gap, hence the final link is going forward.

…since the federal government can no longer pay for new highways or fix the old highways, we must shift our focus from government funding to private capital. Private companies will build new roads in exchange for the trip tolls that will provide investors a profit.

The final link isn’t going forward. Advance is blocked by a Federal Injunction against the project. Complaining about a “highly organized, vocal group” sounds like battle fatigue and growing frustration with the rules of engagement. Further, where is there any justification for the belief that private industry will tailor a public project to serve long-term public interests? Our financial and market system doesn’t reward that kind of altruism.

Earlier rounds in this summer battle series seized on Carmageddon as a justification for completing the 710. These were also soundly defeated.

Freeways are not the answer, Letter to the Glendale News-Press, July 25, 2011, answered an earlier letter by 710 Freeway Coalition Chair Nat Read claiming that Carmageddon-like conditions exist every day on the 5, 2 and 134 freeways because of the 710 gap.

Opinion: the 405 closure as a case for multi-modal transportation in L.A., Metro: The Source, June 17, 2011, argues that:

In our multi-cultural, multi-lingual, multi-faceted city we’ve left the “multi” prefix off of one very important element: our transportation system.

We trapped ourselves in single mode city and suffer the consequences each and every day, whether it be from our daily car-tastrophes (traffic, accidents, road rage) to our occasional carmageddons.

…Hopefully any pain caused by July’s 405 closure will only serve as an incentive to continue to support the non-highway projects that will finally turn L.A. into a multi-modal city.

Print fronts in this series of summer battles include a Business Life Magazine editorial by Nat Read, which called the project “the last remaining gap in the basic core of Los Angeles County,” and a Pasadena Review rebuttal by Janet Dodson on behalf of the No 710 Action Committee, siting other freeway concepts abandoned since the 1958 Master Plan of Freeways. Dodson goes on:

Communities across the region from Glendale to Los Angeles to Commerce have declared their opposition to this tunnel. They all understand the economic and environmental dangers in the proposal. No one has been able to figure out what the advantage to the toll tunnels could possibly be, except to the individuals who see potential massive profit for themselves as the expense of the population and the tax base. The tunnels will increase pollution, they will be dangerous, and will also cost untold billions…

In this 21st Century, we have the special opportunity to offer greener, more forward-thinking concepts to modernize our crucial ports and transportation systems. Here in the land where freeways first flowered, we should advance to the next step, leaving the century-old concepts behind in the dust.

In fact, all phones sold legally in the U.S. must comply with the Federal Communications Commission’s safety standards for RF emissions. According to the FCC, all such compliant phones are safe phones as measured by these standards. The scientific evidence does not support point of sale requirements that would suggest some compliant phones are ’safer’ than other compliant phones based on RF emissions.

In fact, most citizens confronted with placement of a wireless transmission site close to their home or child’s school don’t trust the FCC’s emissions standards, which were set by industry insiders. Why should consumers and citizens believe that phone radiation limits, which were also set by the FCC in consultation with industry technicians, are safe?

Radiation warning legislation similar to San Francisco’s recently failed at the California state level and in Maine after overwhelming telecom industry lobbying efforts, but Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) is not deterred, and today announced that he will introduce a similar bill at the federal level. A statement from the Congressman’s office:

Today Congressman Dennis J. Kucinich (D-OH) announced his intent to introduce a bill to create a new national research program to study cell phones and health, require an update of the decades-old Specific Absorption Rate (SAR), and grant a consumer’s right-to-know by providing for warning labels on cell phones.

“Consumers have a right to know whether they are buying the phone with the lowest – or the highest – level of exposure to cell phone radiation. They also deserve to have up to date standards, which are now decades old,” said Kucinich.

Kucinich first called a hearing on the issue in 2008 as Chair of the Domestic Policy Subcommittee. Dr. Ronald Herberman, then Director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute testified to the Subcommittee, “I cannot tell this committee that cell phones are dangerous, but I certainly can’t tell you they are safe.”

Last month, the Interphone study, a major inquiry into the potential links between cell phone use and tumors, concluded that when taken as a whole, there was no link. However, when the data was broken down, more risk was found and the picture became clearer. Those using their cell phones only 30 minutes per day or more were found to have a 40% increased risk of a type of brain tumor called glioma. This risk increases to 96% if the phone is used mostly on one side of the head.

“Some studies find links. Some don’t. But studies funded by the telecommunications industry are significantly less likely to find a link between cell phones and health effects. We need a first-class research program to give us answers,” said Kucinich. “Until we know for sure, a labeling law will ensure that cell phone users can decide for themselves the level of risk that they will accept. Obviously, cell phone companies should not be the ones making that decision for us.”

Articles from major national dailies under the Sunroom Desk paperweight on fallout from San Francisco’s new law:

Are Cells the New Cigarettes?, New York Times, June 25, 2010, by Maureen Dowd. Excerpt:

Sure enough, when the bill passed Tuesday, CTIA issued a petulant statement that after 2010, it would relocate its annual three-day fall exhibition, with 68,000 exhibitors and attendees and “$80 million” in business, away from San Francisco.

“Since our bill is relatively benign,” Newsom said, “it begs the question, why did they work so hard and spend so much money to kill it? I’ve become more fearful, not less, because of their reaction. It’s like BP. Shouldn’t they be doing whatever it takes to protect their global shareholders?”

So now we have Exhibit No. 1,085 illustrating the brazenness of Big Business.

Cellphone industry attacks San Francisco’s ruling on radiation, Washington Post, June 29, 2010

Research about the effects of cellphone radiation, Washington Post, June 29, 2010 live transcript of Dr. Ron Herberman, former director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, online to discuss research into the effects of cellphone radiation on adults and children. Excerpt from one of Dr. Herberman’s responses:

I believe that the cell phone industry is concerned about bad publicity, which certainly could decrease its business. However, the responsible position should be to protect the public from potential risks by supporting the advice for taking simple precautions to keep the cell phones away from the body. It’s of note that the main cell phone manufacturers themselves provide such warnings in small font notices in the brochures that come with the cell phones. They, however, don’t want people to readily see such warnings.

Wireless industry retaliates against S.F. law, San Francisco Chronicle, June 29, 2010

San Francisco to require stores to post cellphone radiation levels, LA Times, June 23, 2010

The print version of Thursday’s Glendale News Press ran a large photo of Schiff alongside an article on the Massachusetts election and its implications for democrats and health care reform, Political Landscape: Leaders shaken up. Missing was a quote from Schiff; instead it contained comments from representatives David Dreier (R-26th District) and Brad Sherman (D-27th District).

The Thurday LA Times article Democrats reconsider healthcare possibilities ran with just one comment from a California representative – Senator Dianne Feinstein:

“People are very unsettled. They are very worried. There is anger. There is angst. . . . People do not understand [the healthcare bill]. It is so big, it’s beyond their comprehension.”

Thursday’s Daily News said Local Dems ponder fate after loss of Senate seat, but not one congressional representative pondered on the record. Local political consultants and organizers offered predictions, while Republican senatorial candidate Carly Fiorina said, “I think people are tired of incumbents,” and Senator Barbara Boxer’s campaign manager Rose Kapolczynski said, “We’re facing a challenging political climate.”

A swift turnaround in voter sentiment threatens many democratic incumbents, says Michael Barone in If Republicans run as strongly as Brown, only 103 House Dems are safe. Barone’s analysis lists 14 congressional districts in the Los Angeles area alone, including Schiff’s 29th District and Sherman’s 27th District, which “might be vulnerable in some circumstances to Republican capture.”

What are the political options for legislators? Tally Sheet: Where House Dems Stand On How To Move Health Care Reform Forward, lists representatives who are committed to the Senate bill, in favor of amending it, willing to consider separate bills, opposed, or non-committal. Schiff appears in none of the above; and is therefore in the group “Everyone else” in category “Unknown”.

UPDATE: Why didn’t I just call Adam Schiff’s office myself? Read the next post.

But a very new concern has emerged in the past few years: long-term health risks from radiation emitted by mobile media devices. The city of San Francisco will be considering legislation on this issue next week.

Last Sunday, the San Francisco Library hosted a panel discussion on teens and cell phone use and premiered a new video aimed at teenagers, Cell Phones: Just Like Cigarettes?, which draws parallels between the long-term health effects of smoking and “electro-smog” (the radiation emitted by cell phones and their transmitters).

Featured speaker Dr. Devra Davis, a Professor in Preventive Medicine at Mount Sinai Medical Center and founder of The Environmental Health Trust, is “deeply concerned about troubling findings of serious health problems from cell phone use in countries where cell phones have been used for a longer period of time. Many governments, including Finland, Israel, Russia, China, France, Sweden and India recommend that children simply not use cell phones.”

Last September, Dr. Davis testified at a U.S. Senate hearing on cell phone safety. This month, the Maine state legislature will consider a bill requiring warning labels on cell phones. Next week, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom will introduce legislation requiring retailers in San Francisco to post information on Specific Absorption Rates (SARs), wherever cell phones are sold in the city (a ranking of all cell phones by SAR rate is available from this Environmental Working Group webpage).

More on the proposed legislation in an upcoming post.

The coalition member’s theory is that the funds are being used to fight for permission to install hardware in neighborhoods. The article says that most cellular companies have added a few cents to the monthly charge, and in this passage discusses T-Mobile:

The company explained that the fee “is not a tax but a fee we collect and retain to help us recover the costs associated with funding and complying with a variety of government mandates, programs and obligations.”

…T-Mobile said that “these programs and the costs of compliance vary over time, as do the costs that T-Mobile includes.” That’s a nice way of ensuring that customers have no idea what they’re paying for, or why, in any particular month.

A company spokeswoman declined to provide more detail about the rationale for the fee.

The company wouldn’t explain their rationale, so this coalition member offered her theory:

“Obviously carriers such as T-Mobile are raking in money via these fees, which help fuel their litigation efforts to keep local governments from stopping their installations — ie, in my opinion, that is what the “regulatory programs” basically consist of!

The author of this crime novel series, Denise Hamilton, has written more books than I can store with others on the small Glendale authors’ Bookshelf. (She’s also written more books than I have time to read now – so this review is limited to her five Eve Diamond novels.)

Hamilton draws readers into Eve’s character with side stories on newsroom politics (although her turn of the millenium writing about the newsroom has a nostalgic air – I couldn’t find a San Gabriel Valley bureau on the LA Times website). She also drafts her novels’ scenes of LA communities and subcultures with authentic language and examples most locals will appreciate.

A former LA Times reporter, Hamilton says on her website that she wanted to be a foreign correspondent, but finally realized that a Southern California reporting job fit her interest. Crimes she covered here often involved immigrant communities and their behind-the-scenes political, financial, and criminal struggles.

Her fictional counterpart, Eve Diamond, investigates Hong Kong “parachute kids” in The Jasmine Trade; Mexican Spanglish rap music culture in Sugar Skull; Cambodian/Asian child and drug smuggling operations in Last Lullaby; media glorification of Latino gang culture in Savage Garden; and Russian organized crime operations in Prisoner of Memory.

Hamilton’s works have been featured at several Glendale venues, including the Glendale Library. Her next local appearance will be at the South Pasadena Public Library.

A complete list of Denise Hamilton books is here.