California Watch - All Content

State attorneys general investigating for-profit colleges

Mon, 06 Feb 2012 18:43:14 +0000

California's Attorney General has joined the U.S. Department of Justice and several other states in a whistleblower lawsuit against for-profit educational firm Education Management Corporation. See which attorneys general in other states have launched investigations of for-profit colleges.

Increasing use of facial recognition software spurs privacy concerns

G.W. Schulz — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 08:05:03 +0000

G.W. Schulz

1st Lt. Darrick Noah/U.S. ArmyA U.S. soldier photographs a local man in Afghanistan for facial recognition purposes.

When several armed robberies occurred recently in Lancaster, Calif., police had little of use on the two suspects. Then, a reliable image of one suspect turned up from a surveillance camera.

In years past, that still might not have been enough for the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department to close the case.

But with the help of new facial recognition software, investigators plugged the image into a database of booking photos and quickly came up with a possible match. That led to a pair of arrests on Jan. 27.

Facial recognition technology is growing rapidly, both in the consumer world and among police, but privacy advocates are troubled by the potential for intrusion and misuse.

Police in Tampa, Fla., created an uproar several years ago when they installed facial recognition devices in an entertainment district, hoping to identify wanted criminals. The system eventually was unplugged, because it didn’t catch any perpetrators. A similar effort at the 2001 Super Bowl also netted few results.

Things have changed since then. Agencies like the cutting-edge Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office in Florida are using millions of jail mug shots to double-check identities if they believe someone is lying about who they are. Deputies can simply snap a photo of the person and begin a search using their in-car laptop.

That’s how the agency unmasked one man with an active warrant. In another 2009 incident, the North Miami Police Department asked Pinellas County deputies for help tracking down a bank robbery suspect [PDF], and they did so with a surveillance video image that led to an arrest.

“All of this was accomplished by lunch time,” the sheriff’s office boasted then in a press release. Pinellas County also became the first in the nation [PDF] that year to include the use of driver’s license photos in its searching capabilities, rather than just individuals who have been arrested.

In the meantime, outcry over the technology is heating up. The Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington last week called for a moratorium on the use of facial recognition in consumer products. Namely, they’ve targeted a Facebook feature that enables users to tag the photos of friends using special software.

The advocacy group submitted remarks [PDF] to the Federal Trade Commission expressing concern about private companies stockpiling faceprints for their own use and the ability of consumers to control the disclosure of their own identity. The Electronic Privacy Information Center has complained in the past about the U.S. military compiling biometric data on Iraqi citizens, because it could be linked to religious or ethnic affiliations and used to single people out.

Among other things, the group is concerned that facial recognition could undermine the right to anonymity, lead to mistaken identities if it doesn’t work properly or result in identity theft if databases containing the images are hacked. Faceprints can’t be replaced as easily as credit cards, the group argues.

“Facial recognition system errors would lead to innocent people being falsely matched to watch lists or databases, while suspects would pass through the system unrecognized,” the Electronic Privacy Information Center stated in a Jan. 31 notice to the FTC.

A group of Democratic and Republican lawmakers chimed in last week and sent their own letter [PDF] to the trade commission, which didn’t name any corporate offenders specifically but did register worries they had about the brave new technology.

“Currently, there are a number of companies that have implemented both facial recognition and facial detection technologies for the stated purpose of enhancing the user experience,” according to the letter. “We are deeply concerned about how the use of these technologies impact the level of protection for consumers' personal information.”

No matter how it’s regulated, the reality is that biometric identification won’t be going away soon.

India's government is working on an ambitious plan to biometrically identify each of its more than 1 billion people, and Mexico in 2010 signed a contract with Pennsylvania-based Unisys Corp. to build a large database of fingerprint, eye and faceprint information belonging to millions of people there.

Officials in the United States already collect biometric data on international travelers wishing to enter the country through the Department of Homeland Security’s US-VISIT program. Accenture Federal Services won a $71 million contract in December to include faceprints.

Researchers also are looking at the way we walk and even at human buttocks as possible unique identifiers for the future.

Disclosing greenhouse gas emissions boosts business, study finds

Susanne Rust — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 08:05:03 +0000

Susanne Rust

Kim Seng/Flickr

New research shows it can pay to be green.

A pair of California business school researchers has found that companies that disclose greenhouse gas emissions enjoy an immediate rise in stock value and positive returns to shareholders.

Their study appeared in Social Science Research Network.

"When a company makes a voluntary disclosure of this kind, it signals to the investment community that this is a firm that is environmentally responsible," Paul Griffin of UC Davis told The Daily Climate, an environmental news source. "Investors are saying they would prefer to invest in an environmentally responsible firm."

The pair wanted to test a theory known as “voluntary disclosure.”

The theory predicts that certain corporate information, if disclosed judiciously, will produce a benefit for shareholders. The theory also predicts that the disclosure of that information will benefit smaller companies – or companies with less information available about them – more than larger companies.

So the team, which also included Yuan Sun of UC Berkeley, went through all news wires released by Corporate Social Responsibility, a corporate news wire, between 2000 and 2010.

The researchers chose this news wire for two reasons: 1) They wanted to track only companies that voluntarily disclosed their emissions (as opposed to a regulatory database), and 2) the news wire is considered the global leader in providing news about corporate social responsibility, allowing the researchers to examine a large worldwide sample.

The researchers ended up with a sample of 172 greenhouse gas disclosures for 84 companies. They then got company stock values for the day before the announcement, the day of and the day after. The researchers also set controls by analyzing companies that did not release emissions information during that time period.

The researchers found that stock value increased when companies voluntarily disclosed their greenhouse gas emissions. They also found that the benefit for smaller companies was greater than for larger companies, supporting the voluntary disclosure theory.

The study showed smaller companies saw an average increase of 2.3 percent in share value after disclosure.

To be sure, “independent of company size or public information availability, the tests … document a small but reliably positive shareholder response to a Corporate Social Responsibility newswire release,” the authors wrote.

The companies analyzed represented a variety of industries, including health care, information technology and financial services.

The researchers hope their data will influence companies to disclose information about their carbon impact.

Agency: Emissions must be curbed now to avoid severe warming

Poor, minority residents face most health risks with climate change

Assemblyman renews fight against illegal school fees

Corey G. Johnson — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 08:05:03 +0000

Corey G. Johnson

woodleywonderworks/Flickr

Bolstered by a recent court ruling, a Southern California assemblyman filed legislation last week that seeks to crack down on school districts that charge parents and students fees that violate state law.

AB 1575, sponsored by Assemblyman Ricardo Lara, D-South Gate, would require school superintendents and county offices to conduct annual reviews of all policies and practices at their local districts to ensure no unlawful fees are charged.

The reviews would start during the 2012-13 fiscal year. The measure also mandates that all schools have a complaint process that enables parents to question fees and receive resolution within 30 days. Schools that don't have a process now would be required to create one by March 1, 2013.

Lara introduced the measure Feb. 1, days after a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge refused to dismiss an American Civil Liberties Union lawsuit accusing the state of allowing schools to charge for participation in classes and extracurricular activities.

The attorney general's office, state Department of Education, state Board of Education and state superintendent of public instruction wanted the case dismissed, arguing that it wasn't their responsibility to ensure school districts comply with the law. But Superior Court Judge Carl West found the state's arguments "not persuasive." He ordered both the ACLU and the state to continue the case and file their next statements by March 2.

Lara called West's decision a victory for all children.

“The ACLU’s victory in court confirms that it is ultimately the State’s responsibility to uphold our Constitutional guarantee of providing an equal educational opportunity for all children, not just those who can afford it," Lara said in a statement. "AB 1575 provides a new opportunity for the Legislature and Governor to work together to address our current ‘pay to learn’ system. No student should have to worry about being excluded or humiliated when they can’t pay to participate in educational activities."

The ACLU found widespread instances of school districts charging parents and students exorbitant and improper fees for books, educational materials and extracurricular activities.

In 2010, the group filed a class-action lawsuit [PDF] against the state, but settled after then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger pledged to support a law that would create an enforcement mechanism addressing the issue.

Lara then filed AB 165, which sought to require annual audits and a parental complaint process. The measure was overwhelmingly supported by the state Legislature but was vetoed by Gov. Jerry Brown, who called the measure "the wrong approach."

If Lara's new bill is successful, local school officials would be required to publicly report any improper fees to the local school board and reimburse parents and students. All annual school audits would include a review of illegal fee charges.

State asks judge to toss illegal school fees case

Bill would crack down on schools that pass costs to parents

Public schools relying more on private donors

Powerful land owners pose obstacle for rail

Brian Joseph — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 08:20:02 +0000

Anonymous

Courtesy of Reed KaestnerThis planned resort area of Tejon Ranch in the hillsides of the Tehachapi Mountains is no longer at risk of being disturbed by high-speed rail, with the Grapevine alignment no longer being considered.

If you want to build a rail line between Anaheim and San Francisco, people are going to have to get out of the way. Literally.

The proposed California High-Speed Rail would require a lot of land, meaning thousands of California families and businesses will have to move if the project is ever built.

At completion, the project calls for 800 miles of track crossing through 18 counties. The state authority planning the project doesn't know at this point how much private land it needs or what property acquisition will cost, but it plans to buy whatever parcels are necessary at fair market value.

Using preliminary and alternate rail alignments, The Orange County Register traced the proposed track through three counties (Fresno, Kern and Merced) and partway through a fourth (Los Angeles) and found some 2,000 affected properties with roughly 1,300 different owners.

Many of the affected property owners are people and businesses you've never heard of. Some, however, are high profile: land developers and campaign contributors, big businesses and Central Valley farms. Many are sure to be unhappy about losing their land.

For a project that has already known its fair share of conflict, land acquisition is almost certainly high-speed rail's next source of discord.

“It's not going to be pretty,” said Elizabeth Goldstein Alexis, co-founder of Californians Advocating Responsible Rail Design, a Palo Alto group monitoring the high-speed rail project. “Some people are going to be happy with the buyout. Others are not going to go quietly into the night.”

Many of the properties needed for the project have yet to be determined, but according to current planning documents, the California High-Speed Rail Authority is eyeing land owned or used by an array of noteworthy interests, including:

More than four dozen properties in Merced and Kern counties owned by BNSF Railway, including 30 parcels originally held by one of BNSF's predecessors, the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway. Today, BNSF is one of the largest railroad networks in North America and is a subsidiary of Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway investment company.
The site of a Smart & Final warehouse store near Fresno's Chinatown district, assessed at nearly $1 million. The Smart & Final chain contains 250 grocery and foodservice stores in six Western states and northern Mexico.
Merced and Kern counties parcels owned by Pacific Gas and Electric Co., one of the largest natural gas and electric utilities in the United States.
Undeveloped farm land in Shafter owned by Farmland Reserve Inc., the agricultural investment arm of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
The Fresno distribution center of C&S Wholesale Grocers, “the largest wholesale grocery supply company in the U.S.” That property has a total assessed value of more than $8 million.

Most of these businesses were not eager to talk to the Register about the coming rail line. But the state will have to negotiate, individually, for the rights to all of the lands. Ultimately, the state can buy whatever land it wants through the power of eminent domain. But a wealthy or motivated land owner unwilling to deal can stretch out the process for months or longer.

If enough of the land owners fight the project “at strategically chosen places along the route they could tie it up probably a year,” said John H. Blake, a real estate attorney in Redwood City. “It could be less, it could be more, depending on the nature of the issue and how seriously the court takes it.”

History of conflict

The fight over land acquisition is the next battle awaiting high-speed rail if it can survive a torrent of opposition in Sacramento and Washington. For months now, the future of the project has remained in the balance as politicians on both sides of the aisle have questioned the project's viability and costs, though Gov. Jerry Brown has signaled his strong support.

From April 2010 through May 2011, the California High-Speed Rail Authority was the subject of three scathing reports that criticized its ridership projections, its accounting practices and its management. State lawmakers and project opponents accused the authority of being unrealistic in its cost projections.

At the beginning of November, the authority responded to its critics by releasing a sober business plan, which was praised for its frank assessments and practical figures but raised eyebrows over a revised $98 billion price tag.

Since then, new obstacles have emerged.

In mid-November, Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives eliminated future funding for high-speed rail in California. Then Kings County sued to stop the authority from going forward with its initial plan to build a 130-mile stretch of track from Fresno to Bakersfield, which isn't long enough to accommodate high-speed trains.

Then the Legislative Analyst's Office said the rail authority's plans are still too speculative to deserve state money. Then the high-speed rail's Peer Review Group, chaired by Orange County Transportation Authority Director Will Kempton, told lawmakers they shouldn't authorize funding for the project. Then the state auditor released another scathing report, saying the authority's “funding situation has become increasingly risky.”

There's a chance the Legislature will balk this year when it's asked to appropriate $2.7 billion in bond funds for the high-speed rail. The bonds have already been authorized by voters, but the Legislature still controls their purse strings.

During his State of the State address in January, Brown urged legislators' approval and compared critics of the project to critics of the Interstate Highway System and even the Panama Canal.

“The critics were wrong then,” Brown said, “and they're wrong now.”

Land grab

Stretched over 270,000 acres between Bakersfield and Los Angeles, Tejon Ranch is just too big for the high-speed rail to avoid. The historic ranch, which was founded as a Mexican land grant in 1843, is the largest contiguous piece of private property in California. Its 422 square miles encompass farming and ranching operations, a commercial/industrial center and a proposed resort community in the Tehachapi Mountains.

The Tejon Ranch Co. has spent more than a decade planning the resort. Called Tejon Mountain Village, it is envisioned as an idyllic place for a second home or a restful vacation, with 3,450 homes, up to 750 hotel rooms, a couple of 18-hole golf courses and 75 miles of trails for hiking, biking and horseback riding.

Coutesy of Randall BarkerBarry Zoeller, Tejon Ranch vice president of corporate communications and marketing

“We don't believe that mixes well with a high-speed rail,” said Barry Zoeller, vice president of corporate communications and marketing.

The high-speed rail faced a big problem with the Tejon Ranch Co. In May, the California High-Speed Rail Authority announced it would explore the I-5 corridor at the Grapevine as a route between Bakersfield and Los Angeles. Under that plan, the high-speed rail would have passed right by the mountain resort.

Zoeller pledged that “should (high-speed rail officials) make the decision to move ahead with the Grapevine alignment, they would find a strong opponent in the Tejon Ranch Co.”

Last month, the authority decided to abandon the Grapevine idea and instead go with a route farther east, near highways 58 and 14. That route also crosses Tejon Ranch property, but the company doesn't oppose it.

The high-speed rail may have avoided a showdown with the Tejon Ranch Co., but the case illustrates the sort of battles the project could face as it moves into the property acquisition phase.

Rachel Wall, spokeswoman for the California High-Speed Rail Authority, said the agency knows it has an “enormous responsibility” to protect the rights of land owners as it acquires property for the project. To do that, the authority will follow a modified land acquisition process developed by Caltrans that Wall said will provide owners with ample opportunities to assert their rights.

The authority has also factored into its schedule the potential for land owners to slow down the process during the land acquisition phase. Wall said the authority is prepared for all the contingencies it may face, but acknowledges, “There's certainly a lot of work to do.”

On the farm

Farmers are expected to be among the high-speed rail's biggest opponents if the project ever reaches the land acquisition stage. No matter what alignment is eventually chosen, the rail will pass through prime agricultural land in the Central Valley, some of which has been tilled by the same families for generations.

To the agricultural communities affected, the high-speed rail feels like an attack on their world and their bottom line, said Anja Raudabaugh, executive director of the Madera County Farm Bureau, which is concerned about the high-speed rail having an excessive impact on agricultural lands.

“If you change these farmers' way of life, they're going to squawk,” Raudabaugh said. But this is about more than convenience, or even tradition. There “is a monetary cost,” she said.

First, there is the cost of the land itself. Much of the land targeted by the high-speed rail in the San Joaquin Valley is precious for its physical properties, Raudabaugh said. The soil there is uniquely high in nitrogen and phosphorous, which yields pomegranates, pistachios and almonds of a quality that can't be duplicated elsewhere, she said. For farmers, no amount of money can replace such special land.

Then there's the cost of farming around the high-speed rail. Unlike a regular train, the tracks of the high-speed rail will be walled off from the surrounding environment by fences or barriers to prevent cars, people or animals from crossing in front of 220-mph train. The alternative is gruesome: In April 2008, a German high-speed train traveling 124 mph struck a herd of sheep, which caused the train to derail and injured 19 passengers (and killed 20 sheep).

To avoid such an accident, the only way you'll be able to cross the California High-Speed Rail is at designated crossings. That's not a small matter for farmers, who make numerous trips across their fields in a single day. If the rail line cuts through your property, you'll have to drive four to seven miles out of the way just to get to other side of your field, estimates Frank Oliveira, general partner of MEL's Farms, a Kings County farming operation. The high-speed rail is eyeing land on five properties owned by MEL's, Oliveira said.

“They're going to be tearing up everybody's farms and make them not profitable,” he said.

Oliveira said farmers are upset about the project because few in state government seem to recognize its impact on the agriculture community. Construction of the rail line will ruin carefully planned farms with laser-leveled fields and buried irrigation systems, he said.

The authority may tell farmers it only wants a 100-foot strip of their land, but Oliveira said that could ultimately cost farmers 170 feet of usable land because farmers also need space to reverse their tractors. The farmers are angry because they feel the state isn't listening to them, Oliveira said.

Wall, the spokeswoman for the high-speed rail authority, said planners will try “as much as possible” to address the impacts on farms during the design process.

Economic development

Not everyone fears the train, however. For some, the California High-Speed Rail represents the hope for a better future. And at least one community was willing to fight for it.

In July, Palmdale filed a suit in federal court to prevent the California High-Speed Rail Authority from moving forward with the Grapevine plan, which would have bypassed the city. Palmdale officials desperately want a high-speed rail stop in their city for the economic activity it's thought to bring.

“The majority of people I have heard from are in support of the high-speed rail,” said Palmdale Chamber of Commerce CEO Stacia Nemeth, when asked if even Palmdale's affected land owners are in favor of the project. “There's a lot of job potential there.”

The federal suit was dismissed in September, and the California High-Speed Rail Authority has since abandoned the Grapevine option, but until the very end, the city indicated it was willing to keep fighting. Residents there say they want the high-speed rail to come to their city of 152,000.

“I don't see how it couldn't benefit us,” said Marsha Furman, a 27-year resident of Palmdale who is active in community affairs.

Furman said she's never heard affected land owners in Palmdale complain about losing their property to the project. “We see the high-speed rail as just another opportunity to see what the Antelope Valley has to offer,” she said.

Residents and officials believe a high-speed rail station will help Palmdale by attracting new businesses and boosting local tourism. It's also thought that Palmdale residents will use the high-speed rail for daily commutes to jobs in Los Angeles or Bakersfield. A faster commute home means the people who already live in Palmdale will have more opportunities to spend their money locally.

“Having a station here, I know it would improve the area economically,” said Bill Pappas, a resident of Palmdale since 1990.

For Palmdale, the fight may be over. But for land owners in the path of the high-speed rail, the fight may be just beginning.

Brian Joseph is the Sacramento correspondent for The Orange County Register. Contact him at 916-449-6046 or bjoseph@ocregister.com. This story resulted from a partnership among California news organizations following the state's high-speed rail program, including The Fresno Bee, The Sacramento Bee, California Watch, The Bakersfield Californian, The Orange County Register, the San Francisco Chronicle, The (Riverside) Press-Enterprise, U-T San Diego, KQED, the Merced Sun-Star, The Tribune of San Luis Obispo and The Modesto Bee.

More coverage of the high-speed rail project

Spain’s high-speed rail system offers lessons for California

Colleges crack down on selling, sharing notes

Erica Perez — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 08:05:03 +0000

Erica Perez

Flickr/Columbia_Admissions

California State University and University of California campuses are taking new steps to limit what students can do with their class notes: At least one CSU Chico student recently was reported to judicial affairs for selling notes to a website, while a newly updated UC Berkeley policy restricts how students share their notes with others.

The policies raise questions about whether instructors or students have copyrights to the notes students take in class. While the California Education Code prohibits students and others from selling class notes – and many campuses have policies that also ban unauthorized note-selling – critics say students, not instructors, own the copyright to their own notes.

Some university officials say faculty members have the right to protect their professional reputation – they don't want inaccurate or low-quality notes to be attributed to them. But others say the university policies are restricting students' free speech.

"Given the amount of money students are paying to go to school right now, to ... confront them with these policies and say, 'You don't even have the right to use your own notes any way you want,' seems to be the wrong message to be sending," said Jason M. Schultz, assistant clinical professor of law at UC Berkeley and director of the university's Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic.

The CSU and UC systems have made efforts to shut down private note-selling websites for some time. As early as 1999, the note-selling website Versity.com sparked officials' furor at UC Berkeley. In fall 2010, CSU sent a cease-and-desist order to NoteUtopia, which allows students to upload course notes, study guides and outlines to a website, then set a price and earn cash for their work.

More recently, both UC and CSU have sent cease-and-desist letters to Notehall, a note-selling website owned by Santa Clara-based Chegg.

CSU sent its letter to Chegg in January after at least one student was reported to student judicial affairs for selling notes through the service. CSU Chico's student newspaper, The Orion, reported that two students were referred to judicial affairs, but Lisa Root, the university's director of student judicial affairs, said there has been only one case involving the note-selling policy in the past three years. She could not comment on the specific case. The one student named in the Orion story declined to talk to a reporter Wednesday.

It's unclear whether the student was sanctioned or whether other universities in California have sought disciplinary action against students who have sold their notes to third parties.

The letter from CSU to Chegg cited CSU's own student policies and the California Education Code, both of which prohibit selling, distributing or publishing class notes for a commercial purpose.

Notehall's website indicates the company is no longer accepting notes from CSU or UC students. Users who try to upload notes for CSU or UC campuses see an error message.

"Unfortunately, No More Notes!" the message begins. "The California State University Student Conduct Code prohibits students from selling class notes, and subjects violators to potential disciplinary action. Out of respect for this policy, Notehall does not offer its note taking services at your school. We apologize for the inconvenience, and share your disappointment with this CSU policy decision."

In a written statement, a spokeswoman for Chegg said the company is fully compliant with California law and is "working to ensure that our services fall within what is acceptable from one state to the next."

But Berkeley's Schultz questioned whether states can prevent students from selling their notes. Instructors have almost no intellectual property rights to what students write down in class, he said. Faculty members may have intellectual property in the books they write, articles they publish and even possibly in the lecture notes they write for themselves, but students own the copyright on their own notes, he said.

"Copyright is a federal law, and generally when state laws conflict with federal laws, federal law wins," Schultz said. "Perhaps more important is there's a First Amendment issue as well. If I take notes in class, and I want to share them, that's speech."

UC's legal office also sent a cease-and-desist letter to Notehall in November 2010, prompted at least in part by complaints at UC Davis about Notehall, said Jan Carmikle, senior intellectual property officer at UC Davis.

The university told Notehall that the company was violating California law, potentially infringing on copyright law, and encouraging students to violate university policy and risk discipline.

Carmikle said many professors and instructors at UC Davis who found notes for their classes on Notehall were indignant about it.

"For a lot of them it's a reputational quality-control issue. They take a lot of pride in giving really high-quality lectures," she said. "If a D-student can put these notes up, that's not good to anybody. It's not good for other students and not good for the instructor."

Schultz argued that faculty members can easily address quality issues by making clear to students that they should not trust the accuracy of unofficial class notes.

He described the policy as a trade-off between the cost of suppressing student enthusiasm for learning and sharing knowledge against the benefit of protecting instructors' reputations – something they can achieve through other means.

"I just don't think the trade-off is a very good trade-off for public education," he said.

At UC Berkeley, a joint academic senate/administrative task force recently revised the university policy on course notes. The new policy [PDF], which took effect in January, continues to ban the unauthorized sale of class notes. It also says students can share notes with other students only if they're both enrolled in the class at the same time. In theory, that means a student could face disciplinary action for sharing his or her notes from last semester with a student currently enrolled in the same class.

Philip Stark, a member of the task force and professor of statistics at UC Berkeley, said the policy should have included more careful definitions of "course notes." At issue, he said, are transcript-style notes, not a student's own synthesis of lecture material.

"I can't imagine any action being taken against a student who says, 'Here's the bullet items from this class.' That's not what this is intended to address," he said. "It's intended to address someone representing something as the instructor's words."

Stark, who is also vice chairman of the statistics department, said the policy is aimed at maintaining the integrity – and accuracy – of the instructor's lecture.

"It's my words, it's my performance, it's my material. I want you to learn from it, but I don't want you to represent to someone else that these are my words if I haven't had a chance to vet them," he said.

Schultz said he's concerned the universities are moving in the wrong direction.

"It's a policy against sharing knowledge. The Internet and networked technologies have been disrupting, one by one, every business model that has tried to put gates around information," he said. "These universities have to decide how they're going to handle this. They can embrace it or suppress it."

Contractors OK'd to bid on Fresno-area bullet train construction

Tim Sheehan — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 08:05:03 +0000

Anonymous

snapphoto/istockphoto.com

Fourteen construction companies are on the short list of firms poised to bid for contracts to begin building California’s high-speed rail system in the Fresno area later this year.

The list was revealed by California High-Speed Rail Authority CEO Roelof van Ark at the authority board’s monthly meeting yesterday in Sacramento.

Van Ark said the companies have formed into five teams that the authority has qualified to compete for a contract on a stretch of the line through Fresno, from the San Joaquin River at the north end to American Avenue at the south end. The contract is expected to be worth $1.5 billion to $2 billion.

The builder teams are:

California Backbone Builders, a consortium of two Spanish construction firms – Ferrovial Agroman and Acciona
California High-Speed Rail Partners, composed of Fluor Corp. of Texas, Sweden-based Skanska and PCL Constructors of Canada
California High-Speed Ventures, made up of Kiewit Corp. of Nebraska, Granite Construction of Watsonville and Comsa EMTE of Spain
A joint venture of Dragados SA of Spain, Denver-based Flatiron Construction Corp. and Shimmick Construction of Oakland
Tutor Perini Corp. of Sylmar, Zachry Construction of Texas and Pasadena-based Parsons Corp.

The project includes building 12 street overcrossings or underpasses, two elevated viaducts, a tunnel and a bridge across the San Joaquin River. Laying the tracks will be done later under a separate contract.

While the authority has qualified the teams in a screening process, significant hurdles remain, and it could be months before the companies get a chance to submit bids.

The state Legislature has yet to approve nearly $3 billion in bond funds from Proposition 1A, a 2008 bond measure – no sure thing, given a barrage of criticism of the authority’s latest business plan by the state’s legislative analyst, auditor and a peer review group appointed by the Legislature.

Final environmental documents for two sections of rail routes through the Valley – from Merced to Fresno and Fresno to Bakersfield – must also be approved before the authority can seek bids. Van Ark said the authority’s board will consider the environmental reports for Merced-Fresno in early May, but reports for Fresno-Bakersfield are going through more revisions.

Van Ark said appraisers will likely begin meeting with property owners in the Fresno area in late February and early March to explain how the authority plans to buy the right of way it needs to lay tracks through the city.

The route in Fresno generally follows the Union Pacific Railroad tracks near Highway 99 from the San Joaquin River through downtown, before curving south to follow the Burlington Northern Santa Fe freight tracks south of the city.

The reporter can be reached at tsheehan@fresnobee.com or 559-441-6319. This story resulted from a partnership among California news organizations following the state's high-speed rail program, including The Fresno Bee, The Sacramento Bee, California Watch, The Bakersfield Californian, The Orange County Register, the San Francisco Chronicle, The (Riverside) Press-Enterprise, U-T San Diego, KQED, the Merced Sun-Star, The Tribune of San Luis Obispo and The Modesto Bee.

More coverage of the high-speed rail project

Poor, minority residents face most health risks with climate change

Bernice Yeung — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 08:05:02 +0000

Bernice Yeung

Werner Kunz/Flickr

Poor, urban and minority residents are most at risk for health problems linked to climate change, according to a new California Department of Public Health analysis of Los Angeles and Fresno counties.

The department examined social and environmental factors ranging from the rising sea level to public transportation access and found that African Americans and Latinos living in these counties are more likely to be exposed to health and safety risks related to poor air quality, heat waves, flooding and wildfires stemming from climate change.

“Clearly, climate change risks are not equal across the state or within individual counties,” according to the report [PDF]. “Identifying communities at greatest risk is a necessary step in efficiently employing limited resources to protect public health.”

In Los Angeles County, neighborhoods near Santa Monica and Long Beach were among those deemed most vulnerable, "largely from risks due to sea level rise, but also partially attributable to poor public transit, wildfire risk, and a large proportion of elderly living alone,” the report said.

The study also found that there was a notable economic disparity between families living in the areas most vulnerable to climate change and those who didn't – the more at-risk families earned between 40 and 55 percent less each year than the least vulnerable families. Residents living downtown or in urban areas were also more vulnerable, the study said.

A western portion of Fresno County near Mendota also was found to be especially susceptible to climate change-related safety and health problems.

Public health experts say these disparities in climate-related health risks can partially be explained by living conditions and a poor baseline status of health.

“If you are low-income, you may live in a facility that is in poor repair, and you can't open the windows, or you don't have air conditioning. Then you may be more at risk for heat-related activity. It's the same with the cold," said Dr. Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association. "The fact is that low-income communities, especially those of color, start with a health deficit. No one does well with bad air quality, but when you have poor health status, you’re going to be more at risk.”

Across the country, public health departments have become increasingly focused on the connection between health and climate change. The California analysis – the first to look at climate change health and safety risks at a county level – is based on a methodology developed by researchers at Occidental College in Los Angeles, the University of Southern California and UC Berkeley, and it is part of an effort to help local officials plan and identify potential policies for handling the human health impacts of climate change.

"Given that climate change presents a suite of risks and not a single risk, this is more of a planning tool for identifying which communities you should be taking some time to make sure you address," said Manuel Pastor, who directs USC's Program for Environmental and Regional Equity and advised the state health department analysis. "You look at a map like this, and you see the areas that need more support. It could inform different preventative and emergency response strategies."

A bill introduced in November by U.S. Rep. Lois Capps, D-Calif., also calls for the development of a national strategic action plan to respond to "rising health threats from climate change."

These efforts have been applauded by the American Public Health Association.

“If you think about the history of public health, our history has been all about making sure that the water is safe to drink, the food is safe to eat, and the environment is safe to be in, and all of those things can be disrupted with climate change,” Benjamin said.

But climate change skeptics say California's climate-and-health analysis is misleading and unnecessary.

Richard S. Lindzen, a professor of atmospheric sciences at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a prominent climate change skeptic, said the issue is often erroneously conflated with extreme weather or natural disasters.

“In California, if you have extremes of warm or cold weather, it’s not due to global warming; it’s due to which direction the wind is blowing,” Lindzen said. Public health departments are merely “coming along for the ride,” he said. “As far as I can tell, the global warming impact on California health has to be immeasurable at this stage.”

UC Berkeley physics professor Richard Muller, a onetime skeptic who changed his position on climate change after conducting research funded by other skeptics, said that while “there is evidence of climate change that is visible to scientists but not to the everyday person,” the state public health department’s analysis is of limited use.

“It’s certainly true that the poor people of our state are always the most vulnerable to any change whatsoever – you don’t have to do an analysis to figure that out,” he said. “If you want to spend money on the poor, I suspect preparing for climate change is the least effective way to do that. The poor will always need help, and I don’t think it should be spent on something like a fad like climate extremes and predictions that things might get worse.”

The Union of Concerned Scientists disagrees. According to a 2011 study [PDF], California would experience the “biggest economic impacts and the biggest heath impacts when ozone and temperatures increase” due to climate change, said Elizabeth Perera of the union’s climate and energy program. That study projected that an increase in ozone pollution would result in about $729 million in related health care spending in California in 2020.

Twitter town hall on Latinos and education

Thu, 02 Feb 2012 18:51:17 +0000

In "English learners still far behind using immersion methods" and "State has one of nation’s highest gaps in Hispanic-white reading proficiency," Sarah Garland of The Hechinger Report reports on the Latino achievement gap in California schools. That conversation continues with a Twitter town hall held by @HispanicEd and #Latism. U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan will be the special guest. California Watch Public Engagement Manager Ashley Alvarado will participate. Use the hashtags #Latism or #HispanicEd to follow the conversation.

Location

Twitter.com

United States

See map: Google Maps

Pro-Romney super PAC rakes in California cash

Will Evans — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 08:05:04 +0000

Will Evans

Gage Skidmore/Wikimedia CommonsGOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney

If super political action committee dollars were votes in the Republican presidential primary, California would already have voted resoundingly for Mitt Romney.

Restore Our Future, the super PAC supporting the former Massachusetts governor, collected $2.3 million from Californians last year, more than any other super PAC, according to new filings this week. The group boosting Newt Gingrich, on the other hand, pulled in a paltry $1,750 from California, less than any other super PAC involved in the Republican primary.

Super PACs have been omnipresent in the primary race, spending lavishly on hard-hitting TV ads and rivaling in influence the candidates' own campaigns. The political committees are controversial because, under loosened campaign finance regulations, they allow wealthy individuals and companies to give unlimited amounts of money to directly support their preferred candidates.

Much of California's pro-Romney money came from the world of private investment – not surprising, as Romney formerly headed investment firm Bain Capital and the industry's business practices have become a hot issue in the campaign.

The biggest Golden State donor to Restore Our Future was W/F Investment Corp., which, together with CEO Bill Fleischman, gave $350,000. The Los Angeles private equity firm's portfolio includes a Bavarian beer importer and The Roadium open-air market in Torrance. W/F Investment referred calls to the super PAC.

Restore Our Future spokeswoman Brittany Gross said the organization is running advertisements in Nevada, which holds caucuses Saturday, and Arizona and Michigan, which have primaries later this month. As for the donations, Gross said, "we’re going to let the numbers speak for themselves."

The second-biggest donation, at $250,000, came from Glenbrook LLC. The Redwood City address listed on the donation is that of Glenbrook's accounting firm, which declined to provide any information about the company.

Dick Boyce, a San Francisco partner at private equity giant TPG Capital, gave $200,000. Boyce previously worked at Bain and currently serves on the board of Burger King. TPG has investments in Petco Animal Supplies, Spanish-language network Univision, retailer Neiman Marcus and casino company Caesars Entertainment.

David Wilson, owner of several Southern California car dealerships, gave the super PAC $100,000.

So did controversial Los Angeles developer G.H. Palmer Associates. Owner Geoff Palmer has been lauded for his pioneering upscale developments but criticized [PDF] for not including low-income units. Palmer's company was fined $30,000 in 1992 by the Fair Political Practices Commission on allegations of laundering campaign contributions through company employees.

The head of CKE Enterprises, the company that owns Carl's Jr. and Hardee's, also gave $100,000. CEO Andrew Puzder has been an outspoken backer of Romney, defending his business background at Bain and arguing that he will help businesses by reducing government regulations.

"The policies he proposes are precisely the ones we in the private sector need to successfully grow our businesses," Puzder wrote.

With California's presidential primary not until June, the state's role in the race is mainly that of an ATM, said Jessica Levinson, campaign finance scholar at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles. Super PACs, she said, have allowed for a "shadow campaign finance system" that is detrimental to the political system.

"If money’s speech, then people with more money get more speech, and this is a fundamental problem in a representative democracy," Levinson said. "It’s giving people with money a megaphone in the current debate."

But the U.S. Supreme Court has consistently rejected that argument, said John Samples, director of the Center for Representative Government at the Cato Institute.

"The concern is that it’s unequal – unequal money," Samples said. "The problem is that equality and freedom here are direct tradeoffs."

Chase Davis of the California Watch staff contributed to this report.

California funding to super PACS involved in presidential race

Super PAC	Amount	Supported candidate
Restore Our Future	$2,362,525	Mitt Romney
Priorities USA Action	$2,353,000	Barack Obama
Endorse Liberty	$950,000	Ron Paul
Our Destiny PAC	$317,750	Jon Huntsman*
Make Us Great Again	$307,000	Rick Perry*
Americans for Rick Perry	$35,000	Rick Perry*
Red, White & Blue Fund	$30,250	Rick Santorum
9-9-9 Fund	$8,544	Herman Cain*
Winning Our Future	$1,750	Newt Gingrich

*Candidate has withdrawn from the race

Source: Federal Election Commission