Public Comment

Letters to the Editor

Tuesday February 14, 2006


Editors, Daily Planet:  

As a homeowner affected by the Creeks Ordinance, I’m not sure that I like being represented as “a small but vocal sector of the Berkeley population.” You might as well say “we only want to evict a few of the tenants, what are they complaining about?” 

These unreasonable restrictions on remodeling are unacceptable, and would have prevented our purchase of the house. Unfortunately, we did not know that the northwest corner of our backyard contained a culvert when we bought our West Berkeley house, so now we have been negatively affected by the restrictions and are unable to make room for my mother-in-law; nor can we sell the house at market value, because it would be illegal to not disclose the restrictions now that we know about them. Furthermore, if the culvert ever does collapse, under the current statute the property owner is on the hook for potentially more money than the house is worth. Our own chunk of culvert would cost an estimated $16,000 to fix ($7,000 per yard, plus repairing the fences and landscaping after construction). 

If the intention of this law is to gradually displace residents from the nearly 2,000 affected properties so that creeks can be daylighted, it’s certainly structured well. I for one certainly hope that if such a plan were to be seriously considered, it could be openly debated in a democratic forum. We’re willing to accept reasonable limitations on what we can do with the house for the greater good, but the current 30-foot setback ruling on enclosed culverts is problematic. A much more serious issue is the repair of culvert failures, which is practically guaranteed to force residents out of the city.  

Jack Coates 




Editors, Daily Planet: 

As a caring citizen of Berkeley I urge the City Council to stand up for the health of our creeks, a very special resource which we are blessed to have in Berkeley. We need stronger protections for creek corridors instead of weakening the protections we have now. Please do not give in to the wishes of the developers. Business is not more important than environmental health. I thought that most on the City Council understood this, but it appears we must revisit it again. Here are some of the protections that need to be kept in place or implemented. 

1. No new construction closer than 30 feet to a creek. 

2. No paving right up to the banks of a creek. 

3. Culverted creeks should be kept in the ordinance. 

4. Protect real opportunities for daylighting creeks. 

5. Unroofed structures should also be built at least 30 feet away from the creeks. 

I ask the City Council to please do the right thing as you take a relook at these issues. The creeks and watersheds are part of the Commons and it is your job as public servants to protect the Commons. 

Meaveen O’Connor 



Editors, Daily Planet: 

I am writing to let you know that I am very alarmed by the proposed revisions of the Berkeley Creek Ordinance. If a small number of creekside property owners believe that they have the right to do what they wish with their tracts, then they must be ignorant or defiant of the negative consequences they could wield over an entire region. If the Planning Commission, the Creeks Task Force, and the City Council are not ignorant to the effects that such ordinance revisions could cause, what is the incentive for being defiant of them? I don’t feel that I need to list the ecological, economic and practical reasons for continuing to protect and even contribute to the health of our local creeks. Many an expert testimony has been provided for you, and common sense dictates that a creek is a conduit affecting all of the living things in its watershed.  

I can’t help but think of my 2-year-old son here. He’s a great guy, but there are times when he’s got a pretty vehement sense of “mine.” He’s learning the difference between his rights and his righteousness. I hope that the City of Berkeley can appreciate that distinction, as well. 

Kate Thompson 




Editors, Daily Planet: 

Berkeley is rightly proud to be one of California’s oldest cities, at the same time it is one of California’s densest cities. Berkeley’s General Plan, adopted in 2002, endorses the Landmarks Preservation Ordinance to protect charming neighborhoods that contribute greatly to the character of our city. 

In a recent letter, Mayor Bates and City Councilmember Anderson described our historic Lorin District as being one of the most interesting, beautiful and historic neighborhoods. Indeed, our Ashby station and Lorin District hold buildings with a rich sense of history and character. Just passing by, the sight of the interesting architecture makes one want to stop and explore. It’s the type of architecture that one associates with creativity and interesting shops, treasures and good food. It is not the architecture of a bland strip mall or sterilized retail that offers little of interest or of substance. 

At a time when many large housing developments are being planned, in construction, or recently built, do we need to further hasten handing over our past and future to the developers? We can not just remanufacture our historic treasures at a later date. Our historic resources are a testament to the ingenuity, diversity, work ethic and dreams of both native born and immigrants to Northern California from many backgrounds and countries.  

Let’s protect our valuable historic resources. Protect the LPO. 

Robin Wright 

Amnuay Amuaydejkorn  




Editors, Daily Planet: 

Regarding Judith Scherr’s Feb. 10 article “Public Library Workers Claim Retaliation for Speaking Out”: 

When Berkeley Public Library Director Jackie Griffin “note[d] that the complaints come from only some among the 212 employees and don’t represent the diverse group as a whole,” did she mean that retaliation against library staff is acceptable if it is against “only some among the 212 employees”? 

Bullying should never be tolerated. An administration that seeks to prevent staff members from attending library board meetings, retaliates against them if they speak out, and otherwise intends to curtail their freedom of speech, should be stopped immediately. 

The list of abuses in the article, and other actions over the past several years, including throwing thousands of our library books into garbage cans and dumpsters, and wasting close to a million of our tax dollars on RFID, a seriously flawed system that was not needed or wanted, indicate that our library system is out of control. 

If the Berkeley Board of Library Trustees (BOLT) does not take responsibility for overseeing library policies, what is their function? What recourse do we, the citizens and taxpayers, to whom these libraries belong, have? How much longer are we to tolerate the ungoverned actions of a library administration that has no interest in honoring the standards of our community?  

Shirley Stuart 




Editors, Daily Planet: 

Reading the latest follies of our Berkeley Public Library with the allegations of retaliation against outspoken employees, I am struck by two things. First, when the library director says the alleged retaliations only involved some few of her diverse 212 employees, does she mean by that only the outspoken employees were retaliated against, or that there are many other unhappy employees not retaliated against, or that there are many other allegations of misconduct which do not involve retaliation? Second, wouldn’t it have been simpler for all involved if long ago the director had simply come forward and admitted that the RFID system does not work as planned. In our post-Watergate world, isn’t it better to play the innocent and cast blame on Checkpoint’s slick sales force than to attempt a career-destroying cover-up? 

Sylvia Maderos-Vasquez 




Editors, Daily Planet: 

Bernie Sanders is still fighting for our civil liberties, as are John Conyers and some of the investigators into the NSA warrantless wiretapping surveillance hoopla. I feel glad about the continuing struggle to protect our civil liberties in Washington; never give up, Mr. Sanders and Mr. Conyers! 

I am chastened to read in last Friday’s Daily Planet that at least one of the Berkeley Library Board of Trustees (BOLT) thinks that people are “just coming together” on the issues of RFID and workplace safety/worker’s rights/fair labor practices at the library. She couldn’t be more wrong, unless she is referring to a very small group of people. Who could those people be, I wonder? 

It is worrisome that a city board overseeing a public trust with a more than 13 million dollar budget could be so out of touch with the true sentiments and goals of workers and library users. It still doesn’t seem like the Board of Library Trustees has a clue how most of us feel. Why is that? 

Super Berkeleyans for Library Defense (SuperBOLD), the ACLU, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, SEIU, EPIC, and many others have been speaking to these local and very real issues for over a year now at board meetings, at protests, and at City Hall during the public comment period, since we don’t seem to be able to get a public hearing on the issue. It seems as though they still can’t hear us. 

That sucking sound you hear is the vacuum created by city and library board lack of attention to and protection of our civil right to read what we want, watch what we want, and listen to what we want without the deterrent of potential surveillance. You also hear the draining of library budget dollars away from the true resources (materials and truly talented trained librarians) into a layer of management and technology potentially enabling the NSA to look easily in your back pocket, your purse, or your living room with even more ease than ever before. 

But perhaps only we, outside of the small group, can hear this sucking sound. Wake up, BOLT! How loud do we need to be? 

What price, privacy? Who decides what defines a terrorist? These are the questions we need to be discussing at a local level, before the vacuum engulfs us all. 

Lynda Winslow 




Editors, Daily Planet: 

On Feb. 11 the East Bay Daily News gave a substantially inaccurate account of a meeting I attended sponsored by Berkeleyans for a Livable University Environment (BLUE). Let me offer some corrections.  

Firstly, I (and some others present) did not support or endorse Zelda Bronstein as a mayoral candidate. There were some people present who seem to have decided in advance to so, but their numbers were thin, let’s say five or fewer. Ms. Bronstein may develop into a viable candidate, but for me the issue remains open. Secondly, I (and some others present) did not actively discourage Berkeley leader Dean Metzger from running. To the contrary, I think his candidacy should seriously be considered. Thirdly, I have been a member of BLUE for quite a while and therefore could not have been “invited” to attend. However, I will say here that I am now seriously reconsidering my support for and membership in this group since several of its leaders have, in my experience, not operated in a democratic manner. 

I have lived in Berkeley for 37 years and have been active in Berkeley politics for about eight years. I have developed an informed opinion about the most important issues. The city’s settlement with UC and the planned further expansion of UC is really unpalatable, but it is not the only issue. The issues important to me, and to thousands of other longtime Berkeley homeowners and residents, also include: restoring Berkeley as a slow-growth town with a good quality of life, limiting or eliminating subsidies and permits to developers of high-density residential projects, curtailing excessive local taxes and fees, economic development toward a strong retail and taxpaying base, high-quality schools that will entice Berkeley children and families, repair and restoration of our decaying physical infrastructure, increased attention to our high crime rate and increased funding for law enforcement, and municipal fiscal soundness and sustainability. 

Unless and until there is a mayoral candidate who openly supports a substantial part of my “platform” I will refrain, and I will advise anyone who will listen to me to refrain, from supporting or endorsing anyone for mayor. I will also add that I was not unimpressed with the city manager budget report of Feb. 7 and with Mayor Bates’ State of the City address. At this point, what I am hearing from that quarter is not without promise, and I will be following City actions as closely as ever to see how this surprising scenario evolves. 

Barbara Gilbert  




Editors, Daily Planet: 

For some time the Daily Planet has been publishing cartoons portraying Moslems as violent fanatics. For example, in the Feb. 3 issue, three thuggish figures dressed in black and brandishing weapons are labeled “Hamas” “Iraq” and “Iran.” These cartoons are not much different from cartoons depicting lazy blacks, avaricious Jews, ignorant Chinese, and so on. 

The Danish publishers of a cartoon on the same theme claimed that they were exercising freedom of the press. But there are limitations to freedom, and cartoons like these are unacceptable to decent people. That is because they have been used to justify and to incite discrimination, lynching, pogroms and wars. 

With these cartoons you are asking the rest of us to accept the repression and violence that is taking place against our Moslem brothers and sisters. I, for one, do not accept it and I object to the publication of this racist material. 

Whose interests do you think are being served when we are divided against each other by prejudice? 

Helen Finkelstein 



Editors, Daily Planet: 

Will the Daily Planet please consider printing the 12 cartoons submitted to the Danish newspaper which has been the subject of such controversy over the past few weeks? I’m listening to a brave newspaper editor in Cheyenne, Wyo. who is the first U.S. newspaper editor I’ve heard of who has printed any of the cartoons. Why is our free press censoring these images which are so central to the situation? Since it is a legitimate news story I think our community would be enriched by the discussion of a free press, religious intolerance, racist intolerance, and more. 

Jesse Townley 




Editors, Daily Planet: 

Two hundred thousand dollars for traffic calming! There is no traffic on the streets where they put the traffic circles. There is no traffic to calm for $200,000! 

Myrna Sokolinsky 




Editors, Daily Planet: 

Defend our liberties! What should we do in the community about the repression in Berkeley and the United States? Come to the first Free Speech Saturdays, at 2 p.m. Feb. 18, at Telegraph and Haste in Berkeley. Rallies will also be held on March 11 and April 8. 

Who is doing this? The ad-hoc committee to organize the 2006 People’s Park anniversary is holding these rallies. We have a sound permit and everyone will get to speak. Also everyone is invited to the to the planning of anniversary events happening between April 23 -30. The meeting are at Café Med (upstairs), on the first and third Sunday’s at noon. 

Michael Delacour 




Editors, Daily Planet: 

I am wondering how Oakland city administrators think that fast food restaurants and stores should pay extra taxes to keep the city streets clean. Why should they pay extra taxes? Do the restaurant owners throw wrappers, packages, plastic spoons and bottles on the streets? I don’t think it is right to punish and tax those who prepare and sell products to the customers. The public lacks the civil sense to keep their surroundings clean. There are bins and garbage cans almost everywhere to throw such trash and keep the city clean. Why don’t they catch the people who destroy the city’s beauty? I find graffiti and litter all over the place, especially in the streets of Oakland, Berkeley, and also Albany. The city officials should not transfer the civic responsibilities to others. It is high time that the people learn to keep their cities clean. 

Romila Khanna 





Editors, Daily Planet: 

I had to laugh at a bit of information regarding the apparently upscale Read Brother’s Building at Fourth and Addison. The lavish finishes for a 3,000-square-foot penthouse were described and then it was stated that “Construction cost is expected to exceed $300 square feet.” I wonder if the taxpayers of Berkeley are aware that the Hills Firestation, which is providing over 3,000 square feet of living space for the full-time three-person crew, is costing over $1,000 per square foot (6,800 square feet total at $7,250,000 was, I believe, the last publicly stated total cost).  

According to the president of a company that specializes in fire station construction the going rate for very nice new stations is $350 square feet, which includes land acquisition. Perhaps someone might want to look into this very upscale city project. 

Andrea Cukor 




Editors, Daily Planet: 

Regarding the recent article on the shooting at Acton and Ward streets: 

“Officers later found shell casings from both 9-millimeter and .223-caliber bullets outside the house. The latter rounds, which are used in assault rifles like the AR15, are designed to fragment on impact, Galvan said.” 

I know that that this information came from the police, but it is incorrect.  

First of all, the AR-15 is not an assault rifle. Assault rifles are by history, design, and definition, full-auto firearms like the military M-16. The semi-auto only AR-15 does not fire full-auto. There is a similar term, assault weapon, which is often used to describe semi-autos like the AR-15, but it is really a pretty meaningless term.  

Second, the .223 round itself is not designed to fragment. There are specific bullets that one can buy for the .223, or any other caliber for that matter, which are designed to fragment, others are designed to expand but stay together, and yet others are designed to not expand or fragment at all. The bullets used by the military do tend to fragment at above specific velocities, but this is unintentional and usually occurs because of a cannelure around the bullet. The purpose of the cannelure is to provide a crimping surface so that the bullets will not move inside the cartridge case during handling. Such movement could be very dangerous.  

Finally, there are a lot of different rifles which fire the .223 round including bolt action rifles, break action rifles, pump action rifles, lever action rifles, as well as semi-auto rifles.  

John Bloodgood, 

Former military and civilian arms  





Editors, Daily Planet: 

On Friday night, I was driving home after a long work week and looking forward to a relaxing weekend. As I approached the Marin Circle I noticed a line of cars ahead of me and vehicles backed up in every direction approaching the circle. Normally I am a strong advocate of free speech and in fact enjoy seeing protests/vigils, etc. held at the circle. This time however, the cause of the traffic jam made me frustrated and angry. Circling around the fountain were bicyclists, four or five abreast, most without lights or helmets (at 7 p.m.), preventing vehicles from entering the circle. A-ha, I thought to myself, this must be a Critical Mass ride. I myself often ride my bike to work and enjoy recreational riding in my time off. I am a huge advocate of cycling and cyclists. I am not however an advocate of idiots.  

What are these people thinking? What are they hoping to achieve with these rides? Not only are they breaking laws designed to protect them (riding without a light when it’s dark, not following the same rules as motor vehicles), but their actions lead to anger and ire in the “driving community” and are achieving nothing in terms of policy change. Please, if you are a member of the cycling community, think about your actions. Not everyone behind a wheel of an automobile is “out to get you.” Read the laws and regulations of operating a bicycle on city streets. You are to act like a motor vehicle. Stop at stop signs, stop at red lights, yield to pedestrians in cross walks! Thankfully, I’m finally home, despite this unpleasant and unnecessary delay to my commute. I will continue to “see bikes” as the bumper sticker says, and am hoping that more cyclists will start to “see cars” and we can finally “share the road” in peace.  

Ilana Peterson 



Editors, Daily Planet: 

First it was parking your car in the middle of the street to jaw with friends. Now it’s riding your bike at night with no lights. Dark clothes on dark streets at night. The dumber and more selfish the idea, it seems, the hipper it is.  

The excuse of many is that their slip-on, $20 headlights have been stolen. I went through a couple of those myself until I bought a perfectly bright $10 version and superglued it in the slot. I push the lamp face down whenever I lock my bike and no one seems to notice it. It’s been there two years.  

That said, there is still no valid reason for riding without lights or even one light in front or back. I urge the police to enforce the law requiring vehicle head- and taillights and parents and schools to do the same before we see cars driving at night without lights. Wouldn’t that be fun? 

Bud Hazelkorn 




Editors, Daily Planet: 

Thank you, Becky O’Malley, for opening the door a little, on this country’s widespread hypocrisy concerning religion (“They’re Everywhere, the Stupids,” editorial, Feb. 7). Just one example, which goes far beyond “silly,” is our ridicule of other cultures and religions, while we allow anti-democratic exclusionary religious prayers to begin every congressional session! 

It goes far beyond silly that these lawmakers unquestioningly allow this discrimination against many of us by regularly pledging their faith in God and Jesus- in our “halls of justice”! 

It goes far beyond silly when they pretend to honor the teachings of “the prince of peace” while authorizing an unjust war. 

We may not teach such violence as the cutting off of body parts, but we are, just as unthinkingly, and even cruelly, cutting off respect for individual beliefs. 

Gerta Farber 




Editors, Daily Planet: 

In response to Becky O’Malley’s editorial on the silliness of religious belief, I have to tell you that what is much more silly is to believe that there is no mystery, that this material world we see around us is all there is. That would be the biggest joke ever, to think that this more or less nonsensical montage of matter and experience might be self-sufficient and the end-all of being. No, Becky, think thrice before you make such a silly statement as you have made in your most recent editorial. One thing to think about is the limited character of our modes of human experience. All evolutionary creatures have limitations and there is every reason to believe that as such we are severely limited in our ability to perceive the ultimate reality of what appears to us as the world around us. The aspiration beyond our limited human existence is the very noblest of human attributes. It is what truly makes us human. 

Peter J. Mutnick 




Editors, Daily Planet: 

The world governed by the Bush administration grows daily more distant from the one I inhabit.  

Looking abroad they see democracy marching, freedom spreading, terrorism waning, insurgency expiring, coalition expanding. Closer to home they incarcerate enemy combatants and question suspects up to the threshold of mortality, they unleash unlimited unconstitutional executive powers, they help the poor by cutting tax on the wealthy.  

Vice President Cheney sees in Afghanistan the beginning of freedom and in Iraq the last throes of the insurgency.   

Defense Secretary Rumsfeld defends us against enemies at our doorstep, evidently extending across an ocean and a sea.  

Attorney General Gonzales dismantles all barriers to extra-judicial eavesdropping in order to make his fellow citizens feel safer.  

State Secretary Rice answers allegations of torture by emphasizing the amoral savagery of its victims. 

I see a different world. I see the president praise “Brownie,” an inept rescuer of a major city then accept his resignation, promise to rebuild and then delay funds. 

I see democracy marching, yes—forward in Bolivia, Venezuela, Iran, Palestine and backward in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, and alas here. In Afghanistan I see the Taliban resurrected and in Iraq I see young soldiers and civilians in the tens of thousands killed and maimed.   

The world is as it is, of course, but theirs is full of fear, fluff and fantasy while mine is all too depressingly bloody and dysfunctional. 

Marvin Chachere 

San Pablo  




Editors, Daily Planet: 

I was so happy to meet with Ruth Bird, through her letter in the paper last week. Just wanted to agree in writing to stop the killing—of precious life. Stop the killing and start (once again) to simply care for one another. No need to have the rich and the poor, Mr. Bush et al. No need to poison one another. The only need—and oh so necessary—is for some light to be shed within the vacant, conniving minds of those who rule us right now. Let’s face it...they do. Have for some time.  

We all deserve what any social order could provide, if it wasn’t distracted from the needs of living by the orders of the uncaring. There is enough wealth for all. There is the mighty sun. It is simple enough to pay attention—to do no harm; to reach out to all of life as it reaches out to us. 

Iris Crider 




Editors, Daily Planet: 

On Jan. 21 I was violently attacked by a female that I have not had contact with for five years. When I called the Berkeley police, they told me that they currently had her pulled over in her vehicle for an unrelated charge and if I wanted to press any charges I would have to meet them at the location in North Berkeley that she had been pulled over at. I drove back to Berkeley and brought two witnesses of the attack with me; one witness is someone that I had never met before that night. The police told me that my attacker claimed I was in possession of a firearm and that I had punched her in the face earlier that night (although she had no evidence of this) and threatened to shoot her. This girl was clearly on drugs that night, has mental problems, and the police didn’t seem to care about that. The police also didn’t care to document the fact that my eye was swollen shut, or any statements from my two witnesses. I asked them if they needed pictures or statements, and they said no. Thanks to the Berkeley police report, my case is not going to court and this girl is trying to contact my family members. I am really excited to have read in the Berkeley Daily Planet that the department is seeking new officers, because maybe unlike the officers who handled my case, they will pay attention to detail and learn how to take a proper report. 

Nancy Harrison 




Editors, Daily Planet: 

P.M. Price’s reaction to seeing the film Brokeback Mountain was interesting to me as a white person (and someone who has not seen the film). Price wondered whether the white cowboy characters in Brokeback would have cared about the oppression of black people or known about the civil rights movement taking place in 1963. I would like to point out that there was more commonality between gay and African American oppression in 1963 than Price may be aware. An openly gay man or lesbian in 1963 could be imprisoned or lose their job because “gay sex” (or even same sex dancing) was illegal everywhere, including California. The story of Bayard Rustin as told in the film Brother Outsider: The Life of Bayard Rustin is an especially interesting lens for looking at both issues, since the U.S. government tried to discredit Martin Luther King, Jr. for having a gay advisor in Rustin. Read more about him on the website 

Janine Baer 

El Cerrito 




Editors, Daily Planet: 

My God, Bush decides to help these nefarious spy types spy on Quaker peace groups and also vegans? Who does he think he is—king? Good Lord! I respectfully suggest that Sen. Harry Reid and others in power now work to find a special prosecutor to help hold President Bush and the other nefarious ones (people like Condi Rice, Gonzales, Rumsfeld, etc.) accountable for spying on innocent Americans who are not terrorists and don’t know any personally!  

What is happening to this country? Pray, meditate, use your intuition, and keep after Congress and others in power. Work, to build a better, more peaceful country. Help get us out of Iraq ASAP, take back Congress in 2006, and above all, learn to live a life of peace and love and generosity, yourself!  

I, in the meantime, am working on forgiving America for falling for this entire ruse in the first place. “WMD in Iraq”... horseybleep! Unless they’re discussing the WMD that we have since put there.  

Please don’t become another grieving mother or friend! Let’s take back America. Let’s make world peace. What you do affects all of life, all people. And for God’s sake, cut down on use of fuel and gas, and find a more sustainable lifestyle. We can’t go on using cell phones and technology ad nauseam. We’re endangering ourselves and the earth. Pray for all of us. Pray for America. Pray for yourself, your friends and family, your sweetheart if you are lucky enough to have an intimate partner(s). Pray, as if it all depended on God or Goddess or Jesus or Buddha or whomever. Then work, as if it all depended on you.  

It is not too much trouble to be kind, gentle, to smile at a stranger, write to your mother, hug your friends, follow your dreams, and keep on saving stuff like college scholarships, jobs in America (oh please not Wal-Mart wage slavery). 

I’ve elaborated long enough. I’m glad to be doing my part. If I can’t do a lot, I’ll do a little. Doing a little is better than doing nothing, for Heaven’s sake. I love all of you, all of America, and all of the world. I just don’t have a close personal relationship with everybody alive, only my good friends, family, and any future lovers, pets, or children.  

Linda Smith 




Editors, Daily Planet: 

The State of the Union could be looking a lot cooler. I find it quite deceiving that President selectively used information in order to make his energy policy look beneficial for the American people. Firstly, Bush’s foreign policy is driven by a desire to secure oil resources from “unstable parts of the world”; so, it is absurd to make a claim about weaning the United States off of oil when we have been at war for three years in a region rich with oil reserves. While we only import about 10 percent of our oil from the Middle East, George Bush made the claim that we will replace more than 75 percent of our oil imports from the Middle East by 2025. Hooray George! You successfully fooled Americans into believing we get most of our oil from the Middle East, when in actuality most of it comes from Canada and Mexico. If Bush really wanted to replace our imports from the Middle East, then he should push the Energy for Our Future Act, which would raise fuel efficiency standards to 40 mpg in the next 10 years and in turn save as much oil as we currently import from the Middle East. Congress needs to work together on this new piece of legislation if they hope to actually have an energy policy in place that will begin to dramatically cut our contribution to global warming and move us in a progressive direction. 

Josh Sbicca 

Campaign Director  

Environmental Action