CVIndependent

Thu11232017

Last updateWed, 27 Sep 2017 1pm

Kevin Fitzgerald

On Oct. 8, the Trump White House released a long list of demands that the president had given to Congress—demands that Trump said would need to be met in order for the fate of young undocumented immigrants, often called DREAMers, to be determined.

“These findings outline reforms that must be included as part of any legislation addressing the status of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients,” Trump said. “Without these reforms, illegal immigration and chain migration, which severely and unfairly burden American workers and taxpayers, will continue without end.”

The list of demands disappointed advocates of DREAMers—young men and women who could face deportation if Congress does not act.

Hadley Bajramovic is a Riverside County immigration attorney for both the Consulate of Mexico and the Consulate of Guatemala. She said the proclamation by Trump did not surprise her.

“I don’t know that it was shocking,” Bajramovic said, “but the recommendations (the Trump White House) made are very harsh from our point of view. A lot of the principles and policies that are talked about in that memo are already in place. So, for me, there are parts of it that are just a big eye-roll.

“I noticed a theme of using criminality as a scare tactic—like we aren’t protected from (immigrants). ‘We need to protect the U.S.A. from these people,’ but the protections are already there.”

Bajramovic highlighted some of the positions outlined in the White House directive that she found to be misleading and/or inflammatory.

“The administration is suggesting that the border is still porous, and it is not,” she said. “I work with people who come to the border and declare asylum or ask for protection, and also people who crossed the border illegally. In the past two to three years, I have not had anybody come to my office who recently crossed without inspection. It was very common up until about 2007-2008 that people would either cross through the desert or come in (with the help of) a coyote. Now the people I am seeing were admitted or paroled in by the Border Patrol because they established that they could be eligible for relief. So the notion that the border is still porous is wrong. Building a wall is unnecessary. It’s an unnecessary expense.”

“But what was interesting and eye-opening is that whoever drafted these policies was aware of the protections coming into place under our local laws to help undocumented people or people with immigration issues who have criminal convictions. Most recently, California passed a law that allows attorneys to submit motions to vacate criminal convictions if it can be proven that the defendant was not fully aware of the immigration consequences of accepting a plea deal. This law, California 1473.7, went into effect this past January and says that before a person can do a plea deal, they must understand what they are doing. It’s a due-process protection, and it’s fair. This memo attacks that type of due-process protection and is calling it a part of the ‘sanctuary status.’ It calls for prohibiting states or cities from giving that kind of a remedy. That’s really disturbing.

“Another point that is really important: California provides services and benefits to aliens,” Bajramovic said. “In fact, the California Department of Social Services just opened up federal funding (to access by the public) of $45 million to fund immigration relief for undocumented people. Now this memo says they want to restrict grants to states that do that.”

Megan Beaman Jacinto is a La Quinta-based immigration-rights attorney.

“I’ve seen some phases of reaction and response (among current DACA beneficiaries), beginning with the time leading up to Sept. 5, when Trump declared that DACA would be ended by executive order. There was dread mixed with terror leading up to that date—but after, it was just terror,” she said. “There was a lot of uncertainty immediately about whether that announcement meant that Immigration and Customs Enforcement would just be coming for everyone who then possessed DACA. That was the initial reaction, I think, both in the advocate community as well as the DACA-recipient undocumented community.”

Beaman Jacinto pointed out a less-obvious consequence of the Trump administration’s ongoing anti-immigration stance.

“There’s been an interesting political framing of the DREAMer community as the one, limited group of people who are deserving of immigration protection,” Beaman Jacinto said. “It’s like they were the victims of their parents (actions and decisions). I appreciate, and agree, that the group we call DREAMers should be protected, but it sort of requires that we vilify everyone else. The parents of those kids are not DREAMers, even though they came here to provide a better life for their families. And the kids arriving now are not DREAMers, because they didn’t arrive before the deadline and the passage of the DREAMer legislation. It’s an interesting and arbitrary set of guidelines that have established this one deserving group that’s received protection both from Obama’s DACA executive order and now, most likely, from the (new Trump iteration) of the DREAM Act which we think will become law, hopefully next year. If that passes, it will be really great, and a step in the right direction—but it has required throwing a lot of other people under the bus.”

“If the DREAM Act does pass, or even if it doesn’t, we need to do the right thing for other people who didn’t fall into that so-called DREAMer category—because we’re all dreamers.”

Since 2007, the California Legislature has worked to encourage the development of telephone and Internet access through the California Advanced Services Fund. The fund provides financial assistance to both large telecommunications companies—including Frontier, AT&T, Charter and Cox—and independent broadband projects driven by community organizations that partner with smaller Internet service providers.

Thanks in part to the fund, the Legislature has grown closer to its goal of deploying broadband Internet service to 98 percent of Californians by 2017. But as the end of 2017 drew closer, many California legislators wanted to update the broadband-support program. The result: AB 1665, aka the Internet for All Now Act, which was authored by eastern Coachella Valley Assemblymember Eduardo Garcia.

After overwhelming approval in both houses, the bill now sits on the governor’s desk, as of this writing.

“We know that having broadband Internet access improves the state’s economy, enhances educational opportunities, and benefits public safety, (as well as) our medical field and patient care,” Garcia said during a recent phone interview. “Even in the Coachella Valley, civic participation requires a connection to the Internet now. So this law supports a program that invests in and ensures that the infrastructure is in place for the purpose of allowing carriers to connect all these homes, businesses, schools, hospitals, clinics and public safety services in remote areas, allowing them to communicate. It’s vital to what we all do on a daily basis.”

Garcia said the Legislature set the 98 percent connectivity goal about a decade ago. “We have now gotten to about 94 percent or so, and that last (unconnected) percentage happens to be in mostly underdeveloped areas like the eastern Coachella Valley, Imperial County and other rural parts of the state. So that’s what this program will do.”

However, the bill did not make it to the governor’s desk without controversy.

Stephen Blum is an executive team member of the Central Coast Broadband Consortium, a California Public Utilities Commission-funded group engaged in broadband planning and development in the state, He’s also the president of Tellus Venture Associates, his own broadband-development consulting agency. He is not fan of the Internet for All Now Act version that made it to the governor’s desk.

“There have been attempts in the last legislative session and the two previous sessions to put more money into the (CASF) fund, more or less keeping the program as it was,” Blum said. “This year, things changed. The incumbents (large corporate ISPs) including AT&T, Frontier and the California Cable and Telecommunications Association jumped in and said, ‘We want the bill to be X, Y and Z.’ … Assemblymember Eduardo Garcia took it and started adding language that reflected the desires of these cable and telephone company incumbents.

“The bill went through three revisions, and each time, more perks were added for the incumbents. So as it’s written now, AB 1665 is going to put $300 million into a CASF infrastructure grant account and make it virtually impossible for independent projects to be funded. Essentially, then, it becomes a fund for AT&T and Frontier to use at their discretion.”

Blum said some of the changes made to the act baffled him.

“One of the things this bill does that boggles my mind is it lowers California’s broadband speed levels—and it’s a significant change,” he said. “Right now, an area is fundable if there’s no existing service that provides 6 mbps (megabits per second) download and 1.5 mbps upload speeds. That’s the standard. This bill changes it to 1 mbps up. Now, that doesn’t sound like a big deal, but it is, because the difference between 1.5 or 1 mbps up is the difference between 1990 DSL systems and contemporary copper system architecture and electronics. You can take a 1990 DSL system, do relatively minimal upgrades to it, and reach the 6 down, 1 up speed standard required. You can’t get 6 down, 1.5 up without going in and doing substantial work. That’s the change that AT&T and Frontier pushed very hard for, because that allows them to do minimal upgrades in rural areas to meet their obligations. Now they’re going to have to invest even less money—because the state will pay for it.

“If you’re in an area that falls under the CASF umbrella … you’re looking at a future where you’re going to have service somewhere in the 6 to 10 mbps download range, and 1 mbps upload range, and that’s not going to change for 10 to 20 years, because once this stuff is in, there’s no point in upgrading it.”

Garcia defended the changes made to the bill.

“There are places throughout the state that still have absolutely no Internet service whatsoever,” Garcia said. “The intention of the bill is to get people connected. The debate was: Why would we allow for certain areas that are already connected to increase their speed capacity? We laid out a goal, through a bipartisan effort of Republicans and Democrats from both rural and urban parts of the state, to make sure that the primary focus of this legislation was to serve the unserved populations. We had people push back, saying that we should be trying to get higher network speeds in places that already had connectivity, and we wrestled with that. What we decided is that we could (try for higher network speeds) after we connect everybody to some service in the areas still having no service. So, modifications to the bill were made where we were not able to appease everyone, but get enough support to move the bill forward.”

Another controversial aspect of the bill: For “last mile” projects that connect established “mid-mile” broadband pipelines to end users like homes, hospitals or businesses, those end users will have to participate financially in the funding of their access. Is that reasonable or fair when the target population is disadvantaged?

“The thought was that there should be some investment, or ‘skin in the game,’ on everyone’s part in order to be considered for access to CASF grants, and ultimately be connected,” Garcia responded.

The Independent asked whether there is some sort of means test built into the bill in order for disadvantaged end users to obtain financial support via the CASF.

“There is a means test through the CPUC,” Garcia said. “There was some confusion that this bill was attempting to just give people free Internet access—that it was like a welfare-type of program where if you signed up, you got free Internet. That’s nowhere near the real case. We’re talking about infrastructure being developed, and that makes it that much more accessible for people to connect to some type of broadband service.”

Blum said when we spoke that he was hopeful the legislation was not a done deal.

“When it gets to the governor, I think there’s a conversation to be had at that point,” he said. “We think that’s where the final decision will get made, and we feel that’s still an open question.”

In April 2016, the Rural Community Assistance Corporation (RCAC) held a rally to highlight its achievements in bringing safe, clean and potable water to schools in the Eastern Coachella Valley via its Agua4All campaign, which installed 75 clean water-bottle-filling stations for student use.

For many of these local children, these stations offer the only consistent and free access to safe drinking water they have. (See “Potable Progress: Agua4All Meets Its Goal of Giving East Valley Students Access to Safe Drinking Water—but There’s Work Left to Do,” May 8, 2016.)

Since then, however, Agua4All’s progress has slowed significantly. Just those initial 75 stations are operating; no others have been installed.

“I wouldn’t necessarily say that the program has stalled,” said Olga Morales, the RCAC regional manager. “Originally, we had two pilot programs, in the Coachella Valley and Bakersfield. Most of our resources were utilized in those two communities. Then, we expanded our program into other counties throughout the state, and arguably, the available money didn’t go as far as it did when it was concentrated in one specific area.

“Our whole program thus far had been funded strictly by foundation and bank money. It takes a lot of effort to attract those kinds of dollars. … In the end, it doesn’t really go very far.

“We did succeed in expanding the program into other counties across the state,” Morales continued, “but there have not been sufficient resources to increase our outreach in Riverside County and the Coachella Valley. However, in the last two months, we were awarded what’s known as a ‘technical assistance (funding) program’ for our drinking-water-in-schools program, which is hosted under the State Water (Resources Control) Board. Under this new program, we’ve been directed to work with schools to identify the need either for access to, or treatment of, drinking water on their campuses. The program officially launches next month, and it has $9.5 million set aside for drinking water infrastructure to be installed at schools in primarily disadvantaged communities.”

Unfortunately, Morales said only school districts in cities with populations less than 20,000 can apply for that assistance for the first nine months—meaning most of the Coachella Valley schools in need will not qualify.

However, there is good news to report regarding infrastructure access in the Eastern Coachella Valley.

The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), in partnership with other governmental offices and community stakeholders, is poised to deliver some lasting improvements to East Valley communities. CVWD Board Vice President Castulo Estrada, who represents the East Valley, talked about the positive signs for valley residents who have struggled with a lack of access to potable water for decades.

“During discussions at the CVWD Disadvantaged Communities Infrastructure Task Force meetings (chaired by Estrada), we can put some focus on the water needs of the east side, which is due to a lack of infrastructure,” Estrada said. “… Over this last year, our group at the meetings has grown to include a lot of the people who need to be part of the conversation, and who are essential to ensuring that these projects get done. Our group now includes the assemblymember’s office (Eduardo Garcia), the congressman’s office (Dr. Raul Ruiz) and the county supervisor’s office (V. Manuel Perez). We have folks from the Riverside County Transportation and Land Management Agency, which is the department in charge of issuing permits. We have folks from the United States Department of Agriculture, folks from Building Healthy Communities (BHC), folks from the leadership council, and folks from the housing coalition. Now folks from the Desert Recreation District want to join us.

“Our meetings now provide a place where everybody can talk about the projects that they’re working on, and it allows everybody to have a sense of what’s happening, and that way, things can get done better.”

Estrada mentioned the San Antonio del Desierto sewer-extension project as an example of how the task force is making progress.

“The county was holding back a grading permit that was stopping progress with the project, and as a result, we had to request at least two extensions for a grant from the USDA,” Estrada said. “Then, when Supervisor Perez came in, I spoke to him about it, and there was a big meeting called. After that, things got done. So now that project is going out to bid (for construction contractors) this month after a whole year of hiccups and delays.”

Supervisor V. Manuel Perez agreed that the CVWD task force’s work is leading to much-needed solutions to the East Valley’s longstanding needs for potable water and sewer-system access.

“Castulo’s attempts to ensure that we have reliable water infrastructure on the east side deserve recognition, particularly when it involves safe drinking water, which I view as a social-justice right.” Perez said. “This has been an historical issue for us for a very long time.”

District 56 Assemblymember Eduardo Garcia was also optimistic about the progress being made in the East Valley—including possible forward progress for Agua4All.

“From my perspective, we’re going to continue to build off our efforts with the legislation AB 2124, which included dollars to ensure safe, clean drinking water for our schools and communities in and around our school grounds,” Garcia said. “That was part of the Agua4All campaign, which received approximately $10 million in support of their efforts.

“In this last budget approved by the governor, there is roughly $17 million budgeted toward these types of efforts. That’s specifically a result of our advocacy and the advocacy of other legislators who represent similar geographic districts that are primarily rural, agricultural economies, where you have remote housing circumstances, as we do here in the Coachella Valley, that are unable to centralize infrastructure. … My job, and the job of Castulo Estrada, and the job of RCAC is now to try to bring those dollars to our backyard.”

On June 27, the California Department of Public Health issued its first data report on residents’ participation in the new End of Life Option Act.

The law was signed by the governor in 2015 and took effect on June 9, 2016. The report reveals that 258 terminally ill California patients—diagnosed as having less than 6 months to live—started the process as called for under the law, as of Dec. 31, 2016.

Of those 258 patients, 191 were prescribed the life-ending medications, by 173 unique physicians. The report states: “111 patients, or 58.1 percent, were reported by their physician to have died following ingestion of aid-in-dying drugs prescribed under EOLA, while 21 individuals, or 11 percent, died without ingestion of the prescribed aid-in-dying drug(s). The outcome of the remaining 59 individuals, or 30.9 percent, who have been prescribed aid-in-dying drugs, is currently undetermined, as there has been no outcome reported for these individuals within the time period covered by this report.” (Full disclosure: One of the 111 patients who passed away using the new law was my mother-in-law; see “Annette’s Story,” posted at CVIndependent.com on Dec. 20, 2016.)

Kat West is the national director of policy and programs at Compassion and Choices, a national support organization for medical aid-in-dying patients and their cause. The organization just released its own, independent report on the law, covering activity through May 31 of this year.

“We were actually very encouraged by the data that came out of the state, because it showed that (the participation rate) was in keeping with our previous experience in the other authorized states,” West said. “The one piece of data we were very happy to see was the ratio of the number of different doctors prescribing the drugs compared to the group of patients requesting. That was a really good indicator that medical aid-in-dying is being what we call “normalized” and basically mainstreamed into end-of-life care.”

According to the Compassion and Choices report, the organization knows of 313 prescriptions that were written for medical aid in dying in the first five months of 2017. Meanwhile, 498 health-care facilities and 104 hospice locations have adopted policies supportive of patient choice, while about 80 percent of private insurance companies have covered the cost of the medications, including Blue Cross Blue Shield, Kaiser Permanente, Sutter and all Medi-Cal plans.

“The additional 313 prescriptions issued (thus far in 2017) were only the ones that we know about,” West said. “There are plenty of doctors who did not reach out to our organization, and there are plenty of terminally ill people who did not reach out to us. As a result, we don’t know of all of the prescriptions that may have been written in the state of California.”

Not all of the news is good for proponents of medical aid-in-dying protocols. The federal House Appropriations Committee recently voted to block funding to implement a new medical aid-in-dying law in Washington, D.C.

In California, a Riverside County Superior Court judge allowed the Ahn vs. Hestrin lawsuit, which challenges the End of Life Option Act, to move ahead into the courts, although an injunction request to put the law on hold was rejected by the judge.

John Kappos, a partner at the O’Melveny and Myers law firm, is representing proponents of the law. He said he is not too concerned about the lawsuit.

“What I find most concerning is the fact that a purely voluntary procedure like medical aid in dying causes some people to try to impose their will on others,” he said. “People can decide that they want to do it, or they can decide that they’d prefer not to do it and just die of natural causes. There’s no one here who is telling the people who do not want to participate in medical aid in dying that they need to, or have any obligation to do so. It’s very concerning to me that there are people in California who feel that they need to tell others … they have to suffer at the end of life, and potentially die an excruciating death.”

Kappos said it could take a year or longer for the case to be resolved. “It’s hard to guess at these kinds of things, but in my view, these are purely legal issues, and eventually, that will come to light, and the case should be resolved on a motion (in the defendant’s favor).”

Here in the Coachella Valley, Eisenhower Medical Center continues to deny its staff and doctors permission to write medical-aid-in-dying prescriptions for its terminally ill patients.

“I try to take the long view, and that is that change is hard,” said West, of Compassion and Choices. “But look back 20 years as an example. If you were to bring up the subject of hospice care with a group of medical professionals, it would clear the room. That’s how taboo the topic of death and end-of-life care was then. Now, of course, hospice is completely mainstream, and everyone thinks it’s great. So it’ll be the same trajectory for medical aid in dying, especially now that California has authorized it.

“Eisenhower is just going to find itself out of step with the community’s needs and desires. It’s going to find itself out of step with its own doctors’ feelings about the issue, and eventually, it will change its policy. The community clearly wants it, so it’s just the administrators. The community is already stepping up their demands, and internal champions within Eisenhower are also calling us and letting us know what they think.”

West predicted change will come to Eisenhower sooner rather than later.

“I’d say they will change their policy within a year. I do believe that,” West said. “The administrators have to pay attention to what their community is asking for.”

West suggested that everyone engage in an end-of-life-treatment discussion with their own health-care professionals.

“Our big ask of everyone is to ask your own doctor now if they would provide the protocol legalized in the End of Life Option Act—whether she or he will support you if and when the time comes,” West said.

The Salton Sea was accidentally created in 1905, and its relentless deterioration began in earnest after the area’s heyday as a resort area in the 1950s and 1960s.

In the decades since, water levels have dropped precipitously, while pollution and salinization levels have skyrocketed—and as a result, the lake is a gradually evolving natural disaster in our backyard.

Over the years, various scientific and political initiatives have been proposed to forestall the very real dangers posed by the degrading sea. But few, if any, of the proposed solutions have been implemented.

Until now, that is.

“The two-pronged approach is moving forward under the Salton Sea 10-Year Plan,” said Bruce Wilcox, the assistant secretary of Salton Sea policy at the California Natural Resources Agency. “(The first prong is) concentrating on getting some construction done out there so there’s some habitat restored, and more importantly, from a public health point of view, getting some dust suppression happening. We’re doing that right now. We’ve already started.”

The second prong is still being developed, and various Salton Sea threat-management stakeholders—including the Salton Sea Authority, the California Department of Water Resources, the Imperial Irrigation District and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife—are in the process of conducting a series of community workshops, led by Wilcox, in cities surrounding the Salton Sea.

“These meetings are for anyone, but they’re particularly designed for the public,” he said. “We hold them in the evenings so that folks who are working during the day can go.”

What’s the goal of these workshops?

“What we’re hoping to get from the general public is some input on whether or not they think the short-term projects make sense,” Wilcox said. “Are (people) happy with where they are located (geographically)? What other longer-range solutions do you see for the Salton Sea? So far, we’ve gotten some interesting feedback. For instance, there’s concern about water import. There’s concern on the part of people who live on the west side of the sea as to how soon there might be a restoration program under way near them. Those are the sorts of things we’re trying to get from folks.

“Also, longer-term, we want to know if they think the two-pronged approach will work, and how well they think it might work, or what they think we should do to change it.”

One encouraging aspect of the Salton Sea 10-Year Plan rollout is that it offers the first evidence that separate bureaucratic efforts are finally coming together. Signed by the governor in October 2015, Assembly Bill 1095 called for the creation of a list of “shovel-ready” Salton Sea restoration projects by March 31, 2016.

“All of the projects which were mentioned in that bill are included in the 10-Year Plan,” Wilcox said. “Red Hill Bay has started construction.”

The Red Hill Bay Project is a joint effort by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Imperial Irrigation District to restore habitat on the southeastern shore of the Salton Sea. Wilcox said the state-funded project includes about 500 acres.

Wilcox said other projects will get started later this year and early next year.

“The southwest corner of the sea includes the New River, and on the east side of that river, there are about 640 acres of species-conservation habitat,” he said. “We will advertise in the next month for a bid on the development of this project, and we should start construction on that later this year. That’s a deeper-water fisheries habitat. We now have salinity issues with the Salton Sea that are raising heck with the fisheries, so when we put these on the ground, we’ll manage the salinity in these impoundments. At least we’ll then have some stable fish habitats. It’s not enough, but it’s a start.”

The 10-Year Plan projects are expected to cost about $390 million in total. Who will provide that funding?

“We have $80 million in state of California grants stemming from (2014’s) Prop 1,” Wilcox said. “But we’re looking at getting additional funding from the (United States Department of Agriculture) perhaps, or from the (federal) watershed improvement acts. There’s a bill right now in the California State Senate that would provide additional funding. I’m confident that we’ll get the money we need.”

However, the Trump administration has not exactly embraced funding for environmental issues.

“Well, it’s a new administration, and we’re learning about them as they’re learning about us,” he said, rather diplomatically. “We have a signed memorandum of agreement with the Department of the Interior for funding. I’m going to assume that we’ll get that funding.”

However, Wilcox acknowledged that the memorandum was signed under the Obama administration.

“It certainly could be taken away,” Wilcox said. “But for the state of California, and for most people who look at this question, the cost of restoring the Salton Sea is a huge number. But when you look at it from the federal government’s perspective, it’s a line item in a budget, and there are all sorts of line items in there that are bigger than this one, so I’m reasonably confident that we’ll be able to prevail with the agencies. We’ve had some very productive discussions with them to this point. … But I don’t want to kid anybody. Funding is going to be an uphill fight. It always is, no matter what the project is.”

Wilcox expressed optimism that the 10-Year-Plan will succeed.

“I think the odds are reasonably good,” he said. “(The sea) won’t be like it was in the 1960s. It’ll be smaller, but sustainable. We call it the Salton Sea Management Program for that reason: It’s not restoration, necessarily. It’s to manage and impact all of the things going on.”

Workshops on the Salton Sea’s 10-Year-Plan are being held in cities all around the Salton Sea, including one at 5:30 p.m., Thursday, July 6, at the Indio Performing Arts Center, 45175 Fargo St., in Indio; and another at 5:30 p.m., Wednesday, July 12, at the Rancho Mirage Public Library, 71100 Highway 111, in Rancho Mirage. For more information, including a complete schedule of workshops, visit resources.ca.gov/salton-sea.

After months of rain—and increased revenue from last year’s rate increases—both the western Coachella Valley’s Desert Water Agency and the eastern valley’s Coachella Valley Water District find themselves wading in more riches than they could have imagined just one short year ago.

However, that does not mean that all of the water-conservation mandates are a thing of the past.

“The drought is over, but conservation isn’t,” said Ashley Metzger, the DWA’s outreach and conservation manager. “That’s the big message.”

While Gov. Jerry Brown declared on April 7that the drought was officially over in most of the state—including Riverside County—many of the water-usage restrictions imposed during the drought may be with us for some time.

“We live in the desert, and we’re always in a drought,” said Heather Engel, the CVWD’s director of conservation and communication. “Even though there were many areas of the state that were facing unprecedented circumstances, for us, this is how it is all the time.”

Coachella Valley residents are continuing to conserve. According to the CVWD’s March conservation report, customers used 24.5 percent less potable water than compared to the same period in 2013, while the DWA reported a 23.6 percent decrease.

“There are still prohibitions on water waste, water runoff and watering during or soon after rainfall. These are all things for which the DWA will cite people,” Metzger said. “We see the drought as having been a good learning opportunity for our customers, and we want to keep that message going in terms of water use efficiency.”

However, some of the most onerous water restrictions may be eased.

“Any restrictions that local water agencies imposed above and beyond the state’s, according to my understanding, can be eliminated,” said Engel. “That’s where you see that some of the local time or day-of-the-week outdoor-irrigation usage restrictions are being lifted. But the state restrictions are pretty much common-sense restrictions, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the governor and the State Water Resources Control Board make those kinds of restrictions permanent.”

Still, the local agencies are celebrating the results of all the recent precipitation.

“The big and good news is that, with the state getting plenty of rain and snowmelt runoff in Northern California, we are expecting to get 85 percent of our imported water allotment from the State Water Project this year,” Engel said. “That’s huge. If you’ve driven over that Whitewater Bridge lately, you’ve seen the water flowing down, and it’s going to be flowing all year. We’re thinking that we might be able to put about 300,000 acre feet of water into the aquifer, which is huge for all of us here in the Coachella Valley.”

The last year in which the valley received a noteworthy imported water allotment from the state was 2013.

“The only downside is that we have to be more diligent in our messaging concerning safety,” Metzger said. “You know during the summer when people want to get a reprieve from the heat out here that the river flow is alluring. But we want to point people to the reserve to experience the water resource—and not have them go into the river.”

The CVWD may also receive an unexpected revenue windfall. Last year, the CVWD board of directors approved aggressive incremental rate increases over five years. Engel explained: “When we pitched the need for these rate increases to the community, we said there were three key reasons: chromium 6 treatment (required by new state regulations); reduced revenue due to conservation; and the third had to do with a number of other capital-improvement projects, some of which had been deferred during the recession years.”

However, CVWD staff members last fall—after the rate increases were enacted—became aware of test results involving an alternative chromium 6 treatment program.

“We decided to take a timeout and do a pilot study of this alternative treatment method,” Engel said. “If this doesn’t work, we probably won’t meet the deadline to be in compliance with state-mandated chromium 6 levels by 2020. So there’s a bit of a risk there, but the savings to our customers would be so significant, and the positive impact on our communities and the environment so significant, that our board decided it was a risk worth taking. Since the report came, a handful of water districts in the state, and the city of Coachella, are looking into this other method.”

Could this new treatment option lead to—at least—lower rate increases for CVWD customers?

“The board could reduce rates back to 2010 levels if they wanted to do that,” she said. “Or they could say they don’t need any increase this year. Or they could increase any amount up to the total that was published.”

At 8 a.m., Monday, May 22, the CVWD Board is holding a public meeting to review a presentation on next year’s fiscal budget, effective July 1.

“Certainly, we did not spend the money in the last year on the chromium 6 treatment project that we had planned, but we’re uncertain about that future,” Engel said. “People are still conserving, and that’s good, and we do still have these additional projects that we need to do. For instance, we’re in the planning stages for the construction of a new aquifer-recharge facility in Palm Desert, where subsidence of the aquifer has become an issue. So there’s still a need to fund these other projects, but whether or not we can do it with or without a rate increase is still undecided. Based on what the board has said in recent public meetings, it’s clear they’re hoping that staff can come up with a plan (for the next fiscal year) that does not require an increase.”

Meanwhile, the DWA and other local water agencies have found a way to lessen the impact of rate increases on some customers. Partnering with the United Way, the DWA formed the Help2Others program, which provides financial aid to help lower-income residents pay their water bills.

“We have a lot of seniors and some lower-income neighborhoods. … it was really important to get a program like that set up, and we did,” Metzger said. “… Now all five public water agencies in the valley have this program in conjunction with the United Way.

This valuable assistance is funded differently through each of the participating agencies. “Here at the DWA,” Metzger said, “our vendors and our employees have contributed funds to make our program possible, which I’m super-proud of. I think we all realize what we do wouldn’t be possible without the residents paying our rates, and if you need help, we understand water is one of the most fundamental things you need.”

The quiet bustle outside of Eisenhower Medical Center’s medical campus in Rancho Mirage was disturbed by the old-school call and response of an organizer’s bullhorn and a crowd of protesters on the morning of Thursday, March 2.

“What do we want?” shouted Joe Barnes, the California outreach manager for Compassion and Choices, a national advocacy group for terminally ill patients.

The crowd of 100 or so enthusiastic supporters of the California End of Life Option Act responded: “Access!”

Barnes continued: “When do we want it?”

“Now!” hollered the crowd.

The protest on the sidewalks alongside the Bob Hope Drive entrance to EMC was organized by, and for, Coachella Valley residents frustrated by the refusal of EMC administrators to allow any of their doctors, other professional staff members and facilities to participate in the new state law, which lays out the strict guidelines under which patients can obtain life-ending prescriptions, should they so choose. (Full disclosure: My mother-in-law utilized the law last year.)

Signs were waved; short and impassioned speeches were given; chants were raised; and then the group headed into the hospital building to meet with an EMC representative.

“We encourage members of our communities to speak with their doctors about what their priorities are at the end of their life, and really become a team with their doctors rather than accepting everything that the medical community just pushes out to them,” said Joan Stucker, the chairperson of the Coachella Valley Access Team for Compassion and Choices, to the Independent during the rally. “We have a hold-up (in patient access to End of Life Option services) with Eisenhower Hospital, because their doctors are employed by the hospital, and even though some of their physicians want to give their patients access, they (EMC leaders) refuse to let them do that. We want them to change that position.”

The other major-health care provider in our valley, Tenet Healthcare, operates the Desert Regional Medical Center in Palm Springs, the JFK Memorial Hospital in Indio, and the Hi-Desert Medical Center in Joshua Tree. These facilities will not be a target of pro-End of Life Option demonstrations, because Tenet administrators recently clarified publicly that they will allow their personnel, including doctors in their networks, to support a patient’s End of Life Act rights.

The newly released official policy statement stipulates that any Tenet personnel who choose to engage in the End of Life Option procedures must record patient interactions in the Tenet health records systems. While Tenet physicians may write prescriptions for the life-ending drugs described in the California law, patients may not fill those prescriptions in Tenet pharmacies, or take those drugs in any of Tenet facilities.

Tenet is clearly doing more to address the needs of the terminally ill patients than EMC, which refuses to cooperate with the California law on any level.

“It just doesn’t seem that they (EMC) are providing the good care that they claim to give,” Stucker said. “They’re supposed to give incredible care to their patients, and yet they’re refusing to let them have this option.”

Idyllwild resident and EMC patient Francoise Frigola turned out for the rally.

“I asked my doctor what her position was (regarding the End of Life Option Act), and she was furious,” Frigola explained while leaning forward in her wheelchair. “She was part of writing the law, and because she’s affiliated with Eisenhower down here, she cannot do anything.”

Barnes told the Independent that he spoke with an EMC representative before the rally and told her: “‘You know, if you did what you said you were going to do, then we wouldn’t have this rally here today.’ Last fall, Compassion and Choices spoke to EMC representatives, who told us that they would make public outreach efforts and hold a town hall-style meeting where patients could state their concerns. But they never did anything.”

We asked Stucker what steps would next be taken regarding the lack of End of Life Option access at EMC.

“We know that getting access to medical aid in dying takes time. We know there’s a certain amount of resistance,” Stucker said. “It’s very difficult, because physicians and hospitals have not really been trained in end-of-life care. They’re very uncomfortable doing something that they’ve actually been trained not to do. But Eisenhower Medical Center is such a major player in local health care, serving a lot of patients all over the valley. We think it’s only right that their patients have a chance to get access (to medical aid in dying assistance) with the physicians that they are seeing.”

Gov. Jerry Brown signed the End of Life Option Act in October 2015, and the law went into effect on June 9, 2016.

But for many Coachella Valley residents who have been diagnosed with a terminal illness and given a prognosis of less than six months to live, the end-of-life option remains out of grasp—that is, unless they switch health providers.

Trust me, I know: I helped my mother-in-law through the end-of-life process last year.

No statistics are available yet regarding the number of Coachella Valley patients who have obtained prescriptions for life-ending medications since the law took effect; the initial annual report required by the law will not be issued until later this year. But according to patient, doctor and advocate feedback, the refusal of some major health-care providers in our valley to support the new law has been keeping those numbers down. Eisenhower Medical Center (EMC), with facilities located across the valley, and both Desert Regional Medical Center in Palm Springs and JFK Memorial Hospital in Indio (the latter two owned by Tenet Health, a company based in Dallas) have been refusing assistance to terminally ill patients.

However, this picture improved in mid-February, when Tenet Health informed Compassion and Choices—a national nonprofit “medical aid in dying” advocacy organization—that the company had established a “regulatory compliance policy to define the scope of permitted participation, documentation and notification requirements for Tenet entities” in California.

Compassion and Choices California director Matt Whitaker welcomed the news.

“Tenet confirmed that their physicians are indeed allowed to participate in the (End of Life Option) act,” Whitaker wrote the Independent in an email.

Curiously, the written policy just delivered by Tenet was dated June 7, 2016. What could have caused the eight-month communication delay?

“The good news is that they (Tenet) are going to allow individuals to have access to medical aid in dying,” said Joe Barnes, the Compassion and Choices California outreach manager, during a recent phone interview. “It sounds like they are probably still having challenges about whether or not to allow people who are being treated in their hospitals to be able to be in a private hospital room surrounded by loved ones and ingest the medication to end their pain and suffering.”

Barnes said many health-care organizations are still figuring out the logistics of dealing with the new law.

“It seems some health-care systems are still working out the internal mechanics of how they are addressing the needs of their patients,” he said. “Sometimes, one side of the hospital is not communicating with the other side, and then the patient doesn’t receive the correct information. But we try to follow up with health-care systems to see what their questions might be if they have any, and also to find out what their official policy is. If a health-care system doesn’t have a written policy, then they are automatically considered a supportive health-care system.”

While Tenet is taking steps toward assisting patients with the law, EMC is apparently not. I contacted Lee Rice, the media coordinator and public relations specialist at EMC, to talk with an appropriate representative regarding the End of Life Option Act. After several days, Rice replied that no interview could be arranged. He did, however, forward to me an official statement, which read, in part: “Eisenhower Medical Center carefully reviewed and discussed the requirements of the End of Life Option Act and elected the option under the act not to participate in the process. … Eisenhower will provide information about the End of Life Option Act upon request and supports each patient’s right to make decisions about care, including the choice to accept or reject treatments that might be available.”

Compassion and Choices’ Whitaker expressed disappointment with EMC’s stance.

“We would characterize Tenet’s policy as supportive, but not Eisenhower’s,” Whitaker said. “The line that (Eisenhower representatives) keep using is that their physicians are free to do this on their own time. That’s the framing they use to say that they’re not limiting access for patients in the area: ‘We (EMC) are only limiting it during the time that they’re employed by us.’ But the way that health care has consolidated, EMC has 40-something clinics that have affiliated with them in the area, so there are not a lot of sole practitioners out there—and for folks who work in a hospital or an outpatient clinic, they don’t really have the ability to do things on their own time. They don’t have their own medical-records system. Oftentimes, their malpractice insurance is through their employer. They don’t have the physical facilities available to care for these patients. So (EMC) is kind of a broken record when they just keep pushing back, saying, ‘Well, the doctors can do it on their own time.’ That’s not what’s needed. Patients who are being seen by doctors at these clinics need to be able to receive this treatment during the course of their care.”

In an effort to influence EMC’s stance, Compassion and Choices supporters and other valley residents are planning a rally at 11 a.m., Thursday, March 2, in front of the main Eisenhower Medical Center campus in Rancho Mirage.

“Ever since Eisenhower Medical Center announced that it wasn’t going to allow people to have access to medical aid in dying, there’s been an increase in the requests for presentations to community groups and organizations across the area,” Barnes said. “The question always comes up as to what the community can do, because that’s (one of the) the flagship hospitals in the area.

“We have thousands of people who are supportive of medical aid in dying in that area. They helped us pass the law in the first place by reaching out to their local legislators and holding events to educate fellow community members to the importance of medical aid in dying. So, the natural next step is that the folks want to have a rally in front of the hospital. Many of the people who will be at the rally are also donors to the Eisenhower (Medical Center) Foundation. They’re kind of scratching their heads, because they live in the community and donate to the hospital but can’t get access to medical aid in dying, and they really don’t understand it.”

Coachella Valley got a break from stormy weather on Saturday, as predicted—but the sunshine didn’t necessarily translate into better play across the three enjoyable La Quinta courses of the CareerBuilder Challenge.

However, it did if your name was Adam Hadwin. Playing at the La Quinta Country Club, Hadwin became only the second player in the tournament’s long history—and the eighth in PGA Tour history—to shoot a 59.

“I think it makes tomorrow harder,” Hadwin, a Canadian, said in his post-round interview. “They say one of hardest things in golf is to follow up a low round. The Stadium Course is a much tougher course than La Quinta. It’s a Sunday. I’ve got a chance to win a golf tournament. That’s what you want.”

The feat vaulted him into a one-shot lead at the close of play on Sunday.

Meanwhile, other players—including local favorite Brendan Steele, as well as Hudson Swafford and Dominic Bozzelli—who had been standing near the top of the leaderboard for the first two days managed to post scores that kept them in the running. New tournament ambassador Phil Mickelson struggled a bit on the PGA West Stadium Course, and found himself heading in the wrong direction on Saturday, shooting a one-over-par 73.

The stage was set for what was predicted to be a soggy and potentially chaotic finish on Sunday, when all the players who survived the cut would congregate at the Stadium Course for a battle to the finish. As had been the case on Friday, the weather forecasts for Sunday were so threatening that the tee time for the entire field was moved up an hour, to 7:30 a.m., in hopes that the early start would allow golf to be completed before the third major storm of the weekend bore down on the valley.

As the final rounds began, 12 players were within five shots of the lead. Even though the rain did stay away, risk aversion seemed to be the strategy adopted by many players at the front of the pack, as they showed uncharacteristic restraint while playing the notoriously dangerous layout at PGA West. In the end, early-round leader Hudson Swafford’s 5-under 67 won the tournament, with his two biggest birdies coming on the 16th and 17th holes as he let loose his power game.

It was his first career victory on the PGA Tour. “They don’t give them away out here,” Swafford told the media after his win. “It’s not easy. I've been close. I’ve been in the hunt lately, and this just feels unbelievable.”

Earlier in the day, CareerBuilder CEO Matt Ferguson and Desert Classic Charities president and chairman of the board John Foster sat down with reporters to talk about the future of the event, which has long been a staple of the valley’s sporting season. Ferguson was asked if the presence of Roger Clemens and Joe Carter portended a return to the star-studded celebrity fields that came out to join Bob Hope when it was his tournament.

“It was nice that Roger and other celebrities came out and played (this year),” Ferguson said. “I mean, I’m never going to recruit like Bob Hope. I think that was a unique individual and a unique time. But I think as we have more years to plan and talk to people, and more celebrities want to come out, we’d love to have them.”

Foster said he was hoping to build more excitement with the tourney. “I think you’ll see Phil (Mickelson) getting a little more involved,” he said. “Already, there’ve been a number of changes. A lot of things you saw (this past weekend), like Fitz and the Tantrums (who played a concert on the driving range after play on Saturday evening), were kind of like experiments. I think everybody who we’ve seen was very excited, and it lit a nice fire. We would probably look to enlarge that aspect a little. We’re a golf tournament first, but we’re entertaining guests to raise money for charity.”

As I pulled on my rain boots before driving to PGA West at 6 a.m., Friday, Jan. 20, a KMIR meteorologist on the TV screen was issuing a warning about the continuous and dangerous weather that would soon engulf the Coachella Valley.

However, the rain was late to arrive at the “U.S. politics-free zone” media center at PGA West’s Stadium Course. There were persistent showers as play began on Thursday, but for the most part, mixed clouds and sunshine on the first two days of play provided a beautiful and dramatic backdrop for some sterling play on the three La Quinta courses. In fact, as of the halfway point in play, the only party to suffer from the incessant forecasts of terrible weather was the resurgent 2017 PGA CareerBuilder Challenge Tournament itself: Spectators and fans had been scarce, and that’s not good news for the concessions and vendors who have seen very few customers.

The adventurous attendees who ignored the warnings were treated to a number of entertaining opportunities. It’s not often that a fan can enjoy an up-close-and-personal vantage point to watch perennial crowd favorite Phil Mickelson play. Normally surrounded by hundreds of fans wherever he goes, Mickelson teed off on Friday at the Jack Nicklaus Tournament Course in front of about two dozen spectators. This past offseason, he accepted the role of golfing ambassador for this tournament, and this week marks his first competitive rounds since his knee surgery. Much to the pleasure of his many supporters, he finished Day 2 tied for sixth place, just four shots off the lead.

In other news, some big-name baseball celebrities joined the amateur field this year. Multiple-time Cy Young Award winner Roger Clemens is playing, as is slugger Joe Carter, best remembered for winning the 1993 World Series with a walk-off home run for the Toronto Blue Jays.

Local PGA favorite Brendan Steele from Idyllwild is here again. Already a winner at the Safeway Open in this PGA wrap-around season that’s just begun, Steele shot an 8-under-par 64 on Friday to put him just two shots back of leader, Hudson Swafford, who carded back-to-back 65s. Should Swafford hold on to win, it would give him his very first PGA victory. Last year’s winner, Jason Dufner, is back, too, along with many of the tour’s top players.

Just before play wound down on Friday, it began pouring. The good news is that Saturday’s weather was expected to be clear and dry. Alas, more rain is in the forecast for Sunday.

Page 1 of 9