California – Page 3 – artdiamondblog.com

Washington, D.C. Regulators Protect Citizens from Goat Yoga

“Goat yoga has spread nationwide since last year. Practitioners in Glendale, Calif., in May.” Source of caption and photo: online version of the WSJ article quoted and cited below.

(p. A1) WASHINGTON–Young goats have on occasion grazed in the Historic Congressional Cemetery, deployed to keep down brush. A yoga instructor has been holding weekly classes in the chapel.

Goats and yoga go together, as any modern yogi knows. So, cemetery staff proposed this spring, why not combine them and bring inner peace to all on the grounds?
“I asked the farmer if there’s any harm to the goats doing yoga,” says Kelly Carnes, who teaches the discipline on the cemetery grounds. “She said quite the opposite–the baby goats just love to interact with humans.”
Gruff was the response from District of Columbia officials. District policy, they decreed, prohibited the human-animal contact goat yoga presented: “At this time the request for the event with the inclusion of baby goats has been denied.”
. . .
(p. A12) This spring at the Congressional Cemetery, Ms. Carnes read about goat yoga and raised the idea with participants in her “yoga mortis” classes at the cemetery. They were “crazy to try it,” she says.
She spoke with Paul Williams, president of the nonprofit that manages the cemetery, about trying it with the goats they had twice hired over the past several years to eat down unwanted plants.
The cemetery planned to hold goat classes in a pen in a grassy area. In June, Mr. Williams sought permission from the health department.
The “no” came that month. The capital’s health code, says Dr. Vito DelVento, manager of the District of Columbia Department of Health’s animal-services program, bans animals beyond common household pets from within district limits.
. . .
Then there’s Washington’s “no touch” policy barring direct contact between humans and animals beyond household pets.
“Baby goats are probably one of the most fun animal species–they are a blast,” says Dr. DelVento, who has farm animals outside the District and has raised goats. “But the fact that we have baby goats jumping on people and interacting with people obviously violates our ‘no touch’ policy.”
Mr. Williams says he will try again next year when Mrs. Bowen has a fresh herd of kids. He will seek a no-touch-policy exemption.
“We’re really trying to offer a service,” says Mrs. Bowen, “that is good for people’s mental health and physical health.”

For the full story, see:
Daniel Nasaw. “The Kids Are Not Alright: Bureaucrats Buck Goat Yoga.” The Wall Street Jounal (Sat., OCT. 2, 2017): A1 & A12.
(Note: ellipses added.)
(Note: the online version of the story has the date OCT. 1, 2017, and has the title “Goat Yoga, Meet the Zoning Board.”)

For Innovators to Seek the Way to San Jose, City’s Bureaucrats Should “Get Out of the Way”

The passages quoted below are authored by the Democratic mayor of the city of San Jose, California.

(p. A17) Recently, states and cities have been luring companies with subsidies. . . . The commonwealth of Massachusetts and city of Boston brought General Electric headquarters to Beantown with a $145 million incentive deal.
. . .
But my city won’t be offering incentives to Amazon. Why? Because they are a bad deal for taxpayers. With many subsidies, the jobs a company brings to an area don’t generate revenues commensurate with public expenditures. The GE deal will cost taxpayers more than $181,000 for every job created in Boston. Most experts insist that other factors–particularly the presence of a skilled workforce–play a far larger role in determining boardrooms’ corporate location decisions. Moreover, some 95% of Silicon Valley’s job growth comes from new small-business formation and when those homegrown companies develop into larger firms.
. . .
A healthy economic ecosystem that supports innovation and growth is what makes a community attractive to a company like Amazon.
. . .
As elected officials, we would do well to resist ribbon-cutting and take the longer view. To attract innovative employers, let’s all stay in our lanes, create safe and attractive cities for talented people to live in, and clear bureaucratic red tape. In other words: Get out of the way.

For the full commentary, see:

Sam Liccardo. “Why I’m Not Bidding for Amazon’s HQ; San Jose won’t offer subsidies for favored corporations, which are a bad deal for city taxpayers.” The Wall Street Journal (Thurs., Oct. 5, 2017): A17.
(Note: ellipses added.)
(Note: the online version of the commentary has the date Oct. 4, 2017.)

Boys Town Closes California Sites Due to Intrusive Regulations

(p. 1A) It’s been a century since a young Irish priest named Father Edward Flanagan welcomed homeless boys into a run-down Victorian mansion in downtown Omaha.
But as Boys Town celebrates its centennial, the organization is lessening its focus on the kind of residential care model that made it famous.
The latest wave came in June, as Boys Town announced the shuttering of sites in New York, Texas and California, including one residential care site in Orange County.
. . .
In 2000 under the Rev. Val Peter, then its executive director, the organization had 16 sites — though some were shelters without residential care.
The Rev. Steven Boes, current president and national executive director, insists the Flanagan mission of caring for American families and children remains, despite what he called some tough decisions to close sites.
. . .
(p. 2A) Boys Town decided to shutter its 80-acre residential site in Trabuco Canyon and two family homes in Tustin, California, after years of advocating for regulatory changes in that state. At the time of the June announcement, those homes housed 28 children.
The Trabuco Canyon site was one of 14 Boys Town residential care facilities opened in the 1980s and ’90s as Peter worked to spread the model to larger metro areas around the nation.
Since then, changing state regulations have made it more difficult to implement the Boys Town model in many of those areas, said Bob Pick, executive vice president of youth care.
“We opened those sites 20 or 30 years ago, and it was an exciting time,” Pick said. “But times change, contracts change and we have to serve kids with the highest quality. We just couldn’t do that in some locations.”
When the Trabuco Canyon facility opened, youths stayed for up to two years, Pick said, adding that Boys Town’s own research shows that the minimum stay should be about six months and a yearlong stay is ideal.
Because of contractual rules including mandated length of stays in California, “we couldn’t get kids to stay longer than two or three months,” Pick said. “That’s just not quality care.”
. . .
The changes at Boys Town haven’t come without criticism.
The Rev. Peter worries that the closing of Boys Town sites and focus on research runs afoul of Flanagan’s mission. “I gave my whole life to this — to Flanagan’s dream,” Peter, 83, said. “This is called God’s dream. Times change, but God’s dream doesn’t.”

For the full story, see:
Klecker, Mara. “Renowned care model no longer main focus; Overall trend is toward in-home family consulting, fewer residential sites.” Omaha World-Herald (Sun., Aug. 27, 2017): 1A-2A.
(Note: ellipses added..)

California Elite Regulates to Reduce Affordable Housing

(p. A11) In Silicon Valley the median home costs $1.2 million, about 2.5 times as much as in Seattle. Houses are less expensive inland–about $350,000 in Riverside and Sacramento–but living there often means a long commute. The weather also isn’t much better than in Phoenix or Dallas, so why not move to another state? A net 800,000 people did just that between 2005 and 2015, and many of them earned less than $30,000.
. . .
The state Legislative Analyst Office notes that in California’s coastal metros more than two-thirds of cities and counties have policies explicitly aimed at restricting housing growth, such as limits on density. When a developer wants to break ground, local governments impose multilayered reviews that can mean getting approval from the municipal building department, health department, fire department and planning commission as well as elected officials.
Neighbors can delay or block projects using the state’s 1970 Environmental Quality Act. It isn’t coincidental that California’s housing prices soared during the 1970s. Getting a building permit in San Francisco takes about three times as long as in the typical American metro.
There are more-direct costs, too: Local governments tack on hefty development fees, which run about three to four times as high in California as in the rest of the country. Politicians often attach conditions to projects requiring developers to pay workers “prevailing wages,” determined by local unions. This is one reason the cost of construction labor in California is about 20% higher than nationwide. Stringent building codes and energy-efficiency standards can add tens of thousands to the price of a house–even though low-flow appliances often cause people to use more water.
All told, it costs between $50,000 and $75,000 more to build a home in California than in the rest of the country. Building a low-income housing unit costs $332,000–about $80,000 more than the median home in Dallas or Phoenix.
. . .
Zoning is generally the biggest obstacle to development in coastal areas.
. . .
California’s housing policies are intrinsically regressive. Limiting the supply drives up home values in well-to-do coastal communities, while pricing everyone else out of the market.

For the full commentary, see:
Allysia Finley. “Why Housing Is Unaffordable in California; What could really help is deregulation, but residents aren’t likely to get it from Democratic lawmakers.” The Wall Street Journal (Sat., Sept. 30, 2017): A11.
(Note: ellipses added.)
(Note: the online version of the commentary has the date Sept. 29, 2017.)

Silicon Valley Techies Make Pilgrimage to Hewlett-Packard Garage

(p. 6) The Birthplace of Silicon Valley
On a quiet Palo Alto street lined with multimillion-dollar Victorian and craftsman homes, Spanish villas, lemon trees and sidewalks perfect for jogging or strolling with babies in carriages, a National Register of Historic Places sign in one front yard recognizes the home’s famous roots. In the detached garage of the house, the Silicon Valley was seeded. The garage is where two Stanford students, William R. Hewlett and David Packard, began developing their first product, an audio oscillator, in 1938. Their partnership resulted in the establishment in 1939 of the Hewlett-Packard Company, a manufacturer of software and computer services.
What Berry Gordy Jr.’s restored upper flat in Detroit is for Motown music buffs, the Hewlett-Packard garage has become for techies, who make the pilgrimage to 367 Addison Ave. to snap photographs of the property.

For the full story, see:
KAREN CROUSE. “A Few Sights to Take in on a Drive to the Game.” The New York Times, SportsSunday Section (Sun., FEB. 6, 2016): 6.
(Note: bold subtitle in original.)
(Note: the online version of the story has the date FEB. 6, 2016, and has the title “On the Road to Super Bowl 50.”)

Higher-Paid Finance Jobs Moving from NYC and San Francisco to Phoenix, Salt Lake City, and Dallas

Source of graph: online version of the WSJ article quoted and cited below.

(p. B1) Traditional finance hubs have yet to recover all the jobs lost during the recession, but the industry is booming in places like Phoenix, Salt Lake City and Dallas. The migration has accelerated as investment firms face declining profitability and soaring real estate costs.
. . .
“San Francisco is a wonderful place, but unfortunately it’s an expensive place from a real estate standpoint,” said Brian McDonald, a senior vice president for Schwab. “So we had to identify other places where we could make things work.”
While the finance industry has been relocating entry-level jobs since the late 1980s, today’s moves are claiming higher-paid jobs in human resources, compliance and asset management, chipping away at New York City’s middle class, said (p. B2) Kathryn Wylde, president and chief executive of the Partnership for New York City, a nonprofit that represents the city’s business leadership.
“This industry isn’t just a bunch of rich Wall Street guys,” Ms. Wylde said. “It’s a big source of employment that’s disappearing from New York.”

For the full story, see:
Asjylyn Loder. “Wall Street’s New Frontier.” The Wall Street Journal (Thurs., JULY 27, 2017): B1-B2.
(Note: ellipsis added.)
(Note: the online version of the story has the date JULY 26, 2017, and has the title “Passive Migration: Denver Wins Big as Financial Firms Relocate to Cut Costs.”)

Rain and Snow End California Drought

(p. A18) After six years of a prolonged drought in California, it is all but over. On Friday [April 7, 2017], Gov. Jerry Brown ended the drought emergency for the vast majority of the state. The drought had reduced Folsom Lake, a major reservoir in Northern California, to less than a third of its capacity in 2015, and all but wiped out the Sierra Nevada snowpack.
. . .
But the state’s hydrologic picture brightened significantly beginning in October 2016, when a series of massive storms drenched Northern California. The rain and snow continued through the winter, swelling major reservoirs to the point that officials were forced to make releases.
Meanwhile, the state’s snowpack made an impressive recovery. As of Friday, the water content in the state’s snowpack was about 160 percent of what is considered normal for this time of year. By comparison, the snowpack was reported as about 5 percent of average the day Mr. Brown stood on the barren field and ordered mandatory water conservation.

For the full story, see:
MATT STEVENS. “Drenched by Winter Rain, California Is Told ‘Drought’s Over’.” The New York Times (Sat., APRIL 8, 2017): A18.
(Note: ellipsis, and bracketed date, added.)
(Note: the online version of the story has the date APRIL 7, 2017, and has the title “California, Drenched by Winter Rain, Is Told ‘Drought’s Over’.”)

Restaurants Add Labor Surcharges to Help Pay Minimum Wage Costs

(p. B1) In lieu of steep menu price increases, many independent and regional chain restaurants in states including Arizona, California, Colorado and New York are adding surcharges of 3% to 4% to help offset rising labor costs. Industry analysts expect the practice to become widespread as more cities and states increase minimum wages.
“It’s the emerging new norm,” said Sharokina Shams, spokeswoman for the California Restaurant Association. She said California restaurants are adding surcharges as the state lifts the minimum wage every year until it reaches $15 an hour by 2023. It is currently at $10.50 an hour for employers with 26 or more workers.
. . .
While adding a surcharge risks turning diners away, some restaurateurs say they want customers to understand the consequences of higher wages on a business with profit margins of generally between 2% and 6%.
. . .
(p. B2) Sami Ladeki added surcharges to the menu at six Sammy’s Woodfired Pizza & Grill restaurants in San Diego and eight more across California. He said it was a mistake to call the charge a state mandate, and has changed the wording. But he remains critical of rising minimum wages.
“This is not sustainable,” said Mr. Ladeki, who says he makes a profit of around 1% charging $12 to $14 a pizza. “People are not going to pay $15 or $20 for a pizza.”
. . .
David Cohn, who owns 15 restaurants in San Diego, including BO-beau, said his 3% surcharge wasn’t a stunt.
“We want people to understand there is a cost,” Mr. Cohn said. “How do we stay in business with margins shrinking and competition increasing?”

For the full story, see:
JULIE JARGON. “New on Your Dinner Tab: A Labor Surcharge.” The Wall Street Journal (Fri., March 10, 2017): B1-B2.
(Note: ellipses added.)
(Note: the online version of the story has the date March 9, 2017.)

Uber Fights Regulations by Asking Forgiveness, Not Permission

(p. B3) For seven years, Uber’s stance on complying with regulations has been consistent: Ask forgiveness, not permission.
On Friday [December 16, 2016], the ride-hailing company stuck to that position. It said it had no intention of ending a new test of its self-driving vehicles in San Francisco, even though California regulators had said the service was illegal because Uber had not obtained the necessary permits. Uber said its self-driving cars were still on the road and picking up passengers.
The dispute is rooted in Uber’s refusal to seek a permit from the California Department of Motor Vehicles, which would allow it to test autonomous vehicles under certain conditions. Companies like Google, Tesla Motors and Mercedes-Benz have all gotten such permits.
Uber officials contend that under the letter of California law, the company does not need a permit because the motor vehicles department defines autonomous vehicles as those that drive “without the active physical control or monitoring of a natural person.” Uber said its modified, self-driving Volvo XC90s require human oversight, and therefore do not fit California’s definition of an autonomous vehicle.
. . .
The episode serves the latest volley in Uber’s war with local and state regulators — not only in the United States, but in many of the more than 70 countries in which the company operates. Uber has previously grappled with the authorities in California over safety concerns. And Otto, the self-driving trucking start-up founded by Mr. Levandowski and acquired by Uber in August, has flouted state laws in Nevada in the past.

For the full story, see:
MIKE ISAAC. “Uber Defies California Officials Over Self-Driving Cars.” The New York Times (Sat., December 17, 2016): B3.
(Note: ellipsis, and bracketed date, added.)
(Note: the online version of the story has the date DEC. 16, 2016, and has the title “Uber Defies California Regulators With Self-Driving Car Service.”)

Poor Are Exiting High-Housing-Cost Cities

Source of graph: online version of the WSJ article quoted and cited below.

(p. A3) Americans are leaving the costliest metro areas for more affordable parts of the country at a faster rate than they are being replaced, according to an analysis of census data, reflecting the impact of housing costs on domestic migration patterns.

Those mostly likely to move from expensive to inexpensive metro areas were at the lower end of the income scale, under the age of 40 and without a bachelor’s degree, the analysis by home-tracker Trulia found.
. . .
Another study this year from California policy group Next 10 and Beacon Economics found that New York state and California had the largest net losses of domestic migrants between 2007 and 2014, and that lower- and middle-income people were more likely to leave.

For the full story, see:
CHRIS KIRKHAM. “Costly Cities See Exodus.” The Wall Street Journal (Thurs., Nov. 3, 2016): A3.
(Note: ellipsis added.)
(Note: the online version of the story has the date Nov. 1, 2016, and has the title “More Americans Leave Expensive Metro Areas for Affordable Ones.”)