• Letters to the Editor and Editorials: Election Nov. 2011

    Note: We have noticed a lot of readers coming to our website as a result of certain search engine queries. These searches indicate to us that you, our readers, are looking for information and opinion about the water board candidates running in tomorrow’s election. Many, we know, have already voted. But for the others, we have taken all of the letters from our print version and lumped them here in this post to make it easy for you and, we hope, easier for you to make up your minds. The latest are the ones at the top and from there they go back in time. Editorials are at the end.

    Letter writers are wrong about Byrne and ‘scare tactics’
    Editor:

    Vicki Pearse, in her letter (October 21 issue) accused Jeanne Byrne of using “scare tactics” in her campaign. Time to set the record straight with facts.
    The Cease and Desist Order states as of December 31, 2016 Cal Am pumping from the Carmel River is limited to its legal right of 3,376 acre feet. Fact.
    The adjudication order for the Seaside Basin states Cal Am pumping from that basin is limited to 2,299 acre feet for 2017 and 1,820 acre feet in 2018. Fact.
    Residential water use will be limited to 35 gallons per day per person (current use, 60 gallons per day per person). Fact.
    This means the hospitality industry, for example, could be out of business without replacement water. 20,000+ jobs lost. $40 million of local tax revenues generated gone and TOT revenue drastically diluted, directly impacting city services. All fact.
    Certain individuals and organizations in this community love “process” but never get anything done, thus our water crisis. A hard fact.
    This is precisely why the Coalition of Peninsula Businesses supports Jeanne Byrne for MPWMD Board. The incumbent thinks about alternatives and promotes more conservation. Byrne recognizes the crisis and is committed to solving the problem.
    John V. Narigi, Co-chair
    Coalition of Peninsula Businesses

    Byrne is right: water future is scary
    Editor:

    Jeanne Byrne is right. The Peninsula’s water future is scary.
    The State’s Cease and Desist Order (CDO) goes into effect December 31, 2016. There is no reason to believe the State will delay the CDO. The effect on the Peninsula will be catastrophic. Residents who are already among the lowest water users in the State will have to reduce by another 40%. All other uses (hospitals, schools, government, and business) in the Cal Am service area will have to compete for the little water that will be left. There will be no water for growth of any kind. The Hospitality industry, its $2 billion in revenue, 23,000 jobs and $40 million in local tax revenue will be all but gone. The impact will be felt throughout the region, not just on the Peninsula. That is scary.
    Jeanne Byrne’s opponent wants to study more alternatives, including alternatives that have been studied, and force more conservation. There is not much left to conserve. None of the alternatives can be studied, approved, financed and built in time to avoid the CDO. That is scary.
    MCHA supports and recommends Jeanne Byrne for the MPWMD Board. Ms. Byrne recognizes the crisis and is to committed action, not more studies. Any other option is scary.
    Bonnie Adams
    Monterey County Hospitality Association

    Influence from the inside
    Editor:

    It’s surprising to me that Mr. Monosoff would misrepresent facts pertaining to a contribution from a Realtor® Political Action Committee in Los Angeles, when Mr. Monosoff himself is a Realtor® and should understand how these contributions are made.
    For clarification purposes; while the check indeed does come from Los Angeles, (for legal and accounting purposes) the decision to support candidates for local elected office are made by a LOCAL committee of Realtor® within Monterey County. Specifically, these individuals are members of the Monterey County Association of Realtor®, an organization of which Mr. Monosoff is also a member. The funds used for local candidate support come only from local Realtor® contributions.
    I happen to be a resident of Pacific Grove and proudly sit on the above-mentioned committee. We extended invitations to all of the MPWMD candidates and heard back from all of them, minus one – Regina Doyle. I speak for the committee when I say that we did our homework in this race. We asked tough questions and received real answers and firmly stand behind our endorsement and support of Jeanne Byrne for MPWMD Board of Directors.
    As a resident and Realtor® in Pacific Grove (and not an out-of-district business group), I encourage my friends and neighbors to vote for Jeanne Byrne – a proven leader focused on real solutions.
    Arleen Hardenstein
    Pacific Grove
    Influence from the outside
    Editor:

    Every voter in Pacific Grove and Pebble Beach should be asking why so many businesses from outside the area are trying to influence their vote in next week’s water board election. Four groups in particular – a real estate PAC in Los Angeles, a “leadership” group in Salinas, a county business PAC and commercial property owners in the city of Monterey – contributed $5,000 each to the campaign of former Mayor Jeanne Byrne, who is trying to unseat incumbent Regina Doyle for the Pacific Grove/Pebble Beach seat on the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District’s board.
    Their donations amounted to half of the $40,557 Byrne had raised by last week’s deadline for filing financial disclosures, while building trades unions in the Bay Area and Marina contributed another $5,000, and a Monterey investor donated $2,700.
    The businesses’ largesse may allow the most expensive campaign ever for this water board seat — so far amounting to about $9 for each of the 4,747 votes cast in the last election. The money is being spent for professional campaigners, expensive ads and yard signs plastered around the area.
    Doyle reported a more modest $9,156 in campaign contributions, which is about normal in this district when candidates usually depend on volunteers to discuss issues that matter with their neighbors. The Doyle campaign is spending about $2 per voter, most of it for printing and mailing brochures and letters.
    These contributions and expenditures are all on file in the Monterey County Elections Department for anyone who wants to read them. And they really raise the question of why so many outside interests are trying to influence our local votes. Are they really concerned about our best interests?
    Lance Monosoff
    Carmel

    Note: The preceding letter appeared first in the Monterey County Herald, a daily newspaper, so Ms. Hardenstein’s response, above, appeared at the same time that Mr. Monosoff’s letter appeared on our pages.

    Byrne is the problem-solver we need
    Editor:

    I have been walking neighborhoods with Jeanne Byrne and am surprised at how many people do not fully understand the rationing consequences if we do not have a long-term sustainable water project by the end to 2016.  It is not scare tactics to make people aware of the 60 percent cut back of the Carmel River pumping mandated by the State Water Resources Board and the related rationing of 35 gallons of water per person per day unless there is a new water project.
    All of us who were here for the previous rationing of 50 gals/person know that the rationing proposed in 2016 will definitely eliminate jobs, drastically affect families and cause the loss of businesses.
    As mayor, Jeanne Byrne was effective in negotiating Peninsula solutions such as including Pacific Grove and Carmel on the Fort Ord Reuse Authority Board, giving preference on FORA contracts to the tri-county area for economic recovery and creating a Peninsula Mayor’s monthly meeting to resolve specific Peninsula issues.  She will bring the same collaborative problem-solving to the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District to move a long-term water solution forward to provide for the future of the Peninsula.
    Kathy Anderson
    Monterey

    MPWMD Board: Let’s see some action: Don’t go back to days of rationing
    Editor:

    Boy, Ron Pasquinelli’s recent letter [Cedar Street Times Vol. IV Issue 6] really hit home with me. I too remember living through a severe drought and saving the used dishwater to water the plants and flush the toilets. I remember having buckets in the shower with me so that I would have water for other uses. Needless to say, that is no way to live. I believe in saving the Steelhead Trout and preserving nature, but when do people become an endangered species?
    Since moving to the Monterey Peninsula we have been amazed at how little water people here use compared to places like San Diego, Sacramento, and the Bay Area. The days of ignoring the need to find more water – or at least replace what we are about to lose – are over. I hope we can get rational people like Bob Brower re-elected, and people like Jeanne Byrne elected to join him. Maybe then we can finally get some action out of the MPWMD Board and some of the other agencies involved in this issue.
    Rudy Fischer
    Pacific Grove

    Conservation is not enough: We need a sustainable water source
    Editor:

    Peninsulans use approximately an average of 60 gallons per person per day, which is the lowest in the state by about 130 gallons. However, conservation alone will not save us from the water crisis we face.
    Cal Am Water has been ordered to limit pumping from the Carmel River groundwater basin by more than 60 percent of what it currently pumps. If no replacement water is created by the end of 2016, everyone will suffer critical economic and quality of life hardships.
    Less water means businesses such as hotels and restaurants will generate less revenue and will need to cut jobs. Less water means less tax revenue to support local police, fire, teachers and other services.
    There has been too much talk and not enough action to develop a sustainable water source to solve the coming water crisis. A community leader who understands the issues and supports the future of our community is Jeanne Byrne, former Pacific Grove mayor, community volunteer and a longtime architect running her own business. Jeanne Byrne deserves our vote for the water management board on Nov. 8.
    Henry Nigos
    Chairman, Board of Directors
    Pacific Grove Chamber of Commerce

    Water Management District should be planning, but is now in crisis mode
    Editor:

    The issues and proposals for our Peninsula water supply become more varied and confusing as time moves forward. Unfortunately, as time moves forward without a concrete solution to the State-mandated Cease and Desist Order, we move closer and closer to the reality of severe rationing and no long-term solution for water for our future.
    There are a variety of small projects under consideration, as well as drought-resistant desal proposals. The smaller projects include, among others, aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) and reclaimed water from the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA). However, none of the small proposed projects are drought resistant, as they depend on either pumping from the Carmel River during peak flow periods or available water when it is not required by the Salinas agriculture industry. In addition, these smaller projects are only aimed at just offsetting the cutback in the over-pumping of the Carmel River. In 2014, the cutback will be approximately 40 percent. This means that the current building moratorium and the current moratorium on new water meters will stay in place.
    There have been misleading statements and proposals for water solutions based on inflated production levels, minimized costs and unrealistic timelines for projects that do not have any of the required approvals. The disservice to the community is that these “proposals” further confuse and hamper the progress of actual viable projects. Unfounded misinformation is a diversion to the focus on accomplishing real projects within the critical timeline of the State Cease and Desist order.
    By 2016, without a larger, long-term, sustainable project, the rationing to meet a 60 percent reduction in pumping from the river will be severe. Residents will be guaranteed 35 gal/day/person (below the health standard), but that will leave businesses to absorb the remaining deficit of approximately 1,744 acre-feet, assuming a high winter flow for ASR.
    These are the numbers that Cal Am and the Monterey Peninsula Water Management Dist. (MPWMD) have estimated from current use records and, again, only allow for replacement water for the Carmel River over-pumping. The numbers that are missing are those estimating the water use for economic recovery and moderate economic growth.
    The Monterey Peninsula Water Management District should function as originally intended, to plan for the future of the Monterey Peninsula water needs. Unfortunately, the District’s function has been reduced to that of management by crisis in order to assist Cal Am in complying with the Cease and Desist order. To address the over pumping of the river is now the most urgent task at hand. However, in order for the District to continue to serve the community it must restore its long-term planning function. The future of the Peninsula depends on assessment and planning for our long-term water needs.
    Jeanne C. Byrne
    Pacific Grove


    (Editor’s Note: Jeanne C. Byrne is running for election in Division 4 of the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District. Her figures were verified through the Water Management District, Cal Am and the California Public Utilities Commission. )

    Water, Taxes and the Quality of Life
    Editor:

    Why don’t we have enough water? We used to.
    In the late 1970’s we endured a serious multi-year drought. The Monterey Peninsula Water Management District was formed and the water wars began in earnest. On one side were those who believed that they could preserve the Quality of Life on the Peninsula by limiting population growth by limiting the water supply. The other side believed that this was shortsighted and unfair to those who were born here, wanted to live here, build their homes and enjoy a good quality of life. Local environmentalists, who also wanted limited, or no, growth, managed to get a State ruling that restricted Cal-Am’s use of the water from the Carmel River.
    For well over 30 years these factions have debated and fought over every proposed water project. No significant projects were ever agreed on nor built. The State Water Resources Board became frustrated with this lack of progress and issued a “Cease and Desist Order” requiring Cal Am to stop pumping the bulk of their water from the Carmel River. The order states that if by December 31, 2016, we have not developed another water supply, we must reduce our residential consumption to 35 gallons per person per day.
    The concept of limiting infrastructure and thereby limiting growth has proven to be not only shortsighted but also costly and destructive of the very lifestyle it was believed such action would protect. Those of us who were here in 1977-8 remember living on 50 Gallons per day per person. People washed their dishes in a pan of soapy water and rinsed them in different pan of clear water. They used the rinse water to save a few of their garden plants. People were told to not flush the toilet every time. The mantra was “If it’s yellow, let it mellow, If its brown flush it down.” It was a very difficult 2 years. It was not fun and residents Quality of Life was very degraded.
    If there is no new water supply by 2021 non-residential users (hospitals, schools, municipalities, parks, recreation etc. ) will have to get by on whatever is left over. Non-residential users will have to cut about 60% of their current use. The hotel and restaurant industry long ago reduced their use by over 50%. They simply cannot stay in business if they cannot provide their guests with water.
    What will be the cost to the residents if we don’t have a project built and on-line by 2017?
    Rationing is very inconvenient and expensive. Cal-Am will have to charge more for the little water they do deliver just to cover their fixed costs. There will also be a major loss of tax revenue as the Hospitality Industry shuts down. Not to mention the 27,000 jobs which will be put at risk.
    At this time The Hospitality Industry generates $55,000,000/year in Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) plus sales, property and other taxes, all paid by non-residents. If this industry is shut down, the County and the Municipalities will have no choice but to cut services drastically AND RAISE TAXES on residents.
    For those who might look forward to a Peninsula without all the tourist traffic, think of your favorite local restaurant that has also gone out of business.
    We need to tell all our elected officials that we expect them to STOP this from happening. We need to elect individuals to our Water Management Board who will work to find a water supply, NOT tell us we to conserve more.
    Ron Pasquinelli, President
    Monterey Peninsula Taxpayers Association

    Cal Am’s study backs scare tactics: Choose Doyle instead
    Editor:

    The cost analysis of water proposals published in Cedar Street Times is deceptive, even if accurate (I’m allowed to be skeptical). Cost per acre-foot makes the huge Regional Desalination Project (RDP) appear least expensive. In fact, it is the most expensive — because of its excessive size and the incredible injustice of the way water-rate increases will be distributed (almost free to Marina, sky-high to the Monterey Peninsula). Estimated at over $400 million and rising, it is simply (as Marge Jameson notes later in the editorial) “outrageous.” If the crushing expense were not enough, here are more reasons why this is the wrong choice:
    [1] The analysis cites an exaggerated demand for water, based on old data. [2] The projected RDP is wastefully over-built even by this puffed-up standard. [3] Experience with large-scale desal plants in California has demonstrated flaws inherent in large size; only small-scale plants have proved practical. [4] Besides being expensive in dollars, desal technology is dangerously energy-expensive, precisely at a time when energy costs are increasing — and we need to be reducing carbon emissions. [5] The corrupt and secret process that has shaped this monstrous project are reason enough to reject it. Indeed, it is on hold and appears to be collapsing under the weight of its own sleaze: all the more reason to move ahead immediately with the multiple affordable alternatives outlined by the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District for smart handling of available water.
    Meanwhile, one of our candidates for the District board is using scare tactics, falsely equating conservation with brutal rationing: When faced with “a trickle of water from the tap,” she threatens, ratepayers will choose to pay whatever the RDP costs. Well, this is not our only choice. Choose Regina Doyle instead.
    Vicki Pearse
    Pacific Grove


    If anyone can help resolve water issue, it’s Jeanne Byrne
    Editor:

    Eleven years ago I had the experience of working with Jeanne Byrne on issues concerning Vista Point senior apartment building, which is near my residence.
    She earned my total respect. She is hard-working, creative and deeply cares about the community of which she has been a part for so many years. If anyone can help resolve the water issue, she can.
    She has my vote in November.
    Marion Trentman-Morelli
    Pacific Grove

    No more slogans, studies, delays: Vote for Jeanne Byrne
    Editor:

    When I was a teen-ager in the water-rationing era of the 70’s, living with my parents in Monterey. We had to make do on 50 gallons per person a day. My parents are Great Depression babies and very conservative by nature – never wasting anything. 
     Coming home from working on a ranch, my father wanted nothing more than to wash away all of the dust and dirt from his long day.
    Being a wonderful daddy – and because I was a self-conscious teenager – he allowed me to take my daily shower when he got home but couldn’t let the shower water drain. Once I was done, my father jumped in the tub and bathed himself in my shower water. Then we used that same water to manually flush the toilet by gravity, and also to water our plants inside and out.
    Nearly 35 years later, we are still in the same tub. Held hostage in this political and legal water fight and we, as tax-paying and water-conserving citizens, are the pawns.
    No more slogans, no more studies, no more delays. We need effective leadership now to find water supplies for the Monterey Peninsula. Vote for Jeanne Byrne.
    Arleen Hardenstein
    Pacific Grove

    The following are editorials written for the pages of Cedar Street Times. The one about water candidate Jeanne Byrne appeared on October 14, 2011 and the two about Measure V on Oct. 29 and 21 respectively.

    Vote as it your life depended on it
    Did you receive your absentee ballot yet? Many local people will vote in the next three weeks, before election day. If the past is any indicator, a majority of Pacific Grove voters will do so.
    There are two issues before you – Measure U, which eases some of the restrictions placed on hospitalities by Measure C a few years ago; and Measure V, which extends and replaces the current parcel tax.
    We’ll also be voting for a representative to the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District, making a choice between (alphabetically) Jeanne Byrne, architect and former mayor of Pacific Grove, and Regina Doyle, the incumbent and an educational consultant.
    To some with whom we’ve spoken, this race is between growth and no growth, progress and status quo, public water and a conglomerate utility, people and fish. It is, of course, more complicated than any of those single issues. In fact, it’s probably the most complicated issue we’ve examined since founding this newspaper.
    We have been watching it unfold since pressure began to restore the Carmel River. As various plans for replacement water have been brought to the fore over the years, we’ve been glad-handed and courted, pressured and accused as has every member of the public, whether they were paying attention or not.
    What it comes down to for us is this: time, cost, and leadership.
    There can be no question that there needs to be replacement water as the Cease and Desist Order takes effect. But we’re mired in litigation and investigations as the countdown is under way, and time to get any option for replacement water is running short.
    The Regional Water Project, still the solution of preference for replacement water, has grown from a manageable $150 million a few years ago to the current outrageous $404 million, and no one is talking about how it’s going to be financed and what we, the ratepayers, are going to have to shell out to take a shower and water the begonias, let alone add a second bathroom for Grandma or take her out to dinner. But if we believe the recent study, it’s still the cheapest option.
    We have a private water company with failing pipes. Are they waiting for the ratepayers to replace them? The delivery options for the Regional Water Project would seem to say so. And don’t kid yourselves, the public could not do any better job than an experienced utility, even with its aged infrastructure: We saw the results in Felton, when F.L.O.W. took over Cal Am, which had, in turn, purchased Citizens Utility. That didn’t last long. San Lorenzo Valley Water, which provides water for the rest of the San Lorenzo Valley, is now handling Felton’s water which they should have done all along.
    But should all of our water be in one bucket, so to speak? No. We in Pacific Grove have become mired in endless discussions about other matters and have ignored the possibilities of new water that have been presented time and again. A grant-financed study years ago showed us we could revive the old reservoir on David Avenue and, with concrete tanks, store enough water in peak flow season to get some things done around here. We were shown a spring box at a private residence below the golf course, an inexpensive solution that anyone sitting on the underground river here in Pacific Grove could adopt. Cisterns have been approved, but how many of us have installed them? We’ve wondered all along why potable water was being used to water the golf course and cemetery when the MRWPCA has an idea to use recycled water that would give us thousands of acre feet, currently going to water artichoke fields.
    We have not seen any leadership. We have seen a Water Board give us flow restrictors and meters to measure house plant watering, but not new water. We have “conserved” ourselves into the record books. We need representation, not little timers for our showers. These, our elected representatives, should have been applying pressure all along to get these problems solved, and now, when our backs are to the wall, they crow that they have set up a “supply committee.” The internship is over, people.
    And whether some members of the Monterey Peninsula Water District like it or not, there can be no question that we need new water. It’s not about growth. It’s about people, and the economy, and living a reasonable style of life.
    As you sit down at the kitchen table to fill out your ballot, we urge you to consider these factors: The time it would take to get a new project drawn up, approved, and built; the cost (and that’s anyone’s guess at this point); and which of the two candidates can provide effective leadership to guide us safely to the next drought. We believe that’s Jeanne Byrne.
    Then, by all means, VOTE. If water is life, your life depends on it.
    – Marge Ann Jameson

    Misconception that Measure V doesn’t address Special Education students
    We received a letter from a man who wrote that Measure V is misdirected and does not address the needs of Special Education students in our district. We wish to point out that one reason Measure V is so important is that so much of the General Fund of Pacific Grove’s budget does go to unfunded mandates around special education students.
    Pacific Grove Unified School District has an overall budget of $23 million. It serves approximately 1900 students at five K-12 schools, including two grade schools, one middle school, a high school and a continuation high school. There are an additional 1300 students at the adult school. Of the student body of 1900 in grades K-12, some 180 are considered Special Education, with a wide range of needs including learning disabilities, physical disabilities and, most predominant, autism.
    These students are well served by our district, even if they are not necessarily educated here in Pacific Grove. Special Education is mandated by the Federal government through the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The funds required to educate these students come from state entitlements, federal funds and from the District’s general fund. Funds provided by the state come nowhere near what is needed to fulfill the required mandates for Special Education students (“unfunded mandates”) which come to about $3.93 million, so the Pacific Grove District’s General Fund provides some $3.01 million each year for Special Education to augment the difference in funding. That works out to $16,667 per student plus what ever funds the state is able to provide, which was $675,341 last year for example. Federal funding was $296,564. PGUSD covered the unfunded $3.01 million out of our general fund. Any funding to help offset that $3.01 million shortfall in Federal and state funding would help our overall program.
    (Incidentally, Pacific Grove Unified School District spends an average of $12,650 per regular education student.)
    Pacific Grove Unified School District is even required to fund transportation for some of these students to classes outside Pacific Grove, which may include special schools as far away as Santa Cruz. Pacific Grove always pays the cost of outside services, makes the necessary arrangements and deals with any issues that arise. In a few cases, parents are paid for transport when Pacific Grove is unable to provide a bus.
    You are correct. Pacific Grove does not have enough Special Education students to develop full programs for all SpEd students within the district, given the spectrum of needs, the number of students and the current grade level range of needs. Therefore, contracts have been made with Monterey County Office of Education and with Monterey Peninsula Unified School District to provide required services and classes.
    Incidentally, Carmel Unified follows a similar process as Pacific Grove due to its similar district structure. Monterey Peninsula Unified School District, and other larger school districts, have begun to create their own programs and pull their students out from County Office services. The result is that Pacific Grove’s share costs have skyrocketed.
    Pacific Grove Unified School District endeavors wherever possible to mainstream SpEd students on top of their special education classes.
    The funds raised by Measure X, $35 per parcel, will expire in 2013. The funds raised by Measure V, $60 per parcel, would replace Measure X funds and begin in 2012; if Measure V passes, Measure X would be replaced a year early. These funds are slated to be spent on classroom teachers and academic programs which serve all of our students, replacing more funds from the General Fund spent on Special Education. Measure V funds would not be spent on facilities or administration.
    — Marge Ann Jameson

    Measure V: It’s a replacement tax and worthy of your vote
    Voters will be asked on Nov. 8 to approve a parcel tax designed to bolster the portion of the Pacific Grove Unified School District’s budget devoted to instruction. Back in 2009, a similar measure, Measure X, was approved with a 70.84 percent vote. Measure X, in turn, was an extension of Measure A which had placed a $35 per parcel tax on the ballot.
    Faced with declining state funding contributions, and needing to maintain smaller class size and special programs, the Board of Trustees decided to place Measure V on the ballot this fall.
    Measure V replaces (emphasis on “replace”) the $35 tax with a $60 tax. Measure X expires June 30, 2013. Measure V would begin July 1, 2013.
    They will not run concurrently.
    No money goes to administrative salaries or to the state.
    No money goes to facilities.
    It has nothing to do with football stadiums or science labs, modernized kitchens or pedestrian safety at the Middle School. That was Measure D, the bond issue which was directed at facilities and cannot be used for instructional purposes. Property owners may even notice that, as a result of “selling” the Measure D Bond last June, the interest savings has generated an additional $1 million and property taxes aimed at the debt service should be going down. District staff and the citizen oversight committee look out for our money.
    School district trustees, seeking to maintain the high level of education provided by our schools, endeavor constantly to find the best route to a good education for our mainstream students, the community high school and the adult school. No one can argue against the need for teachers and instructional materials to be constantly updated as the world gets smaller and moves faster in every imaginable area.
    We graduate high achievers who go on to do bigger and better things. We are at the top of the list of schools recommended by the military for their families coming to the area. We send our students to compete at the state and national level, and glow when they do us proud.
    Our teachers work constantly to research and obtain grants for various special programs. The level of dedication of the teachers is palpable.
    Attend a school board meeting, especially one that involves a site visit, and you will come away amazed and gratified. This sort of enthusiasm and dedication is a direct result of the smaller class sizes and district and community support that we are able to give in Pacific Grove. Keep it coming. Vote yes on Measure V. We can’t afford not to.
    – Marge Ann Jameson

    posted to Cedar Street Times on November 7, 2011

    Topics: Current Edition, Front PG News, Opinion, Snarkin' With Marge

    Comments

    You must be logged in to post a comment.



  • Cedar Street’s Most Popular

  • Beach Report Card

    Loading...

    This is the Heal the Bay Beach Report Card for Monterey Peninsula beaches, which reports water quality grades, or when relevant, weather advisories. An A to F grade is assigned based on the health risks of swimming or surfing at that location. Look at the "dry" grade for all days except those "wet" days during and within 3 days after a rainstorm. Click here for more information on the Beach Report Card. Click the name of the beach when it pops up for more details, or choose a beach below.

    AsilomarCarmelLovers PointMunicipal Wharf 2 (Monterey)Upper Del Monte Beach (Monterey)San Carlos Beach (Cannery Row)Stillwater Cove (Pebble Beach)Spanish Bay

    adapted from Heal the Bay, brc.healthebay.org
    subscribe via RSS
    stay safe on the go: app for iOS or Android