By Steve Kubby

Two weeks ago, I suffered a mysterious and traumatic onset of violent vomiting. The attack lasted for four days and left me with severe ribcage pains and an inability to take more than a half breath.

Apparently, the cartilage in my rib cage had been badly stretched by all the vomiting, creating an extraordinary level of discomfort. I could not sleep more than an hour and only then in a special position that did not push against my rib cage.

I conferred with my doctor, who diagnosed my issue as costochondritis, an inflammation of the ribs’ junctions to the breastbone or sternum that causes chest pain. No broken ribs, but because it was cartilage, I was told it would take much longer than a fractured rib to heal. Even worse, he diagnosed me with first stage pneumonia as a result of the restricted breathing in my left lung. I’ve had pneumonia three times in my life and each time I had to be hospitalized, so this new development really disturbed me. Worst of all, my cannabis had zero effect upon the illness and I had to endure constant pain and nausea the entire time.

Steve Kubby

Then, I remembered the non-psychoactive CBD lozenges being patented and developed by my biotech research company, KPAL, and decided to give them a try. I had no idea if they would work since smoked cannabis had already failed me.

Within a few hours my pain level went from intense to mild. I could actually sleep in a bed. My lungs, kidneys and bowels quickly returned to normal function. Since then, I’ve been steadily improving on one lozenge a day.

Just a few days after starting the CBD lozenges, I revisited my chiropractor, David Borges, who had examined me when my symptoms were still severe. Borges told me he was stunned by my amazing return to health.

In fact, as the scientific studies about marijuana accumulate, it’s getting harder to understand why CBD, otherwise known as cannabidiol, which is naturally found in marijuana, but can’t get you high, remains illicit. A growing library of data demonstrating the profound health benefits of CBD, including the ability to fend off cancerous tumors, prevent diabetes and epileptic seizures, protect nerve cells from degradation and ward off anxiety. However, it is as an anti-inflammatory that CBD is in a class of its own, because it has few side effects and is extremely powerful in reducing inflammation anywhere in the body.

The U.S. government is not only very aware of the lifesaving powers of CBD, it actually owns the patent. Instead of fast tracking the development of CBD medicines, they’ve taken it off the market and, even though it can’t get you high, the DEA lists CBD as Schedule One Controlled Substance, with “no medical benefits” and a “high potential for abuse”.

Steve Kubby is a resident of South Lake Tahoe and is CEO of Kubby Patents and Licenses (KPAL).

By Dan Walters, Sacramento Bee

As the state budget’s deficit widens, Gov. Jerry Brown is being thrust into a three-front political battle.

He must not only persuade voters to pass his sales and income tax package, but, implicitly, persuade them to reject a rival tax measure just for schools.

Meanwhile, Brown is pressing liberal Democratic legislators to ignore their political DNA by making deeper cuts in health and welfare programs, not only to close the deficit but to bolster appeals to voters for new taxes.

“It’s not easy,” Brown told hundreds of business and civic figures gathered Tuesday in Sacramento for the annual Host Breakfast.

“We’re getting there,” Brown continued. “We’re making the cuts. But we also need the revenues.”

Read the whole story

To the community,

Bueno and Marty Kettleson of Bert’s Café recently hosted a spaghetti night fundraiser for Tahoe Arts Project. It was a wonderful evening enjoyed by many.

All of us at Tahoe Arts Project would like to thank Bakemark Foods, Crystal Dairy, Bonanza Produce, US Foods, Sausage Factory and of course the staff at Bert’s for helping to make this fundraiser a success.

A big thank you to all of you who had dinner with us that evening and to the TAP board members and volunteers who helped serve our guests.

Thank you to Bueno and Marty for your continued support. Tahoe Arts Project is a nonprofit organization that brings professional performing arts into the schools and community of South Lake Tahoe. Event proceeds will benefit more than 5,000 K-12 students who see our programs.

If you would like to know how you can support Tahoe Arts Project, call (530) 542.3632.

Thank you,

Peggy Thompson, executive director Tahoe Arts Project

El Dorado County voters are being asked on June 5 to approve two measures that would help small businesses.

Measure C is a countywide measure that would alter El Dorado County’s Charter that was approved in 1994. It would allow department heads to approve expenditures of $10,000 or less. As it is now, anyone doing work for the county must have a formal contract no matter what is being done.

Measure B is just for South Lake Tahoe and would change the business license structure by lowering the annual tax for most businesses, while increasing the cap for a handful.

Lake Tahoe News is recommending a yes vote on both measures. They each need 50 percent plus one vote to pass.

Measure C would streamline business in El Dorado County. In turn, this means businesses – many of which are small – would be paid in a more timely fashion. It will also reduce county staff time and paperwork.

All of this makes for a more efficient, effective government operation.

It does not mean oversight has been eliminated. There are checks and balances in place to make sure money is not leaving county bank accounts for purposes other than what was intended. And there are protocols to ensure it was a necessary purchase or the work performed was required.

County Counsel Lou Green wrote the impartial analysis of Measure C for voters. He says, “The purpose of the measure is to simplify the contracting process with service providers who do not traditionally use signed contracts in their business, and who frequently resist the county’s request for a written contract. However, the proposed amendment does not allow for undocumented transactions.”

A similar measure was on the ballot a few years ago that would have allowed expenses up to $15,000 be approved without a contract. That failed 51 percent to 49 percent.

As a comparison, South Lake Tahoe’s city manager is allowed to approve expenses up to $6,000 without council approval and contracts up to $30,000.

Besides Lake Tahoe News, other supporters of Measure C include Supervisor John Knight, Supervisor Ron Briggs, District Attorney Vern Pierson, Sheriff John D’Agostini, Auditor-Controller Joe Harn, and the El Dorado Hills Chamber of Commerce board of directors.

Measure B in a slightly different format was also before voters in recent years and barely failed.

What is different this time around is this will lock in rates for businesses whose gross sales do not increase. As it is today and was on the previous ballot measure that did not pass, the business license tax increased each year based on the consumer price index. The CPI component has been eliminated in Measure B.

Ninety-eight percent of South Lake Tahoe businesses would have a lower tax with the passage of Measure B.

While Lake Tahoe News supports Measure B, there are two flaws. One is the timing. The vote is June 5 and the new rate structure takes effect July 1 – when the annual license is paid to the city. This was poor planning on the city’s part. The increase should have been delayed to 2013 to give businesses the opportunity to work the new rates into their budget.

The other flaw is with not keeping the CPI part of the tax structure. Without having it in there, and assuming Measure B passes, one day the city will be collecting less money than it did in 2011.

Conflicting messages have come out of city hall as to whether Measure B is all about making things more equitable for businesses or if the intent is to bring in a couple hundred thousand dollars more a year.

Lake Tahoe News likes both reasons. We just don’t understand why the CPI component was eliminated and strongly disagree with that decision. But we don’t disagree enough to vote no.

Measure B is for businesses. Yes, the cap goes from about $3,000 a year to $20,000 – but that means those making more money are paying a fairer percentage of their gross income. The measure attempts to level the paying field, so to speak.

South Tahoe Chamber of Commerce has come out against Measure B. Lake Tahoe South Shore Chamber of Commerce is not taking a stance.

Lake Tahoe News says yes to B and C.

By Phil Taylor, Sports Illustrated

I remember sitting at the dinner table with my family six years ago when my son Ben finally said the words I had been expecting, and dreading, for years. He had played basketball, baseball and soccer almost from the day he could walk, and my wife and I were beginning to think that at 14 and nearing the end of his freshman year of high school, he had decided those three sports were enough. But just when we dared hope that Ben would never force us to make the Big Decision, our luck ran out. “So,” he said between forkfuls of spaghetti, “I want to play football.”

Those were the words Ben used, but at the time they seemed to pass through some sort of internal parental translator. What I heard was, “I’d like to subject my brain to repeated trauma and expose my body to increased risk of broken bones, arthritis and paralysis.”

My wife and I needed time to process Ben’s declaration, which didn’t surprise him. “I thought you would probably say no right off the bat, and then I’d have to give you all the reasons you should change your mind,” my son, now a junior at Oregon, said last week when he granted his old man an exclusive interview. “I figured it was going to be more than one conversation.”

He was right. For some parents, the question of whether to allow their sons to play football is an easy yes, for others it’s a don’t-even-think-about-it no. I know one dad who ripped up his son’s football parental consent forms the first time the boy brought them home, then put a second set in the shredder when his son tried again a week later. But most of us lie between the extremes; we need to wrestle with the issue for a while before deciding. The potential downside of saying yes grew even darker with the news last week that All-Pro linebacker Junior Seau, 43, had committed suicide, an act that may well have been related to the constant cranial pounding of his 20-year NFL career.

Seau’s death, coming on the heels of similar suicides by ex-NFL safeties Dave Duerson 15 months ago and Ray Easterling last month, put a famous face on the issue of football’s long-term toll. The more we learn about the delayed brain damage that the sport’s controlled violence can cause, the harder it is for a growing number of parents to feel comfortable allowing their kids to play. According to the most recent figures available from the National Sporting Goods Association, participation in youth football declined from 10.1 million in 2006 to 8.9 million in 2009. Even ex-NFL quarterback Kurt Warner acknowledged last week that he would prefer his sons, one of whom is 13 and has already suffered a concussion, not follow in his footsteps. “You understand the size [of the players], the speed, the violence of the game, and then you couple that with situations like Junior Seau,” he said on Dan Patrick’s radio show. “It scares me as a dad.”

Read the whole story

Publisher’s note: This editorial is from May 23, 2012, Washington Post.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has an interesting definition of what constitutes the middle class. She believes it includes people earning anything less than $1 million a year — at least when it comes to tax cuts.

The California Democrat sent a letter Wednesday to House Speaker John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, calling on him to schedule an immediate vote to make permanent the Bush tax cuts for income below $1 million annually. President Obama’s position has been that the tax cuts should be extended, but only on income of $250,000 or less. Republicans, of course, insist on maintaining the upper-income tax cuts in their entirety, a move that would cost an estimated $850 billion over the next decade — $1 trillion, including the cost of paying additional interest on the debt, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

How much federal revenue would be lost by moving the cutoff point to $1 million? Citizens for Tax Justice estimates it at about 43 percent in 2013, and there is no reason to think that the loss would be any smaller in future years. If anything, as the economy improves and incomes rise, the loss could be larger. And among the biggest beneficiaries of Ms. Pelosi’s “middle class” largess would be those earning more than $1 million a year, because they would enjoy the benefit of paying lower marginal rates on the first $1 million of income. Indeed, an estimated half of the benefit of the lower rates would flow to, yes, millionaires.

Read the whole story

By Michael Reagan

Sheep and chickens.

That’s what America’s greatest corporations have become.

Whether it’s in California or nationally, it’s the same sad story.

America’s best and biggest companies — the banks, the energy corporations, the computer giants — are refusing to stand up to the bully governments in Sacramento and D.C.

Michael Reagan

The men and women who run California’s corporations know that high taxes, over-spending, excessive regulations and foolish energy policies have turned the state from one of the best states to do business in to one of the worst.

But when bad law after bad law is passed in California, the corporations don’t fight back, they cower or run.

Their executives are afraid to speak up, or buy ad time, or join with those of us who are trying to reverse the death spiral of a state that’s been wrecked by four decades of Democrat misrule in Sacramento.

For example, I know that many business leaders support the “Citizen Legislature Act.” That’s the ballot initiative that, if it gets on the fall ballot, will give voters in California the chance to turn the state legislature into a part-time wrecking crew instead of a year-round one.

But many of the corporate execs in California are afraid to join the ballot initiative drive, which I chair, because they fear retaliation from Sacramento.

They have good cause to fear retaliation from the Democrats. But that’s no excuse not to fight for what they know is right. Fighting is the only way they’ll ultimately strip the Democrats of their power to retaliate.

We have the same problem nationally — a flock of corporate chickens.

Why is it that the only voices we hear fighting against Washington are talk radio and Fox News?

Where are Exxon and Apple and Ford and Wells Fargo? Why aren’t they standing up for what’s left of free enterprise in America?

Imagine if Microsoft or Verizon or even Facebook spent just a pittance of their profits to fight against those who are slowly strangling the system that made their financial success possible.

Why aren’t their CEOs pointing the finger of blame for our economic miseries where it belongs — at the Obama administration?

Why aren’t they blasting away at the liberals in Washington for their constant business bashing and attacks on the rich? They’re afraid of retaliation from Washington. But again, the solution isn’t to cower or run, it’s to fight.

Unfortunately, California’s sheepish companies would rather move to Nevada than stay and fight the Democrats in Sacramento. America’s chicken companies would rather move their operations overseas than stay and fight Washington.

It’s time corporations start standing up for themselves. Talk radio and Fox News’ 4 million viewers can’t save a bunch of sheep and chickens. No one can.

There’s a scene in the “Avengers” movie where the people are told to kneel down to show their subservience to their ruler. But one brave man stood up and said he refused to kneel any longer.

That’s what our businesses have to do if they are to survive. Get off their knees. Fight for what’s right. They’re not going to be saved by Captain America or Captain Romney or anyone else. They have to stand up and save themselves.

Michael Reagan, the eldest son of Ronald Reagan, is heard daily by more than 5 million listeners via his nationally syndicated talk radio program, “The Michael Reagan Show.”

Publisher’s note: This editorial is from the May 14, 2012, Modesto Bee.

In touting the new system for electing legislators and congressional representatives in California, advocates emphasized that the top two vote-getters might well be from the same party. This prediction could very well come true in the 5th Assembly District, a heavily Republican district that stretches from South Lake Tahoe to south of Mammoth Lakes, with a toe boot into Madera County.

The district sprawls across nine counties and well over half of the geography is within a national forest or park. Two-thirds of the population is white and this area supported the Republican candidates in the last gubernatorial and presidential elections.

If voter registration were not enough of an edge, two Republicans in this race have the most money and endorsements and highest name recognition. They are Madera County Supervisor and rancher Frank Bigelow and San Andreas businessman and former legislator Rico Oller.

Oller wants to return to the capitol, where he served in the Assembly from 1996-2000 and in the Senate from 2000 to 2004. Under the current term limits law, if elected he would only be eligible for one more term in the Assembly.

Oller has picked up endorsements from several county central committees in the district and from the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. He signed the no-new-taxes pledge and said his primary reason for running is to oppose the state’s global warming law, AB 32, which will limit greenhouse gas emissions.

Oller declined the opportunity for an interview with The Bee’s editorial board, indicating he either doesn’t want or doesn’t expect our recommendation.

Regardless, Bigelow stands out to us as the best candidate in this field. As a county supervisor, he is painfully aware of how the actions and inactions in Sacramento have affected local governments. Bigelow has the endorsement of several Republican legislators from the region, including Tom Berryhill and Anthony Cannella, whose Senate districts include parts of the 5th Assembly District, and Assemblywoman Kristin Olsen, whose current 25th Assembly District includes Tuolumne and Calaveras counties. Far more than Oller, Bigelow appears willing to work with moderates and conservatives on behalf of the district

El Dorado and Madera counties have by far the largest number of registered voters in this district and both those central committees supported Bigelow. The rancher also won a key endorsement from the California Farm Bureau.

Read the whole story

Publisher’s note: The South Tahoe Association of Realtors asked for this letter to the TRPA to be reprinted on Lake Tahoe News.

Dear Honorable Members of the Governing Board:

The South Tahoe Association of Realtors Board of Directors would like to comment on the TRPA’s draft environmental impact statement. While we applaud some sections of the draft EIS, we have serious concerns about the EIS sections regarding a potential point-of-sale mandate for best management practices.

There are two alternative plans in the draft EIS that call for best management practices to be installed and inspected at the point-of-sale. A point-of-sale mandate for best management practices would be disastrous for the real estate community, for homebuyers and home sellers. The following points highlight our serious concerns about the EIS point-of-sale alternatives.

1. Not environmentally friendly — Ironically, relying on a point-of-sale to implement policies is not friendly to the environment. That is because the point-of-sale is an inefficient trigger mechanism for implementing any type of policy. While some homes do change ownership after only a few years, many homes remain with the same owner for years and even decades. Lake clarity does not improve if only a few homes are being scrutinized. TRPA staff have recognized that the most environmentally friendly plan for best management practices is area-wide planning, not individual parcel planning with a point-of-sale trigger.

2. Shuts down the real estate market for at least six months a year — BMP certification requires inspection, prescription, implementation and final sign off by different parties. All of these steps can only be completed when snow is not on the ground. Furthermore, implementation of anything that disturbs more than 3 cubic yards of dirt can only be completed in the Tahoe basin between May 1 and Oct. 15. No one could buy or sell their homes in the winter or with snow. The real estate market is already fragile. Mandating a point-of-sale trigger would wreak havoc on an already strained market.

3. Unfair — To place the burden of the whole community on homebuyers and sellers is inequitable. Why should only a segment of the population be required to shoulder the burden for something that impacts the entire community?

4. Adds complications to sales transactions — Escrow is a time sensitive process. Another step only delays the process and adds more stress to the homebuyer and seller. More stress is not what homebuyers and sellers ever need, but particularly not in this economy.

5. Makes Realtors the enforcement police — Various retrofitting mandates require the agent or broker’s signature for the completion certificate to be validated. This forces the real estate professional to act as an expert in a field in which they are not trained.

6. Causes the real estate professional to do the TRPA’s job — An obligation by a government body should be enforced by that body, not by an individual in the private sector.

7. Creates unnecessary legal liabilities on the real estate professional — Usually, despite all factors, the real estate professional is the one who is forced to get directly involved in a lawsuit. The liability is unfair to real estate agents and brokers.

8. Any point-of-sale mandate would require all properties to be evaluated — Most of the homes in the Tahoe basin do not have evaluations yet, and there is a long waiting list. Additionally, they will not do evaluations in the winter. Evaluating all properties is a costly and time-consuming process.

9. Putting money in escrow is infeasible — As stated above, properties cannot be evaluated in the winter for BMP compliance. How does one determine a dollar amount to implement BMPs if one does not know the costs? Furthermore, escrow companies don’t want the responsibility of holding money for BMPs and lenders don’t like to authorize it. The actual effect of a point-of-sale mandate will be to block home sales.

10. Not within the legal scope of the TRPA Compact – Article VI(a) of the TRPA Compact states that the TRPA’s regulatory authority is generally limited to “matters which are of general and regional application.” This language, along with the direction of the new Regional Plan, does not support the TRPA getting involved in private real estate contracts. Real estate contracts occur at the local level. For the TRPA to impose a best management practices point-of-sale mandate would require the TRPA to overstep its jurisdiction and get involved at the local level — far from the regional level planning powers the Compact grants the TRPA.

In addition to these listed concerns, we are concerned that the TRPA Governing Board would choose any alternative plan not endorsed by TRPA staff. TRPA staff’s preferred alternative — alternative 3 — does not call for any point-of-sale mandates. Instead, alternative 3 advocates for area-wide best management practices as the most environmentally friendly option. TRPA staff is in the best position to recommend the direction of the best management practices program. We urge you to follow the TRPA staff direction and support alternative 3 in the draft environmental impact statement.

We, as a community, have a unique opportunity with the new TRPA Regional Plan. We have the ability to look forward toward more effective environmental planning in the Tahoe basin. Supporting an alternative that includes a best management practices point-of-sale mandate looks backward instead of forward. Please support alternative plan 3 this fall.

Sincerely,

Jill Teakell, president South Tahoe Association of Realtors board

Publisher’s note: This editorial is from the May 9, 2012, Sacramento Bee.

The newly created 1st Assembly District sprawls across the northeast corner of the state, stretching from north Lake Tahoe to Yreka and including the cities of Susanville and Redding.

Nominally, this is GOP territory – with nearly 44 percent of voters registered Republican and 30 percent registered Democratic. Yet nearly 20 percent of voters are “decline to state,” meaning this open seat is somewhat in play.

Of the five candidates in the race, three have filed ballot statements and are actively campaigning.

Voters seeking a conservative have their choice of two affable elected officials – Lassen County Supervisor Brian Dahle and Redding City Councilman Rick Bosetti.

Dahle, a farmer who co-owns a seed company and nursery with his wife, is supported by agriculture interests, including the California Farm Bureau.

Bosetti, a retired major league baseball player, is supported by timber and real estate interests, the latter of which has recently helped finance a $115,000 independent expenditure campaign on his behalf.

Read the whole story