Landlords and lawns
EDITOR: I rented a house for 10 years from a landlord who forced me to waste water on a front and back lawn. What did he care? He doesn't live in Sonoma County, and we had to pay the water bill.
This past year we were lucky enough to buy our own place, where we promptly ripped out the lawn and installed low-water use plants.
Unfortunately, there are still many other renters who are forced to waste water to satisfy the whims of an absent landlord. This is an issue that needs to be addressed, both from water conservation and renters' rights standpoints.
Stick with PG&E
EDITOR: Our population should be informed that Sonoma Clean Power has no business structure; it's just a group intent on making money without being responsible for any risk. Our county supervisors should not be speculating with our tax money; gambling should be left to our local Indian population.
PG&E is a properly organized company that can issue stock and incur debt payable through corporate bonds if a fuel supplier should fail or some disaster occur. All that Sonoma Clean Power group could do in similar situations is to issue 100 percent debt. It has no skin in the game except its customers' money, so county taxpayers would be stuck with the debt.
Sonoma Clean Power will have no more reusable energy than PG&E and will be of no better advantage to our environment, but it will be more expensive once they get enough customers signed up. Its claim to have cleaner energy than PG&E is based on renewable energy credits, which are just bits of paper. No energy will actually be purchased and transferred.