Let's Think about Water while We Still Have a Bit.

Sometimes something startles me.

Reading an article on a multistate agreement designed to save the Colorado River, a graph shows where the water goes, a blue stream flowing downward on the page, with lighter blue offshoots marked “Residential (12%), Commercial/Industrial (4%), and thermoelectric power (4%).

But 79% is agricultural. Those offshoots include Cotton (11%), Wheat (3%), Corn grain (2%), Barley (1%), and Other crops (7%).

The other 56% of the water went to livestock, 1% for watering livestock and 55% for the alfalfa, hay, grasses, and corn livestock feeds on. That’s 56% of all the river water used.

With all due respect to our state’s ranchers and dairies, uhhh, WOW! Water we drink, bathe with, grow vegetables with, or utilize in industry, plus cotton, etc. and food crops is less than the water used to ensure abundant meat and dairy products.

Our rivers are drying up. See the “Rio Sandy” in our backyard. While some still dither about whether global weirdness is real, or whether it’s related to human piggishness, real rivers are really dying. (Meanwhile, our state operates largely on water laws enacted to attract people to a desert that now cannot sustain population levels.)

It’s time for us to change: if you eat meat, recognize that if we all halved our meat and dairy consumption, we’d save a lot of water.

Some estimates say that, with watering feed crops and the cattle, it takes more than 38 gallons of water (plus transportation) to produce a quarter-pound beef patty.  As you eat it (plus whatever weird stuff growers and fast-food joints add to maximize profits), consider you’d need just five gallons of water to get that protein from tofu.  Don’t like tofu? Eat two burgers (76 gallons) ignoring that 15 poor folks somewhere could have eaten some protein if you’d passed on meat today.

I’ve eaten some dairy and have eaten meat. I bicycle way less than I should, and always loved long showers (though those have shortened considerably). (Admittedly, having last eaten meat in 1984, I don’t miss it.)

We put food waste in the compost bins at home. Largely influenced by my wife, we collect our dish water to pour on the compost. (This newspaper goes in, too.) We have buckets at hand, and daily I pour several of those on the compost bins. (Tissue and newspaper go in there too, and the occasional paper bag.) My wife traps rain in rain barrels, to help in watering the garden.

Wasting less water feels good. The walk to the compost bin is outdoor time to think. Pouring water, I smile for the worms I hope are surviving our desert summer.

Of course, these efforts are a literal drop in the bucket. We must elect leaders who care enough and dare to make systemic change – and hold ‘em to their promises.

Will our grand kids pay $20 for a glass of water, and their kids be refugees to New Hampshire, Canada, or maybe Siberia? How would we explain to them why we couldn’t cut from daily meat consumption to twice a week, or that our lawns looked too pretty to abandon. Or why we didn’t insist politicians make serious improvements? Or voted for some candidate saying there’s no problem.

Change can be challenging, yet produce unexpected good. Cutting back on meat and dairy for our grand kids' sake also improves our health. Water is life.

                                                          – 30 –

 

[The above column appeared Sunday, 28May 2023, in the Las Cruces Sun-News and on the newspaper's website and KRWG's website. A related radio commentary will air during the week on KRWG (90.7 FM) and on KTAL (101.5 FM / http://www.lccommunityradio.org/) and be available on both stations’ websites.]

Beautiful, but not Good

[There’s so much more to say on this subject, both in terms of what each of us ought to do (and why I think we should, when we can spend time taking buckets out to our compost bins then watch city or county or NMSU or company let a huge pipe run all day in the street.) and regarding facts and policies. (I hope no eco-terrorist starts burning down every new pecan orchard, but would understand the impulse.) A pet comment of mine is that a state law should prohibit (with criminal penalties) the planting of more than four new pecan trees on any acreage in a calendar year. Sounds crazy but would do good, and ain’t gonna happen, but the arguments for it might help topple over some other problem.]

 

Advice No One Will Likely Give Graduates

This is for the season’s graduates.

But “Don’t Trust Anyone over 30!” People over 30 mostly have marriages, kids, mortgages, paying jobs, even nascent careers to protect. Graduates also shouldn’t trust me because they face a new world dominated by cyberspace, AI, drones, and climate change. Even so:

Life’s key challenge is to face the truth without letting it obsess or destroy you. We’re insignificant, powerless critters, confused combinations of body and mind, clinging to the surface of a minor planet for a nanosecond.

Scary. The traditional response is to hide in some religion, or start one. After this painful life, there will be harps, virgins, or plenty of buffalo in the next (and longer) one. So it’s cool. If you choose that route, I hope it works for you.

Riding a train across North China, long ago, I was reading Dogen’s words: “At each moment, do not rely upon tomorrow. Think of this day and this day only, for the next moment is uncertain and unknown.” As if to make sure I understood, the train lurched to a halt near a bridge. Just beneath our window lay a Chinese peasant, hit by the train, expiring, a small pool of blood spreading on the ground around her.

The challenge is, without some god to fear, doing the right thing, which often involves, yes, treating folks as you’d like to be treated in their place. Stripped of myths, “judge not that ye be not judged,” and “treat the least of your human brethren as you’d treat a king,” remain helpful ideas. So is the practice (widespread among “uncivilized” peoples) of treating resources as limited and animals, vegetables, and minerals as if they have spirits deserving of respect. If you must shoot and eat this deer, or hire that worker at low wages, be as respectful as you can. Destroy no more than you must.

“Be True to yourself!” – but nourish that self into its best version by keen observation, varied experience, and random kindness. Let it grow, not ossify.

“Everything is in the hands of its enemies!” Ambitious U.S. politicians destroy the U.S., while priests, roshis, and academic chairs battle to build their limited power into empires, ignoring what they claim to honor.

“Don’t Trust Everything You Think!” I spotted that bumpersticker on an old Volkswagen driven by a beautiful woman. So I married her. It’s a way I’ve always tried to be: receptive to new information that might contradict stuff I’ve thought so far. Great for our obscenely partisan era. The Buddhists suggest not getting too attached – to power, possessions, people, beliefs – because everything passes. Attachment, while beguiling, even irresistible, spawns pain.

An unfair world doesn’t mean we lash out like a crying child denied his ice cream. Rather, it makes all the good stuff more precious. Surprise at least one someone each day with kindness. Practice gratitude. Getting to live even our pathetic lives is a huge gift. (Science confirms that laughter and being grateful enhance and lengthen human lives.)

Treat others’ bad acts as bottles of poisoned wine those folks offer you. You needn‘t drink. Let their greed and envy fester in them. But why take it into you? A friendly smile – honestly felt – is the most devastating response. Drop their broken arrows in one of those little plastic bags we use to pick up dog waste.

Maybe you see why schools don’t invite me to address graduates!

                                                            – 30 – 

 

[The above column appeared Sunday, 21 May 2023, in the Las Cruces Sun-News and on the newspaper's website (albeit with a misspelled headline) and KRWG's website. A related radio commentary will air during the week on KRWG (90.7 FM) and on KTAL (101.5 FM / http://www.lccommunityradio.org/) and be available on both stations’ websites.]

[When I noticed Walt Rubel’s most recent column gave advice to graduates, I figured mine could too. I hope someone enjoys it. Even curmudgeons might get something right now and then.]

[Right after sending this in, I wondered why I hadn’t worked into it, “Never lose your sense of wonder!” ]

[That life is short and then we die is no reason not to immerse yourself in a wide variety of experiences, personally and through the arts: reading, seeing films, as well as music and painting can open inner doors you didn’t know were there.

[A friend who read the column in this mornings paper suggested a couple of solid additions: “KISS,” or “Keep it Simple, Stupid!” and to keep always in mind that none of us (so far as we know, anyway) gets to decide, or even vote on his or her parents and childhood situation. Cutting folks a little extra slack because of that ain’t a bad policy.  Thanks, Charles.]

[The Dogen quote has stayed with me. It comes to mind often. I even worked it into a T-shirt, many years ago:

Don’t ask me why I inserted a cardinal and a parrot playing go with Mt. Fuji in the background.]

[“Everything is in the hands of its enemies,” MMSU English Department Chair Bob Wichert said to me more than a half-century ago. He was a quiet man with (obviously) some wisdom to impart if we paused to listen. Keep it in mind – a wide variety of situations and institutions will remind you of it.

Irrelevant digression: Bob didn’t talk about World War II, but once he related a night when he and his fellow soldiers were in France, in darkness, in a battle zone, with artillery firing frequently. They found an abandoned farmhouse, and realized they could spend the night in the basement. Three shifts would keep watch. In the morning when soldiers awakened and tried to emerge from the basement, the trap door wouldn’t push up. They initially thought someone on the third shift was playing a prank. Eventually, though, once they managed to get out, there was no longer a farmhouse, nor was there any sign of those who had been on watch.]

 

Prominent Defamation Lawyer Gets Involved in NM PRC Controversy

Sorry to write again about Avangrid/Iberdrola, but developments warrant it.

Iberdrola mostly owns Avangrid, which sought NM Public Regulatory Commission approval to buy PNM, which delivers electricity to most New Mexicans. The PRC disapproved, 5-0. A major reason was Iberdrola’s international reputation for bad conduct. The PRC hearing examiner recited extensive facts. Avangrid has appealed.

Mariel Nanasi is executive director of New Energy Economy, a consumer-interest gadfly that formally opposed the merger.

Background: PRC documents and international news outlets established long ago that Iberdrola is subject of a long-running Spanish investigation of corporate misconduct, including fraud and bribery, and has been subjected to hefty fines elsewhere; and Avangrid’s operations in other U.S. states have featured major problems with billing and service. There are allegations of fraud. However, Iberdrola is the world’s biggest wind-energy producer, and some New Mexico officials feel its renewable energy experience trumps allegedly bad corporate character.

Recently Nanasi misstated something: in reciting that Iberdrola had allegedly bribed public officials, spied on judges, committed other misconduct, she included “bribing judges,” which had not been alleged.

Her interview has found 63 YouTube listeners, including Avangrid/Iberdrola’s employees, lawyers, and consultants. Retake our Democracy has 35 subscribers, likely already unsympathetic to Avangrid. (I heard nothing of the broadcast until someone sent me “The Paper”’s article on Elizabeth “Libby” Locke’s letter, which he thought destroyed Nanasi’s credibility.)

It’s hilarious (or further evidence Avangrid is undesirable here) that Locke, who recently represented Dominion against Fox, is threatening a libel lawsuit by Avangrid against Nanasi. (Nanasi quickly issued a press release correcting the error.)

Is this an effort to recover for reputational damage, as Locke claims, or an effort to silence Nanasi, as she claims?

To prove defamation, Avangrid would have to prove Nanasi intended to make a false statement (knew she was lying or should have known and didn’t care) and that the lie damaged Avangrid’s reputation. Whether Nanasi knew or should have known she’d made a false statement is a judgment call for a jury: she did make the statement, but off-the-cuff; an exhaustive study of documents and news articles would tell her the stories on bribing public officials never mentioned judges. That Nanasi checked her work and corrected it quickly and publicly does not suggest malice; but Avangrid could allege she should have made that check before talking on You-Tube. Too, an intentional lie would have made little sense: it would be exposed, undermining credibility; and, except lawyers and fellow judges, few listeners distinguish sharply between bribing a judge and bribing other public officials. If this ever went to trial, I’d bet on the defense.

Reputation damage? Iberdrola’s reputation was already a disaster for the company, internationally. A few dozen people, likely already unsympathetic to Avangrid, heard Nanasi’s statement, but Locke’s letter and Avangrid’s press release have thousands or tens of thousands reading about the “bribing judges” allegation.

In court, the defense would argue that erroneously including judges among the public officials Avangrid allegedly bribed was a pretty minor error, quickly corrected. I’ve reached out to Avangrid’s lawyer and PR person here, to elicit more on Avangrid’s view.

An effort to recover millions of dollars in damages for a cynical lie told by Nanasi? Or intimidation?

We’ll see. The little misstatement has been corrected. Avangrid likely won’t sue. If it does, the minimal offense and the microscopic possible damages suggest the suit wouldn’t cover Avangrid or Libby Locke with glory. 

                               -- 30 --

 

[The above column appeared Sunday, 14 May 2023, in the Las Cruces Sun-News and on the newspaper's website, and on KRWG's website. A related radio commentary will air during the week on KRWG (90.7 FM) and on KTAL (101.5 FM / http://www.lccommunityradio.org/) and be available on both stations’ websites.]

[By the way, I make no claim to having any personal knowledge of any of this. I know only what I have read in documents, news reports, legal briefs, etc. and what I’ve been told by various individuals about all this.]

[I do have grave questions (discussed in my recent column on these issues) about the effort by Avangrid to short-circuit the appeal process and the normal public discussion by agreeing with the PRC to drop the appeal and reconsider the rejected merger (without new public hearings, apparently!) Avangrid representatives I’ve spoken to (or read) contend that this was normal “procedural” communication between appellant and an appellee. Maybe the New Mexico Supreme Court will agree. However, I’d bet against that. To me, given a public entity’s obligations to inform the public, “procedural” stuff means “can we reschedule that hearing?” or “may we have an extra two weeks to submit our brief,” not an agreement so substantive it would end an appeal (in which others are involved) with no advance notice, and impair others’ rights. The secret plan to do so without, apparently, adding to the public record with new evidence and public discussion, seems particularly inappropriate. It may be legal, since dropping an appeal could be described as a procedural move. It may not.

[Later note (4June):  Posting another column today, I glanced at this one's headline and wondered if maybe there's not a clear dividing line between the permissible "procedural" communications and those that would be improper/illegal.  Of course you can call the PRC and say, "we want to drop the appeal," and to ask, "will you sign on to that," although PRC permission shouldn't be necessary; and Avangrid's lawyers could tell the PRC's lawyers that Avangrid plans to seek a rehearing at the PRC; but all the further discussion, of what will and won't be done at a possible rehearing, ultimately resulting in a secret agreement purporting to deprive other parties of their rights at the PRC, should be punished by the NM Supreme Court.  (There's a difference between telling them "we're dismissing our appeal and will seek a rehearing" and telling them, "we'll dismiss our appeal if you agree to a rehearing under these additional conditions," and the PRC members cannot properly discuss the latter, let alone agree on anything!)  The PRC is like a judge.  I can file papers with the judge, asking for what I want; but I can't have secret conversations with the judge about how s/he'll handle the case and whether she'll let your father testify.  Appealing to the Court of Appeals doesn't give me any additional right to talk ex parte with the judge about the case, particularly if I'm planning to bring it before that judge again!  i can dismiss my appeal, or tell the judge i'm doing so, but discussing details on my plan to ask for a rehearing could get both me and the judge suspended.  That the PRC is not exactly a judge shouldn't alter that.  However, I should note that I still haven't researched the issue, as I would if I were one of the lawyers in the case, so maybe there's some decision on the subject that I'm unaware of.]

I don’t mean to malign Libby Locke. She’s a star in her field. Lawyers represent their clients. Lawyers do not always (in their hearts – and, yes, most do have hearts, contrary to the popular imagination) agree with or admire their clients. But her involvement, so soon after the Fox decision, seemed noteworthy. Even a committed revolutionary in colonial North America represented British soldiers accused of murdering protesters, before the American Revolution. But.]

A Las Cruces Story -- dirt streets to governor's mansion

This is a Las Cruces story, about a long-time Cruces family and the sad distance between the city we are and who we used to be.

It starts with Reymundo Apodaca, and Elisa Alvarez, both born here in 1907 into sufficiently poor families that each started working too early to finish high school.  After their marriage, Mundo worked odd jobs, such as loading chile and other vegetables for shipping, then became a salesclerk at the local J.C. Penny. Drafted by the Army, though the father of five, Mundo served years during World War II, after which the couple opened a small grocery store. Elisa ran it all day, then Mundo took over after Penny’s. They later owned and operated the city’s only Dairy Queen for a quarter-century.

They lived at 308 Bowman the whole 70 years of their marriage. Ray, Jr., was such a great athlete at Las Cruces High they named him “The Greatest Bulldog,” a nickname younger brother Jerry, born in 1934, later earned, lettering in four sports. Jerry won a football scholarship to UNM, where he starred as a halfback his last two years. (Initially so homesick that he returned to Cruces, Jerry quickly got over it.)

I met him in 1974, as a young reporter. Jerry was a long shot candidate in the Democratic primary for the gubernatorial nomination. I spent most of the weekend before the primary talking with Jerry and his wife, Clara. Still an avid runner, Jerry also sponsored that weekend “The Governor’s Cup,”thirteen miles through the streets of Albuquerque. I ran with him. I liked him.

Two days later the Democrats nominated young Jerry. Elected in November over Republican Joe Skeen, Jerry was the first Hispanic Governor here since 1917, in a town where, during his childhood, some Anglo fathers would frankly tell their daughters’ young Hispanic male friends to stay the hell away.

Jerry was smart and personable. People called him and Clara “the Hispanic Kennedys.” Many predicted national success.

In the life of anyone who does something really well, it can be hard when the cheering stops. Although I gather Jerry kept on knocking aside barriers to Hispanics in large corporations, he experienced no further political success.

But Mundo and Elisa had lived to see their third child our governor and their fourth, my friend Rudy Apodaca, the Chief Justice of New Mexico’s Court of Appeals. A Georgetown grad, Rudy served thirteen years on that court. Reymundo and Elisa were delighted by the successes of all five children.

Jerry died last week, at 88.

I won’t pretend I agreed with all that Jerry said publicly during the past few years. For a long time, he wasn’t at his best. Too, he was governor so long ago that many newer residents of Las Cruces have no clue who he was.

But he deserves to be remembered. With great affection and respect. By family, friends, and the community that produced him, and which he loved.

Our friend Jose Garcia, retired NMSU prof, recently called Jerry, “simply, the best governor New Mexico has produced since statehood.” Professor Garcia emphasizes that Jerry not only dreamed but had the practical savvy to make real improvements in our state. Jerry also had the marathoner’s discipline. By law he could serve just one term: and he made it count.

As our present governor noted, Jerry also helped us begin electing a much more diverse set of political candidates.

                                  – 30 --

 

[The above column appeared Sunday, 7 May 2023, in the Las Cruces Sun-News and on the newspaper's website, and on KRWG's website. A related radio commentary will air during the week on KRWG (90.7 FM) and on KTAL (101.5 FM / http://www.lccommunityradio.org/) and be available on both stations’ websites.]

[First: two corrections to the column as it appeared in the print edition: Instead of Jerry’s birth year of 1934, I typed in 1939, his brother Rudy’s; and my faulty memory had a field of four in that Democratic primary; but Rudy corrected me. There were six candidates. Maybe two had little chance at all.]

[That weekend is a vivid memory. I’d been a newspaper reported (for the El Paso Times) less than two months. I liked Jerry and Clara lot. The run was another story. In those days, I was in great shape – playing tennis at 6 a.m. six days a week with Dick Tegmeyer, playing basketball in Meerscheidt at noon, Sunday touch football, and some evenings some soccer with the foreign students.

However, I never jogged. I ran a few times, to practice for running in Jerry’s event. I also, stupidly, bought new sneakers. After five miles, I was running right beside Jerry, but suffering painful blisters on the tops of my toes. I paused to remove them, tossed them in the back of a passing support truck, and ran the remaining eight miles through the streets of Albuquerque barefoot, or maybe with just socks on ‘til they wore out.]

[A Celebration of Jerrys life has been scheduled for 15May at the Capitol in Santa Fe.]

[Dr. Garcia’s op-ed, mentioned above, can be found at: https://www.riograndesun.com/opinion/former-governor-jerry-apodaca-dies-at-88/article_afa89c72-e5ff-11ed-a843-ef52656937cc.html.]

Jerry and Jimmy

 

 

Loloking Further at Avagrid-Iberdrola and OUR PRC

 

This concerns a huge international company that seems to be a particularly bad actor and a rural state where a “professional” Public Regulatory Commission looks somewhat disastrous just now.

Some basics: judges (or administrative bodies that judge controversies) are meant to be impartial, and to follow rules to prevent even the appearance of bias. (See “Clarence Thomas?”)

Iberdrola’s subsidiary, Avangrid, sought to buy PNM, the investor-owned utility that provides most New Mexicans’ electricity. The merger would mean big bucks for PNM big shots. In 2021 the PRC rejected the merger, 5-0. Avangrid/Iberdrola’s bad record elsewhere was more than any Commissioner could stomach.

Avangrid appealed to the state supreme court. A consumer watchdog, New Energy Electricity, opposed the appeal. In March, with no warning, public comment, or open meeting, the “new” governor-appointed PRC announced it was joining Avangrid in withdrawing the appeal, then and would rehear the case with no new evidence! However, the appeal had deprived PRC of jurisdiction.

On April 19 we discussed on radio our puzzlement about how this could happen without improper PRC-Avangrid “ex parte communications.” At a public meeting that afternoon, before outraged citizens, the PRC, to its credit, did an about face. The two involved commissioners withdrew their agreement to rehear, conceded they’d used an inapplicable rule to justify their action, admitted (without the requisite detail) ex parte communications, and promised that if Avangrid tries to reopen the case, the PRC will hear everyone and respect due process. “Due process” – that you get to speak up against court or administrative actions that could affect you – is a key concept in our Constitution.

Credit NEE’s dogged opposition for the partial reversal. Avangrid’s conduct here has written in large red letters that Iberdrola is trouble. I hope Avangrid has sufficiently fouled its New Mexico nest even this PRC would see that.

Questions remain.

First, is there sufficient evidence of Open Meetings Law violations for the Attorney-General to prosecute and perhaps convict offenders? Commissioners cite the “discussion of litigation” exception to the law, which may apply; but even so, they acted unfairly and unlawfully. What they did would likely get a judge disbarred. Suppose in our lawsuit over our knife fight, the judge found me guilty but then, during my appeal, announced s/he was reopening the case to find for me, with no new evidence? But the PRC is not a judge.

Finally, aside from the due process and transparency issues, how did this happen? Did Avangrid convince the commissioners through persuasive logical arguments that NEE had no chance to rebut? Or did Avangrid use less savory means, either conning them into changing their minds, or using even less savory means? (Iberdrola is under criminal investigation in Spain over allegations that include bribery.) Or did our Governor, whom I mostly support, appoint only folks committed to ignore Iberdolaa improprieties that led former commissioner Steve Fischmann to comment, “There can be no good deal with a bad partner?” (She’s not alone. Some reputable environmental protection groups apparently think Avangrid’s abilities outweigh its dubious corporate character.)

Second, must we once more “reform” the PRC? And how? If elections don’t work and gubernatorial appointments don’t work ,. . . ? Former Commissioner Valerie Espinosa says the current commission has met in privately more often in four months than the PRC did in her eight years. That ain’t transparency.

It’s a mess. I’ll try interview the commissioners.

But it’s problematic.
                                 – 30 –