Fête de la Musique!

I happened across this announcement on the SacWiki... sounds promising!

The Fête de la Musique, also known as World Music Day, is a world wide music festival that takes place on June 21, which is usually the summer solstice. On this day, sidewalks, parks, community gardens, stores and more become impromptu musical stages for both amateur and professional musicians to showcase their talents. All concerts and performances are free and open to the public.

Selective Libertarians

There is an interesting piece on California water law in, of all places, the most recent online edition of Edible Sacramento. The piece, by someone named Mike Madison, is a pretty sane overview of the crazy state of the law in California. I still find it bizarre to hear California farmers pushing for unregulated markets in anything. Madison, to his credit, seems fine with some kinds of government involvement, but he draws the line at subsidies for thirsty crops like corn:

Most thoughtful farmers welcome government regulation of agriculture; that is, regulation of environmental protection, public health and safety, quality standards, accurate labeling, resource conservation, and fair employment practices. We know how crazy our neighbors are, and regulation protects us from their follies. It also gives the rest of the world confidence in California's agricultural products. What is inappropriate is government regulation of markets which, left alone, regulate themselves far more efficiently than any scheme hatched by a bureaucrat. Get rid of the corn and ethanol subsidies, which were created merely to purchase votes in Iowa, and we would quickly stop wasting California's precious water on corn.

It's hard to disagree with the gist of his argument. But I'm not sure if I really believe that any farmers, thoughtful or not, welcome government regulation of agriculture. I haven't seen a whole lot of farmers challenging the Farm Bureau when it clings to the notion the "nonpoint source" water pollution, the primary source of which is fertilizer and pesticide runoff from agricultural fields, should be exempt from regulation. Most farmers are content to continue to stonewall the state's efforts to gather even the most basic information about where these pollutants originate.

Furthermore, while I agree that corn and ethanol subsidies are a cynical boondoggle, it is striking to hear such free-market libertarian arguments leveled in the interest of farmers in a state so dependent on government subsidized water. Not surprisingly, Mr. Madison carves out an exception to his laissez faire philosophy for water:

If free markets are efficient for distributing crops, why not set up a free market for California water? This idea has zealous proponents, but it is inappropriate for a vital necessity such as water. Free markets are good at setting prices for discretionary items; they are less good at allocating resources; and they are dismal at allocating scarce, critical resources in a society with large inequalities of wealth.

Free markets are also dismal at permitting agriculture to flourish in semi-arid or desertlike climates in the Central Valley. The fallacy of a "free market" in water isn't simply a function of the fact that water is a "scarce, critical resource." The problem is that, from its very origin, the "commodity" of California water is a product of government subsidy, thanks to two major water projects sponsored by the state and federal governments. Without the highly regulated water system, you wouldn't just have inefficiency, you'd have little to no agriculture at all. All the asparagus in the world won't pay for the energy and management resources consumed by California's water projects.

State and national taxpayers have, wittingly or unwittingly, already decided to underwrite California agricultural production. With that support comes regulation, to ensure that the government's involvement doesn't inadvertently undermine the many other aspects of the "public interest" that we rely on government to protect. The notion of a "free market" in California water isn't just a bad idea; it's an impossible idea.

City of Trees, City of Fools

Once upon a time, someone started the rumor that Sacramento was the “City of Trees.” I am not sure who is responsible for this very local urban legend. A longtime environmental activist friend of mine once told me that the Sacramento Tree Foundation is responsible for manufacturing this enchanting bit of local boosterism.

Now, I am a big fan of trees. And I appreciate the work of the Sacramento Tree Foundation. But it’s a little disturbing to see how readily the locals have lapped up their own propaganda Kool-Aid when it comes to trees. Somewhere along the line, the “City of Trees” monicker went from slogan to fiercely held local belief. Someone claimed that the city had “more trees per capita” than any other city besides Paris. And for as long as I have lived here, I have heard that claim repeated at various times by people attempting to extol the beauty of our city. The media also picked up on the idea-- check out these pieces by NPR/KQED and the august New York Times repeating the claim.

I can claim no firsthand knowledge of the relative densities of urban forests or the number of “trees per capita” of any particular metropolitan region-- particularly those in France. But as someone who has traveled a bit beyond the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Valleys, I confidently offer this observation: Sacramento is definitively NOT the “City of Trees.” And the idea that we have more “trees per capita” than any other city this side of the Atlantic is pure fantasy.

I grew up in Indiana, and I went to school on the Gulf Coast. I have seen a fair bit of the South and the Midwest east of the Mississippi. In either of those regions, any two-bit town with a little undeveloped land could easily claim a higher density of trees, and a higher ratio of “trees per capita,” than our fair city. Most of those areas of the country were either forest or swamp. Consequently, you don’t have to think about planting trees. Any piece of land, left to its own devices, will spontaneously sprout a variety of second-growth species of tree. The roads and drainage ditches are lined with thick underbrush and canopy-producing forest. In most cases, I doubt that much thought went into the cultivation of these trees. But there they are, nonetheless-- a product of a wet climate and a legacy of a woodland ecology that humans have not quite managed to subdue.

I notice that the Sacramento Tree Foundation continues to perpetuate a slightly more modest version of the Forested Sacramento Myth. They claim here that it is the “beauty of Sacramento’s tree canopy” that is second only to Paris. In my not-so-humble opinion, this claim is no less laughable than the claim that our sprawling metropolis is among the most tree-dense cities in the world.

Does it seem as though I am more irked by the “City of Trees” myth than I should be? Perhaps. In my opinion, it is just another indicator of this city’s fantastic inferiority complex and its desperate and pathetic attempt to fashion an identity for itself. City leaders and city residents cling to the strangest things in hopes of proving that Sacramento is a unique and interesting place to live-- whether it be gentle white lies about our urban forest, or less innocent lies about the importance of professional basketball to Sacramento’s civic life. At least the lies about trees are relatively inexpensive.

Mid-Day Biking Holiday

May is bike month in Sacramento, and Sacramento Area Bicycle Advocates encourages you to bike to work.


What better way to celebrate than to skip work for a bike ride?





Somewhere between 50 and 100 cyclists, by my count, joined SABA in a lunchtime ride from the State Capitol through midtown, via the new bike lanes on either side of 19th Street. The pace was leisurely, and our presence was impressive! We had the air of a well-behaved Critical Mass rally.


I could have spent hours admiring the broad range of bikes that turned out. Expensive road bikes, retro fixies, fancy single speeds, folding bikes, recumbents, kids on single speed BMXers with sagging chains-- we had all types of two-wheelers in all types of conditions.


Surprisingly, the reaction from the motorists who might have been inconvenienced by our mass presence was overall positive. Only one asshole attempted to pass us through a left turn. And by contrast, many autos rolled down windows to enquire as to the occasion for our ride, and we got lots of supportive honks and huzzahs! Here's hoping Sacramento develops its pro-bicycle trend!