Whatever they're on, I wish I had some.

Seriously, the city council must have a really good supplier of some amazing drugs. Does it make any logical sense to anyone else that they annexed the Greenbriar area last night to allow more building in Natomas?

They must have missed the memo from FEMA about the state of the flood protection in Natomas. No wait, we know they got it because Fargo promised to go head to head with Matsui, who said safety is the primary concern. From Breton's Bee article dated 1/20/2008 "On Friday, Rep. Doris Matsui, D-Sacramento, easily rebuffed Fargo's argument. "If I thought that was the right way to go, I would. But this is a different time," Matsui said. "We need to move forward on flood protection."

At least she's reading the FEMA memos.

What the heck is the city council thinking? We're in a serious housing crunch. Pardee Homes all but abandoned a huge chunk of land and left me with an ugly wall to look at. Yet somehow, despite the major flood risk, the economy and ongoing debate about the safety of building more homes in Natomas, the city council thought this was a good plan?

Kevin Johnson for mayor, anyone? At least he has his own money and won't be beholden to AKT and their shady land deals. Natomas has seen this before. We're done.

Other tidbits from the Grand Jury Report

*Sacramento County currently pays its pharmacists for health clinics 10% less than neighboring counties and 25-35% less than area hospitals. Temporary pharmacists are actually paid anywhere between 30 and 50% more than permanent hires. This pay scale problem has left a shortage of pharmacists, according to the report.

* The City and County are continuing to allow development in areas that do not have 100-year flood protection. Potential flood depths in some areas are greater than 15 feet. The report recommends that all building in North Natomas stops immediately until at least 100 year flood protection is achieved.

*The Education committee toured several area high schools and listed several components of the programs at each school. None of these snapshots shows any critique of the schools or programs. It is simply a short summary of the committee's tour of the campus and a description of the programs. It reads more like a marketing brochure for each school.