太原治疗痔疮最好的方法太原肠息肉手术,山西哪有治便血的医院,太原肛肠科医院那里好,山西痔疮的肛肠科医院,太原肠镜怎么做,太原肛肠下垂治疗,太原肛门息肉 治疗

SAN DIEGO, Calif. (KGTV) -- Hundreds of families are sleeping at Liberty Station Saturday night to raise awareness and money for the homeless in San Diego. The event is an annual tradition for the The San Diego Rescue Mission. Families participating in the event sleep on cots and tents made of cardboard to experience what homeless experience on a daily basis. Participants also build hygiene kits, blankets, and pet packs for the homeless. This year, the event included a concert, food, and a prayer session to pray for those that don't have a home. All of the proceeds raised at the event go to the San Diego Rescue Mission. 636

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Anglers and biologists believe California is likely to experience an increase of chinook salmon during the fall run resulting from the coronavirus and fewer fish caught during the summer. The San Francisco Chronicle reported state and federal scientists earlier this year forecast more than 473,000 adult salmon off the San Francisco Bay Area coast from the Sacramento River system. The forecast is a big jump from 380,000 last year and 224,000 in 2018. The season for the fish also called king salmon was delayed from its scheduled opening, with more than two months of fishing shut down. 618

SAN DIEGO -- The San Diego County Board of Supervisors has voted to support the Trump administration’s lawsuit against California’s sanctuary laws.The board voted 3-1 Tuesday afternoon to support the lawsuit. The board directed that the County’s attorney to file an amicus brief supporting the federal lawsuit.The deadline to file a brief passed, so Chairwoman Kristin Gaspar said the earliest the county can file a brief is if the ruling is appealed to a higher court.RELATED: Escondido City Council votes to support sanctuary policy lawsuitSupervisor Greg Cox was the only one opposed to supporting the lawsuit. Supervisor Ron Roberts wasn’t present for the vote.Among the laws targeted by the legal action is SB 54, which limits cooperation between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities.Supervisor Dianne Jacob led public opposition to the laws and said she agrees with U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions that they are unconstitutional and undermine public safety.RELATED: Justice Department to sue California over 'sanctuary' laws 1093

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — As many as 100,000 Californians are eligible to receive payments for the damages they suffered from a series of devastating wildfires over the last several years. But tens of thousands of them have not sought compensation.They face a Monday deadline to file claims against Pacific Gas & Electric, the utility blamed for many of the fires and required to cover a wide range of wildfire-related losses as part of its bankruptcy plan.Concerned that as many as 70,000 victims may miss out on payments, attorneys filed court papers Friday to alert the bankruptcy judge that wildfire survivors — many still traumatized and struggling to get back on their feet — aren't aware of their rights to file a claim."People really are overwhelmed and don't understand what they need to do," said Cecily Dumas, an attorney for the Official Committee of Tort Claimants, a group appointed by the court to represent all wildfire victims in the bankruptcy."Renters, lower-income people were simply too exhausted by their day-to-day circumstances to deal with it," she said.PG&E filed for bankruptcy protection in January as it faced billions of dollars of damages from wildfires that have killed scores of people over the past couple of years and destroyed thousands of homes. The investor-owned energy company set aside .4 billion for payouts to wildfire victims and mailed 6.2 million claim forms to possible victims, calling attention to the process through websites, email, social media, and radio and television ads.However, many victims said in court papers supporting a deadline extension that the legal notice didn't reach them because they have been displaced, or if they did receive it they mistook it as a scam.Some said they thought they couldn't pursue a claim because PG&E is bankrupt, or that they weren't eligible to make a claim since they already received money from their insurance company.Others thought they couldn't make a claim without a lawyer."I thought I wasn't a victim because I got out alive," said Elizabeth Davis, 91, who lost her mobile home in a wildfire that essentially wiped out the town of Paradise nearly a year ago. "I never received any information that PG&E has billions of dollars available. I thought I was not qualified to make a claim."A man who said his house in Paradise was destroyed by fire three months after he bought it said he learned through social media that he could recover money from PG&E for his losses. Ryan Mooney said he believes there are countless people like him who don't know they can file claims "or what they will lose if they don't."Mooney said he and his wife and his aunt and uncle who lived close by barely escaped the fire after they woke up to the smell of smoke and saw a wall of flames coming over a canyon."All of us are still grappling with the trauma to this day," he said. "We are constantly planning fire escape routes and putting together emergency kits. When there is smoke outside, we get nervous."PG&E has separately agreed to pay more than billion to insurance companies to compensate for claims they have already paid out to wildfire victims.Dumas said wildfire survivors can additionally claim for hardships such as lost wages, lost business and emotional distress. Renters can seek to recover the cost of finding alternate housing.Dumas wasn't certain a deadline extension will lead to more people making claims. However, she said she felt a moral obligation to inform the judge so he can grasp the scope of the problem.Among people who knew about the deadline, some wrestled with whether to pursue it."It took a while for me to decide if it was the right thing to do," said Pam Beauchamp, who lost her house in the wildfire in Paradise.Beauchamp said she hesitated to ask for a payout because she reasoned the wildfire was a natural disaster and that she considered herself lucky to buy a house in the nearby city of Chico less than a month after the fire.But when investigators concluded that PG&E equipment sparked the wildfire, she said she felt more comfortable claiming for her losses."Nothing is going to replace what I had in that house or make that day better," Beauchamp said. "I am forever changed. And while money is not going to bring back the community I knew, it feels a little bit like even Stevens." 4349

SAN DIEGO, Calif. (KGTV) - A new rule from the California Air Resources Board could wind up costing San Diego MTS hundreds of millions of dollars.CARB announced a series of regulations last week, all aimed at making bus fleets more environmentally friendly.One rule says all buses need to be zero-emission by 2040.That could be costly.Right now, SDMTS uses Compressed Natural Gas in their buses, which they say burns much cleaner than diesel fuel.Those buses cost 7,000 each, and MTS buys about 50 new buses each year.New electric, zero-emission buses will cost about 2,000 each.Replacing the entire fleet with electric buses will cost 7.5 million more than CNG buses."The technology is relatively new, the costs are high right now," says MTS Spokesperson Rob Schupp. "I think CARB is looking into the future. As we encourage more and more manufacturers to build these buses, the costs will come down."San Diego MTS is already putting six electric buses in their fleet this summer as part of a pilot program.They'll use those to test how the electric buses operate across several terrains and distances in San Diego.They also received a grant to help buy 11 more for a South Bay Bus Rapid Transit line that will open in 3 years.Beyond that, MTS says they may use a combination of state funding, grants and possibly rate increases to pay for the new electric buses.Schupp says the state has plans to chip in about 0,000 per bus.The cost of new buses isn't the only concern about going electric.MTS says they need to look into how much electricity will cost compared to natural gas.They also may need to build and install charging stations around town, because the buses may not be able to go as far as they would using gas.Despite all that, Schupp says the MTS Board fully supports the change. 1812