哪里治幻幻症南昌市-【南昌市第十二医院精神科】,南昌市第十二医院精神科,南昌哪里的医院精神官能好,南昌癫痫怎样恢复的快,南昌治疗精神比较好的医院,南昌失眠症好治疗吗,南昌第十二医院治疗精神科专业么靠谱么,南昌抑郁的症状怎么治疗
哪里治幻幻症南昌市南昌上哪家医院治疗神经官能,南昌第十二医院精神科医院靠谱吗贵吗,南昌去哪家医院看发狂症,治幻觉南昌那家医院技术好,南昌较大的精神医院,南昌有看听幻的医院吗,南昌治疗精神失常症的专科医院
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California's increasingly deadly and destructive wildfires have become so unpredictable that government officials should consider banning home construction in vulnerable areas, the state's top firefighter says.Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Director Ken Pimlott will leave his job Friday after 30 years with the agency. In an interview with The Associated Press, he said government and citizens must act differently to protect lives and property from fires that now routinely threaten large populations.That may mean rethinking subdivisions in thickly forested mountainous areas or homes along Southern California canyons lined with tinder-dry chaparral. Los Angeles County supervisors on Tuesday were considering whether to allow a 19,000-home development in fire-prone mountains amid heavy criticism of the location's high fire danger.California residents should also train themselves to respond more quickly to warnings and make preparations to shelter in place if they can't outrun the flames, Pimlott said.Communities in fire zones need to harden key buildings with fireproof construction similar to the way cities prepare for earthquakes, hurricanes or tornadoes, and should prepare commercial or public buildings to withstand fires with the expectation hundreds may shelter there as they did in makeshift fashion when flames last month largely destroyed the Sierra Nevada foothills city of Paradise in Northern California.California already has the nation's most robust building requirement programs for new homes in fire-prone areas, but recent fire seasons underscore more is needed. Officials must consider prohibiting construction in particularly vulnerable areas, said Pimlott, who has led the agency through the last eight years under termed-out Gov. Jerry Brown.He said it's uncertain if those decisions should be made by local land managers or at the state level as legislative leaders have suggested. But Pimlott said "we owe it" to homeowners, firefighters and communities "so that they don't have to keep going through what we're going through.""We've got to continue to raise the bar on what we're doing and local land-use planning decisions have to be part of that discussion," he said.California's population has doubled since 1970 to nearly 40 million, pushing urban sprawl into mountain subdivisions, areas home to fast-burning grasslands and along scenic canyons and ridgetops that are susceptible to fires. After a crippling drought, the last two years have seen the worst fires in state history. November's fire in the northern California town of Paradise was the deadliest U.S. wildfire in a century, killing at least 85 people and destroying nearly 14,000 homes.A year earlier, a fire that ripped through the San Francisco Bay Area city of Santa Rosa killed 22 people and destroyed more than 5,000 homes and other structures.Every year since at least 2013, firefighters did not anticipate California's wildfires could get worse, Pimlott said. But each year the fires have increased in intensity — driven by dry fuels, an estimated 129 million drought- and bark beetle-killed trees, and climate change.In response, the state is doing more planned burning to eliminate brush and dead trees that serve as fuels for wildfires. The state will also add seven large firefighting aircraft, replace a dozen aging helicopters, provide firefighter counseling and ensure that firefighters have enough time off for medical checkups to help them manage the mental and physical stress from a fire season that now never ends.He said California leads the nation in clearing away dead trees and thinning forested areas that are crowded with trees that can fuel fires, contrary to criticism by President Donald Trump who has blamed forest mismanagement for the fires."No other state, or even the federal government, are putting the amount of investment into this space as California," Pimlott said.The department's philosophy for many years has been to stamp out fires quickly to protect people and property. Prescribed burns were previously used sparingly out of concern they could get out of control, but he said the department is making "a sea change" by recognizing that starting fires under optimum conditions is a good way to reduce dangerous fuels.Recent fires that have burned into cities have made clear that those protections need to be centered around vulnerable communities, he said. Paradise, for example, was built on a ridge atop steep canyons that helped channel the wind-driven fire, while wildfires have repeated blown into Northern and Southern California subdivisions from neighboring wildlands thick with tinder-dry fuel.Pimlott rose through the ranks from seasonal firefighter to deputy director of fire protection before his appointment as chief of the agency. In that role he doubles as the state's chief forester and oversees a department that includes nearly 8,000 firefighters, forest managers and support staff.He said he has seen fire conditions worsen each passing year during his three decades with the agency, taking its toll on residents and firefighters alike."Folks can say what they want to say, but firefighters are living climate change. It's staring them in the face every day," he said.To adapt, he advocates wildfire warning systems that not only use new technology like automated phone calling systems, but maybe restoring civil defense-style emergency sirens in some areas. City planners must prepare communities "unlike we ever have before" with easy evacuation routes and new evacuation centers.And he said Californians must treat "red flag" extreme fire danger warnings the way Midwesterners treat tornado warnings — as imminent threats."The reality of it is, California has a fire-prone climate and it will continue to burn," he said. "Fire is a way of life in California and we have to learn how to live with it, we have to learn how to have more resilient communities." 5973
RIVERSIDE, Calif. (KGTV) - An elementary school in Riverside was evacuated Tuesday after reports of a parent barricaded in a classroom.Police say the 70-year-old teacher being held inside the classroom was rescued and taken to the hospital to be checked out. According to police, the suspect was injured during an officer-involved shooting and was taken to the hospital. Police have an update in a press conference following the incident:??????? KABC in Los Angeles reported the incident happened at about 11 a.m. at Castle View Elementary School. 575
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — The California Assembly voted Thursday to cap the interest lenders may charge on loans that can carry rates spiraling into the triple digits.Backed by civil rights groups, religious organizations and some trade associations, the proposed law would cap annual rates at around 38% for loans between ,500 and ,000.The bill comes as legislators across the country seek to reign in a storefront lending industry critics accuse of preying on low-income consumers in need of cash and trapping them under mounds of debt for years.But even as the bill advanced, some California lawmakers expressed concern that it will limit choices for consumers with bad credit or little access to banks and other financial products. And the lending industry, which wields significant influence in legislatures as well as in Washington, has launched an advertising campaign in California attacking the bill as it heads to the state Senate, where observers expect a tougher fight.Proponents of capping interest rates point to an explosion in high-interest consumer loans around the state over the last decade.The state already caps interest rates on consumer loans under ,500 but not for amounts over that threshold. In 2009, 8,468 loans for amounts between ,500 and ,000 came with interest rates over 100%, according to data from state regulators. Lenders now issue more than 350,000 loans each year with interest rates in the triple digits. A legislative analysis said at least one out of three borrowers is unable to pay their loans.But proposals to cap interest rates in recent years have faltered at California's Legislature. Several lawmakers still expressed concern about the latest proposal, suggesting it could drive lenders out of the market, pushing consumers with low incomes toward unregulated lenders or cutting off their easy access to capital."Without these alternative financial service providers, those folks would have nowhere else to go," said Democratic Assemblywoman Sydney Kamlager-Dove of Los Angeles.Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon dismissed arguments the bill would ultimately harm low-income residents."Those are merely talking points of an industry that has repeatedly lied to members of this chamber," he said.Casting the bill as a moral issue, the Democrat said the legislation can be considered as important as any other lawmakers will vote on this year in the country's most populous state.The bill ended up passing with bipartisan support as one Republican legislator cited religious prohibitions on usury."I'm a free-market capitalist and I'm unashamed of it but we need to stand up and protect people who are being preyed upon," said Assemblyman Jordan Cunningham of San Luis Obispo.The support of the financial industry this year, too, may also signal that the sector foresees a reckoning in the state or at least further political uncertainty if lawmakers do not approve limits for loans between ,500 and ,000.The California Supreme Court cast a legal question mark last year over the lending industry's practices, deciding in one class action lawsuit that some interest rates can be so high as to be deemed unconscionable under financial laws.Democratic Assemblywoman Monique Limon of Santa Barbara, the bill's author, also suggested that an interest rate cap could end up on the ballot if the Legislature does not act.If passed, California would join 38 states and the District of Columbia in capping interest rates for these types of loans, according to a legislative analysis. The level proposed in California would be on the higher end.Observers expect a bigger political fight when the bill heads to the state Senate, however.Opponents of the bill have launched an advertising campaign aimed at stopping it.The trade group Online Lenders Alliance has bought ads on Sacramento television stations, according to Federal Communication Commission filings.A group calling itself Don't Lock Me Out California has also bought online ads attacking the bill. 4018
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California lawmakers are trying again to tamp down rising housing costs by expanding rent control and stopping rental price gouging, warning a failure to act this year could result in another costly ballot measure in 2020."Our Legislature has failed to act to address the plight of struggling tenants," Democratic Assemblyman David Chiu said. "That has to change in 2019."California lacks enough homes to shelter its nearly 40 million people, a situation that drives up the costs of homes and rental units. The federal government considers someone "rent burdened" if they spend more than a third of their income on rent. More than half of California renters meet that threshold.At the center of the debate is a 1995 law that bans rent control on apartments constructed after that year and on single-family homes and condominiums.RELATED: Making It in San Diego: Rent increases sharply in San Diego, new report showsDemocratic Assemblyman Richard Bloom wants to change the law to allow rent control on apartments built more than 10 years ago as well as single family homes, with an exception for small landlords. He said those ideas are a starting point.His proposal comes after he tried unsuccessfully to repeal the law last year, prompting tenants to take the question to the ballot. Advocates on both sides spent a combined 0 million, with the bulk coming from real estate agents in opposition.Opponents argued rent control would stifle the building of more homes. Voters ultimately rejected the ballot measure and upheld the law."It failed, but it did not end the crisis," Bloom said.RELATED: Making It in San Diego: Prevalence of fake home rental scamsAssembly Democrats argue that renters need protections now, because it will take years for the state's housing supply to increase significantly."We have got to build homes and protect tenants," Assemblywoman Buffy Wicks said.Bloom said he hopes to begin conversations with groups representing real estate agents and apartment owners to avoid another ballot fight.Sid Lakireddy, president of the California Rental Housing Association, said rent control policies do not create more affordable housing. He said his group, which represents rental housing owners, is open to discussing "real solutions.""The California Rental Housing Association supports smart and effective policies that will actually make a difference by rapidly increasing our affordable housing supply," he said in a statement.The California Apartment Association and California Realtors Association did not immediately respond to emails seeking comment.A Chiu bill would ban rent gouging, relying on consumer protection laws targeting price gouging following natural disasters or other emergencies.It would set a threshold, likely somewhere between 6 and 10 percent, above the consumer price index and say rent increases can't top that percentage. Chiu argued the cap would be high enough that landlords could still take in profits.Oregon recently passed a similar law.Two other bills would create a rental registry to help the state gather data on rent increases and prevent landlords from evicting people if they can't prove a cause.Several renters joined the lawmakers to talk about their own experiences with rent spikes.Stasha Powell of Redwood City brought a letter from her landlord saying her rent would be increased from ,040 a month to ,500 a month in several increments.Newsom said he wants lawmakers to bring him a package of bills to address skyrocketing rents."We need new rules to stabilize neighborhoods and prevent evictions, without putting small landlords out of business," he said during his February State of the State. "Get me a good package on rent stability this year and I will sign it." 3776
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California lawmakers sent the governor a bill Wednesday that would give new wage and benefit protections to workers at so-called gig economy companies such as Uber and Lyft where people pick up jobs on their own schedule.The 56-15 Assembly vote marked a victory for labor unions and a defeat for tech companies that vehemently oppose the proposal.Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom has already said he supports it.If signed, the proposal could have national implications as politicians and businesses confront the changing nature of work in the so-called gig economy.In a rare injection of presidential politics into a state issue, most of the major Democratic presidential contenders urged California lawmakers to pass the bill and have championed similar proposals in their campaigns."This isn't perfect, but I think this goes a long way to protecting workers, legitimate small businesses, legitimate businesses that play by the rules, and we as taxpayers that have to clean up the mess when these businesses don't provide enough for their workers," said the author of the bill, Democratic Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, her voice shaking with emotion Wednesday.Newsom is committed to continuing talks on other refinements even after he signs the bill, said governor's spokesman Nathan Click,The state Senate passed the measure with a 29-11 vote late Tuesday over strident Republican opposition.The bill has drawn staunch opposition from on-demand delivery and ridesharing companies that say it will effectively kill their business model.Drivers are divided on the issue.By picking which industries can use independent contractors and which workers must be treated as employees, "we are playing a political Russian roulette with their lives, their livelihood and their labor," said Republican Assemblyman Jim Patterson of Fresno.The bill would put into law a California Supreme Court decision making it harder for companies to classify workers as independent contractors and instead would make them classify the workers as employees.While its impact on gig economy companies has drawn most of the attention, it would affect a wide array of industries."Today these so-called gig companies present themselves as the so-called innovative future of tomorrow," Democratic Sen. Marie Elena Durazo of Los Angeles said as she presented the bill in the Assembly late Tuesday. "Let's be clear. There is nothing innovative about underpaying someone for their labor."The law lays out a test to decide if workers can be labeled as contractors. They worker must be free from control of the company, perform work "outside the usual course of the hiring entity's business," and be engaged in an independently established trade, occupation or business of the same nature of the work they are performing.Uber, Lyft and meal delivery companies such as Doordash and Postmates still hope Newsom can negotiate a new proposal with unions that would create a separate set of rules for gig workers.They have proposed a base hourly for workers, paying into a fund for benefits including accident coverage and allow for "sectoral bargaining," where workers across the industry could organize. Several of the companies have threatened to spend million on a ballot measure next year if they do not get their way.They've argued that making their workers employees would limit workers' abilities to work flexible hours of their choosing.Gonzalez says nothing in the law forces the companies to eliminate worker flexibility. As employees, the workers would be entitled to minimum wage and benefits such as workers compensation, unemployment insurance and paid leave.Federal law still considers gig workers independent contractors, so it's unclear if a state law making them employees would allow workers to unionize.Sen. Mike Morrell of Rancho Cucamonga was among Republican opponents of the bill, many of whom told emotional stories of their own entrepreneurial success."This is just another assault on the free market, and again, it is a slouch toward socialism when government controls what business does," Morrell said. 4125