昆明妇科医院哪比较好昆明顺产多少钱 台俪,昆明流产的费用费用,昆明哪家医院的妇科比较好,昆明人流很好医院,昆明哪里医院可以做人流,在昆明做人流大概花多少钱,昆明流产那家医院做的好

SAN DIEGO (KTGV) - The City of San Diego could be looking at spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to figure out what to do next with a vacant city-owned building in the downtown area.A letter obtained by 10News shows the city is looking into proposals for additional services regarding the building at 101 Ash St.The Aug. 14 letter to the deputy director of architectural engineering and parks division outlined a proposal with costs for services estimated at 2,000."I think this is a ridiculous waste of money," said Council President Pro Tem Barbara Bry. "What I proposed on Aug. 6 at the council meeting is still what I think the city should be doing, and that is to get into a room and negotiate with all the parties that have a financial interest."The downtown building at 101 Ash St. has been sitting vacant for most of the last four years, and as it continues to sit empty, taxpayers are footing the ,000 per day bill. As 10News previously reported, in 2016 the city approved a lease-to-own agreement for the building, valued at million.The idea was to move upward of 1,100 city employees into the facility. But officials quickly discovered a series of problems requiring major renovations to the site's 19 floors. In December 2019, the city finally began moving workers into the building, only to vacate them a month later when the county found traces of asbestos.This month, City Council leaders voted 5-4 — with Council Members Vivian Moreno, Monica Montgomery, Barbara Bry, and Georgette Gómez voting in opposition — to request monthly updates on the building's status and costs for several options presented by Mayor Kevin Faulconer's office.According to the latest proposal letter, "The City has requested Kitchell to identify potential cost and schedule savings through further studies and investigations. Kitchell has added Jackson and Blanc Power Systems Testing to our team to perform diagnostic testing of the HVAC and Electrical systems to establish a baseline of operation. Upon completion of the diagnostic testing, Kitchell will develop four options for improving 101 Ash Street."The letter outlined several options that would eventually be presented to the city if leaders went with the proposal, including bare requirements to reoccupy the building, fire/life/safety recommendations, and potentially demolishing and replacing the existing building.The mayor's options for this building have included putting millions of dollars more into the building for the needed repairs, buying out the lease, pursuing a new landlord, trying to renegotiate its lease, or walking away entirely, the last of which could risk litigation and credit damage.When asked about the proposal letter obtained by ABC 10News, the mayor's office responded that the city's Communication Department provided information.A spokesperson for the city told ABC 10News, "Many documents, including this letter, may not be final. It appears you have documents that are not final and should not be treated as such."In an emailed response to questions, the spokesperson said, "The letter sent to Elif Cetin was a proposal, and anything within it should be considered draft and negotiable, including the fees, scope of work, etc. That is a proposed figure from the consultant and is still subject to negotiation."When asked about what type of consultations the city looking for and if Is there’s an approved dollar amount the city is looking to spend a city spokesperson also noted, "The City is pursuing all legal and financial options to protect taxpayers, recoup costs, hold accountable the contractors who worsened the building's condition, and implement new levels of accountability. The City is building and working with a multidisciplinary team of outside legal and real estate experts to achieve these goals. These plans were presented to the City Council at a public hearing on August 6, and the Council voted to continue to receive updates, which staff will provide." 3985

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) - An open letter to the World Health Organization titled “It is Time to Address Airborne Transmission of COVID-19” is signed by 239 scientists from 32 different countries and highlights the importance of acknowledging and protecting the public against the possibility that coronavirus can be spread through the air. One San Diego scientist who signed is from the UCSD Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Doctor Kim Prather.The idea shared is that COVID-19 can be spread from aerosols, which are particles that float in the air rather than dropping to the ground like a droplet. An infected person breathes out aerosols that are suspended in the air, then another person walks through that air and breathes it in.It’s no secret that heath officials have discussed the importance of good airflow to stop the spread, but this paper says leaders like the WHO are not recognizing the possibility that it is airborne and the “lack of clear recommendations on the control measures against the airborne virus will have significant consequences: people may think that they are fully protected by adhering to the current recommendations, but in fact, additional airborne interventions are needed for further reduction of infection risk.”Researchers say wearing masks and social distancing are important steps to stopping the spread, but want to also emphasize that other steps need to be taken to stop the spread through the air. Some steps for public places include getting better ventilation and decreases crowds. At home, people can open doors and windows and also use air purifiers to help. 1618

SAN DIEGO, Calif. – When college students were forced out of dorms, some without family or a permanent home didn’t have anywhere to go.Young people who are too old for the foster care system have been some of the hardest hit by COVID-19. Researchers with the Field Center for Children’s Policy found they've been severely impacted by the unemployment, education disruption, homelessness, and food insecurity brought on by the pandemic.“Once I turned 21, because I emancipated from foster care, there weren’t any housing resources for me available. It was kind of, you’re on your own," said Jackie Robles. During the shutdown, Robles was transitioning into graduate school at UCLA.“There was a lot of confusion with dorms shutting down, sororities and fraternities pretty much dismantled. And then also on-campus jobs and part-time jobs, those were all being laid off or non-existent," said Gianna Mulkay.Mulkay is Executive Director of Together We Rise, a nonprofit dedicated to helping foster children. When COVID-19 hit, they moved quickly to support former foster youth in college, calling on volunteers to open their homes, working with hotels to secure rooms, and even purchasing RVs for students.“Before you know it, we were serving 1,200 students, with not just longer-term housing, but making sure they had meal assistance, making sure they stayed enrolled," said Mulkay. Through the rapid response effort, Robles received money for food and rent before landing in a housing program for the homeless.“We’re very nervous about the continued close-downs and what that means for housing for foster youth," said Mulkay. It’s a system that was already in crisis, Mulkay says, noting some of the dismal statistics.Among them: 80% of the prison population has experienced the foster care system, 70% of foster youth go homeless within 18 months of aging out of the system, and 70% of young women in the foster care system will become pregnant by age 21. Mulkay says there's also a huge disparity in education, only 50% of foster youth graduate high school, and just 3% graduate college.“Foster community is hit, and it’s hit hard. We don’t think it will ever be the same again," said Mulkay. But the rapid response effort is showing results; 100% of students who received help re-enrolled for college this fall. They now have funding to provide this critical lifeline to youth in 14 states.“This is definitely way more direct, way more in the trenches of discovering the real issues," said Mulkay. You can help provide emergency assistance for college youth by donating to Together We Rise.The nonprofit also has a holiday wishlist for current foster children. 2669

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) In light of the death of George Floyd in Minnesota, the Racial Justice Coalition of San Diego is calling for a ban on all neck restraints used by law enforcement officers."They are inhumane, they are improper," said Yusef Miller with the coalition.Miller has called on San Diegans to write to local leaders demanding a ban on any neck restraints still used by officers.It's called the I can't breathe campaign."Whether kneeling on a neck, which is unconscionable or putting them in a carotid restraint, we're saying to ban all those restraints," he explained.Under the San Diego Police Department's use of force policy, carotid restraints are approved.Officers are not allowed to use their knees.A chokehold cuts off a person's air supply and can be deadly, which is banned by SDPD.The carotid restraint instead cuts off the blood supply, which can knock a person unconscious but is considered less dangerous overall."The carotid restraint becomes the chokehold in the field, and people are killed in this manner," said Miller. "We want all neck restraints banned, not only in San Diego, not only statewide, but throughout the nation."The renewed call to action comes after a video posted to social media showed an officer in Minnesota kneeling on George's Floyd's neck, an unarmed black man."He never even flinched, he never stopped for a second, he didn't take any pressure off for even one second," said Walter Cameron with the group Showing Up for Racial Justice. "It enrages me."California Assemblywoman Shirley Weber, representing the 79th District, including portions of San Diego, authored AB 392.The bill was signed into law by California Gov. Gavin Newsom last year and stated that deadly force by officers should only be used "when necessary in defense of human life.""I believe the use of restraints falls under the category of lethal force," Weber told 10News. "The various carotid restraints.""We've constantly been speaking with law enforcement, the mayor, city council, and we've had no tangible traction," said Miller.10News reached out to SDPD and the office of San Diego Mayor Faulconer but did not receive a comment on the group's request. 2184