郑州眼睛多少度能做手术郑州眼睛近视激光安全吗,郑州青少年近视了怎么办,郑州做近视手术得多钱,郑州近视眼手术的最佳年龄,郑州准分子好还是飞秒好,郑州郑州哪里做飞秒手术好,郑州大学生入伍眼睛近视可以吗

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Pacific Gas & Electric's key lenders on Tuesday offered a billion plan to pull the utility out of bankruptcy and give the tarnished company a new name.The proposal filed in U.S. Bankruptcy Court would set aside up to billion of that billion to pay claims on the 2017 and 2018 wildfires caused by PG&E equipment, the Sacramento Bee reported.The plan offered by PG&E's leading bondholders would compete with an alternative that the newspaper says is being drafted by PG&E. Normally the company in bankruptcy has first crack at proposing an exit plan, but the bondholders said in a court filing that they filed their plan because PG&E has "wasted crucial time needlessly."The bondholders also want to rebrand PG&E as Golden State Power Light & Gas Company.Asked about the bondholders' plan, the utility said in a statement that it was considering all options as it navigates the bankruptcy process.The new proposal came four days after Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, floated the idea of a billion package to deal with the costs of future wildfires, paid for by ratepayers and shareholders of PG&E and the other two big electric utilities in California.Newsom's plan does not offer any cash for PG&E's existing liabilities but would revise state law to give utilities more certainty about recovering costs from ratepayers — enough stability that Newsom believes will allow PG&E to borrow the money it needs to pay existing claims, according to the Bee.The bondholders include some of the biggest investors on Wall Street, including Elliott Management, Pimco and Apollo Global Management. They have been quietly promoting a PG&E restructuring plan for weeks in conversations with legislators, Newsom's aides and others. Tuesday's court filing marks the first time they have taken the proposal public."Substantial new capital must be infused into the company," the bondholders said in their court filing.The governor's office had no immediate comment on the bondholders' proposal.Like Newsom's plan, the proposal is "ratepayer neutral" — meaning, customer rates would not go up to pay the costs of getting PG&E out of bankruptcy.But ratepayers would pay: The plan calls for a .50 monthly charge, a feature of PG&E bills since the 2001 energy crisis, to be extended for several years to help raise dollars for a wildfire insurance fund proposed by Newsom last week. That fund would help pay claims for future fires.___Information from: The Sacramento Bee, http://www.sacbee.com 2574

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- California is rolling out a voluntary smartphone tool to alert people if they spent time near someone who tests positive for the coronavirus as cases and hospitalizations soar throughout the state.Gov. Gavin Newsom announced the tool on Monday and said people can opt in to use it starting on Thursday.Officials say the CA Notify tool doesn't track people's identities or locations but uses Bluetooth wireless signals to detect when two phones are within 6 feet of each other for at least 15 minutes.Visit canotify.ca.gov for information on how CA Notify works, including how to download and install on your mobile device.Sixteen other states plus Guam and Washington, D.C. have made available the system co-created by Apple and Google. Most residents of those places aren’t using it. 819

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Athletes at California colleges could hire agents and sign endorsement deals under a bill the state Legislature sent to the governor on Wednesday, setting up a potential confrontation with the NCAA that could jeopardize the athletic futures of powerhouse programs like USC, UCLA and Stanford.Gov. Gavin Newsom has not said whether he will sign it. But the NCAA Board Of Governors is already urging him not to, sending him a letter Wednesday saying the bill "would erase the critical distinction between college and professional athletics" and would have drastic consequences for California's colleges and universities."Because it gives those schools an unfair recruiting advantage, (it) would result in them eventually being unable to compete in NCAA competitions," the letter said. "These outcomes are untenable and would negatively impact more than 24,000 California student-athletes across three divisions."Newsom has 30 days to either sign the bill, veto it or let it become law without his signature.The bill would allow student-athletes to hire agents and be paid for the use of their names, images or likenesses. It would stop California universities and the NCAA from banning athletes that take the money. If it becomes law, it would take effect Jan. 1, 2023."I'm sick of being leveraged by the NCAA on the backs of athletes who have the right to their own likeness and image, this is about fairness," Assemblywoman Sydney Kamlager-Dove, a Los Angeles Democrat, said Monday.The Senate voted 39-0 to pass the bill, which has the endorsement of NBA superstar LeBron James, who skipped college and went directly to the NBA before the league changed its rules to require players to be at least one year removed from high school before entering the draft. But the bill could impact James' 14-year-old son, who is a closely watched basketball prospect in Los Angeles.The NCAA is the governing body for college sports. But membership is voluntary. Athletes can get valuable scholarships, but the NCAA has long banned paying athletes to preserve the academic missions of colleges and universities. But college sports have since morphed into a multibillion-dollar industry, igniting a debate over the fairness of not paying the industry's most visible labor force.Earlier this year, NCAA President Mark Emmert told lawmakers that passing the bill would be premature, noting the NCAA has a committee — led by Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith and Big East Commissioner Val Ackerman — that is exploring the issue. Their report is due in October.The NCAA committee has already said it won't endorse a plan to pay athletes as if they were employees, but they could ease limits on endorsement deals for athletes. The NCAA already lets athletes accept money in some instances. Tennis players can accept up to ,000 in prize money and Olympians can accept winnings from their competitions.The bill still puts some restrictions on athletes, such as forbidding them from signing endorsement deals that conflict with their school's existing contracts.Republican Assemblyman Jim Patterson of Fresno was the only lawmaker to speak against the bill, though he did not cast a vote. He said allowing athletes to make money could make universities in rural areas less competitive because there could be fewer sponsorship opportunities in the area.But other lawmakers argued banning college athletes from being paid was a violation of their freedoms."Playing college sports should not have to come at the cost of personal liberty, dignity, self-expression or any other value this legislature is charged with protecting," said Republican Assemblyman Kevin Kiley of Rocklin. "Let's send a loud and clear message to the NCAA."But in and around California, schools and conferences believe this legislation might not be the best solution.The Pac-12, which includes Southern California, UCLA, Stanford and Cal, issued a statement Wednesday reiterating its previous stance — asking the California Legislature to delay the debate until the NCAA announces formal proposals."We all want to protect and support our student-athletes, and the Pac-12 has played a leadership role in national reforms for student-athletes over the past years," the statement said. "The question is what's the best way to continue to support our student-athletes. We think having more information and informed views will be helpful."J.D. Wicker, the athletic director at San Diego State, a Mountain West Conference member, agreed, saying "California weighing in on this complicates that.""I think the frustration for me is that they probably don't truly understand the NCAA and how we work as a governing body," Wicker said. "Again, it's schools across 50 states and it's all of us working together, whereas the state of California will only harm California schools." 4858

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom overruled a parole board's decision to free Charles Manson follower Leslie Van Houten on Monday, marking the third time a governor has stopped the release of the youngest member of Manson's murderous cult.Van Houten, 69, is still a threat, Newsom said, though she has spent nearly half a century behind bars and received reports of good behavior and testimonials about her rehabilitation."While I commend Ms. Van Houten for her efforts at rehabilitation and acknowledge her youth at the time of the crimes, I am concerned about her role in these killings and her potential for future violence," he wrote in his decision. "Ms. Van Houten was an eager participant in the killing of the LaBiancas and played a significant role."Van Houten was 19 when she and other cult members stabbed to death wealthy Los Angeles grocer Leno LaBianca and his wife, Rosemary, in August 1969. She said they carved up Leno LaBianca's body and smeared the couple's blood on the walls.The slayings came the day after other Manson followers, not including Van Houten, killed pregnant actress Sharon Tate and four others in violence that spread fear throughout Los Angeles and riveted the nation.No one who took part in the Tate-LaBianca murders has been released from prison. It was the first time Newsom rejected parole for Van Houten, while former Gov. Jerry Brown denied her release twice."Nobody wants to put their name on her release, but when they're speaking honestly or off the record, everyone wants her to go home," said Van Houten's attorney, Rich Pfeiffer.Newsom is "going to have more political aspirations that go well beyond the state of California, and he doesn't want this tagging behind him," he added. "Not a surprise. I would have been shocked if he would have said 'Go home.'"Earlier this year, Newsom reversed a parole recommendation to free Manson follower Robert Beausoleil for an unrelated murder. Beausoleil was convicted of killing musician Gary Hinman.Newsom's decision on Van Houten outlined her participation in graphic detail, noting that after the killings, she "drank chocolate milk from the LaBiancas' refrigerator" before fleeing."The gruesome crimes perpetuated by Ms. Van Houten and other Manson Family members in an attempt to incite social chaos continue to inspire fear to this day," Newsom wrote.Van Houten is still minimizing her responsibility and Manson's "violent and controlling actions," he said, and she continues to lack insight into her reasons for participating.Van Houten's lawyer said in January after her latest release recommendation that the parole board found she had taken full responsibility for her role in the killings."She chose to go with Manson," Pfeiffer said. "She chose to listen to him. And she acknowledges that."Van Houten has described a troubled childhood that led her to use drugs and hang around with outcasts. When she was 17, she and a boyfriend ran away to San Francisco during the so-called Summer of Love in 1967.She later encountered Manson while traveling the coast. Manson had holed up with his "family" at an abandoned movie ranch on the outskirts of Los Angeles when he launched a plan to spark a race war by committing a series of random, terrifying murders.Brown rejected parole for Van Houten in 2017 because he said she still blamed the cult leader too much for the murders. A Los Angeles Superior Court judge upheld Brown's decision last year, finding that Van Houten posed "an unreasonable risk of danger to society."An appeals court will decide whether to uphold or reject that ruling by the end of July."No governor's ever going to let her out," said Pfeiffer, Van Houten's attorney who's pinning his hopes on the appeals court. "They are bound by law to enforce the law independently. They have to do it whether or not it's popular with the public ... and the law is that she should be released."Manson and his followers were sentenced to death in 1971, though those punishments were commuted to life in prison after the California Supreme Court ruled capital punishment unconstitutional in 1972. Van Houten's case was overturned on appeal and she was later convicted and sentenced to seven years to life in prison.Tate's sister, Debra Tate, has routinely shown up to parole and court hearings to oppose the release of any Manson follower. Even though Van Houten didn't take part in her sister's murder, Tate said she didn't deserve release under any circumstances.Supporters of Van Houten said she had been a model prisoner who mentored dozens of inmates and helped them come to terms with their crimes.Manson died in 2017 of natural causes at a California hospital while serving a life sentence. 4729

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom overruled a parole board's decision to free Charles Manson follower Leslie Van Houten on Monday, marking the third time a governor has stopped the release of the youngest member of Manson's murderous cult.Van Houten, 69, is still a threat, Newsom said, though she has spent nearly half a century behind bars and received reports of good behavior and testimonials about her rehabilitation."While I commend Ms. Van Houten for her efforts at rehabilitation and acknowledge her youth at the time of the crimes, I am concerned about her role in these killings and her potential for future violence," he wrote in his decision. "Ms. Van Houten was an eager participant in the killing of the LaBiancas and played a significant role."Van Houten was 19 when she and other cult members stabbed to death wealthy Los Angeles grocer Leno LaBianca and his wife, Rosemary, in August 1969. She said they carved up Leno LaBianca's body and smeared the couple's blood on the walls.The slayings came the day after other Manson followers, not including Van Houten, killed pregnant actress Sharon Tate and four others in violence that spread fear throughout Los Angeles and riveted the nation.No one who took part in the Tate-LaBianca murders has been released from prison. It was the first time Newsom rejected parole for Van Houten, while former Gov. Jerry Brown denied her release twice."Nobody wants to put their name on her release, but when they're speaking honestly or off the record, everyone wants her to go home," said Van Houten's attorney, Rich Pfeiffer.Newsom is "going to have more political aspirations that go well beyond the state of California, and he doesn't want this tagging behind him," he added. "Not a surprise. I would have been shocked if he would have said 'Go home.'"Earlier this year, Newsom reversed a parole recommendation to free Manson follower Robert Beausoleil for an unrelated murder. Beausoleil was convicted of killing musician Gary Hinman.Newsom's decision on Van Houten outlined her participation in graphic detail, noting that after the killings, she "drank chocolate milk from the LaBiancas' refrigerator" before fleeing."The gruesome crimes perpetuated by Ms. Van Houten and other Manson Family members in an attempt to incite social chaos continue to inspire fear to this day," Newsom wrote.Van Houten is still minimizing her responsibility and Manson's "violent and controlling actions," he said, and she continues to lack insight into her reasons for participating.Van Houten's lawyer said in January after her latest release recommendation that the parole board found she had taken full responsibility for her role in the killings."She chose to go with Manson," Pfeiffer said. "She chose to listen to him. And she acknowledges that."Van Houten has described a troubled childhood that led her to use drugs and hang around with outcasts. When she was 17, she and a boyfriend ran away to San Francisco during the so-called Summer of Love in 1967.She later encountered Manson while traveling the coast. Manson had holed up with his "family" at an abandoned movie ranch on the outskirts of Los Angeles when he launched a plan to spark a race war by committing a series of random, terrifying murders.Brown rejected parole for Van Houten in 2017 because he said she still blamed the cult leader too much for the murders. A Los Angeles Superior Court judge upheld Brown's decision last year, finding that Van Houten posed "an unreasonable risk of danger to society."An appeals court will decide whether to uphold or reject that ruling by the end of July."No governor's ever going to let her out," said Pfeiffer, Van Houten's attorney who's pinning his hopes on the appeals court. "They are bound by law to enforce the law independently. They have to do it whether or not it's popular with the public ... and the law is that she should be released."Manson and his followers were sentenced to death in 1971, though those punishments were commuted to life in prison after the California Supreme Court ruled capital punishment unconstitutional in 1972. Van Houten's case was overturned on appeal and she was later convicted and sentenced to seven years to life in prison.Tate's sister, Debra Tate, has routinely shown up to parole and court hearings to oppose the release of any Manson follower. Even though Van Houten didn't take part in her sister's murder, Tate said she didn't deserve release under any circumstances.Supporters of Van Houten said she had been a model prisoner who mentored dozens of inmates and helped them come to terms with their crimes.Manson died in 2017 of natural causes at a California hospital while serving a life sentence. 4729