Hasta La Gadget!

In case you missed it, on January 22nd President Obama did back-to-back interviews with three YouTube personalities (Bethany Mota, Glozell Green, and Hank Green) on livestream. Per usual, President Obama has gotten nothing but negative and skeptical feedback from the mainstream media for doing something groundbreaking and let’s face it – dope!

The focus has been more on Glozell Green’s “first wife” slip and less on her extremely powerful police brutality question. President Obama sat down with three different Americans of different backgrounds, with homegrown brands and an ever growing audience. He allowed them to ask him questions that historically only pale, stale and usually male journalists get to. Somehow this has been misconstrued as demeaning to the Commander in Chief position. I would say it’s empowering.

Rather than continue the conversation that Hank Green began on drone technology or the one that Bethany Mota brought up on rising college tuition, sources like HLN have instead opted to discuss whether this was a publicity stunt or not. From the Between Two Ferns interview with Zach Galifianakis to the YouTube live stream this past Thursday; President Obama doesn’t stray from his message. If you recall, in Obama’s interview with Galifianakis, he said point blank, “I wouldn’t be with you here today if I didn’t have something to plug.” The “plug” in this case is an attempt to give young Americans some clarity on the issues that may be troubling them (like cyber security and racial profiling) while also reaching those who may never meet an elected official in person. And the public loved it, over 3 million views and counting!

The truth is that the online audience Obama was able to speak to trust Glozell Green and Bethany Mota. They do not trust mainstream journalists. Rather than taking a look in the mirror, it is much easier to continue with what has become tiresome and played out Obama-bashing.

The bottom line is that we are living in the digital age. What world are some of these critics living in? When Obama goes on YouTube, Between Two Ferns, Reddit, etc. the response should be: “Yeah, of course he did, he is Barack Obama, and it’s 2015!”

Richard Fowler is the youngest syndicated progressive and/or African-American radio host in the United States.

Subscribe to The Richard Fowler Show on YouTube: www.Youtube.com/fowlershow
Join #FowlerNation on Facebook: www.facebook.com/RichardFowlerShow
Follow #FowlerNation on Twitter: www.twitter.com/fowlershow

Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig School in Northern Minnesota has leaky roofs, poor lighting and an exhaust system that smells like sewage. Last school year, part of the roof caved in while students were in class. The floors are uneven, and if something goes awry, some hallways are too narrow for students to evacuate safely.

And yet, over 200 Native American students call the school home.

In a call with reporters Thursday, Interior Secretary Sally Jewell highlighted the Bureau of Indian Education school as an example of one that is in dire need of resources. The call emphasized the increased investments for Native youth and education that are part of President Barack Obama’s proposed budget for the 2016 fiscal year. A large chunk of this money would be designated specifically for schools run by the Bureau of Indian Education, the federal agency that operates 183 schools on 63 reservations. However, it won’t be enough to help all the bureau’s crumbling schools.

“It’s hard not to feel sad or angry when I look at the condition of the facilities,” Jewell said of Native schools, such as Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig, that are in need of repair or replacement. “We can and we must do better for Native people.”

See photos of Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig School below.

The president’s proposed budget, which will be fully unveiled next week, includes the biggest investment in Native education since the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, with a total request of $1 billion, White House officials said on the call. The request is $150 million more than the amount in this year’s budget, and almost $60 million would go to repairing BIE schools.

Even though the president’s proposal would allocate more money to BIE schools than they received in previous years, it is unclear how much of the money would trickle down to a school such as Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig. A December report from the White House noted that 27 percent of BIE schools are more than 40 years old and over $967 million is needed to repair them. A construction priority list of BIE schools from 2004 includes buildings that still need to be replaced, and funding would go to them first. While Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig is one of 63 BIE schools classified as being in poor condition, it’s unclear whether it will make the cut. Jewell said on the call that the amount the administration requested for school construction help was “as far as we could reasonably go.”

The BIE serves only a small portion of Native youth, as over 90 percent of this population attends regular public schools. On the whole, however, BIE students tend to perform worse academically than their peers.

In early January, Crystal Redgrave, the superintendent of the Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig School, told The Huffington Post that she hopes more money is allotted to Native schools for 2016 than in years past.

“Having and allowing and knowing that students and families in these communities have such poor services not only in education but health care and housing, having Congress and representatives know this, to me, now makes them responsible,” Redgrave said at the time.

But administration officials are saying that, unlike previous administrations, Obama is focused on serving this population of students. Indeed, Obama’s recently announced initiative, Generation Indigenous, pledges to create programs that would better prepare Native students for college and careers.

“Native youth are in a state of crisis, unfortunately we have all seen that firsthand,” Education Secretary Arne Duncan said on the call. “Our native youth need and deserve dramatically better, not incrementally better.”

The photos below of Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig School were provided by John Parmeter, who is head of the school’s safety and security. Parmeter wrote the captions, but they have been edited and condensed for clarity.

Are you ready for New York City’s first comic con specifically designed for the queer community?

Geek OUT! announced this week that the organization will sponsor “FLAME CON” this summer and it will be the Big Apple’s first-ever queer-focused comic con. We initially brought you this story last November when organizers were engaged in a Kickstarter campaign in order to fund the event.

“FLAME CON” is slated to take place Saturday, June 13, 2015 at the Grand Prospect Hall in Brooklyn. According to organizers, the event will be a “one-day comics, arts, and entertainment expo showcasing creators and celebrities from all corners of LGBTQ geek fandom, including comics, video games, film, and television.”

“Geeks OUT has been serving the queer comic community for over 4 years now, and this convention represent a huge leap forward,” Joey Stern, President of Geeks OUT!, told The Huffington Post. “It’s going to be a safe space for people to let both their queer and geek desire burn bright in fun environment.”

For more information about “FLAME CON” check out the event’s Facebook page.

Why are U.S. electric utilities facing $48 billion in revenue losses? Because their 20th-century business model, built around a centralized, command-and-control electric grid, is increasingly outdated in an age when we can produce power on individual rooftops from ubiquitous sunshine and manage energy individually on ubiquitous smartphones.

If we can overcome the roadblocks being thrown up by monopoly utilities, that $48 billion can go right into the pockets of utility customers in a more democratic energy system. Read on for an explanation of how we can achieve energy democracy out of the turmoil of today’s electricity system.

A System Under Stress

The following timeline explains the changes being wrought to the U.S. electricity system in the context of its 100-year history.

There have been three waves of change crashing over the electric utility system in the past 50 years: Shock & Competition, Deregulation, and Transition. The third wave, powered by distributed renewable energy and stagnant energy demand and aided by state regulation, isn’t going to recede.

Already, The Wall Street Journal notes that the era of growing electricity sales is likely over.

Not only is demand falling, but competition from renewable energy sources is growing. In the past few years, that competition isn’t just from other large power producers, but from utility customers themselves (see the growth of “small solar” in particular (and red), representing residential and commercial installations 1 megawatt and smaller).

The $48 Billion Question for a New Business Model

Utilities haven’t given up in the face of this threat. In fact, they’re often actively fighting it while they continue to invest in the infrastructure for last century’s grid (read more in our report).

These battles are the origin of “Utility 2.0,” a business model discussion inside and outside of utilities that would allow electric companies to accommodate flat energy demand and rising customer energy production. It’s good policy, focused on shifting the principles of the electricity system to a low-carbon, flexible, and efficient one as well as shifting utility incentives to achieve these outcomes.

But Utility 2.0 will prove inadequate if it remains indifferent to the flow of energy dollars out of communities (the $48 billion question).

Already, 500,000 U.S. homes sport solar energy and it gets more affordable every year. Rooftop solar, smartphones, and widespread energy storage will give utility customers unprecedented opportunity to control their energy usage, and to capture their share of the nation’s energy dollars. A 2.0 utility business model that doesn’t accommodate this opportunity for local, equitable access to energy production and management will leave many U.S. electricity consumers deeply unsatisfied.

Energy Democracy

That’s the central point of Utility 3.0, or as we call it, energy democracy. It adds two other principles – local control and equitable access – to the low-carbon, flexible, and efficient grid of the future to make the Five Pillars of Energy Democracy. The following graphic illustrates the principles of the ideal 21st century electricity system and how the policies of the electricity system contribute to achieving those desired outcomes.

How do we get to energy democracy from where we are now? In Vermont, the state has already identified and adopted many of the key strategies and policies, from robust net metering to integrated distribution and transmission planning. They have an independent energy efficiency utility, and a feed-in tariff to encourage broader distributed renewable energy development. In New York, the state is Reforming the Energy Vision, and considering how to make an open and transparent marketplace that puts utility customers on an even footing with utilities in providing key energy services. The following graphic illustrates this concept.

Neither state has unleashed a system with real “energy democracy” yet, but they’re pursuing the right principles and structure and policy that will lead in that direction.

Will utilities survive this crashing wave of energy democracy? It depends on your definition of survive. Will they continue to profit from retaining control over the generation and transaction of power on the electricity system? Perhaps not. Could they profit from designing and deploying the infrastructure and software to make a democracy energy distribution system? Certainly. They just need a little vision.

And we’ve got one to share.

This article originally posted at ilsr.org. For timely updates, follow John Farrell on Twitter or get the Democratic Energy weekly update.

Annual performance reviews make team members and managers alike recoil with dread — and for good reason. The traditional approach to performance reviews, in which a manager gives an employee’s performance numerical ratings once a year, is at best ineffective, and at worst damaging to morale and productivity.

The Washington Post‘s Jena McGregor reported that performance reviews fail to accurately represent an employee’s performance. In fact, two-thirds of employees who receive the highest scores are not actually the highest performers in the organization. What’s more, performance reviews only increased employee performance by three to five percent.

The performance review has become more about the process and the obligation of completing one than actually providing value to employees, which makes the whole endeavor a bit ridiculous. After all, isn’t the point to help your employees grow and deliver at higher levels so both they and the organization move forward?

To place the focus back on employee and organizational growth, shift the review process to focus on a collaborative conversation between the manager and team member. You want your team member and manager to co-create a clear plan that will help the team member grow.

The process we use in my organization to co-create performance reviews is pretty simple, but incredibly effective. Here’s how it works:

1. Notify the team member about the meeting a couple weeks out minimum. You want to give them plenty of time to think about the questions so they can give real, genuine answers.
2. You and your team member should complete the same document or set of questions. Make sure the criteria you use is as objective as possible, and include space to draft 30, 60 and 90 day performance goals.
3. Have the team member go first. You want them to have the opportunity to present their strengths, where they want to improve, and where they believe their growth opportunities are before you comment.
4. Together, decide on the 30, 60 and 90 day performance goals that help both the team member and business grow.
5. Set the next appointment during the meeting. We’ve found that a 90 day cadence works best.

By holding a performance review every 90 days, you are ensuring your team members, who give you their time, strengths, energy and knowledge every day, receive enough of your time to become as successful as they possibly can. It’s an opportunity to strengthen your relationship with your team members, deliver feedback and guidance on a regular basis, and clarify performance goals and expectations so everyone knows exactly what they need to do to succeed.

Like this? Tweet it: Co-creating performance reviews with your team increases the efficiency and outcome of the review @TheCharfens via @HuffPostBiz

Alex and Cadey Charfen are the Co-Founders of the Charfen Institute.