[CRNMC] Call with CELDF

[Kelly Larson]

...here is a link to the CELDF newsletter.
http://www.celdf.org/susquehanna-newsletter-summer-2014


On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 1:35 PM, karinajoy <karinacotler at gmail.com> wrote:

> I would like to encourage everyone who plans to be part of this call to
> read the CELDF newsletter BEFORE the call. I sent it with the Argument For
> Measure S. I don't want to resend it, as it is too big a file for those on
> dialup.
>
> If you want me to send it to you again, let me know. If you are on dialup,
> perhaps you can find someone who can print out a copy for you.
>
> Many of your questions will be answered in the newsletter and you will
> make better use of everyone's time on the call if you educate yourself
> better beforehand.
>
> My two cents...
> Karina
>
>
>
>
> On Aug 22, 2014, at 6:48 PM, Shannon Biggs wrote:
>
> Again to reiterate its not CELDF's position it's the rights based
> perspective held by lots of folks and organizations like Global Exchange,
> Paul Cienfuegos and the list goes on-including all the communities who have
> gone before you . It may be worthwhile for me to come up and do a democracy
> school refresher for everyone as I'm getting all the same questions from
> many of you, and it all comes back to the basics we covered there. What do
> you all think? It's not possible to answer these questions one by one and
> via email - it's too long a writing project. I would recommend you all read
> the Community Rights toolkit again, or CELDF's common sense. A lot of this
> is covered there, and we can do a 4 hour or all day training specifically
> tailored to your questions as a group. ??
>
> Blessings to all and PS it is very common for folks to drift away from the
> basic analysis and back into traditional law and thinking - it's the nature
> of the culture.
>
> Best,
> Shannon
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Aug 22, 2014, at 4:56 PM, "Carrie Durkee" <cdurkee at mcn.org> wrote:
>
> Hello
> I too would like to be on the call with CELDF.
> I have the same concerns that Meg has…and would like to understand CELDF's
> position.
> Carrie
>
> On Aug 22, 2014, at 4:29 PM, dougmck at mcn.org wrote:
>
>
> Yes,
> I contacted CELDF yesterday as I was asked to do by our point committee
> 4-6 weeks ago but did not have the time or energy to do it at that time.
> Frankly, there has been some consternation expressed by a few in our
> community about the accessability to those who wrote Measure S by those of
> us working so hard to get it passed in November.
>
> While I appreciate that CELDF is working hard on multiple issues
> throughout the country, I also understand the feelings by those who want to
> learn more about CELDF and so acted upon them yesterday to get a little
> more information about the ideas behind the legalese written into Measure S
> in order to better respond to those who have expressed these concerns.
>
> Ben was clear that their partnership with Global Exchange was such that
> communication should go through Shannon.  Nonetheless, he did spend some
> time on the phone with me to ensure that we were all on the same page.
>
> I do feel that a confrence call would be appropriate in order to further
> solidify our relationship and build trust with the organization that has
> promised legal representation should Measure S be challenged.  I would
> recemmend the confrence call be with the chosen members of the point
> committe so as to follow the protocal currently accepted by the group with
> all interested members of the CRNMC able to listen in as they wish.  If
> others, such as Meg, wish to participate as well, I have no problem with
> that personally, but do feel it should be discussed at next Thursday's
> point meeting just to make sure everyone is on the same page.  I will make
> sure this is on the agenda, as well as the idea that others should listen
> in, to see if we reach consensus.  I would not expect this to be a
> problem.  We are already planning to discuss allowing members of the CRNMC
> listen in to all point committee meetings and feel we will probably reach
> consensus on this as well.
>
> Should this be the case, we could schedual a meeting with Thomas soon
> after that.
>
> Doug
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From:
> "Meg Courtney" <mcourtney1 at mcn.org>
>
> To:
> "Community Rights Network" <crn at lists.mcn.org>
> Cc:
>
> Sent:
> Fri, 22 Aug 2014 15:10:07 -0700
> Subject:
> Re: [CRNMC] Contacting CELDF there is a wrong way and a right way
>
>
> I would like to be a part of that conversation. I think you know what my
> concerns are so you could forward them along.
> Meg
>
> On Aug 22, 2014, at 12:01 PM, Shannon Biggs wrote:
>
> >
> > Greetings all,
> >
> > Doug and others have attempted to contact Thomas Linzey. He will not
> speak with anyone that way without going through me and not one at a time.
> That goes for Ben too. :-)
> >
> > If folks want me to put together a group call with Thomas I can arrange.
> Doug if you can send me your questions ahead of time I can make this happen
> and let you all know when he's available
> >
> > Best, Shannon
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > crn mailing list
> > crn at lists.mcn.org
> > http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/options/crn
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> crn mailing list
> crn at lists.mcn.org
> http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/options/crn
>
> _______________________________________________
> crn mailing list
> crn at lists.mcn.org
> http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/options/crn
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> crn mailing list
> crn at lists.mcn.org
> http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/options/crn
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> crn mailing list
> crn at lists.mcn.org
> http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/options/crn
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/crn/attachments/20140824/d7dd30a3/attachment.html