[CRNMC] ADDING TO AGENDA on call with Thomas Linzey Wednesday at 5:30 PM

[dougmck at mcn.org]

Shannon,

I would like Thomas to spend a few minutes describing how this
Measure can be coordinated with other future measures and eventually
a county charter.  When I spoke to Ben he described that CELDF has
worked on charters as well.

If we are passing a community bill of rights, do we have to pass
another one, or add to this one later when we want to do other
things?

Doug 

----- Original Message -----
From: "Shannon Biggs" 
To:"Meg Courtney" , "Community Rights Network" 
Cc:
Sent:Mon, 25 Aug 2014 17:20:44 -0700
Subject:Re: [CRNMC] ADDING TO AGENDA on call with Thomas Linzey
Wednesday at 5:30 PM

 Re: ADDING TO AGENDA  on call with Thomas Linzey Wednesday at 5:30
PMOK – please send me the others by tomorrow, please consolidate
and send them to me together if possible. 

 On 8/25/14 5:12 PM, "Meg Courtney"  wrote:

Hello Shannon et al,

 This is clarification for the issue Huffman raised that I would like
to have on the agenda: It is called UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. 
Does the Community Rights approach open the door to other initiatives
where communities can assert THEIR rights which may NOT be "GOOD" and
may in fact be used to DISMANTLE "GOOD" existing State and Federal
Laws that now protect the environment, etc.?   

 Think: 3 STRIKES INITIATIVE (funded by the prison industry) and PROP
13 (by Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assoc. cutting taxes and leaving CA
with (for one thing) one of the most underfunded school systems in
the States)
 These sounded "good" at the time (unless you really studied up) and
yet they are really harmful.

 I struck out the Public Trust Doctrine (below) that Huffman
mentioned because you have apparently already found that it is not
viable for us. 

 I probably can't make the call unless I can get out of a previous
commitment. :-( arg.  
 Carrie will be my stand-in
 Meg

	* Single subject rule of our ordinance  (or are folks now clear on
this?) 
	* Public Trust doctrine – why it doesn’t actually protect us
(regulatory fallacy) 
	* Traditional legal pushback (and why this isn’t a legal strategy,
but an organizing framework) 

	* Community rights as supreme over fed and state does not mean
“majority rule” 

ADD: Community Rights, possible unintended consequences?

     Date:   Wednesday, August 27, 2014    
       Start Time:   5:30 PM Pacific Daylight Time    
       End Time:   6:55 PM Pacific Daylight Time   
       Participants:   20       
       Dial-in Number:   1-626-677-3000  (West Coast)
         
         Participant Access Code   927942    

 ----

      Organizer Access Code:   *4077578  (you must include
the leading star key)    
 _______________________________________________
 crn mailing list
crn at lists.mcn.org [2]
http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/options/crn [3]

 

Links:
------
[1] http://webmail.mcn.org/mcourtney1@mcn.org
[2] http://webmail.mcn.org/crn@lists.mcn.org
[3] http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/options/crn

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/crn/attachments/20140826/0d0e65bd/attachment.html