[CRNMC] Fwd: what's our next best move

edward Oberweiser edoberweiser at gmail.com
Mon Dec 22 14:32:15 PST 2014 

I don't think preparing for a possible situation is being negative. No
I don't expect anything but we can certainly be prepared in case
something negative happens. I think it would be far more negative to
go in as if everything is going to go the way we want and not be
prepared to deal with a negative situation. We need to get this
fracking ban/community rights measure enforceable and encoded into
Mendocino County law asap. The frackers are drooling over California.

Ed

On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Kelly Larson <solarkelly at gmail.com> wrote:
> I feel that this thread is making a problem where we don't have one yet.  I
> understand that many have their fears, but why project that S won't be
> codified into law?  Why not simply work that it is codified?  I feel that
> proactive activity is more effective in our main goal than this line of
> reasoning.  The point is to have more political power in the citizens - what
> better way than to help implement the law we passed?  That would be positive
> and powerful!
>
> Who would like to be on the committee to help the county implement the law?
> Who do we have that is sharp on the legal part, able to work well with
> others, has the time, etc.  What are the desired qualifications?
>
> I see this as a choice.  We can talk and talk about what might happen, and
> even let our fears race to a disaster, or we can use that same energy to
> revel in our accomplishment and work toward the future we want to see.
>
> Blessings,
> Kelly
>
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 12:59 AM, edward Oberweiser <edoberweiser at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> Charles is studying law right now and I think we need to have his advice
>> on this and perhaps he knows someone with more law knowledge who can help
>> us. A friend of mine who visited me today from Santa Cruz County suggested
>> the threat of a lawsuit. The supervisors and all their staff are our
>> employees. It's interesting what Ben Price of CELDF had to say about this.
>> That the supes cannot thwart the will of the 'We didn't pass Measure S with
>> only 60% of the vote. It was actually more. Here is the official vote count
>> after the election. Yes 69.52 No 30.48.
>>
>> I like Ben Price's idea of publicizing any reluctance by the county
>> supervisors and their staff trying to override the will of we the people. I
>> also like the idea of forming an enactment committee. It sounds like Agnes'
>> idea of talking to 2 supervisors at a time is illegal under the Brown Act. I
>> have heard from Dan Hamburg that with the current board, there are only two
>> positive votes for banning fracking in Mendocino County. However, Pinches is
>> retiring and maybe we will get a more sympathetic supervisor in his place.
>> However,  I also feel that we must not take the attitude of asking the
>> supervisors to encode all of Measure S. We must demand that they accede to
>> the will of 70 percent of the voters.
>>
>> Ed
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Shannon Biggs
>> <shannon at movementrights.org> wrote:
>> From Ben Price. I will be hard to reach between now and the 27th, around
>> yes, but busy and slow to respond. happy holidays.
>>
>> Shannon
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Shannon Biggs
>> <shannon at movementrights.org> wrote:
>> From Ben Price. I will be hard to reach between now and the 27th, around
>> yes, but busy and slow to respond. happy holidays.
>>
>> Shannon
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 11:00 PM, Kelly Larson <solarkelly at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Lanny,
>>>
>>> I also like your idea.  I think that it is very important for those who
>>> speak for S really know their stuff, (legally).  I don't count myself among
>>> them, but support those I know are sharp on the legal side.  There is lots
>>> of possible mis-understanding that can happen at this point, and I am for
>>> collaboration, rather than a couple of folks acting on their own.  We are
>>> stronger together than alone!
>>>
>>> Blessings,
>>> Kelly
>>>
>>> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Lanny Cotler <lcotler at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> What we DON'T want is random people speaking for Measure S, talking to
>>>> supervisors or interpreting the Constitution on their own, or deciding the
>>>> best course of action to take at this time.
>>>>
>>>> Isn't this a good job to give to a special committee of proponents?
>>>>
>>>> How to create a committee like this democratically? I suggest we put
>>>> together a list of interested people. Then the entire group (we should know
>>>> who constitutes this larger group) votes for six, or seven, or however many
>>>> we want on that committee. Call it the Enactment Committee. That committee
>>>> keeps a record of its activity and shares it with the "larger group" in a
>>>> timely fashion.
>>>>
>>>> Sound reasonable?
>>>>
>>>> Lanny
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 21, 2014, at 1:11 PM, agnes at mcn.org wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > As Dan Hamburg said we need to meet with supervisors, two at a time in
>>>> > a
>>>> > home, and tell them we want them to urge the County Cousel to codify
>>>> > Measure "S" in its entirety.Ask them if they will vote on such an
>>>> > agendized item to that effect. Then meet privately with 2 more
>>>> > supervisors
>>>> > telling them the same.If we have 3 solid yeahs then it should become
>>>> > an
>>>> > agenda item to be voted on by the whole board.
>>>> > That's my experience,you can check with Dan Hamburg or your
>>>> > supervisor.
>>>> >
>>>> > Agnes
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >> From Ben Price. I will be hard to reach between now and the 27th,
>>>> >> around
>>>> >> yes, but busy and slow to respond. happy holidays.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Shannon
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Sent from my iPhone
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Begin forwarded message:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> From: Ben Price <benprice at celdf.org>
>>>> >>> Date: December 21, 2014, 10:16:27 AM PST
>>>> >>> To: Shannon Biggs <shannon at movementrights.org>
>>>> >>> Cc: Elaine and Ed <elained at mcn.org>
>>>> >>> Subject: Re: what's our next best move
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> I would have the community group get busy pushing back publicly: if
>>>> >>> the
>>>> >>> county thinks it can pocket-veto the vote of 60% of the people, the
>>>> >>> people can veto the supervisors through the ballot box, and can
>>>> >>> enforce
>>>> >>> the ordinance as per its language. The formality of placing the duly
>>>> >>> enacted laws of the county into the code is not discretionary, and
>>>> >>> if
>>>> >>> the county supervisors think they can disrespect the democratic
>>>> >>> rights
>>>> >>> of the people by not doing their jobs, they can be replaced. The
>>>> >>> supervisors can not choose which laws to obey as a way of claiming
>>>> >>> that
>>>> >>> the people's law is not authorized.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Not certain what recall options there may or may not be.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Shannon Biggs
>>>> >>> <shannon at movementrights.org> wrote:
>>>> >>>> Hi Ed,
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> I will respond to this in more detail, but your ordinance I believe
>>>> >>>> (most of ours do) allows for citizen enforcement which means you as
>>>> >>>> a
>>>> >>>> group can force the county to enforce the law.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Best,
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Shannon
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> On Dec 19, 2014, at 8:23 AM, Elaine and Ed <elained at mcn.org> wrote:
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>> Hi Shannon,
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> My education in the corruption of US and local governments
>>>> >>>>> continues.
>>>> >>>>> I received this disturbing news from Baile.
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> We have all helped to manifest Measure "S".  At the same time, it
>>>> >>>>> has
>>>> >>>>> no real teeth of enforcement until such time as it is written into
>>>> >>>>> the
>>>> >>>>> enforcement codes of Mendocino County.  This process takes place
>>>> >>>>> through the office of the county counsel.  The county counsel can
>>>> >>>>> choose to refrain from writing into the codes of law in the county
>>>> >>>>> any
>>>> >>>>> part of Measure "S" that the county counsel deems to be unlawful.
>>>> >>>>> Since the State of California presently does not ban fracking and
>>>> >>>>> has
>>>> >>>>> passed legislation clearly stating that the right to frack is
>>>> >>>>> solely
>>>> >>>>> determined by the State, than the county counsel could make the
>>>> >>>>> decision that no part of Measure "S" can legally be written into
>>>> >>>>> the
>>>> >>>>> county enforcement codes.
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> Norman has urged us to get busy contacting and lobbying our
>>>> >>>>> respective
>>>> >>>>> Supervisors in order to educate them and persuade them to direct
>>>> >>>>> the
>>>> >>>>> county counsel to "codify" all parts of Measure "S."
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> What options do we have to make sure the will of the people is
>>>> >>>>> carried
>>>> >>>>> out by the county supervisors now? I know from my limited
>>>> >>>>> experience
>>>> >>>>> here that it will be extremely hard "  to get busy contacting and
>>>> >>>>> lobbying our respective Supervisors in order to educate them and
>>>> >>>>> persuade them to direct the county counsel to "codify" all parts
>>>> >>>>> of
>>>> >>>>> Measure "S." What other options, if any are open to us at this
>>>> >>>>> point
>>>> >>>>> in time?
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> Thanks for any help or suggestions you can give us
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> Ed Oberweiser
>>>> >>>
>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>> >> 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
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> crn mailing list
> crn at lists.mcn.org
> http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/options/crn
>

More information about the crn mailing list