[CRNMC] What Ben Price of CELDF said about the supes not endoding Measure S

[Baile Oakes]

Dear Agnes et al

There has been more than one person speaking from the CRNMC that we need to consider establishing a committee to represent our sentiments to the legal channels in the county.

I believe we need to respect and explore this possibility if we wish to speak from the CRNMC.

That other matter is to establish whether our group is comfortable with individuals within our group making clear that they are not representing the CRNMC while sharing their views with county officials.

Something to consider.

with love

always

baile


On Dec 28, 2014, at 3:41 PM, agnes at mcn.org wrote:

> Ed and Baile,
>     Should we send Ben's response to Dan Hamburg?
> 
> Cheers,
> Agnes
> 
>> Sounds like it is getting back to my original email regarding Norman de
>> Vall's recomendation that we need to be proactive to assure the
>> codification of Measure "S" into county law.
>> 
>> Norman was a supervisor for a long time and I figured there was
>> justification to his concern.
>> 
>> Thoughts ?
>> 
>> with love
>> 
>> baile
>> 
>> On Dec 26, 2014, at 8:53 AM, edward Oberweiser wrote:
>> 
>>> edward Oberweiser <edoberweiser at gmail.com>
>>> 
>>> Dec 24 (2 days ago)
>>> 
>>> Hi Ben,
>>> 
>>> Here is what one of our County Board of Supervisors is telling us.
>>> 
>>> Ed Oberweiser
>>> 
>>> Hi Agnes,
>>> 
>>> I didn't mean to imply that three votes will lead to codifying Measure
>>> S.
>>> What I was saying was that three votes could codify a ban on fracking in
>>> the
>>> County.
>>> 
>>> I don't believe the broader proscriptions described in "S" can be
>>> codified
>>> since they run so directly against state and federal law.  There is also
>>> the
>>> issue of an initiative addressing more than single subject (which is
>>> apparently a flaw in the drafting of "S").
>>> 
>>> Prior to the November election, Sups. McCowen and Brown wanted to send
>>> "S"
>>> to the Superior Court to determine its constitutionality; however, a
>>> Board
>>> majority voted to allow it to go to the ballot regardless of the
>>> potential
>>> for a state and/or federal constitutional challenge.
>>> 
>>> Now that "S" has passed overwhelmingly, I would like to see the original
>>> anti-fracking measure come back to the Board.
>>> 
>>> I will talk with County Counsel to make sure I'm right about these
>>> matters.
>>> 
>>> Dan
>>> 
>>> Ben Price
>>> to Shannon, me
>>> Ed,
>>> 
>>> I think you need to arrange a conference call with Shannon Biggs - and
>>> I'll join in if it helps --  to discuss why the Supervisors don't have
>>> a legal option to pick and choose what they enter into the code. If
>>> they or another party want to challenge the legality of the community
>>> bill of rights, or any part of it, there are legal avenues to do so.
>>> They may not assume the authority of a judge and jury and in their own
>>> judgement chop up the CBoR to suit their own taste.
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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