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

[agnes at mcn.org]

We could meet at the forum near the Raw Food Store in what was formerly
Daley Complex in F.B.
What do you think?

Love,
 Agnes

> Can we consider meeting in Fort Bragg ?
>
> Mendocino is a long way from Westport.
>
> Though, I also believe it is best to meet in a location that will produce
> the lowest combined carbon footprint.
>
> hmmm ?
>
>
> On Dec 28, 2014, at 7:13 PM, Carrie Durkee wrote:
>
>> So..
>> Regarding the enactment committee..
>> I recall that there are a few of us interested and we are close to
>> setting a meeting
>> Monday, Jan 12th in Mendocino
 say 1:00
?
>> Could be at the GoodLife Cafe..
>> Those who had previously expressed interest:
>>
>> Agnes
>> Ed O.
>> Kelly
>> Carrie
>>
>> Seems like these are the folks who responded previously. Please correct
>> me if I am wrong.
>> Who else wants to join???
>> My thought is to have a few minds making strategic decisions after doing
>> some fact finding.
>> We also would be our responsibility to stay in touch with the group via
>> CRNMC list serve.
>>
>> Please respond with improvements or suggestions for a better process.
>> Carrie
>>
>>
>>
>> On Dec 28, 2014, at 7:02 PM, Baile Oakes wrote:
>>
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>