[CRNMC] Can someone subtantiate these claims?

Thu Jun 12 15:45:30 PDT 2014

Agreed Caitlin. You all are doing amazing work.  David and I had such a
wonderful time with all of you. David became very connected to the campaign
because of meeting all of you. We are creating a new path, and the road can
be bumpy but look at the view!

On 6/12/14 12:02 PM, "Caitlin Alexander" <caitlin29 at gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> With all due respect Tim, I suspect this ordinance will pass because of us not
> in spite of us. We are, each of us in this group, independent and
> strong-minded thinkers which will naturally bring conflict, this is inevitable
> and OK. Our methods and processes are not being dictated by one person or a
> small group, everyone has a say as they feel the need, which may be less
> streamlined and efficient but is a testament to the fact that we are working
> outside of the colonized method of top-down, hierarchical systems and we are
> doing great!
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Tim Rice <tim at multitalents.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 12 Jun 2014, Shannon Biggs wrote:
>> 
>>> > Indeed that is the focus and a good reminder for all.
>> 
>> Also a reminder that *how* we go about getting this ordinance passed is
>> at least (if not more) important than getting it passed.
>> 
>> If we adopt the "just get it done" approach common in our society, and
>> use half truths and exaggerations to "sell" the ordinance, we will
>> have just modeled and legitimized the very system we are trying
>> to change. To me, having the ordinance pass going down that route, would
>> be a huge failure.
>> 
>> It's important to make sure our message can stand the scrutiny of those
>> that may not like what we are doing. And more importantly, we as a group
>> need to model what we claim to be about. The "who decides?" thing has
>> been interesting to watch in our group. A fair amount of modeling our
>> default culture. To be fair, when we got into this, we didn't know
>> what we didn't know and we naively thought we were different and could
>> get this done in the incredibly short amount of time we had for this
>> election cycle.
>> 
>> I strongly suspect this ordinance will pass in spite of us. There is
>> huge energy behind the changes we're attempting to accomplish. The question
>> is, will having the ordinance pass represent a minor temporary success
>> or a huge lasting success. That will largely depend on how willing we are
>> at looking at our colonized thinking.
>> 
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 6/12/14 8:34 AM, "Paul Lambert" <paul52jazz at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>>> > > Thanks for clarifications, Shannon. As someone who both supports CRNMC
>>>> and is
>>>> > > a member of the media, I have observed that focusing on the fracking
>>>> issue
>>>> > > (while a strong recruiting hook) is engendering? some hysteria - there
>>>> are 15
>>>> > > permits in Mendocino - that would be better directed towards the real
>>>> aim of
>>>> > > the initiative - establishing local control over the purity of water.
>>> >
>>> > If you
>>>> > > keep your focus entirely on fracking, the deeper message of local
>>>> control of
>>>> > > resources might get lost and weaken your campaign in November by
>>>> bringing in
>>>> > > outside money from Western States Petroleum Association to oppose you.
>>> >
>>> > So, I
>>>> > > urge all of you as a friend and supporter to focus on the less sexy
>>>> topic of
>>>> > > local citizen control over air and water.
>>> >
>>> > My two cents,
>>> >
>>> > Paul Lambert
>>> >
>>> > On Jun
>>>> > > 11, 2014 11:51 AM, Shannon Biggs <shannon at globalexchange.org> wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Re:
>>>> > > [CRNMC] Can someone subtantiate these claims?
>>>> > > Hi all,
>>>> > >
>>>> > > I think as a part
>>>> > > of our online culture its important to be really aware of our language,
and
>>>> > > how others will interpret our ³tone.² Email is often terrible at
>>>> delivering
>>>> > > intent, and creates a defensive posture  which I know we have been
>>>> struggling
>>>> > > with as a group. ?
>>>> > >
>>>> > > So having said that, let me share my thoughts on this
>>>> > > item, and then lets try to get to a solution needed.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Paul, my
>>>> > > understanding is that this group list is for the volunteers who are
>>>> part of
>>>> > > CRNMC ?with the goal to exchange information and keep the ball rolling,
>>>> so if
>>>> > > you feel I was asking you something journalistic, not so. I agree, we
>>>> should
>>>> > > have a base of facts that you are all comfortable with. The ³15
>>>> permits² is a
>>>> > > good fact to verify, but again ?It was mentioned by someone else at the
>>>> event
>>>> > > who lives in Mendocino. I am not the author of the stat, but I did hear
it
>>>> > > from members of the team. If whoever did say it, could send that
>>>> information
>>>> > > forward we¹d all be richer for knowing. I do trust what you all say
>>>> from the
>>>> > > podium is based on your local knowledge, so I¹m guessing that its true,
>>>> but we
>>>> > > should nail it down.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > My job is to guide you all in rights-based practices
>>>> > > taking the issue that you are concerned with  i.e. Fracking in your
>>>> county.
>>>> > > ?I do believe you should be knowledgeable on the threats locally and
>>>> > > And it
>>>> > > would be great if we all saw getting to the useful information as ³our²
>>>> job.
>>>> > > ?I brought a fracking expert  David  to speak to fracking generally
>>>> and in
>>>> > > CA, and hold a great deal of information about fracking - Please do
>>>> remember I
>>>> > > work with a ?dozen communities at a time, and cannot be an expert on
the
>>>> > > particulars of each place, though I will see what I can dig up (see
>>>> below).
>>>> > > ??My expertise is in applying what you all see as the issue to the
>>>> > > rights-based framework. ?If you have a question on rights, ask me I¹m
>>>> > > absolutely the right person for that job.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Best, Shannon
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Some
>>>> > > resources:
>>>> > > http://theava.com/archives/29538
>>>> > >
>>>> > >
>>>> > > https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2014/03/14/18752559.php
>>>> > > And while it can
>>>> > > be shown that there is no active production of conventional resources
in
>>>> > > Mendocino County, any recent exploratory well locations are
>>>> confidential. Thus
>>>> > > the potential for both horizontal or slant deviant drilling and
>>>> multiple wells
>>>> > > per pad combined with hydraulic fracturing in Mendocino County at some
>>>> point
>>>> > > in the future cannot be entirely ruled out. Technically feasible and
>>>> > > economically viable approaches may be discovered by the oil and gas
>>>> industry
>>>> > > to tap the tight-gas and shale oil potential in the Franciscan
>>>> formations, and
>>>> > > interest in production could shift from the mature oil-rich resource
>>>> areas in
>>>> > > southern California to the un-associated gas-yielding formations in the
>>>> > > northern parts of the State. ?
>>>> > >
>>>> > > ?It also cannot be ignored, that the wells
>>>> > > in Mendocino and Humboldt Counties are owned by the same Big Oil
>>>> Corporate
>>>> > > Petroleum Companies that own the lease-held agreements to production on
>>>> tracts
>>>> > > of lands in the States of Texas, Oklahoma, New York, Colorado and Kern.
>>>> > > ?Bakersfield is more like a Corporate Park in the State of Kern and
>>>> most of
>>>> > > the north coast county wells are owned by Corporations with 2
>>>> addresses, one
>>>> > > in Houston, and one in Bakersfield. Holdings in Bakersfield and
>>>> throughout the
>>>> > > Kern Oil Fields may change hands for flexible market viability and
>>>> company
>>>> > > survivability, but those same companies selling leased acres even in
>>>> other
>>>> > > Shale plays in other States, (to reduce debt load from expansion), have
>>>> held
>>>> > > onto ownerships in Northern California, and are expanding the
>>>> lease-acres.
>>>> > > Chevron, Vintage (OXY) and INNEX hold leases or own acreage in
>>>> Humboldt,
>>>> > > Mendocino, and Sonoma Counties.
>>>> > >
>>>> > >
>>>> > >
>>>> > >
>>>> > > On 6/11/14 11:12 AM, "Paul Lambert"
>>>> > > <paul52jazz at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>>> > >> Actually, Shannon it would behoove you and
>>>> > > crn members if you nailed it down.
>>>>> > >>
>>>>> > >> Leaving it to me or other journalists
>>>> > > opens you to charges of misrepresentation and trying to build up
>>>> hysteria.
>>>> > > ?Since you said it, you need to confirm it or deny it.
>>>>> > >>
>>>>> > >> Not my job.
>>>>> > >>
>>>>> > >>
>>>> > > Paul
>>>>> > >>
>>>>> > >>
>>>>> > >> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Shannon Biggs
>>>> > > <shannon at globalexchange.org> wrote:
>>>>>> > >>>
>>>>>> > >>> HI there,
>>>>>> > >>>
>>>>>> > >>> Yes David is a
>>>> > > founder of Americans Against fracking and is currently working with the
>>>> > > coalition Californians Against Fracking, of which Global Exchange and
>>>> 50 other
>>>> > > organizations are members.
>>>>>> > >>>
>>>>>> > >>> I did not claim there were 15 permits, but
>>>> > > I did hear that at one of the meetings by someone from CRNMC. Not sure
>>>> who.
>>>> > > There are some articles out there if you google search, and some folks
>>>> > > mentioned some specific articles. Be good for you all to nail down the
>>>> facts
>>>> > > and your talking points on that, as we get our information from you all
on
>>>> > > local matters.
>>>>>> > >>>
>>>>>> > >>> If you have questions for David, let me know and I can
>>>> > > ask him.
>>>>>> > >>>
>>>>>> > >>> Shannon
>>>>>> > >>>
>>>>>> > >>>
>>>>>> > >>> On 6/11/14 9:57 AM, "Paul Lambert"
>>>> > > <paul52jazz at gmail.com <http://paul52jazz@gmail.com> > wrote:
>>>>>> > >>>
>>>>>>> > >>>> I
>>>> > > believe that David Braun also stated that....btw he claimed to me to be
a
>>>> > > founder or associated with Californians against fracking but a search
>>>> of their
>>>> > > site shows no reference to him anywhere.....
>>>>>>> > >>>>
>>>>>>> > >>>>
>>>>>>> > >>>>
>>>> > > Paul
>>>>>>> > >>>>
>>>>>>> > >>>>
>>>>>>> > >>>> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 9:53 AM, edward Oberweiser
>>>> > > <edoberweiser at gmail.com <http://edoberweiser@gmail.com> > wrote:
>>>>>>>> > >>>>>
>>>>>>>> > >>>>> I
>>>> > > agree,
>>>>>>>> > >>>>>
>>>>>>>> > >>>>> This is sounding pretty flaky to me. We shouldn't claim
>>>> > > this unless we have substantial proof. Who else besides Shannon is
>>>> claiming
>>>> > > this. If there are approved permits, shouldn't we be able to get that
>>>> > > information from the county?
>>>>>>>> > >>>>>
>>>>>>>> > >>>>> Ed Oberweiser
>>>>>>>> > >>>>>
>>>>>>>> > >>>>>
>>>>>>>> > >>>>> On
>>>> > > Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 9:45 AM, Paul Lambert <paul52jazz at gmail.com
>>>> > > <http://paul52jazz@gmail.com> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>> Several time I have heard
>>>> > > Shannon Biggs and others claiming that there are 15 (?) already
>>>> approved
>>>> > > permits for fracking in Mendocino County but when I have asked her and
>>>> others,
>>>> > > the only reference I could get is to a small colored state or fed map
>>>> that
>>>> > > shows approved fracking sites, mainly in the mid-state area but whose
tip
>>>> > > seems to end in Mendocino. ?There is no attribution for the map, nor
>>>> are there
>>>> > > any details as to who issued the permits, where they are located, who
>>>> holds
>>>> > > them and what their plans are.
>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>> Can someone help because this is
>>>> > > a potentially damaging assertion which could undermine your credibility
>>>> if it
>>>> > > is not substantiated.
>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>> Paul
>>>>>> > >>>
>>>>>> > >>>
>>>>>> > >>>
>>>> > > _______________________________________________
>>>>>> > >>> 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
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>> 
>> --
>> Tim Rice ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Multitalents ? ?(707) 456-1146
>> <tel:%28707%29%20456-1146>
>> tim at multitalents.net
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20140612/55c2b0e5/attachment.html 