WE THE PEOPLE of San Juan County recognize that these rural islands are an extraordinary treasure of natural beauty and abundance, and that independence, privacy and personal freedom are values prized by islanders. Being a diverse people bound together by these shared values, we declare our commitment to work towards this vision of the San Juan Islands in 2020 A.D.The rest is pretty good too. Read it at this link, and judge for yourself whether we are living up to our common vision.
After you do that, reflect on the miserable quality of the scientific deliberations for the CAOs. Reflect on the baseless, blind ambition to invade islanders' privacy. Reflect on what the CAO restrictions will do to our sustainability, our self-reliance, our independence, and our personal freedom.
One of my favorite Facebook pages goes by the enthusiastic but somewhat improper name of "I Fucking Love Science", which is often abbreviated IFLS. I'll leave you with some of the posters and cartoons from IFLS that have particular resonance with the CAOs.
 |
| Okay, this last one is from the Economist, not IFLS. We may not be Greece exactly, but have you seen the County's debt or the growth of its expenditures while we have frittered away time on the CAOs? |
Whats this consistency thing?
ReplyDeleteId say the voters knew what they were talking about,when no one listened. if only given half a chance they would have thrown everyone in Friday harbor out on their heels. And yes we have some excellent "Public Servants" as well.
The consistency thing? Well, the Council has yet to figure that out itself, and that will be part of the discussion tomorrow. However, this whole CAO process should have begun with a review of the current CAO relative to the Comprehensive Plan and GMA in order to set the scope for the CAO updates. Our always backwards government is doing it in reverse order, however. Having come to the end of the process, they now are going to review whether our proposed CAOs are consistent with the GMA and the Comp Plan.
ReplyDeleteWill it be just an after-the-fact ex-post self-congratulatory affair on a job well done ... or will it be self-flagellation? Regardless, it's a bit late to think about consistency ... unless you are the kind of person who looks at the map only after you've arrived at your destination.
Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel.
ReplyDeleteAmbrose Bierce
Apparently The Friends are encouraging people to show up tomorrow wearing red shirts to protest the CAO as being too *weak*.
ReplyDeleteThe emails the Friends have sent out linking the issue to the anti-Coal efforts are pretty shameful.
?? Both "sides" say wear red tomorrow?
ReplyDeleteYikes, yes, both email from CSA and FOSJ website say wear red. It could be a lot of red going on tomorrow at the meeting. I think I might wear black.
ReplyDeleteMake a real statement... go nude.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I think all sides should wear Trojan Heron t-shirts, but alas, there aren't any (yet).
ReplyDeleteAs a second choice, I think it's appropriate for everyone to wear whatever the Friends say that everyone should wear.
This is beginning to remind me of the star-belly sneetches story by Theodor Seuss Geisel.
Twas the night before council,
ReplyDeleteWhen all through the town,
The citizens expressionless,
Not even a frown….
The ordinances were drafted
Actual science not a care,
The influence of the Friends,
Had come directly to bear
Our leaders were seated
High upon their throne,
This horrific legislation,
Will they come to own?
Incorrect assumptions,
Draw on a map,
Howie still sleeping,
The endless nap.
Out in the community
There arose such a clatter,
Island life for all,
The council trying to shatter
Away to the courthouse
The attorneys will dash
Motions in hand,
Endless litigation will hash.
A beacon of light
Some say Common Sense
May just prevail,
It’s our only defense.
With no surprise, usual suspects emerge
Passing this mess, appears on the verge
Is the fix in,
Most folks will wonder,
How did we arrive
At this horrific blunder?
Now Ecology
Now Friends
Now Grant Money too
On Buffum
On Loring
We are hardly through…
To the top of the court,
With our back to the wall,
We shall not tire,
We shall not fall…
In the blink of an eye,
Sanity we can restore,
Hold to principles,
This we implore….
Tomorrow is not Christmas,
But a tale will be told,
What of our Island,
As we all grow old???
That's quite brilliant! Thank you :-)
ReplyDeleteHow wonderful that poem is, will someone please read it into the public record today? It is perfect.
ReplyDeleteNow, as to the Consistency Hearings. At this juncture, no one seems to know what the consistency of the proposed CAO is. The Cowncil gets to figure that out today. But before they do, let's ponder that ...
The consistency of our proposed new CAO is ...
1) That of a cold porridge left uneaten
2) Rather like something I stepped in during a walk in the park
3) Grey goo, as in the science fiction horror of self-replicating nano bots consuming the world
4) A viscous sludge of some unmentionable offal
5) Like a wad of spaghetti hurled against the wall by a raging infant
6) The siege of some mooncalf
Rather scary to marvel that at the end of the day ... today ... this multi-year multi-million dollar mess has come to the question of whether it is actually consistent with anything.
Wish I could be there. I will be wearing red at home, at the commandment of the Friends.
Can we please, respectfully, refer to them as "the clowncil"??
ReplyDeleteThis is an excerpt from the CAPR document this morning..... I don't know how they can argue with this!
ReplyDeleteAccording to Washington’s Attorney General, “In assessing whether a regulation has exceeded substantive due process limitations and should be invalidated, the court considers three questions. First, is the regulation aimed at achieving a legitimate public purpose? There must be a public problem or “evil” that needs to be remedied for there to be a legitimate public purpose. Second, is the method used in the regulation reasonably necessary to achieve the public purpose? The regulation must tend to solve the public problem. Third, is the regulation unduly oppressive on the landowner? Failing to consider and address each of these questions may lead to a substantive due process violation.” (Attorney General’s Advisory Memorandum pg. 10, December 2006)
and a little more....
ReplyDeleteFactors to Consider in a Regulatory Takings Analysis. Regulatory action that deprives property of all value constitutes a taking of that property. Where there is less than a complete deprivation of all value, a court will evaluate whether a taking has occurred by balancing the economic impact against two other factors: (1) the extent to which the government’s action impacts legitimate and long-standing expectations about the use of the property; and (2) the character of the government’s actions — is there an important interest at stake and has the government tended to use the least intrusive means to achieve that objective?” (Attorney General’s Advisory Memorandum 2006)
Watching this afternoon's session was like watching the hangman testing the trapdoor on the gallows. First, Lovell's pathetic attempt to justify why the council should pass the CAO by the end of the year. Worse, 5 out of 6 agreeing with her, and no matter what shape it is in, it will pass by Dec 28th! Sad was the discussion about mitigation, where they admit that there is no way for a citizen to understand what they must do, and the council just doesn't care. A discussion ensued where the fact that the "Director" can ask for unlimited amounts of data, studies, experts, etc, doesn't even seem slightly out of balance. And Shirene reminds me of Scrooge before the Ghosts did their work. Not a shred of human compassion. A pure tool of the Friends and some obscure code of planners to support process over people. Well and truly screwed we are.
ReplyDeleteThank you for the report. Unfortunately, it is just as I expected, even as I hoped some responsible person would move to table all such discussion until the new council was seated and of course it would be good to hear from attorneys in the know, but once the new Council is seated and additional lawsuits are duly filed, could not the new Council in a lawsuit settlement agreement, throw the whole thing out?
ReplyDeleteShit, your report launches one into a depression. I want to say more, but I don't feel like it, cause it's such a waste of TH intellect.
ReplyDeleteOK, Buddy, this is for you:
ReplyDelete(With a big pardon from PM Churchill)
Even though large tracts of Europe and many old and famous States have fallen or may fall into the grip of the Gestapo and all the odious apparatus of Nazi rule, we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the the seas and oceans, we shall fight in every venue the DOE has discarded, we shall defend our islands whatever the costs may be. We shall fight on, the beaches, we shall fight on the landings, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, and we will fight in the hills; we will never surrender, and even if, which not for a moment we would believe, a part of our islands was subjugated and starving under the boot of the DOE, then our mighty empire from all across these many United States would rise up to defend David against Goliath until in God's time the Real World would step forth to rescue us in our wont to be left alone.
ReplyDeleteTo the County Council: Today your performance annoyed ...
Your breath first kindled the dead coal of wars
And brought in matter that should feed this fire;
And now 'tis far too huge to be blown out
With that same weak wind which enkindled it.
King John (1598) Act V, scene 2, line 83.
------------------------------------------
Cæsar's spirit, ranging for revenge,
With Até by his side come hot from hell,
Shall in these confines with a monarch's voice
Cry "Havoc," and let slip the dogs of war.
Julius Cæsar (1599), Act III, scene 1
I'm down with it, this is my home, fuck me ok
ReplyDeleteWhoa, It's likely no readers of the TH want to engage in that.
ReplyDeleteDid not Ms. Lovel, (sorry to digress, but where does a name like that come from anyway? "Love" was too blatant so an "L" was added? Maybe an uncle with a large bank account, named lou?) say she lost because she was outspent and voters were confused.
So, she is broke, dream on, and ifso facto who's gonna pay for her County wide election effort if she files by December 14th?