Creating The Eco Matrix

The movie The Matrix depicts a dystopian future in which reality as perceived by most humans is actually a simulated reality called "the Matrix," created by sentient machines to subdue the human population, while their bodies' heat and electrical activity are used as an energy source.

In San Juan County, our dystopian present is created by the Machine to subdue our human population using trumped-up eco-doomsaying, while grants are used as an energy source. We saw this on display today during Amy Windrope's presentation for the undead San Juan Initiative. The zombie San Juan Initiative 5-Year Review was funded by a TACT grant from the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife. We've talked about the TACT grant before. It stands for "Trouble shooting, Action planning, Course correction, and Tracking and monitoring." Under this grant, the Friends and members of our MRC reportedly worked with armed state police in boats from WDFW's Enforcement Division to map supposed shoreline violations. Sources suggest that this grant-funded activity resulted in a phonebook-sized inventory of purported violations, especially along the west side of San Juan Island, where activity was focused.

This was all supposed to come together in a neat little package. The on-the-ground mapping of the TACT/San Juan Initiative was supposed to be reinforced by Pictometry. The Conservation District would facilitate State agency enforcement (enforcement based on bias and misinterpretation). It was all arranged, and "they" just needed an obsequious, complicit County government to play along with the demands of the State agencies (WDFW, PSP, Ecology), the grant-driven whims of our non-profits/quangos (Friends, Kwiaht, Madrona Institute, Stewardship Network), the illusory subject-matter expertise of the Conservation District, and the self-interests of the tribes.

That's how homeowners get framed. That's how the Eco Matrix is created, and before you know it (see the video), we have soccer moms talking like jackbooted thugs before the Council asking, "What is the concern with armed boats?"

She understands our concern ... sure she does.

The Walking Dead Bureaucracy

Back in the heady days of 2006, the County entered into an agreement with a 501(c)(3) called Shared Strategy for Puget Sound to develop an ecosystem-based management system for the San Juan Islands. Amy Windrope was hired as Project Manager in November 2006 while a consultant named Jim Kramer ran Shared Strategy. As with most environmental initiatives around here, there was an awful lot of coordination that had to happen, paid for by a bucketload of grant money. Meetings were held; oversight committees were appointed; regulatory agencies and experts graciously devoted their time; and in the end, a report was written. Nothing actually happened to the environment, but a lot of people got paid handsomely for talking with other people about how much they love the environment.

At the end of 2009, the sun set on the San Juan Initiative. RIP ... or was it really gone?

Late last year (while she worked for the County), Linda Lyshall applied for a grant from the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife, where Amy Windrope now works. The purpose of the grant was to report on the County's progress in implementing the San Juan Initiative's work. When the grant was awarded, it became the subject of a County discussion when the then-Council found out about it after the fact.  It was covered in a story in the Island Guardian at the time:

Council Chair Patty Miller, while supportive of accepting the invitation to join in and hold a public meeting to review progress made towards implementing the Initiative’s previous recommendations, questioned who, exactly, applied for the grant in San Juan County’s name in the first place?

Miller also asked how many more grants has the County applied for, and by whom?

And just like that, the San Juan Initiative came back to life like Lazarus ... even though it's still not clear how this undead bureaucracy rose again or who constituted it. Now, after spending another $77K in grant and matching funds during its afterlife, a group calling themselves the San Juan Initiative is set to present a follow-up report to the Council on Monday. Incredibly, the list of report preparers includes Patty Miller ... the very woman who questioned how the grant came to be in the first place.

It is not clear who appointed these people. Were they appointed by the Council or did they appoint themselves?  It's not clear if they think they are the San Juan Initiative or some group following up on the San Juan Initiative.  Their letterhead says "San Juan Initiative," and the all-too-familiar list of serial participants includes:

• Jonathan White, Co-Chair
• Lovel Pratt, Co-Chair
• Lisa Byers
• Patty Miller
• Linda Lyshall
• Stephanie Buffum Field
• Peter Kilpatrick
• Tom Cowan
• Marilyn O’Connor

Were Pratt and Miller working for the San Juan Initiative (and voting to receive their own grant money) while they were on the Council? 

I guess old bureaucracies never die, they just move on to the next conflict of interest.

Linda Lyshall of the Conservation District ... and the Madrona Institute Advisory Council ... and the San Juan Initiative ... and the Stewardship Network Steering Committee ... formerly of the Puget Sound Partnership ... formerly of the Marine Resources Committee ... grant writer and resurrector of extinguished bureaucracies

Taking Stock

The election results should be certified this week. The final count is later today. With just a handful of ballots remaining, the totals as of May 1 are:

• Pratt - 3,359 to Jarman - 3,421
• Byers - 3,356 to Hughes - 3,485
• McClerren - 2,783 to Stephens - 3,701

Combining these figures with the PDC totals, fundraising-per-vote amounted to the following (with Trust Islanders fundraising spread evenly across Jarman, Hughes, and McClerren).

• Byers - $9.12 per vote
• Jarman - $7.74 per vote ($5.41 per vote without Trust Islanders)
• Pratt - $6.96 per vote
• Hughes - $5.87 per vote ($3.58 per vote without Trust Islanders)
• McClerren - $5.51 per vote ($2.68 per vote without Trust Islanders)
• Stephens - $5.24 per vote

The elections may be over, but there is still plenty of controversy in our islands. Many of our fellow citizens continue to push for greater regulation, even if they don't follow the rules themselves. Also, the Pictometry mess is raising important questions about privacy, and the Friends and their friends (e.g., Futurewise) are gearing up for battle about the Shoreline Management Plan (SMP) update.

More to come in future posts on all that ... and more.

The better approach would be to prevent construction of new homes where they will ever need armoring and then prohibit the construction of armoring for that home. Once shoreline erosion reaches the home, it must either be removed from the shore, or rebuilt further upland.

And in response to the argument that preservation of aesthetically stunning landscapes is elitist, I would argue that transferring the benefits of natural views of the shoreline from the public to wealthy, shoreline property owners is rather elitist.

For those passing by water, all the homes may be considered visual blight.
-- Stephanie Buffum (8/13/09) Executive Director, Friends of the San Juans

The Wait Is Over

The election results are in.

• Jarman 3,372 votes (50.52%) to Pratt 3,302 votes (49.58%)
• Hughes 3,440 votes (51.1%) to Byers 3,292 votes (48.9%)
• Stephens 3,640 votes (57.08%) to McClerren 2,737 votes (42.92%)

San Juan County is no stranger to recounts. If there is a recount, then the challenging party must pay $0.25 per ballot (depending on the closeness of the outcome). According to the election website, there are approximately 60 votes left to tally.

The Lopez School Bond measure, which needed 60% to pass, lost badly.

• Approved - 619 votes (42.19%)
• Rejected - 848 votes (57.81%)

And for some strange reason, Sharon Kivisto felt the urge to predict the outcome of the election just hours before the official results were in. Kivisto predicted that Pratt would defeat Jarman.

Kivisto reprised the Chicago Daily Tribune (Dewey Defeats Truman)  by predicting a win for Pratt just hours before the official results were announced.

While We're Waiting ...

The only election result that seems safe to call at this moment is the one between incumbent Jamie Stephens and Brian McClerren in the Lopez race. Looks like Stephens has won that contest.

As for the other races, Jarman leads Pratt; and Hughes leads Byers, but it's too close to make a final call. While you wait for the next count of ballots at 5pm on Wednesday, have a look at a video of the Council discussion regarding aerial photos that took place on Tuesday.

If you listen to the video, you will hear that the resolution of the proposed photos is no better than that of Google Earth? Then why doesn't the County just pay $400 for a Google Earth Pro license?

Also, other Counties aren't making the aerial photos public, even though the photos are paid for with taxpayer money? Is that revelation supposed to be a comfort ... that our County government will have aerial photos that will be kept secret from the taxpayers who paid for it? The photos are public records. How can they be kept from the public?

The more the Council talks about the aerial photos, the stranger it seems. The County is getting some of the money for the photos from Roche Harbor Resort and a realtor on Lopez ... a realtor on Lopez? What?!?

County Gone Wild - A Recap

A recent New York Times article discussed why our great nation sometimes seems to be coming apart at the seams, and I think it aptly pinpoints the state of affairs in San Juan County too:

I heard a more satisfying if somewhat depressing explanation for the seemingly random eruptions of political idiosyncrasy from Samuel Abrams, who teaches politics at Sarah Lawrence and Stanford. Abrams, who has spent the last decade or so researching our political habits, begins with the evidence that most Americans are simply not engaged in local politics, except perhaps on pocketbook issues. In the absence of public attention, motivated, well-financed and sometimes extreme elites have captured the lawmaking process in many state capitals. Legislatures are vulnerable to (and often populated by) the most ardent believers in a cause, the ones who care enough to take the time, raise the money, turn out on Election Day and lobby relentlessly.

“People who participate in state and local government tend not to be representative of the masses at all,” Abrams told me. “They tend to be highly engaged political elites — 15 percent of the population who think they’re fighting this culture war. They’ll see an opening. They’ll see a judge, they’ll see a legislature that looks amenable to something, and they’ll try to push it through and build a groundswell around that.”

This County has been run by a power clique for so long that residents have become accustomed to it as normal. It's not normal (or shouldn't be). It's not representative. It's the wrong way to live.

By Trojan Heron estimates, about 160 influential people run this County. They sit on committees; they interview candidates for office and support/endorse the ones that pass their muster; they get grants; they work inside the County and control who gets hired; they manage the non-profits; they write the letters that get published in our newspapers. In short, they run our lives while the rest of us are trying to just live our lives. If no one else in the County except these 160 people existed, you wouldn't even notice by only looking at the way our public governance and media conduct themselves.

The traditional power clique is losing its grip on the control levers here (thanks to all of you), and they are very upset about it. They are unraveling. The letters and emails they send out are often ad hominem attacks, not based on issues. Even their attempts at issues-based homilies, like Judge Darrah's opinion piece, are so turgid and bereft of relevant facts as to be meaningless (like the CAOs themselves). Elaborately worded ignorance is still just ignorance, and Judge Darrah can't seem to wrap his elevated mind around something very simple: the CAOs cannot remedy something that does not exist to begin with. These islands have not been shown to be contributing to environmental decline, so efforts to justify restrictions on the premise of protection are specious. The only environmental threats the CAOs address are the ones fabricated on paper by the tables and assertions developed by Shireene Hale and concurred by Dr. Adamus. A CAO scofflaw would be in violation of one of these tables/assertions only, not violating actual environmental protections.

The new CAOs are so confusing, anti-people, environmentally pointless, and rambling that it is nearly impossible to support them without also being a hypocrite regarding some aspect of their implementation ... because somewhere, somehow nearly everyone will be in violation of their unbridled discretion. The CAOs were designed to catch everyone. If you support them, you are undermining yourself, not just your neighbors.

The ballots are out. Already, some of you may have voted. We hope you re-read the posts on this blog and look at the links on this post before you hand in your ballot. You can help to stop the madness if you continue to participate, vote, and speak out.

Here are the latest fundraising tallies (and links to posts/videos of the candidates). It's quite clear who is independent and who is supported by the Machine. It is also gratifying to see that some candidates have noticeably changed their message during this campaign in response to citizen feedback. That just shows that we can have an effect if we all stay engaged.

• Byers - $28,871
• Pratt - $22,516
• Stephens - $19,299
• Jarman - $14,173
• Hughes - $10,468
• McClerren - $5,900

(Note: Trust Islanders has raised $14,125 and has unilaterally endorsed Jarman, Hughes, and McClerren.  However, there is no coordination with their campaigns.)

Byers And Brickworks?

The Trojan Heron is confused. The advertisement below has appeared in the Journal and related papers, and it shows Byers standing in front of the Brickworks and smiling with select contractors.

But Byers doesn't have anything to do with the Brickworks or the Agricultural Guild, does she? Not her too?!? The Ag Guild already had a mess on its hands back in 2010 when Lovel Pratt served simultaneously as Ag Guild Project Director and County Council woman. Now, a Council wannabe is talking about her experience with $20 million in construction projects and standing in front of the Brickworks, one of the most recognizable construction projects in the county.

If Byers or the Ag Guild have anything to do with one another, they should explain their relationship; otherwise, what is this advertisement saying?

Also, we'd like to know how many contractors, beyond the hand-picked OPAL few, really intend to support Byers. Aside from being environmentally pointless, the CAOs are some of the most anti-affordable-housing, anti-business, anti-people, anti-middle-class laws to ever hit our books. That's the feedback we consistently hear from contractors and realtors, especially those who have attended the head-shaking CAO training put on by the County.

Byers supports the revamped version of the CAOs. Do contractors really support her, or is this just a bad April Fools joke?

Ordinary People After Lisa -- OPAL?

The OPAL Community Land Trust is the affordable housing 501(c)(3) run by County Council candidate Lisa Byers from Orcas Island. Some OPAL homeowners have complaints about substandard materials being used in their homes. Allegedly, nine OPAL homes were built using non-structural exterior siding, contrary to design specifications. Complaints stretch back years regarding this issue.

These OPAL owners want their story told, and it appears as if their story is backed by a substantial amount of documentation. Below is the story of these OPAL homes in the words of one of the owners, Roger Adams (click to enlarge any of the 11 pages, or right-click to download).

According to Adams, of the nine homes with alleged off-spec non-structural siding, only one has been repaired ... the home belonging to Lisa Byers.
________________________________________________________________

You Have Two Cows

A friend sent me a fun summary of "isms" which typically start with "You have two cows." I have posted the list below, and I've tacked on my own entry for "San Juan County-ism" for the way things seem to work around here. Feel free to add on, concur, disagree, or comment.

But before you do that, have a look at the latest election fundraising totals from the Washington State PDC, with candidate tallies listed in descending order.

1. Lisa Byers - $26,971
2. Lovel Pratt - $21,807
3. Jamie Stephens - $18,824
4. Rick Hughes - $8,768
5. Bob Jarman - $8,234
6. Brian McClerren - $4,050

The grand total is $88,654, with over 76% going to the party-affiliated candidates. Individually, Byers and Pratt have raised more money than the bottom three non-affiliated candidates combined (Hughes, Jarman, and McClerren together have raised $21,052).
___________________________________________________________

SOCIALISM
You have 2 cows.
You give one to your neighbour

COMMUNISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both and gives you some milk

FASCISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both and sells you some milk

NAZISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both and shoots you

BUREAUCRATISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both, shoots one, milks the other, and then throws the milk away

TRADITIONAL CAPITALISM
You have two cows.
You sell one and buy a bull.
Your herd multiplies, and the economy grows.
You sell them and retire on the income

ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND (VENTURE) CAPITALISM
You have two cows.
You sell three of them to your publicly listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute a debt/equity swap with an associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with a tax exemption for five cows.
The milk rights of the six cows are transferred via an intermediary to a Cayman Island Company secretly owned by the majority shareholder who sells the rights to all seven cows back to your listed company.
The annual report says the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more. You sell one cow to buy a new president of the United States , leaving you with nine cows. No balance sheet provided with the release.
The public then buys your bull.

SURREALISM
You have two giraffes.
The government requires you to take harmonica lessons.

AN AMERICAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You sell one, and force the other to produce the milk of four cows.
Later, you hire a consultant to analyse why the cow has dropped dead.

A GREEK CORPORATION
You have two cows. You borrow lots of euros to build barns, milking sheds, hay stores, feed sheds,
dairies, cold stores, abattoir, cheese unit and packing sheds.
You still only have two cows.

A FRENCH CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You go on strike, organise a riot, and block the roads, because you want three cows.

A JAPANESE CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk.
You then create a clever cow cartoon image called a Cowkimona and market it worldwide.

AN ITALIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows,
but you don't know where they are.
You decide to have lunch.

A SWISS CORPORATION
You have 5000 cows. None of them belong to you.
You charge the owners for storing them.

A CHINESE CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You have 300 people milking them.
You claim that you have full employment, and high bovine productivity.
You arrest the newsman who reported the real situation.

AN INDIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You worship them.

A BRITISH CORPORATION
You have two cows.
Both are mad.

AN IRAQI CORPORATION
Everyone thinks you have lots of cows.
You tell them that you have none.
No-one believes you, so they bomb the ** out of you and invade your country.
You still have no cows, but at least you are now a Democracy.

AN AUSTRALIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
Business seems pretty good.
You close the office and go for a few beers to celebrate.

A NEW ZEALAND CORPORATION
You have two cows.
The one on the left looks very attractive...

SAN JUAN COUNTY-ISM

You have two cows.
The County claims the cows are in a wetland and declares them nonconforming.
The Friends sue because the cows can be seen from a big donor's new shoreline mansion.
The ARC, Tourist Board, and Transportation Steering Committee promote the cows as agri-tourism,
The individuals from the County, the Friends, and the ARC/Tourist Board/ Transportation Committee (above) are all the same people.
The Community Land Trust believes the cows belong to everyone.
The Land Bank wants to borrow money to purchase and preserve the cows.
The Marine Resources Committee believes the cows are killing salmon.
You, the cow owner who just wants to be left alone, are discredited as an alleged Koch-funded Republican.

The Certainty Of Complexity

Today occurred a Growth Management Hearings Board (GMHB) pre-hearing regarding the various challenges to our new Critical Areas Ordinances (CAOs). The presiding GMHB official, attorney William Roehl, who has served on the GMHB for over 4 years, stated that the San Juan County CAO case is very complicated ... the most complicated he has been involved with.

We think Roehl may be confused. The case against the CAOs should be simple, since the County didn't even ask the right questions. It's the CAOs themselves that are "complicated" ... and we might also add "unnecessary" to boot. Subjecting us to these CAOs is akin to subjecting us to ongoing, expensive, complicated, but completely unnecessary medical procedures. Should we undergo chemo therapy without having cancer? Some of our candidates might think so. It is baffling to hear Lovel Pratt run on her CAO record, for instance, just as it would be baffling to hear an overzealous doctor brag about giving patients unnecessary colorectal resections. And we don't have to pre-judge Pratt (or Jamie Stephens) about being overzealous for pointless regulation -- we can judge them instead. Their vote is in the record, and they voted to have this County endure completely unnecessary and painful "precautions."

It is equally condemning to hear Lisa Byers say:

I believe that we do need regulations to protect our environment. That is a consequence of having more people. I believe that the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) passed by the county council last December was a valid attempt, within the requirements of existing state law, to find a way to allow property owners as much flexibility as possible. However, it is important with any regulation that we understand how it works in real life. We need to gather case studies of on-the-ground experience, and then make changes to improve the application and predictability of regulations.

Byers has her logic completely backwards because it is important to gather evidence (case studies) to assess whether regulations are needed in the first place, not to justify them ex-post. And if we are going to dole out regulations because of population, then it would seem that OPAL's per capita share of the regulatory burden should be very heavy indeed, since it houses 5% of the population of Orcas and 15% of its school children.

Byers also says:

It is very important to me that government officials recognize that uncertainty has a significant detrimental effect on business and residential development. The length of time that it took this county to get through the required update to the Critical Areas Ordinance is a case in point. Nine years is too long. The uncertainty had very real economic costs.

This comment is the identical comment repeated numerous times by Stephanie Buffum of the Friends. Byers is channeling Buffum here. In response, all we can say is that the CAOs are a veritable playground of uncertainty. Uncertainty increased with CAO passage, since CDPD, the Friends, and practically anyone else is right in the middle of your life now, if they want to be. Talk about economic impacts -- why would anyone invest in property when, as an owner, you have so little control over your investment?

As if to drive home this last point, earlier this week Shireene Hale sent out CDPD-prepared handouts to realtors to help them explain the CAOs to their clients. These "simple" handouts (too long to include here) spanned 11 full pages of 12 pt font! They included dozens of helpful bullet points that say things like the following:

 There are recommendations, and in some cases requirements, for protecting the habitat of specific plants and animals. These regulations generally apply within 200 feet of protected habitats, but extend to 1,000 ft. for golden eagle nests, and to ¼ mile for peregrine falcon and great blue heron nests. Maps of known locations, photos of protected plants and animals, and protection provisions are described in handouts available on the above County web page.

That kind of certainty oughta really help the economics of the real estate market, don'tcha think?

Lastly, as an epilogue to the previous post, commenters have asked for information on who's who in the email in the last post. Here is a quick rundown.

Dick Grout is on the Byers Campaign Committee, and he has been discussed in earlier posts on this blog. He was our County Planning Director when we first opted to fully plan under the GMA back in 1990, and according to some reports, he was an enthusiastic advocate for opting in. After leaving the County, he headed up the Bellingham office of the Department of Ecology, retiring about a year ago. He was a finalist for County Administrator back in 2006, which was a bit controversial since he did not seem to have gone through the same vetting process as the other candidates. Byers and Pratt were both on the citizen committee providing input on Administrator candidates back then. Some believe that Dick Grout may yet become our County Manager, if Pratt and Byers get elected.

Scott Boye is the former Membership Director of the Friends and a former Board member of the San Juan Community Home Trust.

Janet Brownell is on the Byers Campaign Committee and is the former legislative liaison for the Orcas School District. She's married to Lance Evans who is a Land Bank Commissioner.

Coming To A Doorbell Near You!

Given the close connection between some County employees and the campaigns of some candidates (e.g., Barbara Rosenkotter of CDPD being Lisa Byers Treasurer), and given that some County employees have, in the past, had political emails land in their County email accounts, it shouldn't come as too great a surprise when a routine public records request turns up the occasional campaign gem by pure happenstance.

Such was the case today (although Rosenkotter was not involved in the subject email).

We have talked at length about the Network, headed by Ron Zee, and its subterranean influence on the County. We've seen charges of "incivility" being used to quash dissent. What do you think about the following email excerpt from the standpoint of civility? Or as far as a demonstration of Network efficiency and effectiveness goes?

The last point I’ll make is the need for doorbelling on San Juan. Dick Grout, Jim Slocumb and myself are all willing to walk with Lisa for doorbelling. Jim can put together maps and information lists and can map out routes to walk. I truly believe it will be the difference in winning the election. I’ll point to Laura Jo Severson as my proof. Ron Zee, Jim Slocumb and me took a short grandmotherly type, new to the island, that couldn’t string together a paragraph and got her to within 99 votes of Rich Peterson simply by doorbelling. Think what an articulate woman from Orcas could do.

That glimpse into how the Network works (and thinks) comes from an email train that was sent to the County. Accident or not, it's all part of the public record now, and it was obtained via a public records request. You never know what might turn up from a public records request.

The entire email train is copied below (emphasis added).  Happy reading, and just think what an articulate woman from Orcas could do!
________________________________________________________________________

From: Richard & Susan Grout <grout@rockisland.com>

Subject: RE: Dinner last night

Date: February 28, 2013 8:39:53 PM PST

To: 'Janet Brownell' <maxdigger@gmail.com>, 'Scott Boye' <sgboye@hotmail.com>

See below.

From: Janet Brownell [mailto:maxdigger@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2013 12:37 PM
To: Scott Boye
Cc: Dick Grout
Subject: Re: Dinner last night

Thanks for the intel, Scott.

There is an added layer of paranoia in that a 3 minute clip of Lisa, speaking at some CLT-type conference, has surfaced.  The spin on the video (which is now being circulated via email) is that Lisa is a communist who does not believe in private property and will take away your home if elected.  It's absurd. If it’s that extreme it won’t influence anyone who might even consider voting for Lisa.  It’ll just reinforce the votes she’d never get anyway.  And what would we do, in any event, send out a mailer in which Lisa says, “I am not a communist”?

I'm meeting with Lisa on Monday and will bring all of this up.  They $$ is kind of silly because it's so easy to check via the PDC.

Lisa is WAY into wanting to do doorbelling.  I know Jim is working on maps.  In your opinion -- when do you think the optimal time would be for that?  I’d suggest we start anytime after the signs go back up but focus on the three weeks prior to the ballots being mailed.

Lastly -- bigger font.  Will do.  And will talk to Lisa about meeting with Marc and Greg.  Not just bigger font.  Fewer words.

Hey -- is the yacht club dinner a monthly?  weekly?  nightly? thing?  Could you take Lisa to it?  Maybe she could work that room.

Thank you again for your insights.

On Feb 16, 2013, at 12:25 PM, Scott Boye <sgboye@hotmail.com> wrote:

Janet-

I had dinner last night at the yacht club, an interesting and informative event on several levels.  I chatted with Rich Peterson, who kept the conversation away from politics.  Janice Peterson and I discussed her latest column in the Guardian.  She tells me that she meant for the look back to mirror the CAO but decided at the last minute to cut the political angle out.  Marc Forlenza is a member and well liked by the folks there.  I actually dined with Marc’s campaign manager, Phyllis Davis.  Phyllis is deeply disappointed by Marc’s loss and blames it on the axis of the L’s (Lovel & Lisa), the money that the ‘network’ has funneled to them and is greatly concerned at the political favors that money will buy in the future.  The image I got was alternately Dr. Evil in his lair at the top of the Space Needle (I’m a fan of Mike Myers) or the Wicked Witch staring into her crystal ball, waiting to release the flying monkeys.  Phyllis talked at length about the great qualities of Greg Ayers and how he’ll ‘keep up the fight’.  She mentioned that Greg would be attending campaign functions for Bob Jarman.

Others I spoke to were disgusted at the sway that Lopez has over the county and at the power the FoSJ has over L&L.  The level of comprehension regarding facts was astonishingly low.  Friends contributing $40,000 to the L&L campaign.  Lisa raising $40,000 from off island special interests.  Ditto for Lovel.  The $40k number kept coming up.  I suspect somebody is repeating that.  Board members of Friends managing campaigns. Board members of Friends running other organizations, Ag guild, environmental organizations, etc.

OK, those are some of the threats.  Opportunities are better education of the voters and reaching out to Greg Ayers and Marc Forlenza.  I doubt that we can bring them into the fold but reducing the amount of vitriol is possible.  I’d suggest coffee or lunch with each of them and ask for their advice on where Lisa could take the county.  Humility in victory is a great way to disarm them.  Lisa doesn’t have to follow their advice but they might feel less likely to badmouth her.  I’d also suggest reviewing the mailer and think about how the message gets delivered.  In looking over the mailer it seems like the print is pretty small.  I had to look through the bifocal lenses to read it.  I suspect that this county has the highest percentage of bifocal users in the state.  We’re wealthy enough to afford good eye care and old enough to need it.

The last point I’ll make is the need for doorbelling on San Juan.  Dick Grout, Jim Slocumb and myself are all willing to walk with Lisa for doorbelling.  Jim can put together maps and information lists and can map out routes to walk.  I truly believe it will be the difference in winning the election.  I’ll point to Laura Jo Severson as my proof.  Ron Zee, Jim Slocumb and me took a short grandmotherly type, new to the island, that couldn’t string together a paragraph and got her to within 99 votes of Rich Peterson simply by doorbelling.  Think what an articulate woman from Orcas could do.

Scott Boye, Friday Harbor

Janet Brownell
maxdigger@gmail.com

Byers Response to Carlson

Mike Carlson wrote an open letter to Lisa Byers with several questions. You can find the letter here. Earlier today, Byers answered.

Before we analyze the response, have a look at the letter in its entirety without editorial comment (but we'd be interested in your comments).
________________________________________________________________________

You covered a lot of ground in your letter.  I will do my best to address this complex topic in a concise manner. 

I believe that government has a limited, but important role to play in society. Government is not the answer for resolving many of society’s needs. Many needs are best addressed through volunteer efforts, or by for-profit or non-profit businesses. But when government does provide services, it should do so efficiently and effectively.

When we, as a community, grapple with an issue, I believe that government is well suited for convening people, setting common goals, and then developing incentives to implement solutions. I believe that some of our best innovations have come about through thoughtful collaboration between government and individuals working through for-profit and non-profit businesses.

When we choose to adopt regulations, they should be designed so that businesses that follow the rules may thrive, and property owners may have flexibility in how they use their property. One of the challenges of government is that regulations stay on the books after they are no longer useful, thus becoming an impediment. We must be diligent about pruning out old rules that no longer serve us.

It is very important to me that government officials recognize that uncertainty has a significant detrimental effect on business and residential development.  The length of time that it took this county to get through the required update to the Critical Areas Ordinance is a case in point. Nine years is too long. The uncertainty had very real economic costs.

You say that you have made a living in the islands without government help. I have a feeling that you don’t mean that in the literal sense. You travel on roads and ferries. You know kids or have kids who have gone to school and gotten an education. You’ve probably used maps and weather forecasts. You’ve had a clinic or hospital to help you through an illness or accident. Put simply, at some point, you’ve been helped by your neighbors. And government is, at its most simple, one of the ways that we come together to make our society function.

I know what it is like to work hard, save money, and buy property. I know how scary it can be to think that you won’t be able to provide for your kids. I know how difficult it is when you’ve been running your business successfully, but then the rules change and you have to change in order to survive, let alone thrive. You wrote in your letter that you thought my response to an issue was cavalier. I’m sorry you got that impression. I think that people who work with me would tell you that is not their experience of me. I think they would say that I am thoughtful and balanced. I hope that you will give me the opportunity to re-shape that perception.

Like you, my work has involved hiring people and worrying about making payroll. I have taken risks in order to keep people employed, because I know that without a job they would suffer, and they might move away. We need good jobs, with good wages in our community so that people may thrive.  I think our economy in San Juan County is transitioning.  We will continue to rely on construction and tourism, while at the same time there are more people employed here who are exporting their ideas and creativity.  They are writers, artists, scientists, educators, consultants, and more. This is a place where people come to relax, to learn, and to be inspired. The more we can capitalize on that—by continuing to value this unique environment—the more our economy will thrive.

I believe that we do need regulations to protect our environment. That is a consequence of having more people. I believe that the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) passed by the county council last December was a valid attempt, within the requirements of existing state law, to find a way to allow property owners as much flexibility as possible. However, it is important with any regulation that we understand how it works in real life. We need to gather case studies of on-the-ground experience, and then make changes to improve the application and predictability of regulations. Within the context of state law, we should strive to make regulations as clear, consistent and as flexible as possible. If state law makes that impossible, we should work together to change state law.

Finally, I believe that my work experience makes me very well suited to be a county council member. I have worked with others to build housing for almost 5% of Orcas Island’s year-round population. The construction of that housing created jobs, and the finished product—the houses—provide a home for many people who work at jobs we depend upon on a daily basis.

Through collaboration, hard work and innovation, I have led an organization, using a using a mix of private and public financing, to do something that many thought was not possible. I hope I am able to bring those same skills of hard work and collaborative problem solving to the county council.

Election Fundraising Update

Just a quick update of fundraising totals ... not much movement according to PDC records. Here are the latest figures ranked in descending order:

• Byers - $23,971
• Pratt - $19,657
• Stephens - $10,139
• Jarman - $7,384
• Hughes - $6,363
• McClerren - $0

These figures may be in need of updating, since we are aware that McClerren, for example, has raised a few thousand dollars by now and reported those figures to the PDC.

I Think I Need A Diagram

We have frequently characterized as "dizzying" the interrelationships and incestuousness among the various people and organizations that seem to govern, influence, and fuss at us at every turn. Let's take a look at a couple of recent examples.

Sarah Crosby has a letter in the Island Guardian where she says the following about us:

The Trojan Heron, on the other hand, is an angry anonymous blog, which is my main criticism of your association with it. Someone who spews opinion without the courage of assigning his/her name to it, does not have my respect, nor should they have yours or your platform. On the TH random slinging of accusations at people as if hoping that some of it will stick smacks of self indulgence in the extreme and truly serves no useful purpose. Is this really what you want to offer to our community?

You can read her entire letter at this link. Sarah Crosby is on the Byers Campaign Committee, a member of the (nonpartisan) League of Women Voters, a PCO for the San Juan Democratic Party, a donor to the Pratt campaign, and Chair of the Advisory Council of the Madrona Institute and ex-officio member of the Madrona Institute Board.

The Madrona Institute and its founder, Ron Zee, are busy setting up (what amounts to) an alternative governmental structure here in the islands. We have already brought to light that Zee/Madrona is the local fiscal agent for the Puget Sound Partnership (PSP), taking a modest 5% to 10% off the top of all PSP grants that get distributed to our local Stewardship Network. Remember, the Stewardship Network is a group of 24 local groups who have been paid by the PSP to spread the word that Puget Sound is in trouble and that our environment is our economy. The Stewardship Network includes the Friends of the San Juans, Kwiaht, the Conservation District (of which Zee is President), and five separate County entities (ARC, MRC, Land Bank, Noxious Weed Board, Salmon Lead Entity). Theoretically (or perhaps not so theoretically), the linkage of the PSP-Madrona Institute-Stewardship Network presents an alternative funding route for County projects without the County entities having to receive Council approval.

Now we find out that Ron Zee wants to appoint Kyle Loring, the Friends staff attorney, as an associate Board member to the Conservation District (Loring's wife is already on the Madrona Institute Advisory Council). Nearly simultaneously, we learn from the February 6th meeting of the PSP's Action Agenda Oversight Group (AAOG) that their plan is to offer Ron Zee the Chairmanship of the AAOG/LIO, and part of those responsibilities may entail PSP funding of the Conservation District, of which Zee is president.

Also remember that Zee was Chair of the local Democratic Party last year, and he headed up the endorsement of candidates Byers, Pratt, and Stephens. While our attention has been focused on the elections, CAOs, and various lawsuits, the "fourth candidate" (Ron Zee) has been moving ahead with the consolidation of his power over everything subterranean in this County -- the Conservation District, the Stewardship Network, ECONet, AAOG/LIO, and grant funding going to those groups via the Madrona Institute. Each of those entities, in turn, has tentacles that reach out to state authorities, visioning events, long-range planning activities, and all manner of stomach-churning bureaucratic power levers.

We may be in the midst of Council elections, but Ron Zee, inventor of the CRC "Better Government" Zee Wheel, is already the boss.

_______________________________________________________________________

Historical Tammany Hall Boss Tweed political cartoon updated for life in modern San Juan County

Lisa Byers And Thomas Paine

This blog has often pointed out fallacies, especially when used to justify various aspects of the CAOs. In the video associated with an earlier post, Lisa Byers says:

An early proponent of some of the early ideas around community land trusts in this country was Thomas Paine. He wrote, "Man did not make the earth, and though he had a natural right to occupy it, he had no right to locate his property in perpetuity on any part of it. It is the value of the improvement only, and not the earth itself, that is individual property.

As fallacies go, this one is a whopper. It's a whole bunch of fallacies actually, but it is mainly a fallacy of anachronism, where we judge one time period (the 18th century) by the standards of another (the 21st century). No, Thomas Paine was not predicting or advocating for community land trusts back in the 18th century.

The Byers quote attributed to Thomas Paine can be found in his essay Agrarian Justice, which is a continuation of Paine's earlier work, Rights of Man, in which he defended the French Revolution. In fact, Agrarian Justice was originally written in French, published in Paris, and specifically addressed "To the legislature and the Executive Directory of the French Republic."

When reading Paine's essay, we have to recognize that we are reading a social justice essay written at a time when there was no social justice. We are reading the thoughts and ideas of a man who grew up in feudal England, with its landless peasants and landed gentry. And the entire system was backed by a church that preached that God made the rich and the poor, and the rich nobility were ordained, by God, to be rich and powerful rulers over the poor in perpetuity. Paine grew up in a land where there were no property rights, unless you were the hereditary aristocracy.

Paine simply rejected that whole system and was encouraging the French to do the same. Paine believed that God ordained neither the rich nor the poor; God only made male and female (in Paine's words), and that every person should have a right to own land and its productive capacity. Paine was arguing for the American-style democratization of land in France, rather than common land per se. He said that Europe's pattern of feudal land ownership (i.e., the civilization of the day) had made the vast majority of its inhabitants miserable.

In taking the matter upon this ground, the first principle of civilization ought to have been, and ought still to be, that the condition of every person born into the world, after a state of civilization commences, ought not to be worse than if he had been born before that period.  But the fact is that the condition of millions, in every country in Europe, is far worse than if they had been born before civilization began, or had been born among the Indians of North America at the present day. I will show how this fact has happened.

And Paine was right. In Agrarian Justice, he proposed a new style of land ownership so that the productive capacity of land was put to use in ways that "civilized" European society never dreamed of. In so doing, Paine advance a specific idea that advocated the use of an estate tax and a tax on land values to fund a universal old-age and disability pension, as well as a fixed sum to be paid to all citizens upon reaching maturity.

If you take the time to read all of Agrarian Justice, you will realize that Paine was proposing a type of social security system for France that had the benefit of providing young people with seed capital and the elderly with a form of social security. It was groundbreaking stuff, not for its foresight into community land trusts, but for its foresight into conceptualizing a national plan for social security. For that reason, you can even find Agrarian Justice cited on the webpage of our own Social Security Administration today. Paine felt social security was essential for an authentically civilized society:

It is a revolution in the state of civilization that will give perfection to the Revolution of France. Already the conviction that government by representation is the true system of government is spreading itself fast in the world. The reasonableness of it can be seen by all. The justness of it makes itself felt even by its opposers. But when a system of  civilization, growing out of that system of government, shall be so organized that not a man or woman born in the Republic but shall inherit some means of beginning the world, and see before them the certainty of escaping the miseries that under other governments accompany old age, the Revolution of France will have an advocate and an ally in the heart of all nations.

I do not believe Paine would support any current concept of common ownership rights in the private property of others. And I certainly do not believe that Paine was advocating for all land to be owned by grant-funded non-profit 501(c)(3) corporations rather than individuals.

Original English-Version Cover of Agrarian Justice

Educate Yourself On Lisa Byers ...

An email (see the bottom of this post) has been sent around to many realtors regarding Lisa Byers and the video that was posted on the Trojan Heron on February 6th. Lisa Lawrence explains that the video was taken out of context, implying that Byers was simply delivering a lecture in the third person and not speaking about her own views.

In the Trojan Heron post from February 6th, we quoted Byers from another part of her talk where she is clearly expressing her own views. Here is that quote:

Most Community Land Trusts are 501(c)(3)s ... for those of us who believe that this is actually the right way to ... that this is part of a larger Land Reform Movement ... it would be great if we weren't constrained by 501(c)(3)s ... but in terms of replicating this model and actually getting it on the ground, the place where it has had the most traction has been in the affordable housing world and therefore having that 501(c)(3) status has provided a way to work within the existing economy to implement this alternative economy. There are a number of Conservation Land Trusts and Community Land Trusts that work collaboratively.  There are a few that I know of in the same organization ... my specific experience has been that, again, it takes relationships and specific projects to coalesce around. - Lisa Byers, June 2012 -- New Economics Institute Conference Q&A

And here is the video of that quote.



Yes, by all means, educate yourself on Lisa Byers and her beliefs ... by doing your own homework rather than simply listening to what Lisa Lawrence says about her. For the full context regarding Byers and the New Economics Institute, take the time to watch some of the other videos that have been posted too.  For example, get a load of the talk about Sharing Wealth in the 21st Century, which is posted on the same webpage as the full Byers video.

Watch them all. Make up your own mind.
________________________________________________________________________

From: Lisa Lawrence

Date: February 18, 2013, 1:37:55 PM PST

> 

Subject: Re: Educate yourself on Lisa Byers by watching her speech in this video...

Hi all -

After watching the video that Greg forwarded to us I did a bit of research as it was obvious to me that it was taken out of context. Lisa Byers was simply giving a history of how the land trust model of land ownership was developed - nothing to do with private property rights. It makes me sad when this type of rhetoric or misinformation is sent around as if it had some validity.

Please educate yourselves if you haven't, on home trusts and the like and how they actually help small, rural communities keep people here like teachers, grocery store clerks, farmers, retirees, families, etc. As much we all appreciate and love the idea of owning our own land outright, it is often an unobtainable dream due to financial reasons. Land trusts make homeownership possible for many folks that would never be able to, by taking the price of the land out of the picture or minimal cost. Lisa Byers is well respected across the country for her work in this field, as well as in our county. 

I know Lisa Byers and I have the utmost respect for her. In my opinion we are lucky to have such an honest, intelligent, compassionate person willing to serve our community and I am voting her. I hope you all take a minute to read her response below to my questions for her regarding the video and feel free to contact her directly if you have specific questions. 

Thanks, Lisa

Begin forwarded message:

From: Lisa Byers <lisa@lisabyers.org>

Date: February 17, 2013 9:23:11 PM PST

To: Lisa Lawrence 

Subject: video excerpt

Lisa –

I appreciate you asking me about the video excerpt from a talk I gave last year. I was one of three speakers who talked about how a community land trust and a land conservation easement with The Nature Conservancy helped to create the first Community Supported Agriculture farm in the country, Indian Line Farm in Great Barrington, Massachusetts. I spoke about the history of the community land trust model of land ownership.

As you may know, my work for the past 17 years has been to support our economy in San Juan County by providing affordable housing that will continue to serve the community for decades to come. The community land trust model is a pragmatic option for a county like ours where real estate prices are higher than the norm and wages are lower than the norm.

The way it works is that the non-profit community land trust secures grants and donations to buy land and develop infrastructure for housing. The community land trust leases the land to individuals who own their homes.  The grants and donations lower the price a household pays for the housing they purchase.  In exchange for being able to purchase a home at significantly below market value, the homeowner agrees, through the land lease, that when they choose to sell, they will sell at a price prescribed by a formula in the lease to keep that home affordable for subsequent generations.

I find this model to be a practical blend of progressivism and conservatism, and an example of a successful public-private partnership. Just as with conservation land trusts, public and private funds are invested in a manner that lasts for decades. The non-profit organization stewards that investment by overseeing re-sales at an affordable price. And the individuals who purchase homes under this model have the rights and responsibilities of ownership, which can vest them more fully in the community.

If I am elected to serve on the county council, I plan to spend time working on other ways to help sustain a healthy economy. I will help to foster the continued growth of our agricultural sector by re-aligning state and county statues to be more supportive of small farmers. I plan to help with incubating new businesses, assuring that our zoning provides places for island-friendly commerce, helping OPALCO’s broadband service get established, and reforming or eliminating outdated regulations. I am particularly interested in encouraging young people who grew up here to come back to raise their families.

Thanks again for asking. I hope this places the video in context.  Please let me know if you have any other questions.

Lisa Byers

-- 

Vote Lisa Byers for County Council

San Juan County District 2