The ABCs of Political Patronage

Lead Salmon Recovery Entity ... MRC ... LIO/AAOG ... Conservation District ... Stewardship Network ... Madrona Institute ... Friends of the San Juans ... ECONet ... PSP ... glossy Friends messaging brochures funded by State-government (PSP) Targeted Awareness Grants (TAG) ... millions spent on "salmon recovery" with no measurement of results and no accountability for failure ... frivolous and abusive Friends legal actions opposing everything from an 80-year old widow wanting to retire, to the CAOs -- whose passage and approval the Friends demanded.

You can cut the environmental phoniness in this county with a knife. We don't have "save the environment" groups. We have "save the environmental bureaucracy" groups.  Their primary interests are ensuring that they continue to get paid while they protect the political patronage system they've built.

The current titular heads of the patronage system are Jamie Stephens and Ron Zee. They are working in tandem to hold on to as much of the patronage system as they can, despite the election outcome.  So far, they're doing a pretty good job, and Stephens, in particular, is doing a superb job.

One of the greatest achievements of the patronage system is that we all take for granted that the County deserves a "seat at the table" with the tribes, the PSP, and even its own departments ... instead of actually running the County itself. The County has been demoted to being just another stakeholder, and the group-think of unelected employees and appointees has been promoted to government. That's how the LIO/AAOG works ... and the Stewardship Network ... and the ECONet ... the Lead Entity ... even the County's own MRC.  These groups are accountable to no one, and they represent no one but themselves. They reward themselves and their patronage cronies with money and multi-decade appointments while the County sits on its hands, convinced that it's just a "fiscal agent" or some other bureaucratic label that equates to "eunuch."

The congress of "environmental groups" operating here traces back to relatively few people who appear over and over again, but the proliferation of organizations, committees, and trusts makes it seem like the County is outnumbered. The County has been Delphi'd ... go along with the crowd ... behave ... fall in line ... be patient ... be part of a team ... you want to agree with the rest of us, don't you? ... DON'T YOU?!?!

Stephens has this down pat, and he is working the other two Councilmen for all its worth. Stephens' protection of the patronage system is nothing short of heroic. He got himself appointed Chair of the Council. Stephens sits on the MRC. He's the Council representative on the LIO/AAOG too ... all the key places the patronage system wants to protect. Also, despite the fact that major aspects of the patronage system should have been (and could have been) dismantled immediately, Stephens' has effectively used a series of delay tactics and other maneuvers to convince the other Councilmen that they're "part of a team" and reform "takes time" and we need "patience" ... let's get more "input." When you hear one of our politicians use those words, that's the patronage system talking ... that's a Delphi zombie courtesy of Stephens.

John Cleese recently wrote a satirical piece about terror alerts in various countries in Europe.  Here's what he said about the French.

The French government announced yesterday that it has raised its terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide." The only two higher levels in France are "Collaborate" and "Surrender." The rise was precipitated by a recent fire that destroyed France 's white flag factory, effectively paralyzing the country's military capability.

Aside from that excerpt being terribly ironic given the positions taken by the UK and France over the last two days, let's hope it's not the role model for our new Councilmen as they contend with our system of political patronage.

Jamie Stephens, Chair of the San Juan County Council

Ron Zee, Chair of the San Juan Islands Conservation District

Conservation District Watch: The Stacked Deck

The San Juan Islands Conservation District has merged with the San Juan County Stewardship Network and the Puget Sound Partnership's ECONet. Moreover, the non-profit Madrona Institute and the PSP's Action Agenda Oversight Group (AAOG)/Local Implementation Organization (LIO) have incestuous links to the Conservation District too.

Let's play a shortened version of 20 questions ... let's try 6 questions:

1. Who is head of the San Juan Islands Conservation District?
2. Who is on the steering committee of the Stewardship Network?
3. Who is the founder and head of the Madrona Institute, which acts as the fiscal agent for the Stewardship Network, receiving a modest 5% to 10% cut on all grants?
4. Who endorsed Pratt, Stephens, and Byers for Council?
5. Who has been trying to take County programs and grants away from the County (e.g., Salmon Lead Entity Coordinator)?
6. Who has been discussing #5 above with Jamie Stephens in relative secrecy?

The answer to all of the above is Ron Zee, who is part-creator, part-manipulator of a giant hairball bureaucracy that is a wolf (PSP) in Conservation District clothing. At the end of this post is an effort to depict this hairball with a graph, but honestly, it's an impossible task. Complexity is their disguise. It's a Gordian Knot of bureaucratic self-interest and conflicts of interest. Nevertheless, I hope readers begin to get an idea who the real power is behind this bureaucracy ... and it's not our elected officials.

The Stewardship Network is comprised of 24 organizations, including 5 separate County entities. The Steering Committee for the Stewardship Network is comprised of 4 people: Zee, Linda Lyshall (who works for Zee at the Conservation District), Stephanie Buffum of the Friends, and Lincoln Bormann of the Land Bank. This Steering Committee recently appointed Julia Vouri to be the coordinator of the Stewardship Network/ECONet "under the umbrella of the Conservation District."  The Conservation District Board had no say in the matter. Julia Vouri is the wife of Mike Vouri, who happens to be on the Advisory Board of the Madrona Institute. The Madrona Institute was founded and is headed by Zee. He has put together a 4-person Madrona Institute Board (himself, Land Bank Commissioner Jim Skoog, League of Women Voters member Sarah Crosby, and Elaine Kendall of the Ag Guild ... Zee's wife). In addition, Zee has assembled an 18-member Madrona Institute Advisory Committee that includes Linda Lyshall (again), Lincoln Bormann (again), the previously mentioned Mike Vouri, Nick Teague (National Monument/BLM Manager), and Katie Loring, wife of Friends' attorney Kyle Loring who Zee appointed as Associate Board member of the Conservation District.

Given the weight of all these heavily-networked advisors and board members, anyone who thinks the measly Conservation District Board has any power is at best an optimist and at worst a damn fool. The Conservation District Board consists of 5 members, two of whom are appointed by the State. There are just three elected members to the Conservation District Board in an otherwise sprawling complex of self-appointed greased-palm special interests.

And that's not even including the links between the Conservation District and the AAOG/LIO, whose links to the Conservation District are so cozy that the Conservation District has an office reserved for them in their new building. Who's on the AAOG/LIO, aside from the Conservation District itself? Let's see ... the Implementation Committee of the AAOG/LIO consists of a further 12 organizations, including the Marine Resources Committee (again), the Salmon Lead Entity Coordinator (again), the Stewardship Network (again), three County departments (Public Works, CD&P, Health), the Water Resources Committee, the Town, and 3 tribes.

In this impossible-to-follow Gordian Knot, self-appointed Zee-cronies are represented multiple times while the public is shut out. Let's look at the Salmon Lead Entity (SLE), for example. The Salmon Lead Entity Coordinator is Barbara Rosenkotter, who was the Treasurer for Byers campaign (endorsed by then-Democratic-Party-head Zee). Although Rosenkotter ostensibly works for the County, she represents the Stewardship Network, the MRC, and the AAOG/LIO Implementation Committee ... and she has been working stealthily with Zee, the Northwest Straits Commission/Foundation, and the tribes to move her position and State funding to the Conservation District.

There you have it ... 24 organizations in the Stewardship Network, 18 advisors to the Madrona Institute, 4 board members of the Madrona Institute, 13 members to the AAOG/LIO Implementation Committee, 2 State appointees to the Conservation District ... and just 3 elected members of the Conservation District Board. No independently elected official to the Conservation District or even to our County Council has a clue how they're being played by this bureaucracy of mass destruction. No matter how improved the Conservation District electoral system might become as a result of anticipated reforms and lawsuits, the fix is already in ... the elected positions don't even matter anymore ... the Conservation District is machine headquarters where the business of the PSP and Friends is done. The Conservation District is hopelessly broken as a representative body.

And this cabal will pass judgment on whether we, as a County, are good Puget Sound Partners. That's important because whether we are good Puget Sound Partners will matter when our County tries to obtain funding from the State. There is statutory language to that effect. Given the hearings this past week about Conservation District funding, the County Council may be under the misapprehension that they are funding the Conservation District, but in reality, it's the reverse. The County is being set up to be squeezed by the Conservation District, the PSP, and the Friends over State money. If we don't follow their whims, our State funding will be threatened.

And despite the high-minded labels (e.g., Salmon Lead Entity) and the strident, tearful pleas of bureaucratic insiders crying about the environment, absolutely none of the bureaucratic whims have anything to do with improving ecological health. The taxes and grants devoted to bureaucratic eco-efforts aren't funding on-the-ground "save the salmon" or "save the planet" initiatives ... they're funding "save the bureaucracy" initiatives.

Support the Conservation District and save a self-interested bureaucrat ... and maybe even earn a modest 5% to 10% cut for Zee at the same time.  Now that's environmental stewardship San Juan style.

Click to enlarge. Right-click to download.

State Of The County

With election results due this week, we think it’s time to review the state of the County.

Over the past couple of weeks, the implementation of the new CAOs has been delayed a full year because no one can figure out what they mean. Even Shireene Hale, who wrote the language in the Ordinances and championed them, admitted in front of the Council that she doesn’t know what certain parts of the CAOs are saying. Despite this, certain of our fellow citizens continue to speak in favor of the new CAOs, as if they understand them better than anyone else. They don’t, and neither do the candidates who have alleged that they are simpler and better than the old/current ones.

The CAOs are still under appeal to the Growth Management Hearings Board (GMHB) by the Friends of the San Juans (who urged their approval), the Common Sense Alliance (who did not urge their approval) as well as others. The lawsuit regarding the Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) violations also continues, with a decision expected in the upcoming week about a Motion for Summary Judgement heard in Court on Friday. An appeal of the CRC propositions is still alive too, but will not affect the election this week.

We have a new national monument, the meaning of which (like the CAOs) remains hard to decipher. It was billed as a grassroots effort to protect BLM lands here, but to many, the entire affair looked more like an effort to promote eco-tourism by some of the more prominent and connected eco-glorymongers in the islands.

On election matters, the candidates have raised approximately $110k altogether, with about $73k amassed by the partisan candidates (Pratt - $23k, Byers - $30k, and Stephens - $20k). Trust Islanders, a newly formed non-partisan PAC, has raised about $24k to assist the non-affiliated candidates (whether they want it or not). The non-partisan candidates, collectively, have raised only about $37k.

This election has seen quite a few misstatements by certain candidates in addition to the aforementioned claim that the new CAOs are simple. Jamie Stephens, for example, claimed during the League of Women Voters forums that the County did not add debt during 2012. While the County did refinance some of its debt in 2012, it also added $1.7 million in new general debt too. County budgets are at near all-time highs as well, despite shedding staff over the last few years. Structural cost imbalances also persist since staff payroll costs (which form the bulk of general fund expenditures) continue to grow faster (3% per annum) than the levy lift limit (1% per annum).

Despite the imbalances and the need to add debt, somehow Bob Jean has been able to find about $160,000 in 2013 for highly questionable purposes related to dubious Community Conversations and more advanced aerial photography for our County GIS system.

Committees are still out of control, although the Winter Council has made attempts to get their hands around them.

The Planning Department continues to hire staff, and the unspoken relentless planning vision for our County appears to be to create and staff an Urban Planning Department despite being a rural county.

The Stormwater Program remains confused, purposeless, and expensive.

The Network/Machine continues to thrive and speak out, as is evdent from letters to the editor. It continues to exert itself out of public view too. Ron Zee, head of the Stewardship Network, the Madrona Institute, and the Conservation District, has brought Kyle Loring of the Friends into the Conservation District as an advisor. Word has it that he is about to hire Linda Lyshall into the Conservation District too.

The State of the County? Still rotten ... with plenty of work to do regardless who wins the election.

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

Think Globally, Ruin Lives Locally

From the last few posts, I hope readers are seeing how the Network conducts business. The Network follows a particular formula:

1. General, and often legitimate, global fears about the environment are played up to justify passage of restrictive land use laws on the local level. Sometimes hysteria about minuscule de minimis local issues (e.g., pyrethrins) is mixed in, using extremely questionable local data. The "solution" proposed is always a planning/land use restriction, not another kind of solution.
2. The advocated local planning laws fail to quantify site-specific contributions to the purported problem but nevertheless impose site-specific property restrictions that address alleged "environmental impacts."
3. The site-specific property restrictions trap innocent people in non-conforming and related convoluted circumstances, regardless whether there is any actual harm to the environment.
4. The Friends/Network legally intervene on individual cases to insist on enforcement of the law, relying on judicial policy and bullying tactics to crush people's lives even when there is no environmental impact.
5. Despite stopping activities with no impact, the Friends/Network take credit for fighting big issues (e.g., ecosystem health), and they parlay their work into more grants, more awards, more connections, more power and influence, and more participation in multiple areas of government. Their actual role in pointlessly crushing people's lives never gets any air time. They never stop fighting for more restrictions and "protections."
6. Anyone who objects to the Friends/Network's tactics is subject to cruel retaliation and backlash for being some sort of anti-environmental demon.

Needless to say, our system is broken. It is environmentally pointless, and toxic for our community. It often prevents good environmental outcomes. The CAOs, for example, effectively ban permaculture and probably make everyone practicing permaculture here an outlaw.

You can see which candidates are part of the Network. All you have to do is look at their donor lists. Look at their campaign committees and their endorsements. All you have to do is listen to their statements. All you have to do is observe which of their supporters talk about "the world around us" issues like global warming or emphasize connections to Olympia and elsewhere. Whether they cop to it or not, those candidates are participants in a system that advocates "thinking globally and ruining lives locally."

We referred to the Network in earlier posts as "Iceberg Government." We could just as easily think of it in other terms. Did we just see a fin above the water? Was that? ... no ... I must be seeing things. Let me just sit beside this rock and gather my wits.
___________________________________________________________________

Most of the Network and its self-serving motives are hidden, but who you choose for elected office may determine whether we get finished off.

Just one little push -- just one more election.

That Oughta Fix That Global Warming Thing

When you try to obtain County permission for a little project, you hit the tripwire that inevitably and unwittingly slams you headlong into the Network. The Network that was ostensibly built to combat global warming, to fight against agrochemical pollution, to save salmon, protect whales, house people sustainably and affordably, and stop coal shipments directs its know-it-all suspicions towards hapless you. Of course, if you can pay "donations" to have the Network ignore you, then your mega-dock or super-house might not attract a whiff of concern, but if you're just John Q. Public trying to do something more normal, you're in a spot of bother.

It doesn't matter what your project actually does to the environment, if anything. If it suits them, the grant-fed, self-interested Network backed by the credulity of superficially-thinking believers will shake you down and treat you as a likely environmental criminal no matter what you're doing. After all, there is money to be made in stopping environmental menaces like you, and someone in the Network might actually win an award for stopping you too. You are a surrogate for all the environmental ills of the world; as big a potential threat to life on earth as global warming itself. Well, at least that's how the Network can write it up in the next grant application.

So a Network that claims to be saving the planet actually ends up hassling elderly B&B owners (see email below), shellfish farmers, a small business owner who wants to store kayaks in his own barn, and a simple guy who only wants to grow some organic blueberries for his environmentally friendly restaurant. The rich are able to buy their way out of scrutiny; affordable housing proliferates; and the middle class disappears -- the people who usually start businesses and raise families and pay taxes.

The Network does everything it can to prohibit people from working at home and using their land, and then it tries to "solve" the self-inflicted economic crisis by promoting activities that it controls, like eco-tourism and further grant-funded government-sponsored activities. It rails against development, and then promotes development that it runs.

Most of all, the Network tries to get the right people in office ... both elected office and on the Committees ... because the health and well being of the Network depends on who "they" have in office to pull strings. They need enablers. They need government money and complicity. Will the people who vote for a living beat out the people who work for a living?

So far, I think, "they" are winning, especially when you consider rulings like the one described in the B&B email below. Paraphrasing the email below, if "no guarantee of no future impacts" is the new impossible-to-pass litmus test for whether we can do anything anymore, then we're all doomed. It provides the justification for the Friends and the rest of the Network to stop everything. Looking at the Hearing Examiner papers, you can get a sense of the grand Friends/Network strategy for us all. The trick is to maneuver everyone into a potential nonconforming situation, then target us whether there is an impact or not. In the B&B case, the use was denied not because of impacts (there aren't any), but just because nonconforming uses must be phased out because of judicial policy.

Read the email below by clicking on the image. Since it isn't a public records email, I have redacted the personal information. The email is just another disturbing, meddling, pointless injustice perpetrated by the Friends. Aren't you glad the Friends intervened to stop a kindly 82-year old woman from selling her two-room B&B so she could finally retire? That oughta stop the whole global warming thing right in its tracks, don't you think? Well done Network. Well done Friends.

Click to enlarge. Friends intervene to crush B&B owner.

All Things Being Equal

One of the commenters to the last post said that we have organizations in this county that look like separate entities A, B, C, and D; but when you look at them more closely, you realize that A=B=C=D=County.

How true.

Over the last few posts, we've been examining the PSP ECONet, which is the same as the Stewardship Network, which we now know receives its funding via the Madrona Institute as of last April.  According to the website of the Madrona Institute:

Program managers at the Madrona Institute include:

Karrie Cooper, Program Manager & Network Coordinator, Stewardship Network of the San Juans, joined the Madrona Institute April 1, 2012, to coordinate the operations and projects of the Madrona Institute-sponsored Stewardship Network of the San Juans.   The Stewardship Network  is a coalition of public and private conservation organizations in the San Juan Islands whose mission is to promote a stewardship ethic in the San Juan Archipelago from land to sea. [Additional biographical info on Karrie Cooper forthcoming.]

The point of our tale is that we have a Network that consists of the County and its most influential committees, the Friends and Kwiaht, the Tourist Boards, various parks and the Conservation District. The people who comprise the Network turn up time and again in all sorts of places from the Planning Commission to political campaigns. For example, consider just Linda Lyshall -- she is a County employee who serves as the coordinator for the MRC. As an MRC member, she's part of the Stewardship Network. She's listed as being on the Advisory Council of the Madrona Institute. She's the Curriculum Committee Chair of Leadership San Juans. In the past, she's also been an employee of the PSP involved with the AAOG/LIO.

The management arm of the Stewardship Network is the Madrona Institute. Its education arm is Leadership San Juans. Its funding arm (or one of its funding arms) is the PSP's ECONet. Its political arm is our local Democratic Party (more on this in a moment). Its economic development arm consists of the parks and Tourist Boards. Its housing arm consists of the various Housing/Land Trusts. The Networkers give awards to one another through various programs such as the Good Steward Awards. And most of our local news outlets, being deeply superficial, never report on the dizzying inter-connections, and so might as well be the Network's Pravda.

If you let it, the Network will tell you how to think (ECONet), educate you (Leadership San Juans), promote a certain type of economy for you (eco-tourism), house you (land/housing trusts), and tell you how to vote. It's a one-stop shop for everything in life, and if you want a job involving "coordination" and "facilitation," you're probably in luck there too. That's why it's so important for the Network to get the right people in power who will keep the grant-based economy flowing. That's why the Network shows up heavily in the campaigns of Byers, Stephens, and Pratt.

Honestly, in all this, I feel as sorry for Democrats as I do for environmentalists. I feel "environmentalism" has been stolen from real environmentalists, and environmentalist issues are simply used now as bait to get a grant and push a planning-based agenda for every facet of life -- because, as we seem to be often told, we need a vast planning infrastructure to ensure positive outcomes. Ugh!! In the same way, I feel planning and coordination Ubercrats have taken over the local Democratic Party, and the Party label is serving the self-interests of the Network leaders. I know many Democrats who feel alienated from the behavior of their local Party leaders.

_____________________________________________________________

From: Nancy DeVaux [mailto:nancy@hometrust.org]
Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2012 11:46 AM
To: info@stewardshipsjc.org
Subject: membership in the Network

The San Juan Community Home Trust is interested in joining the Stewardship Network. We wondered how we might be able to become a  partner organizations.

We are proud of our efforts to create permanently affordable housing using Low Impact Development and Green Building techniques. One of our major goals is to become the first residential neighborhood in the State of Washington to use reclaimed (treated) wastewater, from our innovative “Living Machine” on-site sewer system,  in toilets and for landscape irrigation.

We’re interested in focusing on this at the County Fair, possibly  in the Stewardship Network area, possibly with the other Community Land Trusts on Orcas and Lopez, that also focus on sustainable development. What would the process for this be?

Thanks for your assistance!

Nancy

Nancy DeVaux

Executive Director

San Juan Community Home Trust

P.O. Box 2603

Friday Harbor, WA 98250

Phone: (360)378-5541

Fax: (360) 378-3742

nancy@hometrust.org

A Modest 5%-to-10% Proposal

We've been talking about the San Juan County ECONet and the Stewardship Network -- two names for the same thing, like aubergine and eggplant. Actually, you can think of the Stewardship Network as the main entity, and ECONet as sort of like its PSP funding arm.

But how does PSP ECONet funding actually reach the Stewardship Network. After all, the Stewardship Network doesn't truly exist as a legal entity. It's not a 501(c)(3). It's just a group of groups, albeit with a website and regular meetings, and memberships, and coordinators. Well, it turns out the County was funding the Stewardship Network for a while by dispersing the PSP ECONet funds via a Coordination Contract (see the email below). However, about a year ago, the Stewardship Network sought out a different affiliation. They sought to end their contractual association with the County and become affiliated with a new "fiscal agent," the Madrona Institute.

This would mean that PSP grant money would no longer be passed through the County to the Stewardship Network but would instead flow through the Madrona Institute to the Stewardship Network. Accordingly, a memorandum of understanding was drawn up (see emails and images below) that would memorialize the new relationship between the Madrona Institute and the Stewardship Network/ECONet. For its trouble, the Madrona Institute would earn a "modest" administrative fee of 5-10%.

What is going on here exactly? To be honest, we're not entirely certain, but it doesn't look good. The Madrona Institute was founded and is run by Ron Zee. Ron Zee, as you can see from the emails below, was instrumental in reinvigorating the Stewardship Network. Ron Zee (depending on which website you look at) is also the head of one of our local political parties. That political party decided to endorse three candidates in the upcoming local election: Byers, Stephens, Pratt. All three of those candidates are on the record as being very committed to grants, including the prospect of getting millions more in additional grants for the County.

It looks for all the world like partisan Ron Zee endorsed a voting bloc of candidates likely to support a revenue stream for Madrona-Institute Ron Zee that would earn him a "modest" 5% to 10% off the top of a grant revenue stream that potentially could be very significant. And bear in mind that Zee would be the "fiscal agent" for a Network that would be contractually obligated to put out targeted messages that just happen to be quite favorable to his political and financial position, not to mention favorable to his candidate endorsements. Bear in mind that Zee would be "fiscal agent" for a Network consisting of 24 of the most influential organizations in the islands, including 5 major County entities. And all of it would be done without a whisper of consideration by our Council, which (if things were to work out according to plan) would in short order consist of people Zee endorsed anyway. I am sure the Byers/Pratt/Stephens Council would be happy to keep the boss happy by doing everything they could to bring more grants Ron Zee's ... er, I mean, the County's ... way.

It looks like it could be a very cozy fiscal and political arrangement operating under the rubric of "environmentalism" but seeming to have a lot more going on once you peek under the hood. It's very ugly really. By the way, have a look at the email addresses in the second email below. It includes some key people involved in the campaigns of Pratt and Byers. Stalwarts of the Network.

From: Jeff Hanson [mailto:jeffh@sjcmrc.org]
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 10:21 AM
Subject: Stewardship Network Update and Meeting Notice

Dear Members of the Stewardship Network of the San Juans,

Our next meeting is Wednesday, January 18, from 12:30 until 2:00 and will be held at the Friends of the San Juans conference room above the National Park office on Mullis Street, Friday Harbor. 

ON THE AGENDA:

• Katie Fleming of RE-Sources in Bellingham will present information about upcoming workshops on the "Power Past Coal" efforts to inform people about the potential coal exports through Washington. She will be looking for both advice on holding effective workshops on the islands, and assistance with the effort. 
• Evaluation Criteria for the Capacity Building Grant projects. The projects proposed in the Capacity Building Grant include the Good Steward Awards, a series of outreach events in May of this year, and upgrading our website and linking it to the myPugetSound website. We will briefly review the project components and then conduct a process to develop evaluation criteria, which must be in place prior to the awarding of the grant. 
• Practical considerations for the grant projects. One of the decisions is to select the coordinator for these efforts. We have about 80 hours of work in the grant for this. Ron Zee, of the Madrona Institute, has expressed interest in doing this work, but it could be done by another, or a combination of people. We will work toward this decision at the meeting. 

We also have some urgent staffing decisions to consider:

At the December meeting, I let it be known that I will be resigning from the ECONet Coordinator position at the end of January. I am currently discussing the contract with my County supervisors, since the Coordination contract is through the County.  Once the direction is clear, I am hoping the result of those conversations results in a next step that has the Network members  selecting a new Coordinator to finish out the contract from then until June 30. I will notify the Network when the direction is clear. In the meantime, though, please consider how we might move forward. Ron Zee, who was instrumental with rejuvenating the Network in early 2008, has indicated that he would be interested in filling out the contract, but the Network should allow others to express interest and complete a selection process, should the County decision permit that (as I think it will). 

So, plenty to consider. If you cannot attend the meeting and have thoughts on any of the meeting topics, please let me know!

The next e-mail will be a forward of a variety of interesting  information for EcoNet members

I look forward to seeing many of you next week,

Cheers,

Jeff 

Jeff Hanson

EcoNet Coordinator

Stewardship Network of the San Juans

_____________________________________________________________

From: Karrie Cooper [mailto:karriedcooper@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 1:37 PM
To: Aileen Murphy; Amanda Azous; Andrea Wieland; Barbara Marrett; Barbara Rosenkotter; Brian Rader; Cindy Hansen; David Loyd; Debbie Ruggles; Doug McCutchen; Ed Hale; Erin Corra; Fiona Norris; Helen Venada; Jana Marks; Janna Nichols; Jeff Hanson; Jenny Atkinson; Jenny Roberts; Jerald Weaver; John Aschoff; Joseph Gaydos; Judy Cumming; Julie Knight; Kari Koski; Kathleen Foley; Katie Fleming; Kristen Cooley; Laura Arnold; Lincoln Bormann; Linda Lyshall; Liz Illg; Marilyn OConner; Mike Kaill; Noreen Ignelzi; Patos Light Keepers; Phil Green; Richard Lee; Robin Jacobsen; Ron Zee; Russel Barsh; Scott Williamson; Shann Weston; Shireene Hale; Shona Aitken; Soundwatch; Stephanie Buffum; Susan Key; Ted Schlund; Tina Whitman; Tom Cowan; Mindy Kayl
Subject: March 21 Agenda Stewardship Network - ECO Net

Dear Stewardship Network Members,

Our upcoming March 21st meeting we will be welcoming Tom Reeves to inform us on the proposed San Juan Islands National Conservation Area.  Attached you will find a draft letter of support to Salazar that we will discuss following his presentation. 

Also, please note the MOU from Ron Zee which details the cooperative relationship and operations between the Madrona Institute and the Stewardship Network. This item requires action in our upcoming meeting, so please review carefully. 

We will continue to begin our meetings with breif updates from everyone.  In order to make this time effective and efficient, please come prepared with a couple of priority items to share.  Also, if you are willing to write down and hand in your updates, I can easily add them into our meeting notes. 

Thanks for all you do!
--

Karrie

Karrie D. Cooper
Stewardship Network of the San Juan Islands

 - ECO Net Coordinator
karriedcooper@gmail.com
812-322-0453 work cell

____________________________________________________________

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

Spreading Like Wildfire

In the last post, we introduced readers to the local PSP ECONet, which is the PSP appellation for one of our local organizations more commonly known as the Stewardship Network. The Stewardship Network is an organization of organizations.

Who belongs to the Stewardship Network? Their webpage currently lists 24 member organizations. Curiously, included among those 24 members are 5 separate County entities: the Agricultural Resources Committee, Land Bank, Marine Resource Committee, San Juan County Noxious Weed Board, and San Juan County Lead Entity Program for Salmon  Recovery.  Not only that, but the Steering Committee of the Stewardship Network consists of Lincoln Bormann of the Land Bank, Linda Lyshall of the Marine Resources Committee, Stephanie Buffum of the Friends, Ron Zee of the Madrona Institute (more on that in later posts), and Kathleen Foley of the San Juan Preservation Trust. In fact, until recently, Lincoln Bormann of the Land Bank and Stephanie Buffum of the Friends were identified as the Co-Chairs of the Stewardship Network Steering Committee.

How is it that so many County organizations are involved in the Stewardship Network? How is it that County personnel are "steering" the Stewardship Network (Bormann, Lyshall) jointly with the Friends when there isn't any Council input or approval related to their participation. I don't even understand how the County can be represented by five separate entities in one Network? Even if the County were to participate, wouldn't we want just one person/group representing us?

We saw in the last post how the ECONet/Stewardship Network received money from Puget Sound Partnership (PSP) "Targeted Awareness Grants" to spread very specific PSP-formulated messages. Knowing that and seeing the Stewardship Network's membership list, we have to conclude that the County member entities must have been in on it too. Furthermore, below is another email discussing yet another grant related to communication, this time focused on "social marketing behavior change." From other documentation we have, this second grant seems to have focused on spreading two of the perennially favorite talking-points of the Friends, namely reducing pesticide use (remember Janet Alderton's pyrethrin obsession?) and increasing native vegetation.

Now, these topics may or may not have individual merit, but even if they do, we all know how twisted even meritorious topics can become when in the hands of the Friends.  But of greater concern is how we can have multiple County entities involved in a naked advocacy Network that promotes the favorite talking points of the Friends with PSP grant funding for "targeted awareness" and "behavior change"? How does that happen?

And rather than just promoting certain messaging, the Network isn't shy about trying to quash messaging that they don't agree with either. For example, at several times in the past, the Trojan Heron has noted that "civility" has been used in attempts to silence we critics who want reform of the County's environmental approaches. Of particular note, back in April 2012, there seemed to be a coordinated effort by multiple members of the Friends and County sympathizers to use a meme of civility to pressure CAO critics to shut up. Now we find a possible explanation in the March 2012 minutes of the Stewardship Network where it is noted that the Friends introduced the following item for discussion (emphasis added):

Friends of the San Juans: Need to address as a Network the anti-environmental messaging that is spreading like wild-fire in our community. “Environmentalism is killing property values”. “There’s a strategic wide-spread land grab occurring in SJC by environmental organizations”. As a Network we need to strategize our messaging that Nature is our Economy. Consider a communications forum on civility in the face of aggressive confrontation.

And based on the latest civility admonitions by Kit Rawson, not to mention some of the economic talking-points of some current candidates, it would seem that the Network is still working this agenda item.
_______________________________________________________________

From: Karrie Cooper [mailto:karriedcooper@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 2:10 PM
To: Judy Cumming; Shann Weston; Erin Corra; Barbara Marrett; Barbara Rosenkotter; Linda Lyshall
Subject: Upcoming Social Marketing Grant

Hi all, I just spoke with Kristen Cooley about the upcoming grant to design and implement a social marketing behavior change project. 

We should be getting official notification in the next two weeks.  With approximately 6 weeks to submit.  The project lead needs to have participated in Nancy Lee's training, hence me sending this to you all.

The process will involve submitting a letter of intent outlining the proposed project (2 letters may be submitted per ECO Net). Then, if choosen, a full proposal will be requested.

The grant will involve going throught the 10 Steps of a Social Marketing campaign.  The behavior, audience and focus will need to be directly connected to addressing an area of the Action Agenda, regional and/or local. 

The amount will range from $20,000 to $40,000 with a 20% match and 2 years to implement.

We need to put on our thinking caps for what we might want to do with this grant opportunity. Please let me know of your interest and ideas. 

Thanks Much!

Karrie

Karrie D. Cooper, Coordinator
Stewardship Network of the San Juans

www.stewardshipsjc.org
karriedcooper@gmail.com
812-322-0453 work cell