On Tuesday of next week, Barbara Rosenkotter will be discussing the Lead Entity's salmon recovery efforts with our County Council. She sent out the following email to her colleagues asking them to support her during that meeting.
Looks like she wants a "bankruptcy" of grant recipients there to help her explain things.
From: Barbara Rosenkotter <barbarar@sanjuanco.com>
Date: Wednesday, September 4, 2013 4:17 PM
Subject: Salmon Recovery Update to County Council - Sept 10th at 10:30amHello MRC, TAG and project sponsors,FYI, just wanted to let you know that there will be a salmon recovery update provided to the County Council on Tuesday, Sept 10th around 10:30am. If you can attend, it is helpful for them to see folks in the room. They will be meeting in Friday Harbor in the county chambers.Thank you,Barbara RosenkotterLead Entity Coordinator for Salmon RecoverySan Juan County / WRIA2360-370-7593PO Box 947135 Rhone StreetFriday Harbor, WA 98250
I want to help out Fish Lady. But, I'd have to ask for the day off from my boss to attend this without pay. Can I get a grant to cover my time and expenses? Otherwise children will die.
ReplyDeleteDon't worry--we have lots of people paid to attend these very meetings. In fact, it's pretty much all they do. Not bad money, either--union rates and benefits.
ReplyDeleteFantastical story in the Island Guardian about the Stuart Island purchase by the Preservation Trust.
ReplyDeleteReally amazing what these people get away with. I hope Gov. Inslee is informed of the ridiculousness of his statements in relation to Stuart and is sufficiently embarrassed.
@10:06
ReplyDeleteJob? Boss?
Ummmmm haven't you been paying any attention? Obviously not, otherwise you would have been working tirelessly behind your bosses back to have your position transferred to another agency, for instance, some guy named Jake at the tavern.
That's just how it's done.
Is the tavern a county agency or an advisory committee, or a conservation easement I can't remember ...
ReplyDelete"If you can attend, it is helpful for them to see folks in the room."
ReplyDeleteDecoded:
"Red alert. Red alert. Calling all zombies and bobble-heads. Send word throughout the land. I need a mob in the council chambers to rend their garments and gnash their teeth. The council is terrified of mobs. My funding is at stake. That means yours is too. You know who you are. I'll be watching. Don't let me down."
Exactly "...helpful..." for whom?
ReplyDelete"If would be HELPFUL TO ME for MY MINIONS to SHOW UP, to defend MY FUNDING and ME. You can be HELPFUL TO ME by glaring crossly at the council, shifting noisily in your seats and wasting 30 minutes of public access time berating the council to do exactly what I say. I should be ever most grateful. I will make sure a special place is reserved for you in heaven after you are dead. Trust ME"
ReplyDeletelooks like, once again, the facts will not play a part in the councils decisions. It will be agenda driven.
ReplyDeleteBarbara gets it, the machine gets it, unfortunately the THrs don't get it.
ReplyDeleteShe is spot on, filling the room makes a difference - show up or shut up.
@ 5:01 PM
ReplyDeleteFor big ticket stuff, sure. For this kind of nonsense I would not bother. I spoke to one of the council members earlier today. A personal relationship you can build upon, where they begin to look to you as a trusted source goes far beyond playing with a group think mob of jerks wasting time during a work day.
Use your other channels. Quite frankly, boycott the council when this kind of crap happens. DON'T show up, but do let them know why you will not waste your time on cheap theatrics. They'll get it.
@5:01pm I agree, I've found it much more useful to simply talk with our Council reps, than participate in the stilted public-access-time theater.
ReplyDelete@5:48 and @5:49
ReplyDeleteI'm not @5:01, but I'm not sure I agree. It depends on the council member. Some of our council members are deeply superficial, and full rooms matter. Don't overestimate the backbone of our council members.
"Bankruptcy of grant recipients".
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely funny and severely serious.
This begs the question, and I'm sure the TH'ers can come up with something good, but what would a group of planners be called.
First thing that comes to mind is a "hassle" of planners.
Geeze Bill, you see all dem planner folks, looks like dee was a whole dang hassle of 'em.
Might work.
A corruption of consultants
ReplyDeleteA frenzy of Friends
A platitude of planners
A porridge of planners
A Prattfall of planners
A plunder of planners
A hobble of hobby farmers
A dungeon of Democrats
A redoubt of Republicans
An echo of eco-frauds
An earful of environmentalists
Stop me. Dear God, someone stop me ...
Not poetry! Nothing is outlawed on the TH, but that stuff is close. Do you think the fish banking up against Stuart Island where the North bound flood breaks, like poetry?
ReplyDeleteSurely, we must send Ms. R out in a dingy for an exhaustive study. Hopefully, after all that rowing and reading poetry to the fish she will need a long nap.
Hey, it's a step up from her latest "accomplishment."
Jamie Stephens, in his role of Agenda Manager, has given Barbara Rosenkotter a 90 minute agenda slot.
ReplyDeleteNinety minutes. With minions.
"I'm so very pleased to see so many members of the public, and some citizens here today interspersed by half the staff of the county who were given time off to join us. Welcome one and all. Barbara, thanks for joining us here today and we all look forward to your Power Point melodrama. But before we begin, let's have our public access. Let's see, can I have a show of hands? Right. I'm glad we have ninety minutes for this agenda item. We'll need it. Let's get started."
What are the odds that the Council gives her more money?
ReplyDeleteProbably 2 to 1, wouldn't you say?
We PAY these people to represent us, protect us and do what's right for us. If we are expected to show up for every meeting so we won't get screwed it defeats the spirit of how a democracy is supposed to work. WE ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THERE PHSICALLY, THEY ARE.
ReplyDeleteDo they even call themselves public servants anymore? or do they consider that demeaning? Have they never heard or understood what public trust is or means?
If they think what they are doing is what we want, why sneak around, lay all plans on the table. Stop stabbing us in the back with concealed weapons, Randy isn't there a law against that? I have lost my faith in you. Stop covering these scoundrels asses.
Sort of good news: Ms. Rosenkotter's County salary and benefits plus travel expense ($120,000, it says somewhere in her slideshow, if you can find the text among the fish and seaweed) is paid by the state and feds. So far as I can tell, we've never wasted a dollar of County tax money on her.
ReplyDeleteSort of bad news: At least one of our councilcritters reportedly thinks that STARTING to give her money from the County will make her behave better.
Yup, that's just what my parents did when I was a young lad: raised my allowance whenever I misbehaved so I would LIKE them more and be nicer to them.
Can we get some lab tests on the water they serve at Council meetings? Cause it smells like koolaid from here.
@4:39--but what color ribbons are we supposed to wear?
ReplyDeleteFire up those computers, folks, the Council Chair has quite the tasty tidbits to present on Monday! Tune in on the council video stream and watch:
ReplyDeleteEd Hale telling us everything we wanted to know about stormwater--well, not everything, because mostly it's classified, but it's real bad and we need to spend lots of money on it. Otherwise, there's no reason to have a utilities manager because we no longer really have solid waste . . .
Then there's the return of the San Juan Initiative--yeah, it sunsetted in 2009, but that would never stop a good QUANGO. This was former Councilperson Pratt's baby--can we expect to see her there? Here's hoping they do a dramatic reading of the text. Jaw-dropping surprises in there.
Finally, there's the COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY. Because we're only unhappy with the County management because they don't do a good job of explaining to us. Uh-huh. Sounds like it's time to hire another PR guy. Sure, we've got another $80,000 lying around to pay for that, right?
@10:30- One can only conclude that most people running for public office today see themselves as Fundamental Transformation Agents. Their agenda is rarely laid on the table for all to see.
ReplyDeleteI would rather listen to Vogon poetry than Rosenkotter or Ed Hale with their dog and pony shows.
ReplyDeleteOK, so one of our councilmembers feels that by giving money to a rogue employee and her program, it will become easier to control her.
ReplyDeleteThe council critters all have private business experience. Let's see. I have a rogue employee whom I catch shoplifting and cooking the inventory books to make it appear nothing is amiss. Said employee also has a pattern of behavior badmouthing the business and the owner to customers on premise.
So, you take this employee aside and tell them how upset you are by their embezzlement and insubordination, and as I result I am now forced to give you a raise so you will do what I say.
This is cloud cuckoo land where life is beautiful all the time and I'll be happy to see those nice young men in their clean white coats and they're coming to take me awayyy hahhhahaaa ...
One way that Barbara Rosenkotter can encourage a sturdy turnout of minions, zombies and bobble-heads for her Powerpoint ramble would be for her to give out free, all-day suckers.
ReplyDeleteBecause that's who's gonna show up: Free, all-day suckers.
Just sweet and empty carbohydrates.
9/5 4:22
ReplyDeleteI agree, I was wrong to assume or say the reef net gear at the entrance of Reid Harbor was native american.
You seem to be certain who it belongs to. Is it you? Nothing wrong with catching fish if it is you, only that this thing sits out there and looks like it is not getting the attention it needs like pulling in and "sorting" the fish as you claim at least once a day.
Do you think the purchase of the lands nearby will affect in any way the fish in the area? If you know?
Some of us get a little extraneous, in the hope to yes, provoke people that know stuff to break down and tell what they know.
First hand knowledge is better than PhD knowledge, in my opinion.
9/6 @8:30 Well, I really wish I had a PhD so I could chastise you for your smarmy comment, but I don't so I won't. No, I am not a reffnetter, but anyone who has lived here for any length of time should know that when you see the gear anchored there and unmanned it is not fishing. Any fish going through the gear at that time just pass through unharmed. I am sure that any reefneter on here, or anyone with real local knowledge could say more. And come on, what is this need to be "extraneous" as you say to get people to "beak down"? How about asking people directly and publicly and without all the nasty stuff. Really a better way in my humble opinion.
ReplyDeleteAre we certain that the $1M Reid Harbor grant money wasn't for an alternative solid waste disposal site? Or is the million dollars just another San Juan County scam to pay someone off? Something seems fishy here.
ReplyDelete@2:42
ReplyDeleteFish's lives have been dramatically improved just through the receipt of this grant. How dare you question this. It's sad and sickening to see this level of salmonaphobia. I though our culture had progresse beyond that.
If you cant see how 1 million dollars to a family in California can save salmon then I don't know how to help.
Their habitat, it's getting preserved or restored. Functions and values.
Put down your coal pipe and get with it.
If the price had been 2 million, then 2x as many salmon would have been recovered or saved. Come on man, figure it out. It's not like it is "individual studies" or something. It's salmon recovery. It's so easy an insubordinate rogue county employee could do it.
And after months of deliberations, the GMHB is what? Speechless?
ReplyDelete@7:47
ReplyDeleteSalmon have been saved from extinction because of this grant BUT not so much that we won't have to save them from extinction with another big grant next year, and the year after that, and the year after that, and the ... well, you get the picture.
OK, back to the upcoming Council Circus next week with the Rosenkotter Rodeo and Wild West Show featured on center stage for your amusement and edification, I just have a few simple questions. For Jamie Stephens actually, since he is managing the agenda. Anyone can ask him these kind of questions, really.
ReplyDelete1) What is the purpose of this 90 minute agenda item? Who really needs to be there? Why now and why bother?
2) In Jamie's view: "What's the ideal outcome of this council agenda item?" In other words Jamie: "What do you want? What would you have me do?"
Some answers to these kinds of questions would really help me understand if I should make the serious effort to take time off away from work and travel over on the ferry to be a warm body in the room next week.
I mean do I really need to spend hours sitting between amongst excited bobbleheads wearing armbands, drinking Koolaid and licking all day suckers to make a difference here? Really?
Can anyone help answer my questions? Anyone else have similar questions? Don't I have something better to do? Does anyone remember the huge outpouring of working folks from all over the county testifying to the Planning Commission on why the CAO would ruin them? Was there any feedback or follow through? No. Or, Ms. Lisa Byers in full facilitation mode for hours with council paying lipservice to discovering common ground between the FOSJ and CSA? Any feedback? No. Any follow through? No
The council legislative room is fairly small. Now the old courthouse, boy you could pack the rafters in that place. But not any more. The new legislative room was designed (properly I think) for multi-media in order to engage the public electronically county wide. The public access teleconferencing is still pretty buggy, but the video streaming and online agenda information is really very good.
For my way of thinking, taking some time in the evening to visit the video stream by clicking on the specific agenda time is a good use of my time. Its my job to make sure the Council knows I am paying attention, am watching and have opinions and let them know.
I am looking forward to the day when the council critters balance and way the different channels of input they now have and not just call on the same hands that always show up at the front of the class waving "ME! ME! I KNOW THE ANSWER! ME! ME!"
Anyone see anything wrong with a county employee requesting that people show up to a council meeting to "voice their support" for this program?
ReplyDeleteI realize it is clearly self serving, but seems a bit out of bounds for a county employee.
Imagine if an employee sent out an email asking for protestors to show up for something they didn't agree with? What would happen then?
I guess if you can advocate outside of the formal hierarchy to have your job moved, then tell them later, with no repercussions, it becomes clear that the envelope can be pushed much much further, so why not.
Crazy.
Important-There is no non-regulatory in the fish lady, the hales or their followers. They target pond owners, shoreline property owners and any potential flowing water and demand that the owners remove the dams, remove the ponds, have no dirty cars, keep no animals and provide access or get turned into the Dept of Ecology-secretly of course.
ReplyDeleteAnyone see anything wrong with a county employee requesting that people show up to a council meeting to "voice their support" for this program?
ReplyDeleteYES it is very out of bounds for a county employee. or a conservation district employee or a state employee or a WSU employee or ANY public employee.
This bears repeating cause it must stop. Public employees can not do this using company dollars on company computers-they need to be put in check-officially.
6/13 10:20
ReplyDeleteNo Ph.D. necessary. You seem to know about reef net fishing and it would be good to tell people what you know.
Again; do you feel, think, or know, the purchase of the up-lands next to this entrance to Reid Harbor on Stuart Island are beneficial for fish?
You are paying for it as we all are. (The decreasing tax base and the tax benefit to the land owners who live elsewhere means we islanders pay more one way or another.) It is imperative we spend such funds on things productive for the fish or the environment, not just to do something that has the right buzz to it, or boosts someone's LLC.
Have you fished around Stuart for some time? Your knowledge is important, and folks making decisions need to know what you know.
I understand the reason that a County employee would want residents to support their transfer to a Washington state agency.
ReplyDeleteManufactured support.
ReplyDeleteWhat should I say if I communicated w/Rick and Bob?
ReplyDeleteI have a story to add to all of this by the way. Seems related to me.
An old San Juan Valley family were selling land to the Land Bank. They felt good about it until they heard the LB people talking about how they were going to develop it and where the houses should be built. !!!
The family (and I!) didn't realize the Land Bank did that! So the valley family said No No No! That was not the intent at all! At that point the LB resold the land or the development rights or something to...San Juan Preservation Trust? Or another one of these groups to honor the No Development wishes of the family.
I asked what the difference in price was and my friend said she wondered too but they wouldn't disclose that.
All very unsettling to me as part of an old island family as well and feeling like these people believe they know better than us. They are IN CHARGE and happy to leave us and our opinions out of it. Just very unsettling and worrisome.
So...what are the key points about the Rosenkotter appearance on Tuesday? In a nutshell. And...90 minutes!?! Wow. Is that public comment too?
Also...I learned in the CAO debate that public comment can be made w/out showing up but there are parameters including things like a certain number of printed copies etc.... Still not entirely clear what they are but if you want it in the public record you have to follow those rules.
Finally...would it help to show up? Not sure I can but I'm not clear on the value either way. Seems that Barbara R believes the bodies make a difference. What is the TH's opinion on that?
I really appreciate the commentors on this blog. Some very smart people! And I'm also curious about the reef net owners by Stuart and the commenter's opinion of the value of that land purchase in terms of saving the salmon. For that matter I'd love to hear what the owners of the net think too! Thanks everyone.
@8:40
ReplyDeleteThank you for your proposed boldness of speaking out at public access time.
I think it would be wonderful to have one or 2 people show up and ask some of the questions that were printed by a previous poster. Ask Jamie what he hopes to accomplish, etc.
Get them out in the open, on a public record. Jack might do a story about it that reaches a wider audience.
Thanks.
@8:40
ReplyDeleteAll things being equal, yes I think it helps to have people show up. Of course, all things are not equal. Most of "them" are being paid when they sit there whereas its a sacrifice for those of us who oppose them. They have the advantage in that regard.
Nevertheless, I think we should accept it as a personal responsibility to show up when we can and not just think that someone else will do it. As 10:12 said, even if just a couple people show up, that's important.
If you can go to meetings, please do. We realize it's a sacrifice, but it helps. Next time there is an election, vote for people who will not blacklist certain segments of our community. Vote for people who will end the hegemony we've been living under. This should be a pluralistic community where even the voice of non-grant recipients are heard.
Work to end the viewpoint discrimination that is the accepted norm in this County. It happens in our public debates. It is part of the unwritten conditions of employment to work for the County ... or to work for the Conservation District.
It's wrong, so speak up.
A former director of the Port of FH used to say it takes four to show up to make the Commission pay attention and probably persuade them.
ReplyDeleteWhy?
Three or less is too many. In that case the commissioners will either ignore or belittle you.
More than four will intimidate them and they will circle the wagons and try to wall you off.
Four was a magic number because in the case of Port District meetings hardly anyone ever showed up.
But I think its about the same in this physical council chamber because the space is pretty small and normally there is hardly anyone there except the usual suspects.
Be strategic about this. Use ALL the channels and understand that social media, streaming video of council sessions, email and all that didn't exist until pretty recently. And that for working folks under 35 that's how they access the larger world and stay in touch with the community. And they are just the folks who cannot take time off in a work day for this nonsense. They can be reached and be responsive through social media.
So I would say it only take four at a council session to make the presence and position felt, regardless of how many from a different position show up.
If you do it this way:
Don't sit with each other. Choose your seats carefully and arrive early. Have talking points on an index card and be sure to speak at public access.
Many others will watch the video agenda segments later. The time marks to the juicy bits will get posted here so it will be easy to watch the fun stuff.
Then, send emails to the council critters, in your own words. Call them. Invite them to lunch. Ask hard questions. Do not let them off the hook.
And remember: It really only takes four warm bodies to send the message.
If we are going to have to start doing this frequently, its an important insight for our own community organizing ... be strategic, use your time carefully, keep your powder dry.
We are settling in for the long haul and cannot afford to burn ourselves out. Which the Machine will provoke us to do at every opportunity.
Correction to above ...
ReplyDeleteSaid "three is too many ..."
Wrong. Should read:
"three is too few ..."
Apologies
9/8 @ 8:40 Regarding the likely efficacy of any salmon recovery project, I'd have to say there is a system in place for review. Quite a few proposals are rejected, in fact, because they aren't deemed likely to advance the goals of the salmon recovery program. So, without knowing the details of the project, I would assume that he project has gone through this review and is therefore likely to be helpful. But, if I still had concerns I would check the documentation of the review so I could decide for myself. There should be a project proposal and several reviews of the proposal. You can look at these and second guess everyone, if you want to. Again, "it's not that hard." The best way to do this is to ask our lead entity coordinator for the documentation. If you don't want to do that, ask the granting agency, the Salmon Recovery Funding Board. This is what Jack Cory would have done if he were he a real journalist.
ReplyDeleteI know this isn't the answer you wanted from me, but you asked for it, and it's my honest answer. I think what you really want is to find out what the local fishermen think about this. I agree, they should be asked. I hope you are successful in engaging them in the conversation.
Please don't lose sight of my original point, which was that information about the reef net fishery and other things is easy for you to get. Not only do you have the opportunity to get that information, you have an obligation to do so if you are going to participate in discussions of these issues. And slinging mud is never right.
@2:50
ReplyDelete"Slinging mud is never right" but "this is what Jack Cory would have done if he were he a real journalist."
That's Rawson-esque. Take your own advice about slinging mud.
I'm not @8:40. I've been reef-net fishing many times on two different reef-net rigs. They are not always used for fishing. Sometimes they are used for just counting fish. Jack Giard's reef-net operation is part of the Fraser River test fishery. There are, as far as I know, only 11 reef-nets still operating, and no new permits have been issued in years. The eleven remaining permits can be bought and sold, but I believe that's the only way they can be acquired.
Nineteen areas are authorized, by law, for reef net fishing. Fifteen are in San Juan County, 1 is in Skagit, and the rest are in Whatcom. Most of the operating reef nets, however, are in Whatcom County.
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=77.50.050
It is Rawsonesque. It follows the formula exactly. Here's a piece of information, then the moral instruction (you should do this or that), the allusion to being lazy or cowardly (it's not that hard), then the high-minded self-contradictory hypocritical insult (don't sling mud, but if he were a real journalist).
ReplyDeleteDamn good impression of Rawson if it isn't him. Got him down perfectly.
Now here comes the San Juan Initiative to present their new fall line of emperor's new clothes. Yes, they too will be on the exciting agenda this week with the San Juan County Council.
ReplyDeleteAnd what is the San Juan Initiative? Wasn't that done? Well done? Uh, guess not.
And who are these guys? They'd love to tell you all about it right here ... they're baaaaackkkk ...
http://www.sanjuanco.com/Docs/CAgendadocs/09-09-2013/Presentation_SJ_Initiative_090913.pdf
Jonathan White, Co-Chair
Lovel Pratt, Co-Chair
Lisa Byers
Patty Miller
Linda Lyshall
Stephanie Buffum Field
Peter Kilpatrick
Tom Cowan
Marilyn O’Connor
@3:39
ReplyDeleteThey never left.
Do you mean to tell me that Patty Miller, Lisa Byers, and Lovel Pratt were working on this while they were on or candidates for council. They were working on this with Linda Lyshall? How can that be? How can they be working on this while they are supposed to representing the people? How is that not divided loyalties somehow.
Did any of them receive compensation for their work on the SJI?
Real journalists ... well now. We have Bloggo Kivsito, She of the Pencil Hurled.
ReplyDeleteWe have Sound Publishing. Love to take your advert money and suck it out of the community to another country and let you pretend they are a local paper.
Speaking of which. We wouldn't be scratching our heads so much if the Journal actually researched and reported an occasional truthiness news thingee from time to time.
What a racket.
Oh, now I know who Barbara Roskenkotter was appealing to. All her San Juan Initiative pals are coming to hawk their wares next week to. So this weekend, they're working the phones over-time.
I mean, they have great lists right now, and I bet they are still in campaign mode, hell they should on the other side of the dais anyway, the voters were just a little confused.
@3:39
ReplyDeleteWho appointed this group? Did they appoint themselves? I understand the San Juan Initiative officially existed up until about 2009, but who appointed this reincarnation of SJI?
The undead are not reincarnated so much as reanimated. LOL. Ewh. Something smells fishy, again.
ReplyDeleteWho dug up, pried the nails out of the coffin and exhumed this corpse?
The SJI ... it walks by night ... in search of fresh grants ... uh .... uh ...
The undead are not reincarnated so much as reanimated. LOL. Ewh. Something smells fishy, again.
ReplyDeleteWho dug up, pried the nails out of the coffin and exhumed this corpse?
The SJI ... it walks by night ... in search of fresh grants ... uh .... uh ...
Quoting from the San Juan Initiative July 2 2013 letter to council (thank you @3:39 for the link), list among the SJI recommendations that have been implemented is this gem:
ReplyDelete"Enacting new code enforcement ordinances to reduce disincentives for unpermitted shoreline structures"
Can someone please explain what this means? I thought I was pretty good with English but I guess not.
Thanks.
@5:10
ReplyDeleteIt's not english. You don't understand because you don't speak zombie bureaucracy. Only other zombie bureaucrats can translate. It's sorta like speaking for the fish.
"Reduce disincentives for unpermitted shoreline structures."
ReplyDeleteIf I diagram that out, it amounts to "Increase incentives for unpermitted shoreline structures" or possibly "reduce incentives for permitted shoreline structures."
Either way, this has to have been written by someone with a long history in government-speak. My vote is for Lie-Shall, but it could just as easily have been any of the other 8 signatories. Maybe Shireene ghost wrote it, and she can now go before the council and say she doesn't even know what her own writing means. She's already shown she's good at admitting that.
@5:57
ReplyDeleteIt's easy to admit that you produce work products that you can't even understand when there are never any consequences. I guess @2:50 would consider that slinging mud, though. In some circles, I hear it is impolite to point out the haughty gross incompetence of the people who work for us.
Let's not get too fixated on this first recommendation, it gets worse, or better maybe, or at least funnier.
ReplyDeleteLet's deconstruct. Here are some alternatives:
1. Enacting new code enforcement ordinances to increase incentives for permitted shoreline structures.
2. Enacting new code enforcement ordinances to decrease incentives for unpermitted shoreline structures.
3. Enacting new code enforcement ordinances to increase disincentives for permitted shoreline structures.
4. Enacting new code enforcement ordinances to increase disincentives for unpermitted shoreline structures.
5. Redacting old code reinforcement guidelines to increase incentivizing of nonproactive shoreline human habitat.
5. Make it impossible for you to build anything anywhere ever again.
ReplyDeleteIf there is to be no building then why did the planning department need to hire another planner.
For the same reason that the British Colonial Office reached its zenith after Britain no longer had any colonies. The schemes and strategies of civil servants abide their own rules, and the reality of the outside world is but a faint whisper.
ReplyDeleteExcuse Me!!, But when did we give exclusive rights to everyone else to infringe on our constitutional rights to freedom of speech, and freedom of persecution, for our beliefs. That they can impose their beliefs upon our own personal property, in exclusion of our rights as guaranteed by the constitution of this country. I am appalled that these eco_NAZI's feel that we are obliged to follow their lead in this corruption of our live's to support their misguided perception of the world. I will not go willingly to the gates of HELL. I will give my life to oppose the atrocities that are being exposed here. Semper Fi
ReplyDelete
ReplyDelete"Enacting new code enforcement ordinances to reduce disincentives for unpermitted shoreline structures"
translation: PUNISHMENTS for owners of unpermitted shoreline structures.
No no no. You're missing the subtle point raised by @5:10. They have one too many double negatives in their sentence, so it means the exact opposite of what they intended it to mean. They want more enforcement, but they actually recommended less.
ReplyDeleteThey think that it ain't not good to not build on the shoreline, but they said that it ain't not bad to not build on the shoreline.
I hope this clears up the matter.
Well, I hope at least one member of Council will have been sufficiently caffeineated by 9:00AM tomorrow to ask the simple question:
ReplyDelete"What does this recommendation mean? Please, let me read this slowly so everyone can hear this, and I can get it into the record."
@8:43
ReplyDeleteCan't we don't never?