You are currently browsing the monthly archive for June 2013.
By Maria Dixon
DOMA and Prop 8 bite the dust, and a brave one-woman filibuster finished off by a nice dose of civil disobedience preserve, for the moment, abortion rights in Texas.
I’ll come back later with commentary and links, but I wanted to post something.
Here are excerpts from Justice Scalia’s “flaming dissent” of the DOMA decision. He was actually on the side of the angels with Prop 8, rejecting the citizen’s group’s standing. Justice Sotamayor actually dissented with the conservatives on the standing issue.
Lots of frustration and lots of hope for a resolution. I don’t know what it’ll look like, but at least everyone’s still talking.
In light of the recent murder and other events over the past few years, the community is taking notice. The AVA posted a few of the comments – scroll down just a little bit to see them.
Posted by request from Janelle Egger.
To all lovers of the right to speak based on facts–
The fundamental principle that the public has a right to know is in jeopardy. Passed into law in 1968, the California Public Records Act is easy to take it for granted. Today, please call the Governor to defend safeguards that many assumed would never go away, such as requiring local governments to cite a legal reason before turning down requests for records, requiring a response to requests, and providing assistance to the public in making effective requests for records. Today, please call the Governor at (916) 445-2841 and tell his staff: “I urge Governor Brown to veto section 4 of Senate Bill 71 and Assembly Bill 76 (specifically section 6252.8 to the Goverment Code) to restore effectiveness to the Public Records Act.”
More info at–
This comes from an issue of Cultural Correspondence dated 1981. I copied it and I’ve used it over the years to make points about factionalism and sectarianism in politics. Some years back I posted it on the Board at KMUD. Someone didn’t take well to it and graffittied it up. It turns out that Jay Kinney, who drew it up, works at Bolerium Books in SF.
To reconsider the “straw poll” decision of June 3 re the Guiding Principles.
Addendum: NCJ Blogthing coverage of the petition.
I didn’t realize that Hezekiah Allen, the author of the petition, is on the HumCPR advisory council. I bet there have been some angry phone calls over this!
Second addendum: Meanwhile, Judy Hodgson on the “most disappointing panel I’ve ever seen.”
Actually, here’s the link to her own piece.
-For Immediate Release-
Supervisors Make Substantial Changes to GPU Guiding Principles
Despite Pleas for Robust Public Review Process
June 3, 2013
Eureka, CA – On Monday, June 3, the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors did an about face on the Guiding Principles of the County’s General Plan Update. Despite requests from many speakers, including Hezekiah Allen of the Mattole Restoration Council and local resident Lisa Zystro, for more time to review a new set of principles that were released just three days before the hearing, the Board voted 4-1 to substantially alter the original Guiding Principles. The original principles were developed with significant public input over several years and unanimously approved by both the Board of Supervisors in 2004 and then by the Planning Commission, with a few minor changes, in 2012.
Supervisor Fennell, after emphasizing the importance of public participation, decided against giving another two weeks for the public to review and comment on the major changes to the Guiding Principles. Supervisor Bohn made a claim that he felt the new Principles, which were developed behind closed doors, were representative of the community as a whole despite significant concerns brought up by many members of the public in attendance. Supervisors Bass and Sundberg were quick to support the new language leaving Third District Supervisor Mark Lovelace to be the lone dissenting voice.
In response to the outcome of Monday’s hearing, NorthcoastEnvironmentalCenter director Dan Ehresman stated, “The Board’s decision to approve a brand new set of Guiding Principles absent even a week for public review greatly undermines the very idea of robust public participation that this Board supposedly supports.”
Speaking specifically about the newly adopted principles Ehresman continued, “What concerns me most is not necessarily what these new principles say, it is what they leave out. Specifically, the Board decided to take out all reference to protecting forests and farmland from further subdivision – which was an underlying concept that has community support. Moreover, the Board voted to remove a key principle that spoke to the importance of including actionable plans for funding critical infrastructure needs. Given vastly outdated water and sewer lines and a $200 million backlog in costs needed to repair failing roads, one would hope that our government representatives might want to take this issue at least a little seriously.”
The new version also eliminates support of the County’s economic development strategy and prioritizes landowners’ rights over the rights of those who do not own property and over environmental protections in general.
Ehresman concluded, “Overall, we fear that the Board’s decision marks a very clear turning point away from a meaningful public process that seeks to balance the interests of our broad community in favor of one that serves the self-interest of some developers, Realtors, and large property owners.
About the Northcoast Environmental Center
The mission of the Northcoast Environmental Center is to promote understanding of the relations between people and the biosphere and to conserve, protect, and celebrate terrestrial, aquatic, and marine ecosystems of northern California and southern Oregon.
For more information, please contact:
Northcoast Environmental Center
PO Box 4259
Addendum: Ryan Burns’s coverage.